Literature DB >> 26235463

Minimally invasive lumbar decompression-the surgical learning curve.

Junyoung Ahn1, Aamir Iqbal1, Blaine T Manning1, Spencer Leblang1, Daniel D Bohl1, Benjamin C Mayo1, Dustin H Massel1, Kern Singh2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Minimally invasive spine surgery (MIS) procedures carry an inherently difficult learning curve based upon anecdotal evidence. Few studies have investigated the surgeon's learning curve for MIS lumbar laminectomy or laminotomy with or without discectomy.
PURPOSE: To characterize the learning curve of a 1- or 2-level MIS lumbar decompression (LD) based on perioperative and postoperative parameters . STUDY DESIGN/
SETTING: Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained registry was used for this study. PATIENT SAMPLE: There were 228 consecutive patients who underwent a primary 1- or 2-level MIS LD by a single surgeon for degenerative spinal pathology from 2009 to 2014. From 2005 to 2006, 50 patients underwent 1- or 2-level open LD consecutively. OUTCOME MEASURES: Perioperative and postoperative outcomes (complications, visual analogue scale [VAS] scores, reoperations) were the outcome measures for this study.
METHODS: Patients were stratified into first and second groups as determined by the case number at which the procedural time reached a plateau. Demographics, comorbidity, pain scores, and surgical outcomes were compared between the first 50 patients and the subsequent 178 patients. The secondary analysis compared the surgical outcomes between the initial 50 MIS and 50 open LD patients. No funds were received in support of this work.
RESULTS: The initial cohort was older with a higher comorbidity burden (p<.05). However, body mass index, gender, smoking status, and ethnicity did not differ between cohorts. The initial cohort incurred a greater procedural time (p<.001) and longer length of hospitalization (p<.05) than the second cohort. Estimated blood loss (EBL), pain scores, complication rates, recurrent herniation rates, and reoperation rates were similar between groups. In the secondary analysis, the open LD patients demonstrated greater procedural time, higher EBL, and longer length of hospital stay than the MIS patients. However, the reoperation rate and 30-day readmission rate were not different between the MIS and open patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Continued surgical experience was associated with a reduced operative time, shorter length of hospitalization, and similar blood loss following an MIS LD. Independent of surgical experience, all patients demonstrated similar improvements in clinical outcomes. These findings appear to suggest that although surgical experience may improve perioperative parameters (operative time, length of hospitalization), an MIS LD may initially be performed safely without prior experience.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Complications; Learning; Lumbar decompression; Minimally invasive; Surgery; Technique

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26235463     DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.07.455

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine J        ISSN: 1529-9430            Impact factor:   4.166


  17 in total

1.  Accuracy of minimally invasive percutaneous thoracolumbar pedicle screws using 2D fluoroscopy: a retrospective review through 3D CT analysis.

Authors:  Mark J Winder; Paul M Gilhooly
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2017-06

Review 2.  Current state of minimally invasive spine surgery.

Authors:  Avani S Vaishnav; Yahya A Othman; Sohrab S Virk; Catherine Himo Gang; Sheeraz A Qureshi
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2019-06

Review 3.  Minimally invasive techniques for lumbar decompressions and fusions.

Authors:  Ankur S Narain; Fady Y Hijji; Jonathan S Markowitz; Krishna T Kudaravalli; Kelly H Yom; Kern Singh
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2017-12

4.  102 lumbar pedicle subtraction osteotomies: one surgeon's learning curve.

Authors:  Anouar Bourghli; Derek Cawley; Felipe Novoa; Manuela Rey; Abdulmajeed Alzakri; Daniel Larrieu; Jean-Marc Vital; Olivier Gille; Louis Boissiere; Ibrahim Obeid
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-01-30       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Relationship between surgeon volume and outcomes in spine surgery: a dose-response meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hui-Zi Li; Zhong Lin; Zong-Ze Li; Zeng-Yan Yang; Yang Zheng; Yong Li; Hua-Ding Lu
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2018-11

6.  HOW MANY REPETITIONS OF CHILD CARE SKILLS ARE REQUIRED FOR HEALTH WORKER STUDENTS TO ACHIEVE PROFICIENCY? LEARNING CURVE PATTERNS IN CHILD CARE SKILLS ACQUISITION.

Authors:  Zahra Emami Moghadam; Amir Emami Zeydi; Seyed Reza Mazlom; Fatemeh Sardar Abadi; Parastoo Majidi Pour; Malihe Davoudi; Elahe Banafsheh
Journal:  Mater Sociomed       Date:  2015-10-05

7.  Minimally invasive repair of a pseudomeningocele caused by a sheared intrathecal catheter following implantation of a drug delivery system.

Authors:  S Raju; P O Champagne; L Walsh; Daniel J Denis
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2017-12-06

Review 8.  Lower complication and reoperation rates for laminectomy rather than MI TLIF/other fusions for degenerative lumbar disease/spondylolisthesis: A review.

Authors:  Nancy E Epstein
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2018-03-07

Review 9.  Management of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: an evidence-based review.

Authors:  Augusto Covaro; Gemma Vilà-Canet; Ana García de Frutos; Maite T Ubierna; Francesco Ciccolo; Enric Caceres
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2017-03-13

10.  Implant survivorship analysis after minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion using the iFuse Implant System(®).

Authors:  Daniel J Cher; W Carlton Reckling; Robyn A Capobianco
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2015-11-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.