Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg ; 85(2): 171-181, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37506744

ABSTRACT

Cervical laminoplasty is an increasingly popular surgical option for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) and ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL). Over the past few decades, there have been substantial developments in both surgical technique and hardware options. As the field of cervical surgery rapidly evolves, there is a timely need to reassess the evolving complications associated with newer techniques. This review aims to synthesize the available literature on cervical laminoplasty and associated mechanical complications pertaining to different laminoplasty hinge fixation options.


Subject(s)
Laminoplasty , Spinal Cord Diseases , Spondylosis , Humans , Laminoplasty/adverse effects , Laminoplasty/methods , Treatment Outcome , Spondylosis/diagnostic imaging , Spondylosis/surgery , Spondylosis/complications , Spinal Cord Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Spinal Cord Diseases/surgery , Cervical Vertebrae/surgery , Retrospective Studies
2.
JBJS Rev ; 9(7)2021 07 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34319968

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Traditional pedicle screws are currently the gold standard to achieve stable 3-column fixation of the degenerative lumbar spine. However, there are cases in which pedicle screw fixation may not be ideal. Due to their starting point lateral to the pars interarticularis, pedicle screws require a relatively wide dissection along with a medialized trajectory directed toward the centrally located neural elements and prevertebral vasculature. In addition, low bone mineral density remains a major risk factor for pedicle screw loosening, pullout, and pseudarthrosis. The purpose of this article is to review the indications, advantages, disadvantages, and complications associated with posterior fixation techniques of the degenerative lumbar spine beyond the traditional pedicle screws. METHODS: Comprehensive literature searches of the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were performed for 5 methods of posterior spinal fixation, including (1) cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screws, (2) transfacet screws, (3) translaminar screws, (4) spinous process plates, and (5) fusion mass screws and hooks. Articles that had been published between January 1, 1990, and January 1, 2020, were considered. Non-English-language articles and studies involving fixation of the cervical or thoracic spine were excluded from our review. RESULTS: After reviewing over 1,700 articles pertaining to CBT and non-pedicular fixation techniques, a total of 284 articles met our inclusion criteria. CBT and transfacet screws require less-extensive exposure and paraspinal muscle dissection compared with traditional pedicle screws and may therefore reduce blood loss, postoperative pain, and length of hospital stay. In addition, several methods of non-pedicular fixation such as translaminar and fusion mass screws have trajectories that are directed away from or posterior to the spinal canal, potentially decreasing the risk of neurologic injury. CBT, transfacet, and fusion mass screws can also be used as salvage techniques when traditional pedicle screw constructs fail. CONCLUSIONS: CBT and non-pedicular fixation may be preferred in certain lumbar degenerative cases, particularly among patients with osteoporosis. Limitations of non-pedicular techniques include their reliance on intact posterior elements and the lack of 3-column fixation of the spine. As a result, transfacet and translaminar screws are infrequently used as the primary method of fixation. CBT, transfacet, and translaminar screws are effective in augmenting interbody fixation and have been shown to significantly improve fusion rates and clinical outcomes compared with stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


Subject(s)
Pedicle Screws , Spinal Fusion , Cortical Bone/surgery , Humans , Lumbar Vertebrae/surgery , Lumbosacral Region , Spinal Fusion/methods
3.
Hepatol Commun ; 1(7): 595-608, 2017 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29404481

ABSTRACT

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the main cause of mortality in patients with chronic viral hepatitis (CVH). We determined the impact of surveillance and treatments on long-term outcomes in patients with CVH who developed HCC. Between 1984 and 2014, 333 patients with HCC and with hepatitis B or hepatitis C virus infection were evaluated. An adjusted lead time bias interval was added to patients with HCC who presented with HCC (no surveillance), and their survival was compared to patients whose HCC was detected by surveillance. After HCC treatments, survival rates within and beyond 3 years of follow-up were compared. In 175 (53%) patients, HCC was detected through surveillance using alpha-fetoprotein and abdominal ultrasound examinations. Compared to 158 (47%) patients with HCC who had no surveillance, more patients with HCC detected by surveillance received surgical and locoregional treatments (P < 0.0001 to P < 0.001), and their 1-, 3-, and 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates were significantly higher (P < 0.001 for both). During the first 3 years of follow-up, patients with HCC receiving liver transplantation had similar survival rates as those with liver resection or radiofrequency ablation (RFA); however, due to HCC recurrence, survival in resection and RFA patients became significantly less when followed beyond 3 years (P = 0.001 to P = 0.04). Factors associated with mortality included tumors beyond University of California at San Francisco criteria (hazard ratio [HR] 2.02; P < 0.0001), Child-Pugh class B and C (HR, 1.58-2.26; P = 0.043 to P = 0.015, respectively), alpha-fetoprotein per log ng/mL increase (HR, 1.30; P < 0.0001), previous antiviral therapy in hepatitis B virus patients (HR, 0.62; P = 0.032), and treatments other than liver transplantation (HR, 2.38-6.45; P < 0.0001 to P < 0.003). Conclusion. Patients with HCC detected by surveillance had prolonged survival. Due to HCC recurrence, survival rates after liver resection and RFA were lower when followed beyond 3 years after treatments. (Hepatology Communications 2017;1:595-608).

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...