Literature DB >> 19722824

Minimally invasive spine technology and minimally invasive spine surgery: a historical review.

Jeffrey H Oppenheimer1, Igor DeCastro, Dennis E McDonnell.   

Abstract

The trend of using smaller operative corridors is seen in various surgical specialties. Neurosurgery has also recently embraced minimal access spine technique, and it has rapidly evolved over the past 2 decades. There has been a progression from needle access, small incisions with adaptation of the microscope, and automated percutaneous procedures to endoscopically and laparoscopically assisted procedures. More recently, new muscle-sparing technology has come into use with tubular access. This has now been adapted to the percutaneous placement of spinal instrumentation, including intervertebral spacers, rods, pedicle screws, facet screws, nucleus replacement devices, and artificial discs. New technologies involving hybrid procedures for the treatment of complex spine trauma are now on the horizon. Surgical corridors have been developed utilizing the interspinous space for X-STOP placement to treat lumbar stenosis in a minimally invasive fashion. The direct lateral retroperitoneal corridor has allowed for minimally invasive access to the anterior spine. In this report the authors present a chronological, historical perspective of minimal access spine technique and minimally invasive technologies in the lumbar, thoracic, and cervical spine from 1967 through 2009. Due to a low rate of complications, minimal soft tissue trauma, and reduced blood loss, more spine procedures are being performed in this manner. Spine surgery now entails shorter hospital stays and often is carried out on an outpatient basis. With education, training, and further research, more of our traditional open surgical management will be augmented or replaced by these technologies and approaches in the future.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19722824     DOI: 10.3171/2009.7.FOCUS09121

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurg Focus        ISSN: 1092-0684            Impact factor:   4.047


  53 in total

1.  The efficacy of minimally invasive discectomy compared with open discectomy: a meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Hormuzdiyar H Dasenbrock; Stephen P Juraschek; Lonni R Schultz; Timothy F Witham; Daniel M Sciubba; Jean-Paul Wolinsky; Ziya L Gokaslan; Ali Bydon
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2012-03-09

Review 2.  Paradigm changes in spine surgery: evolution of minimally invasive techniques.

Authors:  Zachary A Smith; Richard G Fessler
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurol       Date:  2012-06-19       Impact factor: 42.937

3.  [Indications for deformity correction with minimally invasive spondylodesis].

Authors:  C Wimmer; T Pfandlsteiner
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 4.  MIS lateral spine surgery: a systematic literature review of complications, outcomes, and economics.

Authors:  Jeff A Lehmen; Edward J Gerber
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Morphometry of lumbar spinous process via three dimensional CT reconstruction in a Chinese population.

Authors:  Bo Ran; Qiang Li; Baoqing Yu; Xiangyang Chen; Kaijin Guo
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-01-15

Review 6.  "One and a half" minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: single level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with adjacent segment unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression for spondylolisthesis with bisegmental stenosis.

Authors:  Christoph Wipplinger; Carolin Melcher; R Nick Hernandez; Sara Lener; Rodrigo Navarro-Ramirez; Sertac Kirnaz; Franziska Anna Schmidt; Eliana Kim; Roger Härtl
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-12

Review 7.  Minimally invasive spine surgery: systematic review.

Authors:  Péter Banczerowski; Gábor Czigléczki; Zoltán Papp; Róbert Veres; Harry Zvi Rappaport; János Vajda
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2014-09-10       Impact factor: 3.042

Review 8.  Complications associated with the initial learning curve of minimally invasive spine surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  Joseph A Sclafani; Choll W Kim
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  IPD without bony decompression versus conventional surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: 2-year results of a double-blind randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Wouter A Moojen; Mark P Arts; Wilco C H Jacobs; Erik W van Zwet; M Elske van den Akker-van Marle; Bart W Koes; Carmen Lam Vleggeert-Lankamp; Wilco C Peul
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-01-14       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  The Felix-trial. Double-blind randomization of interspinous implant or bony decompression for treatment of spinal stenosis related intermittent neurogenic claudication.

Authors:  Wouter A Moojen; Mark P Arts; Ronald Brand; Bart W Koes; Wilco C Peul
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2010-05-27       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.