Redefining the Evolution of Spinal Discal Cyst Under Percutaneous Endoscopy: Report of Two Cases.

Discal cyst has been recognized as a distinct cause of back pain and radiculopathy. The clinical features are similar to other pathologies as disc prolapse and stenosis. Various treatment modalities have been described, ranging from nerve blocks to surgical excision. There are scarce reports on the endoscopic appearance of discal cysts. The present paper based on two cases operated by transforaminal and interlaminar endoscopy at our institute demonstrates the explicit intraoperative view and different pathological components of discal cysts.

The Radiologic and Clinical Outcomes of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion for Correction of Adult Degenerative Lumbar Deformity.

BACKGROUND: Osteotomies aimed at correcting adult spinal deformity are associated with higher complications and perioperative morbidity. Recently, oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) was introduced for degenerative lumbar diseases. The aim of our study is to demonstrate the effectiveness of OLIF on the management of adult degenerative lumbar deformity (ADLD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with ADLD who underwent deformity correction and decompression using OLIF and posterior instrumentation were enrolled. For radiologic evaluation, Cobb's angle (CA), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), lumbar lordosis (LL), thoracic kyphosis (TK), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), and pelvic incidence (PI) were evaluated. Visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and perioperative parameters were recorded for clinical evaluation. RESULTS: Fifteen patients with a mean age of 67 years (63-74 years) were enrolled prospectively and an average of 3 OLIFs (range 1-4) was performed. Posterior instrumentations were done at average of six levels (range 4-8). The mean operative blood loss was 863 ml (range 500-1400 ml) with a mean surgical duration of 7 h (range 3-11 h). SVA, TK, LL, CA, PT, and SS showed significant correction (P < 0.05) in immediate postoperative period and all parameters except TK were maintained at final followup. At the end of 24 months of average followup, 86% (13/15) showed fusion. VAS (leg pain), VAS (back pain), and ODI improved by 74% (range 40-100), 58% (range 20%-80%), and 69.5% (range 4%-90%), respectively. There were two major complications requiring revision (1 infection and 1 adjacent vertebral body fracture). Transient hip weakness present in two patients (13%) recovered within 6 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: OLIF gives favorable short term clinical and radiological outcomes in patients of ADLD. It could potentially reduce the need for morbid pelvic fixation and posterior osteotomies in patients with degenerative lumbar deformity.

The Optimal Screw Length of Lumbar Pedicle Screws during Minimally Invasive Surgery Fixation: A Computed Tomography-Guided Evaluation of 771 Screws.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study of radiographic parameters of patients who underwent lumbar spinal pedicle screw insertion. PURPOSE: The optimal length of pedicle screws is often determined by the lateral radiograph during minimally invasive surgery (MIS). Compared with open techniques, measuring the precise length of screws or assessing the cortical breach is challenging. This study aims to ascertain the optimal pedicle screw lengths on intraoperative lateral radiographs for L1-L5. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Research has revealed that optimal pedicle screw length is essential to optimize fixation, especially in osteoporotic patients; however, it must be balanced against unintentional breach of the anterior cortex, risking injury to adjacent neurovascular structures as demonstrated by case reports. METHODS: We reviewed intra- and postoperative computed tomography scans of 225 patients who underwent lumbar pedicle screw insertion to ascertain which of the inserted screws were 'optimal screws.' The corresponding lengths of these screws were analyzed on postoperative lateral radiographs to ascertain the ideal position that a screw should attain (expressed as a percentage of the entire vertebral body length). RESULTS: We reviewed 880 screws of which 771 were optimal screws. We noted a decreasing trend in average optimal percentages of insertion into the vertebral body for pedicle screws going from L1 (average=87.60%) to L5 (average=78.87%). The subgroup analysis revealed that there was an increasing percentage of screws directed in a straight trajectory from L1 to L5, compared to a medially directed trajectory. CONCLUSIONS: During MIS pedicle screw fixation, this study recommends that pedicle screws should not exceed 85% of the vertebral body length on the lateral view for L1, 80% for L2-L4, and 75% for L5; this will minimize the risk of anterior cortical breach yet maximize pedicle screw purchase for fixation stability.

Pedicle Screw Designs in Spinal Surgery: Is There a Difference? A Biomechanical Study on Primary and Revision Pull-Out Strength.

STUDY DESIGN: An experimental laboratory-based biomechanical study. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate, in a synthetic bone model, the difference in primary and revision pull-out strength using pedicle screws of different thread designs. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Over the past few decades, there has been a growing interest in optimizing the screw pull-out strength using various screw designs (single-thread, mixed-thread, dual-thread). Although primary pull-out strength has been studied previously, little is known about revision pull-out strength of different pedicle screws. METHODS: The pull-out strengths of three different pedicle screw designs (single-thread, mixed-thread, dual-thread) were tested in standardized polyurethane foam in three sequences. Sequence 1: A 6.5 mm screw was inserted into the foam block and the primary pull-out strength measured. Sequence 2: A 6.5 mm screw was inserted, removed, and then reinserted into the same foam block. The revision pull-out strength was then measured. Sequence 3: A 6.5 mm screw was inserted, removed and a 7.5-mm screw of the same thread design was reinserted. The revision pull-out strength was then measured. RESULTS: The primary pull-out strength was similar across screw designs, although dual-thread screws showed higher primary pull-out strength (2628.8 N) compared to single-thread screws (2184.4 N, P < 0.05). For revision pull-out strength, the mixed-thread screws had significant reduction in revision pull-out strength of 18.6% (1890.2 N, P = 0.0173). Revision with a larger diameter screw improved the pull-out strength back to baseline. Single and dual-thread screws showed no significant reduction in revision pull-out strength. CONCLUSION: The dual-threaded screws provided the strongest primary pull-out strength for spinal fixation. The mixed-thread screws, however, had the poorest revision pull-out strength, decreasing by 18.6% compared to other screw designs. In cases in which mixed-threaded screws have to be revised (at the index or revision surgery), surgeons should consider the use of larger diameter screws to improve the pull-out strength. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5.