Prospective same day discharge instrumented lumbar spine surgery - a forty patient consecutive series.

PURPOSE: Outpatient lumbar decompression surgeries have been successfully performed in France for over twenty years, earning acceptance. However, outpatient instrumented lumbar spine procedures and arthroplasties are less documented. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, efficiency, and safety of outpatient lumbar instrumented surgery. METHODS: A prospective single-center study involving three experienced surgeons was conducted from September 2020 to September 2021, with a minimum six-month postoperative follow-up. Inclusion criteria comprised patients aged 18 to 75 eligible for same-day discharge, undergoing single-level lumbar spinal fusion or arthroplasty via anterior or posterior Wiltse approach. The primary endpoint was assessing the percentage of successful outpatient discharges (within twelve hours), with secondary endpoints including perioperative/postoperative complications and discharge pain prescriptions in terms of frequency and severity. RESULTS: Forty patients (mean age: 44 years; 16/24 male/female ratio) underwent surgery, including 18 lumbar arthroplasties, twelve ALIF, and ten TLIF procedures. The majority of surgeries were performed at L4-L5 (18 procedures) and L5-S1 levels (22 procedures). 95% (38/40) of patients were successfully discharged within twelve hours, with only two patients discharged the following day. No postoperative hematomas, serious adverse events, or revision surgeries were noted. CONCLUSION: 95% of patients were discharged successfully within twelve hours following outpatient lumbar fusion surgery, with a 100% patient satisfaction rate. Specific technical solutions were not necessary, and oral pain relief sufficed. Patient selection and education, including early pain management, played crucial roles in complication avoidance. This study underscores the safety of outpatient instrumented lumbar spine procedures, leading to cost reduction and expedited recovery.

Safe working zones using the minimally invasive lateral retroperitoneal transpsoas approach: a morphometric study.

PURPOSE: The minimally invasive lateral retroperitoneal transpsoas approach is a recent technique developed for lumbar interbody fusion and discectomy. The proximity of the retroperitoneal vessels and ventral nerve roots to the surgical pathway increases the risk of injury to these anatomical structures. A precise knowledge of the regional anatomy of the lumbar plexus is required for safe passage through the psoas muscle. Preoperative examination of the axial MRI images will allow the surgeon to observe the neural structures at the operative levels and confirm that abdominal vessels do not obstruct the lateral disc space. The objective of this study was to determine the anatomic position of the ventral nerve roots and the retroperitoneal vessels in relation to the vertebral body in the degenerative spine and to delineate a safe working zone using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated lumbar spine MRI in 78 patients (from L1-L2 to L4-L5). The total number of lumbar vertebrae measured was 304 levels. Sagittal MRI sections were used to measure disc height (anterior, middle, posterior). Axial MRI sections were used to measure the sagittal and transversal vertebral endplate diameters, the overlap between ventral nerve roots and the posterior border of the lower endplate of the vertebral body, and the overlap between the retroperitoneal vessels and the anterior border of the lower endplate of the vertebral body. The safe zone was subsequently calculated. It was defined as the relative lower endplate vertebral body sagittal diameter that is anterior to the nerve root and is posterior to the retroperitoneal vessels. RESULTS: The safe working zone was 75.3% of the lower endplate of the vertebral body sagittal diameter at L1-L2, 59.5% at L2-L3, 51.9% at L3-L4 and 37.8% at L4-L5 levels. This area significantly decreases from L1-L2 to L4-L5 (p < 0.05). Compared with L1-L2, L2-L3 levels, the more anterior position of the nerve root and the more posterior position of the retroperitoneal vessels at the L4-L5 level causes a significant reduction of this area. Compared with the L3-L4 level, we observed that the safe zone decrease was simply secondary to the more anterior position of the nerve roots at the L4-L5 level. CONCLUSION: Preoperative planning and safe zone delineation are a simple method to assess the relative position of neural and vascular anatomic structures in relation to the surgical area. This method can help spine surgeons to prevent perioperative complications.

[Spinal epidural angiolipoma: a case report]. / Angiolipome épidural: A propos d'un cas.

Spinal epidural angiolipoma is a rare tumor revealed by a slowly progressive paraplegia. We reported a case of a 44-year-old female and point out the peculiar pattern of this lesion characterized by the prominence of the vascular component over the lipomatous component. Recognition of this entity is important because this is a benign and curable cause of paraplegia.

Incidental durotomy during spine surgery: incidence, management and complications. A retrospective review.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review of a series of patients who underwent spinal surgery at a single spine unit during a 1 year period. OBJECTIVES: To assess the incidence, treatment, clinical consequence, complications of incidental durotomy during spine surgery and results of 37 months clinical follow-up. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Incidental durotomy is an underestimated and relatively adverse event during spinal surgery. Several consequences of inadequately treated dural tears have been reported. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on 1326 consecutive patients who underwent spinal surgery performed in one French spine unit from January 2005 to December 2005. We excluded from this study patients treated for emergency spine cases. RESULTS: Fifty-one dural tears were identified (3.84%). Incidental durotomies were associated with anterior cervical approach in 1 case, with posterior cervical approach in 1 case, with anterior retroperitoneal approach in 1 case and with posterior thoracolumbar approach in 48 cases. In addition, any clinically significant durotomy unrecognised during surgical procedure were included. Thirteen patients presented postoperative complications including 7 cerebrospinal fluid leaks, 2 wound infections, 2 postoperative haematomas, and 2 pseudomeningoceles. Nine of these 13 patients required a revision procedure. A mean follow-up of 37 months showed good long-term clinical results. CONCLUSIONS: Incidental durotomy is a common complication of spine surgery. All incidental durotomies must be repaired primarily. Dural tears that were immediately recognised and treated accordingly did not lead to any significant sequelae at a mean follow-up of 37 months. However, long-term follow-up studies will be needed to confirm this finding. The risks associated with dural tears and cerebrospinal fluid leaks are serious and should be discussed with any patients undergoing spine surgery.