RESUMEN
Conventional open laminectomy has long been considered one of the important surgical options for lumbar central stenosis owing to its positive outcomes. However, newer approaches have emerged as alternatives, including full-endoscopic and biportal endoscopic laminectomy. Therefore, a comparison of the outcomes that are associated with each of these surgical methods is warranted. This prospective multicenter trial, initiated in February 2019, compared the outcomes of three lumbar central stenosis surgical approaches: open laminectomy (OPEN), uniportal endoscopy (UNIPORT), and biportal endoscopy (BIPORT). Among 115 participants from seven centers, one-year follow-ups assessed laboratory, radiological, and clinical outcomes. Despite all groups showing adequate decompression and clinical improvement, the OPEN group exhibited less improvement in Visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain scores (p < 0.05) and significant postoperative increases in most laboratory markers. Furthermore, the OPEN group experienced a significant decrease in multifidus muscle cross-sectional area compared to endoscopic groups (p < 0.001). Each surgical techniques produced similar clinical outcomes and dural space expansion. However, endoscopic surgery was associated with better muscle preservation and better relief of back pain. Endoscopic surgery is a reasonable alternative to conventional laminectomy for treating lumbar central stenosis.This trial was registered on CRIS (Clinical Research Information Service, KCT0004355).
Asunto(s)
Descompresión Quirúrgica , Endoscopía , Laminectomía , Vértebras Lumbares , Estenosis Espinal , Humanos , Laminectomía/métodos , Estenosis Espinal/cirugía , Masculino , Descompresión Quirúrgica/métodos , Femenino , Vértebras Lumbares/cirugía , Endoscopía/métodos , Estudios Prospectivos , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
STUDY DESIGN: The study included 2 fresh-frozen cadavers. OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the positional relationship between surgical instruments and nerve roots during full endoscopic facet-sparing (FE fs-TLIF) and full endoscopic facet-resecting (FE fr-TLIF) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and propose safe instrumentation insertion procedures and recommend cage glider designs aimed at protecting nerve roots. BACKGROUND: Endoscopic surgical techniques are increasingly used for minimally invasive lumbar fusion surgery, with FE fr-TLIF and FE fs-TLIF being common approaches. However, the risk of nerve root injury remains a significant concern during these procedures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eight experienced endoscopic spine surgeons performed uniportal FE fr-TLIF and FE fs-TLIF on cadaveric lumbar spines, totaling 16 surgeries. Postoperation, soft tissues were removed to assess the positional relationship between the cage entry point and nerve roots. Distances between the cage entry point, traversing nerve root, and exiting nerve root were measured. Safe instrumentation design and insertion procedures were determined. RESULTS: In FE fr-TLIF, the mean distance between the cage entry point and traversing nerve root was significantly shorter compared with FE fs-TLIF (3.30 ± 1.35 vs . 8.58 ± 2.47 mm, respectively; P < 0.0001). Conversely, the mean distance between the cage entry point and the exiting nerve root was significantly shorter in FE fs-TLIF compared with FE fr-TLIF (3.73 ± 1.97 vs . 6.90 ± 1.36 mm, respectively; P < 0.0001). For FE fr-TLIF, prioritizing the protection of the traversing root using a 2-bevel tip cage glider was crucial. In contrast, for FE fs-TLIF, a single-bevel tip cage glider placed in the caudal location was recommended. CONCLUSION: This study elucidates the anatomic relationship between cage entry points and nerve roots in uniportal endoscopic lumbar fusion surgery. Protection strategies should prioritize the traversing root in FE fr-TLIF and the exiting root in FE fs-TLIF, with corresponding variations in surgical techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V.
Asunto(s)
Cadáver , Endoscopía , Vértebras Lumbares , Fusión Vertebral , Raíces Nerviosas Espinales , Humanos , Vértebras Lumbares/cirugía , Fusión Vertebral/métodos , Fusión Vertebral/efectos adversos , Fusión Vertebral/instrumentación , Raíces Nerviosas Espinales/cirugía , Raíces Nerviosas Espinales/lesiones , Raíces Nerviosas Espinales/anatomía & histología , Endoscopía/métodosRESUMEN
This study aimed to categorize contrast media images associated with epidural, subdural, and combined epidural-subdural anesthesia in patients who had undergone fluoroscopy-guided epidural anesthesia using contrast media combined with monitored anesthesia care (MAC) targeted at deep sedation, incorporating capnography over 5 years. Additionally, a correlation was established between the anesthetic effects and radiographic findings according to the categorized imaging appearances. This study included 628 patients who underwent endoscopic, open, or fusion surgery under epidural anesthesia at Nanoori Hospital in Gangnam between March 2018 and September 2023. Fluoroscopy-guided epidural anesthesia using contrast media combined with MAC and capnography was used. The dataset included detailed radiographic imaging, nursing, and anesthesia records. Distinct patterns of anesthesia administration were observed, with 49%, 19.6%, and 31% of patients receiving epidural, subdural, and combined epidural-subdural anesthesia, respectively. The incidence and duration of motor block were significantly different among the three groups. Additionally, subdural anesthesia displayed a higher incidence of motor block and a prolonged motor deficit duration than epidural anesthesia. Fluoroscopic guidance using a contrast medium for epidural and subdural anesthesia ensures precise space identification and prevents serious anesthetic complications. Our findings suggest the potential to achieve stable anesthesia, particularly using subdural and combined epidural-subdural anesthesia.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Effective 1 January 2017, single-level endoscopic lumbar discectomy received a Category I Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code 62380. However, no work relative value units (RVUs) are currently assigned to the procedure. An international team of endoscopic spine surgeons conducted a study, endorsed by several spine societies, analyzing the learning curve, difficulty, psychological intensity, and estimated work RVUs of endoscopic lumbar spinal decompression compared with other common lumbar spine surgeries. METHODS: A survey comparing CPT 62380 to 10 other comparator CPT codes reflective of common spine surgeries was developed to assess the work RVUs in terms of learning curve, difficulty, psychological intensity, and work effort using a paired Rasch method. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 542 spine specialists. Of 322 respondents, 150 completed the survey for a 43.1% completion rate. Rasch analysis of the submitted responses statistically corroborated common knowledge that the learning curve with lumbar endoscopic spinal surgery is steeper and more complex than with traditional translaminar lumbar decompression surgeries. It also showed that the psychological stress and mental and work effort with the lumbar endoscopic decompression surgery were perceived to be higher by responding spine surgeons compared with posterior comparator decompression and fusion surgeries and even posterior interbody and posterolateral fusion surgeries. The regression analysis of work effort vs procedural difficulty showed the real-world evaluation of the lumbar endoscopic decompression surgery described in CPT code 62380 with a calculated work RVU of 18.2464. CONCLUSION: The Rasch analysis suggested the valuation for the endoscopic lumbar decompression surgery should be higher than for standard lumbar surgeries: 111.1% of the laminectomy with exploration and/or decompression of spinal cord and/or cauda equina (CPT 63005), 118.71% of the laminectomy code (CPT 63047), which includes foraminotomy and facetectomy, 152.1% of the hemilaminectomy code (CPT 63030), and 259.55% of the interlaminar or interspinous process stabilization/distraction without decompression code (CPT 22869). This research methodology was endorsed by the Interamerican Society for Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery (SICCMI), the Mexican Society of Spinal Surgeons (AMCICO), the International Society For Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery (ISMISS), the Brazilian Spine Society (SBC), the Society for Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery (SMISS), the Korean Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery (KOMISS), and the International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery (ISASS). CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study provides an updated reimbursement recommendation for endoscopic spine surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a multidisciplinary approach aimed at reducing the length of hospital stay, improving patient outcomes, and reducing the overall cost of care. Although ERAS protocols have been widely adopted in various surgical fields, their application in cranial surgery remains relatively limited. METHODS: Considering that the aging of the population presents significant challenges to healthcare systems, and there is currently no ERAS protocol available for geriatric patients over the age of 65 requiring cranial surgery, this article proposes a new ERAS protocol for this population by analyzing successful ERAS protocols and optimal perioperative care for geriatric patients described in the literature. RESULTS: Our aim is to develop a feasible, safe, and effective protocol for geriatric patients undergoing elective craniotomy, which includes preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative assessments and management, as well as outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: This multidisciplinary and evidence-based ERAS protocol has the potential to reduce perioperative morbidity, improve functional recovery, and enhance postoperative outcomes after cranial surgery in elderly. Further research will be necessary to establish strict guidelines.
Asunto(s)
Recuperación Mejorada Después de la Cirugía , Humanos , Anciano , Craneotomía/métodos , Atención Perioperativa/métodos , Recuperación de la Función , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/prevención & control , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Procedimientos Neuroquirúrgicos/métodos , Tiempo de InternaciónRESUMEN
Cervical radiculopathy is a common and disabling cervical condition characterized by symptoms including axial neck pain, radicular pain, weakness, and numbness in one or both arms. Common causes include herniated discs and foraminal stenosis, often accompanied by varying degrees of degenerative disc disease and uncovertebral joint hypertrophy. In the treatment of cervical radiculopathy, there is an increasing preference for posterior foraminotomy over anterior cervical discectomy and fusion due to the avoidance of fusion-related complications. As endoscopic spine surgery techniques continue to evolve, there is a rising interest in posterior endoscopic cervical foraminotomy and posterior endoscopic cervical discectomy as effective treatments for cervical radiculopathy. Because these procedures can performed through a single subcentimeter incision with minimal soft tissue damage, they can often be carried out as ambulatory procedures. In this narrative review, we examined current literature addressing the indications, surgical techniques, outcomes, and potential complications associated with posterior cervical endoscopic approaches.
Asunto(s)
Foraminotomía , Desplazamiento del Disco Intervertebral , Radiculopatía , Humanos , Foraminotomía/métodos , Radiculopatía/etiología , Radiculopatía/cirugía , Radiculopatía/diagnóstico , Vértebras Cervicales/cirugía , Discectomía/métodos , Desplazamiento del Disco Intervertebral/cirugía , Desplazamiento del Disco Intervertebral/complicaciones , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Background: Traditionally, open wide laminectomy and discectomy have been advocated for the treatment of cauda equina syndrome caused by lumbar disc herniation. We aimed to evaluate the technical feasibility of uniportal interlaminar endoscopy in treating cauda equina syndrome. Methods: Nine patients with cauda equina syndrome underwent uniportal endoscopic decompression and discectomy from December 2020 to December 2022. Data were collected retrospectively. Patients diagnosed with cauda equina syndrome were operated on within 6 hours of presentation to the hospital. The visual analogue score (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and bladder/bowel score were used to measure the outcome. Results: Analysis showed that VAS scores for leg pain and back pain significantly decreased from preoperative scores of 8.22±0.79 and 4.67±1.76 to postoperative day 1 scores of 0.67±0.67 and 2.56±1.42 (p<.05). The ODI scores improved from preoperative 52.33±11.93 to postoperative (day 1) 14±6.80. Eight patients had early recovery (1 week) of bladder and bowel functions, and one had delayed recovery at 8 months. None of the patients had a residual bowel/bladder deficit. Macnab's criteria outcomes were excellent in all patients at the final follow-up. Conclusions: Uniportal endoscopic lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy with bilateral decompression and subsequent interlaminar endoscopic lumbar discectomy is a safe and effective minimally invasive course of treatment for cauda equina syndrome as an alternative to open laminectomy in our cohort of patients.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Thoracic ossification of ligamentum flavum (TOLF) is a rare disease that often results in worsening neurologic sequelae if left untreated. Although the gold standard treatment for TOLF is open posterior laminectomy, it is often accompanied by high rates of complications and perioperative morbidity. There have been studies looking into feasibility of endoscopic posterior decompression for TOLF, citing potential for lower perioperative morbidity and achieving similar functional outcomes to its open laminectomy counterparts. We provide an up-to-date systematic review of clinical outcomes after endoscopic posterior decompression for TOLF from the latest assemblage of evidence. METHODS: A systematic review of the technique was conducted from May 2000 to May 2023. Articles were selected based on PRISMA guidelines. Eligibility of studies was independently by 2 reviewers, with disagreements resolved by a third author. RESULTS: Nineteen primary references comprising 337 patients with TOLF who underwent endoscopic posterior decompression were included in the systematic review. Mean follow-up time across all studies ranged from 8.9 to 65.3 months. Mean age ranged from 51.2 to 63 years, with mean intraoperative blood loss ranging from 15 to 62 mL. There is significant improvement in visual analog scale (VAS) score, VAS back, VAS leg, modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, and Oswestry Disability Index compared with preoperative recorded values across all studies, with low rates of complications reported. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic posterior spinal decompression is a safe and effective technique for treatment of TOLF, with a low rate of complications and improvement in pain and function.
Asunto(s)
Ligamento Amarillo , Osificación Heterotópica , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Laminectomía/métodos , Osteogénesis , Ligamento Amarillo/cirugía , Osificación Heterotópica/cirugía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Vértebras Torácicas/cirugía , Descompresión Quirúrgica/métodos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Background and Objectives: The purpose was to compaSre medium-term clinical and radiological outcomes of Partial Pediculotomy, Partial Vertebrotomy (PPPV) Posterior Endoscopic Cervical Decompression (PECD) surgery versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) for patients with cervical disc herniations and foraminal pathologies. Materials and Methods: A prospective registry of patients who had undergone either PPPV PECD surgery or ACDF surgery for cervical disc herniation or foraminal pathologies under a single fellowship-trained spine surgeon was performed. The baseline characteristics and operative details including complications were recorded for all included patients. The clinical outcomes evaluated include VAS, MJOA, motor score, and NDI and MacNab's score. The radiological parameters in neutral-measured facet length, facet area, disc height, C2-C7 angle, neck tilt angle, T1 slope and thoracic inlet angle were also evaluated. Results: A total of 55 patients (29 PPPV PECD, 26 ACDF) were included, with mean follow-up periods of 21.9 and 32.3 months, respectively. Each cohort was noted to have a single case of surgical complication. Statistically significant changes of facet area (49.05 ± 14.50%) and facet length (52.71 ± 15.11%) were noted in the PPPV PECD group. At neutral alignment of the neck on a lateral X-ray, compared to ACDF, PPPV PECD had a statistically significant change in neck tilt angle (-11.68 ± 17.35°) and T1 slope angle (-11.69 ± 19.58°). Whilst both PPPV PECD and ACDF had significant improvements in VAS, MJOA and NDI postoperatively, PPPV PECD was found to be superior across all above scores at various follow-up timepoints compared to its ACDF counterparts. Conclusions: PPPV PECD surgery achieved a satisfactory radiological correction of neck alignment and significantly improved clinical outcomes at medium-term follow-up for our cohort of patients, highlighting its feasibility in treating patients with cervical disc herniations and foraminal pathologies.
Asunto(s)
Desplazamiento del Disco Intervertebral , Humanos , Desplazamiento del Disco Intervertebral/diagnóstico por imagen , Desplazamiento del Disco Intervertebral/cirugía , Vértebras Cervicales/diagnóstico por imagen , Vértebras Cervicales/cirugía , Cuello/cirugía , Radiografía , Descompresión , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios RetrospectivosAsunto(s)
Lipoma , Humanos , Lipoma/diagnóstico por imagen , Lipoma/cirugía , Vértebras Cervicales/cirugíaRESUMEN
Pain generator-based lumbar spinal decompression surgery is the backbone of modern spine care. In contrast to traditional image-based medical necessity criteria for spinal surgery, assessing the severity of neural element encroachment, instability, and deformity, staged management of common painful degenerative lumbar spine conditions is likely to be more durable and cost-effective. Targeting validated pain generators can be accomplished with simplified decompression procedures associated with lower perioperative complications and long-term revision rates. In this perspective article, the authors summarize the current concepts of successful management of spinal stenosis patients with modern transforaminal endoscopic and translaminar minimally invasive spinal surgery techniques. They represent the consensus statements of 14 international surgeon societies, who have worked in collaborative teams in an open peer-review model based on a systematic review of the existing literature and grading the strength of its clinical evidence. The authors found that personalized clinical care protocols for lumbar spinal stenosis rooted in validated pain generators can successfully treat most patients with sciatica-type back and leg pain including those who fail to meet traditional image-based medical necessity criteria for surgery since nearly half of the surgically treated pain generators are not shown on the preoperative MRI scan. Common pain generators in the lumbar spine include (a) an inflamed disc, (b) an inflamed nerve, (c) a hypervascular scar, (d) a hypertrophied superior articular process (SAP) and ligamentum flavum, (e) a tender capsule, (f) an impacting facet margin, (g) a superior foraminal facet osteophyte and cyst, (h) a superior foraminal ligament impingement, (i) a hidden shoulder osteophyte. The position of the key opinion authors of the perspective article is that further clinical research will continue to validate pain generator-based treatment protocols for lumbar spinal stenosis. The endoscopic technology platform enables spine surgeons to directly visualize pain generators, forming the basis for more simplified targeted surgical pain management therapies. Limitations of this care model are dictated by appropriate patient selection and mastering the learning curve of modern MIS procedures. Decompensated deformity and instability will likely continue to be treated with open corrective surgery. Vertically integrated outpatient spine care programs are the most suitable setting for executing such pain generator-focused programs.
RESUMEN
Personalized care models are dominating modern medicine. These models are rooted in teaching future physicians the skill set to keep up with innovation. In orthopedic surgery and neurosurgery, education is increasingly influenced by augmented reality, simulation, navigation, robotics, and in some cases, artificial intelligence. The postpandemic learning environment has also changed, emphasizing online learning and skill- and competency-based teaching models incorporating clinical and bench-top research. Attempts to improve work-life balance and minimize physician burnout have led to work-hour restrictions in postgraduate training programs. These restrictions have made it particularly challenging for orthopedic and neurosurgery residents to acquire the knowledge and skill set to meet the requirements for certification. The fast-paced flow of information and the rapid implementation of innovation require higher efficiencies in the modern postgraduate training environment. However, what is taught typically lags several years behind. Examples include minimally invasive tissue-sparing techniques through tubular small-bladed retractor systems, robotic and navigation, endoscopic, patient-specific implants made possible by advances in imaging technology and 3D printing, and regenerative strategies. Currently, the traditional roles of mentee and mentor are being redefined. The future orthopedic surgeons and neurosurgeons involved in personalized surgical pain management will need to be versed in several disciplines ranging from bioengineering, basic research, computer, social and health sciences, clinical study, trial design, public health policy development, and economic accountability. Solutions to the fast-paced innovation cycle in orthopedic surgery and neurosurgery include adaptive learning skills to seize opportunities for innovation with execution and implementation by facilitating translational research and clinical program development across traditional boundaries between clinical and nonclinical specialties. Preparing the future generation of surgeons to have the aptitude to keep up with the rapid technological advances is challenging for postgraduate residency programs and accreditation agencies. However, implementing clinical protocol change when the entrepreneur-investigator surgeon substantiates it with high-grade clinical evidence is at the heart of personalized surgical pain management.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: There is a lack of literature on indirect decompression in uniportal endoscopic posterolateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (EPTLIF). Our aim is to evaluate the dimensions of the spinal canal and contralateral foramen before and after EPTLIF. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of patients who underwent EPTLIF in a tertiary spine centre over a 2-year period. The cross-sectional area of the spinal canal and the contralateral foramen at the level of fusion were measured on magnetic resonance imaging scan at 1-day postoperation and at the final follow-up. Patients were grouped according to the decompression performed as per the clinician's judgement. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-two levels of fusion were performed in 120 patients. There was a statistically significant clinical improvement in visual analogue scale and Oswestry Disability Index scores postoperation. The measurements of the spinal canal area were 106.0 mm2, 138.8 mm2, and 195.5 mm2; while contralateral foraminal area were 73.2 mm2, 104.4 mm2, and 120.7 mm2 at preoperation, 1-day postoperation, and at the final follow-up, respectively (p < 0.001). For the subgroup analyses, spinal canal area measurements for the bilateral decompression cohort (n = 35) were 57.0 mm2, 123.9 mm2, and 191.8 mm2; for the ipsilateral decompression cohort (n = 42) were 89.3 mm2, 128.9 mm2, 183.3 mm2; and for the cohort without any decompression and only cage inserted (n = 75) were 138.3 mm2, 151.2 mm2, and 204.1 mm2 (p < 0.001). Contralateral foraminal area measurements were 73.3 mm2, 106.4 mm2 and 120.4 mm2 in the bilateral decompression cohort; 69.5 mm2, 99.0 mm2, 116.9 mm2 in the ipsilateral decompression cohort; and 75.1 mm2, 106.5 mm2, 122.9 mm2 in the cohort without any decompression (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Indirect decompression of both the spinal canal and the contralateral foramen can be achieved via EPTLIF. Decompression on an asymptomatic contralateral side is not necessary.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic spine surgery has been established as a practical, minimally invasive technique for decompression in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. However, there remains a paucity of studies prospective cohort study comparing uniportal lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy with bilateral decompression and unilateral biportal endoscopic unilateral laminotomy with bilateral decompression with open spinal decompression-both viable techniques with satisfactory clinical outcomes in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. OBJECTIVE/AIM: To compare the efficacy of UPE and BPE lumbar decompression surgery for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. METHODS: A prospective registry of patients who had undergone spinal decompression for lumbar stenosis via UPE or BPE under a single fellowship trained spine surgeon was studied. Baseline characteristics, initial clinical presentation, and operative details including complications were recorded for all included patients. Clinical outcomes, such as visual analogue scale and Oswestry Disability Index, were recorded at preoperative, immediate postoperative, 2-week, 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up periods. RESULTS: A total of 62 patients underwent endoscopic decompression surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis (29 UPE, 33 BPE). No significant baseline differences were found between uniportal and biportal decompression, when comparing operative duration (130 vs. 140 min; p = 0.30), intraoperative blood loss (5.4 vs. 6mLs; p = 0.05), and length of hospital stay (23.6 vs. 20.3 h; p = 0.35). Two patients (7%) who underwent uniportal endoscopic decompression required conversion to open surgery due to inadequate decompression. Intraoperative complication rates were significantly higher in the UPE group (13.4% vs. 0%, p < 0.05). VAS score (leg & back) and ODI improved significantly (p < 0.001) in both endoscopic decompression groups across all follow-up time points, with no appreciable statistical differences between both groups. CONCLUSION: UPE has the same efficacy as BPE in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. While UPE surgery enjoys added aesthetic benefits of only one wound, BPE had potentially lower risks of intraoperative complication, inadequate decompression, and conversion to open surgery during early period of learning curve.
Asunto(s)
Laminectomía , Estenosis Espinal , Humanos , Laminectomía/métodos , Descompresión Quirúrgica/métodos , Estudios de Cohortes , Estenosis Espinal/complicaciones , Estudios Prospectivos , Vértebras Lumbares/cirugía , Endoscopía/métodos , Sistema de Registros , Complicaciones Intraoperatorias/etiología , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Nondysraphic intramedullary lipomas of the cervical spine are extremely rare, and only a few cases have been reported. We aimed to provide a thorough review of the literature regarding patient characteristics, treatment options, and outcomes in these patients. We also provided an illustrative case from our institution, which we added to the pool of patients identified by our review. METHODS: Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, the literature in PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, and Scopus databases was searched. Nineteen studies were included in the final quantitative analysis. The Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool was used to assess the risk of bias. RESULTS: We identified 24 patients with nondysraphic cervical intradural intramedullary lipoma of the spinal cord. The patients were predominantly male (70.8%) with a mean age of 30.3 years. Quadriparesis was observed in 33.3% of the cases, while paraparesis occurred in 25% of the patients. Sensory disturbances were observed in 8.3% of the cases. In some patients, the presenting symptoms were neck pain (4.2%) and headache (4.2%). Surgical treatment was performed in 22 cases (91.7%). In 13 cases (54.2%) a subtotal removal was reached, and in 8 cases (33.3%) partial tumor removal was feasible. In 1 case (4.2%) a simple laminectomy was performed. Fourteen patients (58.3%) improved, 6 (25%) were unvaried, and 2 (8.3%) worsened. The mean follow-up was 30.8 months. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, surgical treatment can provide substantial spinal cord decompression improving or stabilizing the neurologic deficits. Experience from our case, along with analysis of reports from the literature, suggests that careful and controlled resection may provide benefits and avoid serious complications otherwise that result from aggressive resection.
Asunto(s)
Lipoma , Neoplasias de la Médula Espinal , Humanos , Masculino , Adulto , Femenino , Neoplasias de la Médula Espinal/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Médula Espinal/cirugía , Vértebras Cervicales/cirugía , Vértebras Cervicales/patología , Laminectomía , Lipoma/diagnóstico por imagen , Lipoma/cirugía , Lipoma/patología , Procedimientos Neuroquirúrgicos , Imagen por Resonancia MagnéticaRESUMEN
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PURPOSE: Postoperative evaluation of the cross-sectional area of paraspinal muscle and clinical findings in patients who had interlaminar route uniportal full endoscopic posterolateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (EPTLIF) after 2 years. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: There are limited short-term follow-up studies on efficacy, safety, and physiological changes with a 2-year follow-up. There is no study on paraspinal muscle cross-sectional area change in patients who had undergone uniportal EPTLIF. METHODS: We evaluated patients who underwent EPTLIF with a minimum 24-month follow-up. Clinical parameters of the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were measured at the preoperative, 1-week postoperative mark, postoperative 3-month mark, and final follow-up. Preoperative and 1-year postoperative magnetic resonance imaging measurement of preoperative and postoperative Kjaer grade, right and left psoas muscle mass area, and right and left paraspinal muscle mass area was performed. RESULTS: EPTLIF with a minimum 24-month follow-up of 35 levels was included. The complication rate was 6%, and the mean Bridwell's fusion grade was 1.37 (1-2). There was statistically significant improvement at 1 week, 3 months, and 2 years in VAS (4.11±1.23, 4.94±1.30, and 5.46±1.29) and in ODI (40.34±10.06, 46.69±9.14, and 49.63±8.68), respectively (p <0.05). Successful operation rate with excellent and good MacNab's criteria at 2 years was 97%. There was an increment of statistically significant bilateral psoas muscle cross-sectional area, right side (70.03±149.1 mm²) and left side (67.59±113.2 mm²) (p <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Uniportal EPTLIF achieved good fusion and improved clinical outcomes with favorable paraspinal musculature bulk at the 2-year follow-up.