Multi-center experience with intravascular lithotripsy for treatment of severe calcification during transcarotid artery revascularization for high-risk patients.

OBJECTIVE: Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) offers a safe alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA), but severe calcification is currently considered a contraindication in carotid artery stenting. This study aims to describe the safety and effectiveness of TCAR with intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) in patients with traditionally prohibitive calcific disease. METHODS: All consecutive patients who underwent TCAR+IVL from 2018-2022 at nine institutions were identified. IVL was combined with pre-dilatation angioplasty to treat calcified vessels before stent deployment. The primary outcome was a new ipsilateral stroke within 30 days. Secondary outcomes included any new ipsilateral neurologic event (stroke/transient ischemic attack [TIA]) at 30 days, technical success, and <30% residual stenosis. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients (62% male; mean age, 78 ± 6.6 years) underwent TCAR+IVL, with 22 (38%) for symptomatic disease. Fifty-seven patients (98%) met high-risk anatomical or physiologic criteria for CEA. Forty-seven patients had severely calcific lesions. Fourteen patients (30%) had isolated eccentric plaque, 20 patients (43%) had isolated circumferential plaque, and 13 (27%) had eccentric and circumferential calcification. Mean procedure and flow reversal times were 87 ± 27 minutes and 25 ± 14 minutes. The median number of lithotripsy pulses per case was 90 (range, 30-330), and mean contrast usage was 29 mL. No patients had electroencephalogram changes or new deficits observed intraoperatively. Technical success was achieved in 100% of cases, with 98% having <30% residual stenosis on completion angiography. One patient had an in-hospital post-procedural stroke (1.72%). Four patients total had any new ipsilateral neurologic event (stroke/TIA) within 30 days for an overall rate of 6.8%. One TIA and one stroke occurred during the index hospitalization, and two TIAs occurred after discharge. Preoperative mean stenosis in patients with any postoperative neurologic event was 93% (vs 86% in non-stroke/TIA patients; P = .32), and chronic renal insufficiency was higher in patients who had a new neurologic event (75% vs 17%; P = .005). No differences were observed in calcium, procedural, or patient characteristics between the two groups. The mean follow-up was 132 days (range, 19-520 days). Three stents developed recurrent stenosis (5%) on follow-up duplex; the remainder were patent without issue. There were no reported interventions for recurrent stenosis during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: IVL sufficiently remodels calcified carotid arteries to facilitate TCAR effectively in patients with traditionally prohibitive calcific disease. One patient (1.7%) suffered a stroke within 30 days, although four patients (6.8%) sustained any new neurological event (stroke/TIA). These results raise concerns about the risks of TCAR+IVL and whether it is an appropriate strategy for patients who could potentially undergo CEA.

Capturing the complexity of open abdominal aortic surgery in the endovascular era.

OBJECTIVE: Volume and quality benchmarks for open abdominal aortic surgery and particularly open aortic aneurysm repair (OAR) in the endovascular era are guided by the Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines, but the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) OAR module fails to capture the full spectrum of complex OAR. We hypothesized that VQI-ineligible complex OAR would be the dominant form of open repairs performed at a VQI-participating tertiary center. METHODS: All OAR cases performed at a single tertiary care center from 2007 to 2020 were reviewed. The VQI OAR criteria were applied with exclusions (non-VQI) defined as concomitant renal bypass, clamping above the superior mesenteric artery or celiac artery, repairs performed for trauma, anastomotic aneurysm, isolated iliac aneurysm, or infected aneurysms. Linear regression was used to assess temporal trends. RESULTS: Among a total of 481 open abdominal aortic operations, 355 (74%) were OAR. The average annual OAR volume remained stable over 14 years (25 ± 6; P = .46). Non-VQI OAR comprised 54% of all cases and persisted over time (R2 = 0.047, P = .46). Supraceliac clamping (35%) was often necessary. The proportion of endograft explantation cases significantly increased over time from 4% in 2007 to 20% in 2019 (P = .01). Infectious indications represented 20% (n = 70) of cases. Visceral branch grafts were performed in 16% of all cases. OAR for ruptured aneurysm constituted 10% of cases. Thirty-day mortality was significantly higher in non-VQI vs VQI-eligible OAR cases (10% vs 4%; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Complex OAR comprises a majority of OAR cases in a contemporary tertiary referral hospital, yet these cases are not accounted for in the VQI. Creation of a "complex OAR" VQI module would capture these cases in a quality-driven national registry and help to better inform benchmarks for volume and outcomes in aortic surgery.

Surgical resection and graft replacement for primary inferior vena cava leiomyosarcoma: A multicenter experience.

OBJECTIVE: Primary leiomyosarcoma of the inferior vena cava (IVC) is best managed with surgical resection when technically feasible. However, consensus is lacking regarding the best choice of conduit and reconstruction technique. The aim of the present multicenter study was to perform a comprehensive assessment through the VLFDC (Vascular Low Frequency Disease Consortium) to determine the most effective method for caval reconstruction after resection of primary leiomyosarcoma of the IVC. METHODS: A multicenter, standardized database review of patients who had undergone surgical resection and reconstruction of the IVC for primary leiomyosarcoma from 2007 to 2017 was performed. The demographics, periprocedural details, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 92 patients (60 women and 32 men), with a mean age of 60.1 years (range, 30-88 years) were treated. Metastatic disease was present in 22%. The tumor location was below the renal veins in 49 (53%), between the renal and hepatic veins in 52 (57%), and above the hepatic veins in 13 patients (14%). The conduits used for reconstruction included ringed polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE; n = 80), nonringed PTFE (n = 1), Dacron (n = 1), autogenous vein (n = 1), bovine pericardium (n = 4), and cryopreserved tissue (n = 5). Complete R0 resection was accomplished in 73 patients (79%). In-hospital mortality was 2%, with a median length of stay of 8 days. The primary patency of PTFE reconstructed IVCs was 97% and 92% at 1 and 5 years, respectively, compared with 73% at 1 and 5 years for the non-PTFE reconstructed IVCs. The overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival for the entire cohort were 94%, 86%, and 65%, respectively CONCLUSIONS: The findings from our multi-institutional study have demonstrated that complete en bloc resection of IVC leiomyosarcoma with vascular surgical reconstruction in selected patients results in low perioperative mortality and is associated with excellent long-term patency. A ringed PTFE graft was the most commonly used conduit for caval reconstruction, yielding excellent long-term primary patency.

Prophylactic Muscle Flaps in Primary Vascular Procedures of the Groin.

BACKGROUND: Complications following vascular procedures involving the groin can lead to significant morbidity. Achieving stable soft tissue coverage over sites of revascularization can help mitigate complications. Prior evidence supports the use of muscle flaps in reoperative groins and in high risk patient populations to reduce postoperative complications. Data regarding the use of prophylactic muscle flap coverage of the groin is lacking. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of immediate prophylactic muscle flap coverage of vascular wounds involving the groin. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed on all patients undergoing primary open vascular procedures involving the groin for occlusive, aneurysmal, or oncologic disease between 2014 and 2020 at a single institution where plastic surgery was involved in closure. Patient demographics, comorbidities, surgical details, and postoperative complications were compared between patients who had sartorius muscle flap coverage of the vascular repair versus layered closure alone. RESULTS: A total of 133 consecutive groins were included in our analysis. A sartorius flap was used in 115 groins (86.5%) and a layered closure was used in 18 (13.5%). Wound breakdown was similar between groups (25.2% sartorius vs. 38.9% layered closure, P = 0.26). However, the rate of reoperation was significantly higher in the layered closure group (50.0% vs. 12.2%, P < 0.01). Among patients who experienced wound breakdown (N = 36), a larger proportion of layered closure patients required operative intervention (71.4% vs. 20.7%, P = 0.02). Other rates of complications were not statistically different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing primary open vascular procedures involving the groin, patients who underwent prophylactic sartorius muscle flap closure had lower rates of reoperation. Although incisional breakdown was similar between the groups overall, the presence of a vascularized muscle flap overlying the vascular repair was associated with reduced need for reoperation and allowed more wounds to be managed with local wound care alone. Consideration should be given to this low morbidity local muscle flap in patients undergoing vascular procedures involving the groin.

Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion From L2 to S1: 2-Dimensional Operative Video.

This surgical video demonstrates the technique of an oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) in the lumbar spine from L2 to L5 as well as an oblique approach to the L5-S1 level. It demonstrates the surgical approach, technical nuances of OLIF, and pearls of the surgery. The video discusses the importance of the release of the disc space to allow for height restoration and deformity correction, endplate preparation to enhance arthrodesis, and appropriate implant sizing. The concept of the approach is the minimally invasive blunt dissection through the abdominal wall musculature and mobilization of the retroperitoneal fat. Unlike the transpsoas approach, the surgery is performed anterior to the psoas, avoiding the lumbar plexus.1 For L5-S1, the approach is still performed in the lateral position but with an oblique approach. A vascular surgeon performs the L5-S1 approach, and the disc space is accessed through the iliac bifurcation.2 The discectomy and interbody fusion are performed similarly to a standard anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), but in a lateral position and at an oblique angle. The patient consented to this procedure and for filming a video of this case.

Lymphocele after anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a review of 1322 patients.

OBJECTIVE: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is an effective surgical modality for many lumbar degenerative pathologies, but a rare and infrequently reported complication is postoperative lymphocele. The goals of the present study were to review a large consecutive series of patients who underwent ALIF at a high-volume institution, estimate the rate of lymphocele occurrence after ALIF, and investigate the outcomes of patients who developed lymphocele after ALIF. METHODS: A retrospective review of the electronic medical record was completed, identifying all patients (≥ 18 years old) who underwent at a minimum a single-level ALIF from 2012 through 2019. Postoperative spinal and abdominal images, as well as radiologist reports, were reviewed for mention of lymphocele. Clinical data were collected and reported. RESULTS: A total of 1322 patients underwent a minimum 1-level ALIF. Of these patients, 937 (70.9%) had either postoperative abdominal or lumbar spine images, and the resulting lymphocele incidence was 2.1% (20/937 patients). The mean ± SD age was 67 ± 10.9 years, and the male/female ratio was 1:1. Patients with lymphocele were significantly older than those without lymphocele (66.9 vs 58.9 years, p = 0.006). In addition, patients with lymphocele had a greater number of mean levels fused (2.5 vs 1.8, p < 0.001) and were more likely to have undergone ALIF at L2-4 (95.0% vs 66.4%, p = 0.007) than patients without lymphocele. On subsequent multivariate analysis, age (OR 1.07, 95% CI 1.01-1.12, p = 0.013), BMI (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01-1.18, p = 0.021), and number of levels fused (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.05-3.14, p = 0.032) were independent prognosticators of postoperative lymphocele development. Patients with symptomatic lymphocele were successfully treated with either interventional radiology (IR) drainage and/or sclerosis therapy and achieved radiographic resolution. The mean ± SD length of hospital stay was 9.1 ± 5.2 days. Ten patients (50%) were postoperatively discharged to a rehabilitation center: 8 patients (40%) were discharged to home, 1 (5%) to a skilled nursing facility, and 1 (5%) to a long-term acute care facility. CONCLUSIONS: After ALIF, 2.1% of patients were diagnosed with radiographically identified postoperative lymphocele and had risk factors such as increased age, BMI, and number of levels fused. Most patients presented within 1 month postoperatively, and their clinical presentations included abdominal pain, abdominal distension, and/or wound complications. Of note, 25% of identified lymphoceles were discovered incidentally. Patients with symptomatic lymphocele were successfully treated with either IR drainage and/or sclerosis therapy and achieved radiographic resolution.

Contemporary Experience with Paravisceral Aortic Aneurysm (PVAAA) Repair in a Tertiary Center.

OBJECTIVES: To describe contemporary outcomes from a single center capable of both complex open and endovascular aortic repair for paravisceral aortic aneurysms (PVAAA). METHODS: Data on all patients receiving open or endovascular (endo) treatment for aortic aneurysms with proximal extent at or above the renal arteries and distal to the inferior pulmonary ligament (IPL) were reviewed. Coarsened exact matching (CEM) on age, aneurysm type, gender, coronary artery disease (CAD), previous aortic surgery and symptomatic status created balanced cohorts for outcomes comparisons. RESULTS: Between October, 2006 and February, 2018, 194 patients were treated for juxtarenal (40%), pararenal (21%), paravisceral (6%) and Type 4 thoracoabdominal (34%) aortic aneurysms with open (81, 42%) or endo (113, 58%) at a single tertiary center. Endo repairs included renal coverage with a bifurcated graft (2%), unilateral (13%) or bilateral (4%) renal snorkels, Z-fen (15%), multi-branched graft (IDE protocol; 62%) and unique complex configurations (4%). On multivariable analysis, patients selected for open surgery were more likely to be symptomatic, whereas older patients, female patients and those with Type 4 TAAA extent were more often selected for endovascular treatment. Matching based on the significant independent covariates reduced the open and endovascular groups by one-third. Survival at 30 days was 97% for endo and 94% for open repair, 98% for both subgroups when excluding symptomatic cases, and was not different between the matched groups (98% vs 89%; P=0.23). Hospital and ICU stays were longer in open patients (8 vs. 10 days, 2 vs. 4, both P≤0.001). Post-op CVA, MI, lower extremity ischemia, surgical site infections and reoperation were not different between matched groups (all p>0.05), while pulmonary and intestinal complications, as well as grade 1/2 renal dysfunction by RIFLE criteria, were more common after open repair (all P<0.05). Spinal cord ischemia was significantly more frequent in the unmatched Endo group (11% vs. 1%, P=0.02), but this difference was not significant after matching. Composite major aortic complications was no different between treatment groups (unmatched P=0.91, matched P=0.87). Endo treatment resulted in patients more frequently discharged to home (84% vs. 66%, P=0.02). Reintervention after 30 days occurred more frequently in the endo group (P=0.002). Estimated survivals at 1 and 5 years for endo and open are 96% vs. 81% and 69% vs. 81% respectively (Log-rank P=0.57). CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary repair of PVAAA demonstrates safe outcomes with durable survival benefit when patients are well-selected for open or complex endovascular repair. We believe these data have implications for off-label device use in the treatment of PVAAA, and that open repair remains an essential option for younger, good risk patients in experienced centers.

Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Cage Retrieval for the Treatment of Pseudarthrosis After Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Single-Institution Case Series.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of pseudarthrosis after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) can be challenging, particularly when anterior column reconstruction is required. There are limited data on TLIF cage removal through an anterior approach. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) as a treatment for pseudarthrosis after TLIF. METHODS: ALIFs performed at a single academic medical center were reviewed to identify cases performed for the treatment of pseudarthrosis after TLIF. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, perioperative complications, and 1-yr radiographic data were collected. RESULTS: A total of 84 patients were identified with mean age of 59 yr and 37 women (44.0%). A total of 16 patients (19.0%) underwent removal of 2 interbody cages for a total of 99 implants removed with distribution as follows: 1 L2/3 (0.9%), 6 L3/4 (5.7%), 37 L4/5 (41.5%), and 55 L5/S1 (51.9%). There were 2 intraoperative venous injuries (2.4%) and postoperative complications were as follows: 7 ileus (8.3%), 5 wound-related (6.0%), 1 rectus hematoma (1.1%), and 12 medical complications (14.3%), including 6 pulmonary (7.1%), 3 cardiac (3.6%), and 6 urinary tract infections (7.1%). Among 58 patients with at least 1-yr follow-up, 56 (96.6%) had solid fusion. There were 5 cases of subsidence (6.0%), none of which required surgical revision. Two patients (2.4%) required additional surgery at the level of ALIF for pseudarthrosis. CONCLUSION: ALIF is a safe and effective technique for the treatment of TLIF cage pseudarthrosis with a favorable risk profile.

Supine anterior lumbar interbody fusion versus lateral position oblique lumbar interbody fusion at L5-S1: A comparison of two approaches to the lumbosacral junction.

INTRODUCTION: At L5-S1, anterior access can be performed with a supine anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) or lateral position oblique lumbar interbody fusion (LOLIF). We compared clinical and radiographic features of both approaches. METHODS: A retrospective study of L5-S1 ALIF and LOLIF patients (2013-2018) by 3 spine surgeons and a vascular surgeon at our hospital was performed. Inclusion criteria were patients undergoing L5-S1 anterior surgery only without other anterior or lateral fusion levels, and data collected were patient demographics, cage parameters, perioperative variables, and radiographic parameters. 58 patients were included (33 ALIF and 25 LOLIF). RESULTS: The average surgical time was 211.94 min for ALIF and 154.86 min for LOLIF (p < 0.001). The average blood loss was 214 ml for ALIF and 74 ml for LOLIF (p < 0.001). The average number of days to solid food was 2.55 for ALIF and 0.8 for LOLIF (p < 0.001). The average anterior L5-S1 disc height increase was 8.52 mm for ALIF and 5.02 mm LOLIF (p = 0.018), and the average posterior L5-S1 disc height increase was 3.34 mm for ALIF and 1.30 mm for LOLIF (p = 0.034). The average L5-S1 segmental lordosis increase was 6.82 degrees for ALIF and 7.63 degrees for LOLIF (p = 0.638). CONCLUSION: The LOLIF is a feasible option for L5-S1 anterior access compared to ALIF. However, supine ALIF afforded larger cages to be placed, resulting in greater postoperative disc height. There did not appear to be a significant difference in postoperative L5-S1 segmental lordosis between the two approaches.

Impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic on an academic vascular practice and a multidisciplinary limb preservation program.

With the aggressive resource conservation necessary to face the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, vascular surgeons have faced unique challenges in managing the health of their high-risk patients. An early analysis of patient outcomes after pandemic-related practice changes suggested that patients with chronic limb threatening ischemia have been presenting with more severe foot infections and are more likely to require major limb amputation compared with 6 months previously. As our society and health care system adapt to the new changes required in the post-coronavirus disease 2019 era, it is critical that we pay special attention to the most vulnerable subsets of patients with vascular disease, particularly those with chronic limb threatening ischemia and limited access to care.

The effect of anterior lumbar interbody fusion staging order on perioperative complications in circumferential lumbar fusions performed within the same hospital admission.

OBJECTIVE: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is a powerful technique that provides wide access to the disc space and allows for large lordotic grafts. When used with posterior spinal fusion (PSF), the procedures are often staged within the same hospital admission. There are limited data on the perioperative risk profile of ALIF-first versus PSF-first circumferential fusions performed within the same hospital admission. In an effort to understand whether these procedures are associated with different perioperative complication profiles, the authors performed a retrospective review of their institutional experience in adult patients who had undergone circumferential lumbar fusions. METHODS: The electronic medicals records of patients who had undergone ALIF and PSF on separate days within the same hospital admission at a single academic center were retrospectively analyzed. Patients carrying a diagnosis of tumor, infection, or traumatic fracture were excluded. Demographics, surgical characteristics, and perioperative complications were collected and assessed. RESULTS: A total of 373 patients, 217 of them women (58.2%), met the inclusion criteria. The mean age of the study cohort was 60 years. Surgical indications were as follows: degenerative disease or spondylolisthesis, 171 (45.8%); adult deformity, 168 (45.0%); and pseudarthrosis, 34 (9.1%). The majority of patients underwent ALIF first (321 [86.1%]) with a mean time of 2.5 days between stages. The mean number of levels fused was 2.1 for ALIF and 6.8 for PSF. In a comparison of ALIF-first to PSF-first cases, there were no major differences in demographics or surgical characteristics. Rates of intraoperative complications including venous injury were not significantly different between the two groups. The rates of postoperative ileus (11.8% vs 5.8%, p = 0.194) and ALIF-related wound complications (9.0% vs 3.8%, p = 0.283) were slightly higher in the ALIF-first group, although the differences did not reach statistical significance. Rates of other perioperative complications were no different. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing staged circumferential fusion with ALIF and PSF, there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of perioperative complications when comparing ALIF-first to PSF-first surgeries.

Anterior lumbar compared to oblique lumbar interbody approaches for multilevel fusions to the sacrum in adults with spinal deformity and degeneration.

OBJECTIVE: In adult spinal deformity and degenerative conditions of the spine, interbody fusion to the sacrum often is performed to enhance arthrodesis, induce lordosis, and alleviate stenosis. Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) has traditionally been performed, but minimally invasive oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) may or may not cause less morbidity because less retraction of the abdominal viscera is required. The authors evaluated whether there was a difference between the results of ALIF and OLIF in multilevel anterior or lateral interbody fusion to the sacrum. METHODS: Patients from 2013 to 2018 who underwent multilevel ALIF or OLIF to the sacrum were retrospectively studied. Inclusion criteria were adult spinal deformity or degenerative pathology and multilevel ALIF or OLIF to the sacrum. Demographic, implant, perioperative, and radiographic variables were collected. Statistical calculations were performed for significant differences. RESULTS: Data from a total of 127 patients were analyzed (66 OLIF patients and 61 ALIF patients). The mean follow-up times were 27.21 (ALIF) and 24.11 (OLIF) months. The mean surgical time was 251.48 minutes for ALIF patients and 234.48 minutes for OLIF patients (p = 0.154). The mean hospital stay was 7.79 days for ALIF patients and 7.02 days for OLIF patients (p = 0.159). The mean time to being able to eat solid food was 4.03 days for ALIF patients and 1.30 days for OLIF patients (p < 0.001). After excluding patients who had undergone L5-S1 posterior column osteotomy, 54 ALIF patients and 41 OLIF patients were analyzed for L5-S1 radiographic changes. The mean cage height was 14.94 mm for ALIF patients and 13.56 mm for OLIF patients (p = 0.001), and the mean cage lordosis was 15.87° in the ALIF group and 16.81° in the OLIF group (p = 0.278). The mean increases in anterior disc height were 7.34 mm and 4.72 mm for the ALIF and OLIF groups, respectively (p = 0.001), and the mean increases in posterior disc height were 3.35 mm and 1.24 mm (p < 0.001), respectively. The mean change in L5-S1 lordosis was 4.33° for ALIF patients and 4.59° for OLIF patients (p = 0.829). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent multilevel OLIF and ALIF to the sacrum had comparable operative times. OLIF was associated with a quicker ileus recovery and less blood loss. At L5-S1, ALIF allowed larger cages to be placed, resulting in a greater disc height change, but there was no significant difference in L5-S1 segmental lordosis.

Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (ALIF): Technique Video: 2-Dimensional Operative Video.

This surgical video demonstrates the technique of an anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). This video demonstrates the surgical approach, technical nuances of ALIF, and pearls. The main surgical anatomy and approach-related risks are discussed. The video demonstrates the nuances of ALIF, discussing the importance of the release of the disc space to allow for height restoration and lordosis, endplate preparation to enhance arthrodesis, and choice of implant size. The incision is made via a left paramedian approach with a retroperitoneal dissection and mobilization of the vasculature for access to the disc space. The ALIF provides direct access to the ventral surface of the exposed disc, allowing for an incision of the anterior longitudinal ligament, bilateral release of the annulus fibrosus, and access to a large surface area of the vertebral endplate. This anterior access allows for the placement of implants with a greater surface area for fusion, and this facilitates restoration of segmental lordosis, disc height improvement, and foraminal height increase. We have received informed consent from this patient for the video of this case.

The impact of obesity on perioperative complications in patients undergoing anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

OBJECTIVE: Anterior approaches to the lumbar spine provide wide exposure that facilitates placement of large grafts with high fusion rates. There are limited data on the effects of obesity on perioperative complications. METHODS: Data from consecutive patients undergoing anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) from 2007 to 2016 at a single academic center were analyzed. The primary outcome was any perioperative complication. Complications were divided into those occurring intraoperatively and those occurring postoperatively. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the association of obesity and other variables with these complications. An estimation table was used to identify a body mass index (BMI) threshold associated with increased risk of postoperative complication. RESULTS: A total of 938 patients were identified, and the mean age was 57 years; 511 were females (54.5%). The mean BMI was 28.7 kg/m2, with 354 (37.7%) patients classified as obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2). Forty patients (4.3%) underwent a lateral transthoracic approach, while the remaining 898 (95.7%) underwent a transabdominal retroperitoneal approach. Among patients undergoing transabdominal retroperitoneal ALIF, complication rates were higher for obese patients than for nonobese patients (37.0% vs 28.7%, p = 0.010), a difference that was driven primarily by postoperative complications (36.1% vs 26.0%, p = 0.001) rather than intraoperative complications (3.2% vs 4.3%, p = 0.416). Obese patients had higher rates of ileus (11.7% vs 7.2%, p = 0.020), wound complications (11.4% vs 3.4%, p < 0.001), and urinary tract infections (UTI) (5.0% vs 2.5%, p = 0.049). In a multivariate model, age, obesity, and number of ALIF levels fused were associated with an increased risk of postoperative complication. An estimation table including 19 candidate cut-points, odds ratios, and adjusted p values found a BMI ≥ 31 kg/m2 to have the highest association with postoperative complication (p = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Obesity is associated with increased postoperative complications in ALIF, including ileus, wound complications, and UTI. ALIF is a safe and effective procedure. However, patients with a BMI ≥ 31 kg/m2 should be counseled on their increased risks and warrant careful preoperative medical optimization and close monitoring in the postoperative setting.

The effect of obesity on perioperative morbidity in oblique lumbar interbody fusion.

OBJECTIVE: Obese patients have been shown to have longer operative times and more complications from surgery. However, for obese patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery, these differences may not be as significant. In the lateral position, it is thought that obesity is less of an issue because gravity pulls the visceral fat away from the spine; however, this observation is primarily anecdotal and based on expert opinion. The authors performed oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and they report on the perioperative morbidity in obese and nonobese patients. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent OLIF performed by 3 spine surgeons and 1 vascular surgeon at the University of California, San Francisco, from 2013 to 2018. Data collected included demographic variables; approach-related factors such as operative time, blood loss, and expected temporary approach-related sequelae; and overall complications. Patients were categorized according to their body mass index (BMI). Obesity was defined as a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2, and severe obesity was defined as a BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2. RESULTS: There were 238 patients (95 males and 143 females). There were no significant differences between the obese and nonobese groups in terms of sex, levels fused, or smoking status. For the entire cohort, there was no difference in operative time, blood loss, or complications when comparing obese and nonobese patients. However, a subset analysis of the 77 multilevel OLIFs that included L5-S1 demonstrated that the operative times for the nonobese group was 223.55 ± 57.93 minutes, whereas it was 273.75 ± 90.07 minutes for the obese group (p = 0.004). In this subset, the expected approach-related sequela rate was 13.2% for the nonobese group, whereas it was 33.3% for the obese group (p = 0.039). However, the two groups had similar blood loss (p = 0.476) and complication rates (p = 0.876). CONCLUSIONS: Obesity and morbid obesity generally do not increase the operative time, blood loss, approach-related sequelae, or complications following OLIF. However, obese patients who undergo multilevel OLIF that includes the L5-S1 level do have longer operative times or a higher rate of expected approach-related sequelae. Obesity should not be considered a contraindication to multilevel OLIF, but patients should be informed of potentially increased morbidity if the L5-S1 level is to be included.

Predictors and Outcomes of Paramedian Incisional Hernia After Anterior Spine Exposure.

BACKGROUND: Anterior exposures for lumbar spine surgery are increasingly common for treating various spinal pathologies. A retroperitoneal approach via a paramedian incision has grown rapidly in popularity, but little is known about the risk of incisional hernia development with this technique. We sought to assess the incidence of paramedian incisional hernia development and identify risk factors that are associated with occurrence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of all patients who underwent anterior lumbar spine exposure by a paramedian approach between 2012 and 2017 at a single, tertiary medical center. The primary outcome was the development of postoperative paramedian incisional hernia. RESULTS: Of the 735 patients included in the study, 445 (60.5%) were women, and the mean (standard deviation) age of all patients was 60 y (12.4). Nearly all (97.4%) paramedian approaches were performed with a vascular surgeon present. Median follow-up time was 10 mo (interquartile range 3.5-19.9). Postoperative paramedian hernia developed in 20 patients (2.7%), of which 14 underwent repair. The mean (standard deviation) size of the hernia was 13.5 cm (5.5); 9 of 14 (64%) were repaired with synthetic mesh, whereas 3 of 14 (21%) required bowel resection. On multivariate analysis, risk factors associated with hernia development were male gender (0.045), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class (0.039), history of abdominal surgery (P = 0.013), and postoperative intensive care unit admission (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: A paramedian approach for anterior lumbar spine exposure resulted in a low rate of incisional hernia with minimal morbidity. Surgeons involved in these collaborative procedures should consider the risk factors that predispose patients to develop these hernias.

Outcomes of arterial bypass preceding resection of retroperitoneal masses involving major vessels.

BACKGROUND: Current surgical management of retroperitoneal masses involving major vessels now includes complete en bloc resection with in situ venous, arterial, or combined reconstruction. No studies have investigated preresection arterial bypass for continuous lower extremity perfusion during definitive resection. Here, we characterize and compare the outcomes of surgery for retroperitoneal masses with major vascular involvement by a two-stage approach (femoral-femoral bypass preceding resection) and the traditional one-stage approach (consecutive resection and in situ vascular reconstruction). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent resection of retroperitoneal masses and reconstruction of major arterial or venous structures from 2004 to 2016. Outcomes were compared with unpaired t-tests, chi-squared tests, and Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: Eight patients underwent a two-stage procedure, and seven underwent a one-stage procedure for retroperitoneal masses with vascular involvement. Mean (±SD) oncologic resection time (443 ± 215 versus 648 ± 128 min, P = 0.047) and postoperative ICU stay (0.9 ± 1.3 versus 4.4 ± 2.9 d, P = 0.018) were significantly shorter for the two-stage approach. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first report of a two-stage approach for resection of retroperitoneal masses with major vessel involvement. Femoral-femoral arterial bypass before definitive resection could be a viable option for improving intraoperative vascular control and decreasing perioperative complications in these complex procedures.

Management of aortic injury during minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion.

PURPOSE: Minimally invasive lateral approaches to the lumbar spine allow for interbody fusion with good visualization of the disk space, minimal blood loss, and decreased length of stay. Major neurologic, vascular, and visceral complications are rare with this approach; however, the steps in management for severe vascular injuries are not well defined. We present a case report of aortic injury during lateral interbody fusion and discuss the use of endovascular repair. METHODS: This study is a case report of an intraoperative aortic injury. RESULTS: A 59-year-old male with ankylosing spondylitis suffered an acute L1 Chance fracture after mechanical fall. He was taken to the operating room for a T10-L4 posterior instrumented fusion followed by a minimally invasive L1-L2 lateral interbody fusion for anterior column support. During the discectomy, brisk arterial bleeding was encountered due to an aortic injury. The vascular surgery team expanded the incision in an attempt to control the bleeding but with limited success. The patient underwent intraoperative angiogram with placement of stent grafts at the level of the injury followed by completion of the interbody fusion. Despite the potentially catastrophic nature of this injury, the patient made a good recovery and was discharged home in stable condition with no new neurologic deficits. CONCLUSIONS: This case highlights the importance of immediate recognition and imaging of any potential vascular injury during minimally invasive lateral interbody fusion. Given the poor outcomes associated with attempted open repair, endovascular techniques provide a valuable tool for the treatment of these complex injuries with significantly less morbidity.