Literature DB >> 8578381

Instrumented laparoscopic spinal fusion. Preliminary Results.

J F Zucherman1, T A Zdeblick, S A Bailey, D Mahvi, K Y Hsu, D Kohrs.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Seventeen consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic instrumented interbody fusions using custom-designed delivery instrumentation and "BAK" fusion cages; both are manufactured by Spinetech and the former was developed by the authors. The cases were performed at two spine centers under Food and Drug Administration investigational device evaluation clinical trials.
OBJECTIVES: We expect this approach will maintain a high fusion rate with diminished hospitalization time, recovery time, patient discomfort, and expense. The rehabilitative aspects of the procedure are a great improvement over traditional fusion approaches. SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND DATA: Extraordinary advances in many endoscopic surgical fields have resulted in many endoscopic surgical fields have resulted in lowered morbidity, expense, and suffering associated with their open surgery counterparts. The authors have developed prototype of delivery instruments for the current laparoscopic fusion cage delivery system.
METHODS: The procedure is performed transperitoneally with carbon dioxide insufflation to enable video-assisted visualization through a 10-mm endoscope. Three 10-mm incisions and one 13- to 20-mm incision are required for one-level procedures. Two hollow titanium-threaded interbody implants are packed with autologous bone and inserted into the diseased interspace.
RESULTS: Seventeen patients, with an average follow-up period of 8 months and a range of 6-12 months, underwent the procedure. There were 14 single-level fusions and three two-level fusions, all involving L4-S1 levels. There were two cases that required conversion to open procedures without sequelae; two patients had remote donor site wound infections eradicated with incision and drainage and antibiotics, and one patient required subsequent posterior spinal decompression because of a displaced endplate fracture. Average hospital stay was an average of 2 days, excluding two patients with complications and very prolonged stay.
CONCLUSIONS: Although this procedure is associated with a long learning curve, the technique, once mastered, is effective and advantageous over current approaches to lumbar fusion. Operative time and hospital stay are expected to decrease with future instrumentation development and surgeon experience.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 8578381     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199509150-00015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  12 in total

1.  Anatomic basis of minimal anterior extraperitoneal approach to the lumbar spine.

Authors:  J Y Lazennec; B Pouzet; S Ramare; N Mora; S Hansen; R Trabelsi; H Guérin-Surville; G Saillant
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 1.246

2.  Comparison of conventional versus minimally invasive extraperitoneal approach for anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  V Saraph; C Lerch; N Walochnik; C M Bach; M Krismer; C Wimmer
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2004-05-08       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  "Does size matter?"A comparison of balloon-assisted less-invasive vs conventional retroperitoneal approach for anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Najma Farooq; Michael P Grevitt
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2004-06-26       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  An MRI study of psoas major and abdominal large vessels with respect to the X/DLIF approach.

Authors:  Wan-Kun Hu; Shi-Sheng He; Shao-Cheng Zhang; Yan-Bin Liu; Ming Li; Tie-Sheng Hou; Xiao-Lu Ma; Jian Wang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-10-30       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  The anatomical relationship of the iliocava junction to the lumbosacral spine and the aortic bifurcation.

Authors:  N Pirró; D Ciampi; P Champsaur; V Di Marino
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2004-12-21       Impact factor: 1.246

Review 6.  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

7.  Comparative study of laparoscopic L5-S1 fusion versus open mini-ALIF, with a minimum 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  Sang Ki Chung; Sang Ho Lee; Sang Rak Lim; Dong-Yun Kim; Jee Soo Jang; Ki-Se Nam; Ho Yeon Lee
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2003-10-17       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Technique and surgical outcomes of robot-assisted anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Z Lee; J Y K Lee; W C Welch; D Eun
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2012-07-22

9.  L5-S1 laparoscopic anterior interbody fusion.

Authors:  Constantine T Frantzides; Tallal M Zeni; Frank M Phillips; Sameer Mathur; John G Zografakis; Ronald M Moore; Luis E Laguna
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2006 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.172

10.  Does minimally invasive transsacral fixation provide anterior column support in adult scoliosis?

Authors:  Neel Anand; Eli M Baron; Babak Khandehroo
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.