RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) with posterior screw fusion is a safe and effective treatment for patients suffering from degenerative spine disorders. While LLIF has been shown to restore disc height, decompress neural components, correct sagittal imbalances, and improve pain scores, the approach requires repositioning patients for posterior pedicle fixation, which requires 2 separate surgeries. The evolution of surgical techniques, navigation, and robotics has allowed for a single position approach to LLIF with the patient in the prone position. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the prone single position (PSP) LLIF approach to the dual position LLIF approach. We hypothesized that PSP LLIF will have a reduced operative time, complication rate, and blood loss compared with the dual position LLIF procedure. METHODS: A systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines. PubMed and Embase databases were searched with key terms: (lateral AND [interbody OR "inter body"] AND lumbar AND fusion) AND (prone OR single). Results were extracted and reviewed by 2 authors (MR and RB) per selection criteria. Patient demographics were extracted from the selected studies, along with surgical, patient-reported, and radiographic outcomes. A meta-analysis was performed using an unstandardized mean difference or log odds ratio with a confidence level of 95%. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included in the systematic review and 5 studies compared PSP LLIF to dual position LLIF for meta-analysis. PSP LLIF had a reduced operative time and length of stay compared with the dual position approach, although there was no significant reduction in estimated blood loss. Additionally, PSP LLIF improved lumbar lordosis more effectively than dual position LLIF. There was no difference in segmental lordosis or pelvic tilt. There was no difference in intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, or reoperations. CONCLUSIONS: PSP LLIF reduces operative time and length of stay, with no relative increase in complications or reoperations compared with the dual position approach. Additionally, PSP LLIF improves lumbar lordosis relative to dual position LLIF, which may improve functional outcomes and reduce the risk of developing adjacent segment disease. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The associated operative and postoperative benefits of PSP LLIF may improve long-term outcomes of patients undergoing spinal fusion.
RESUMEN
¼: Conventional total hip arthroplasty (THA) largely remains an unguided procedure dependent on the ability and experience of the surgeon. New technologies, such as patient-specific instrumentation and robotics, have shown promising results in improving implant positioning, which has the potential to improve patient outcomes. ¼: The use of off-the-shelf (OTS) implant designs, however, limits the success of the technological advances since they are unable to recreate the native anatomy of the joint. The inability to restore femoral offset and version or the presence of implant-related leg-length discrepancies often lead to suboptimal surgical results that increase the risk of dislocation, fractures, and component wear, compromising postoperative functional outcomes and implant longevity. ¼: A customized THA system, whereby the femoral stem is designed to restore patient anatomy, has recently been introduced. The THA system uses computed tomography (CT)-derived 3D imaging to create a custom stem, patient-specific component placement, and patient-specific instrumentation that matches the patient's native anatomy. ¼: The purpose of this article is to provide information on the design and manufacturing process of this new THA implant, to illustrate the associated preoperative planning, and to describe the surgical technique; 3 surgical cases are presented.