Ureteral injury during laparoscopy-assisted anterior lumbar fusion

Late diagnosis of ureteral injury from anterior lumbar spine interbody fusion surgery: Case report and literature review

BACKGROUND

Anterior Lumbosacral Interbody Fusion (ALIF) is a type of back surgery with the advantages of direct access to the spinal interbody space and the potential lessening morbidity related to posterior approaches.

PURPOSE

To describe a rare case of left ureteral lesion from ALIF surgery diagnosed 4 months after the procedure.

CASE DESCRIPTION

A 37-year-old Caucasian man with a long history of painful post-traumatic spondylolisthesis and degenerative L5-S1 disc disease underwent a retroperitoneal anterior L5-S1 discectomy, insertion of an interbody tantallium cage, and placement of a pyramid titanium plate fixed with screws. Four months later, due to recurrent left lumbar pain and mild renal failure, a CT scan was performed showing left hydronephrosis with a homolateral urinoma of 17 cm in diameter. A left nephrostomy was placed and the nephrostography detected a filiform leakage at L5-S1 level in communication with the urinoma. The patient underwent laparoscopic urinoma drainage, distal left ureterectomy, and Casati-Boari flap ureterocystoneostomy with ureteral double J stent placement. The stent was held for six weeks and, 1 month later, the control ultrasound scan was negative for hydronephrosis, the creatinine level had normalized and the patient was asymptomatic.

CONCLUSION

Ureteral lesion from ALIF surgery is a very rare event. Spinal surgeons should be more awareness regarding the susceptibility of ureteral injuries along with the clinical presentation, diagnostic work-up, and management options for this kind of complication.

[Research progress of ureteral injury in oblique lumbar interbody fusion]

Objective

To summarize the research progress of ureteral injury in oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF).

Methods

The literature about incidence, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and treatment of ureteral injury complications in OLIF was reviewed.

Results

OLIF surgery poses a risk of ureteral injury because its surgical approach is anatomically adjacent to the left ureter. Ureteral injuries in OLIF are often insidious and have no specific clinical manifestations. CT urography is a common diagnostic method. The treatment of ureteral injury depends on a variety of factors such as the time of diagnosis, the location and degree of injury, and the treatment methods range from endoscopic treatment to replacement reconstruction.

Conclusion

Surgeons should pay attention not to damage the ureter and find the abnormality in time during OLIF. High vigilance of abnormalities is conducive to the early diagnosis of ureteral injury. Furthermore, it is important to be familiar with ureter anatomy and gentle operation to prevent ureteral injury.

Preoperative assessment of the ureter with dual-phase contrast-enhanced computed tomography for lateral lumbar interbody fusion procedures

BACKGROUND

Performing the minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LIF), such as the extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF) and oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF), through a retroperitoneal approach has become increasingly popular. Although urological injury is a major complication of LIF, the anatomical location of the ureter and its risk of injury have not been assessed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of dual-phase contrast-enhanced computed tomography for assessing the location of the ureter and risk of its injury in consecutive LIF cases.

METHODS

27 cases (12 men and 15 women) were enrolled in the study. Dual-phase contrast-enhanced CT was performed preoperatively, and the risk of ureteral injury was assessed. The location of the ureter was classified using the psoas muscle and vertebral body as reference structures for OLIF and XLIF procedures, respectively. During the OLIF procedures, the location of the ureter was additionally assessed with direct vision and manual palpation in all cases. Simultaneously, potential vascular anomalies were assessed with both 3D and axial images of CT.

RESULTS

A total of 125 among 162 ureters, excluding 13 with insufficient enhancement and 24 (44.4%) within the kidney at the L2-L3 level, were assessed preoperatively; 113 ureters (90.4%) were classified as anatomically close to the surgical corridor for OLIF, and 20 ureters (16.0%) as having a potential risk of injury during XLIF. In one case, OLIF was converted to a conventional posterior procedure because of a vascular anomaly. Intraoperative findings showed that ureters moved anteriorly with the peritoneum in all cases, as assessed by manual palpation under direct vision.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual-phase contrast-enhanced CT is useful in assessing the location of the ureter, kidney, and vascular structures simultaneously. Both OLIF and XLIF have a potential risk of urological injury.

Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion

The lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is a relatively new technique that allows the surgeon to access the intervertebral space from a direct lateral approach either anterior to or through the psoas muscle. This approach provides an alternative to anterior lumbar interbody fusion with instrumentation, posterior lumbar interbody fusion, and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for anterior column support. LLIF is minimally invasive, safe, better structural support from the apophyseal ring, potential for coronal plane deformity correction, and indirect decompression, which have has made this technique popular. LLIF is currently being utilized for a variety of pathologies including but not limited to adult de novo lumbar scoliosis, central and foraminal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, and adjacent segment degeneration. Although early clinical outcomes have been good, the potential for significant neurological and vascular vertebral endplate complications exists. Nevertheless, LLIF is a promising technique with the potential to more effectively treat complex adult de novo scoliosis and achieve predictable fusion while avoiding the complications of traditional anterior surgery and posterior interbody techniques.

Urological injury as a complication of the transpsoas approach for discectomy and interbody fusion

Transpsoas discectomy and interbody fusion has become an increasingly popular method of achieving lumbar interbody fusion, but reports of neurological, vascular, and gastrointestinal complications associated with this procedure have been described in the literature. To date, however, ureteral complications have not been reported with this procedure. The authors report 2 cases of ureteral injury and 1 case of renal injury following this procedure. A low index of suspicion is warranted to work up any patient having flank or abdominal symptoms after undergoing transpsoas discectomy and interbody fusion.

Analysis of intraoperative difficulties and management of operative complications in revision anterior exposure of the lumbar spine: a report of 25 consecutive cases

PURPOSE

After a first anterior approach to the lumbar spine, formation of adhesions of soft tissues to the spine increases the surgical difficulties and potential for iatrogenic injury during the revision exposure. The objective of this study was to identify the intraoperative difficulties and postoperative complications associated with revision anterior lumbar spine procedures in a single institution.

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of 25 consecutive anterior revision lumbar surgeries in 22 patients (7 men and 15 women) operated on between 1998 and 2011. Patients with trauma or malignancies were excluded. The mean age of the patients at the time of revision surgery was 56 years (range 20-80 years). The complications were analyzed depending on the operative level and the time between the index surgery and the revision.

RESULTS

Six major complications (five intraoperatively and one postoperatively) occurred in five patients (20 %): three vein lacerations (12 %) and two ureteral injuries (8 %), despite the presence of a double-J ureteral stent. The three vein damages were repaired or ligated by a vascular surgeon. One of the two ureteral injuries led to a secondary nephrectomy after end-to-end anastomosis failure; the other necessitated secondary laparotomy for small bowel obstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

Anterior revision of the lumbar spine is technically challenging and is associated with a high rate of vascular or urologic complications. Therefore, the potential complications of the procedure must be weighted against its benefits. When iterative anterior lumbar approach is mandatory, exposure should be performed by an access surgeon in specialized centers that have ready access to vascular and urologic surgeons.

Thoracoscopy for minimally invasive thoracic spine surgery

Thoracoscopy has been used worldwide for many years by thoracic surgeons. Despite a long learning curve and technical demands of the procedure, thoracoscopy has several advantages, including better cosmesis, adequate exposure to all levels of the thoracic spine from T2 to L 1, better illumination and magnification at the site of surgery, less damage to the tissue adjacent to the surgical field, less morbidity when compared with standard thoracotomy in terms of respiratory problems, pain, blood loss, muscle and chest wall damages, consequent shorter recovery time, less postoperative pulmonary function impairment, and shorter hospitalization. Good results at short- and medium-term follow-up need to be confirmed at long-term follow-up.

Iatrogenic ureteral injury secondary to a thoracolumbar lateral revision instrumentation and fusion

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Urologic, gynecologic, and colorectal surgical procedures account for most of the iatrogenic ureteral injuries; however, iatrogenic injury secondary to thoracolumbar spinal surgery remains a rare complication.

PURPOSE

To report a case of iatrogenic ureteral injury secondary to a thoracolumbar lateral revision instrumentation and fusion managed by percutaneous nephrostomy, ureteroureterostomy, and ureteral stent placement.

STUDY DESIGN

Case report.

METHODS

A 24-year old female underwent surgical removal of a lumbar plate and broken screw with placement of a unirod spanning L1-L3 through a thoracolumbar exposure with resection of the twelfth rib.

RESULTS

On postoperative day 14 she developed left flank pain. Computed tomography scan of the abdomen and pelvis demonstrated a left perinephric fluid collection. After placement of a nephrostomy tube, a retrograde pyelogram with a concomitant antegrade nephrostogram confirmed the diagnosis of ureteral entrapment in the lumbar instrumentation. A spatulated end to end ureteral anastomosis (ureteroureterostomy) was performed over a double J ureteral stent.

CONCLUSIONS

Although an iatrogenic ureteral injury secondary to thoracolumbar surgery is rare, it should be included in the differential diagnosis for a patient presenting with flank pain after undergoing lateral thoracolumbar fusion. A urinoma, also an uncommon occurrence, may be a presenting sign. Prompt diagnosis and institution of appropriate corrective surgical procedures may result in successful outcome.

Perioperative complications in revision anterior lumbar spine surgery: incidence and risk factors

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective review of 129 consecutive anterior lumbar revision surgeries in 108 patients. It is a single-center, multi-surgeon study.

OBJECTIVE

To determine occurrence rates and risk factors for perioperative complications in revision anterior lumbar fusion surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Although complication rates from large series of primary anterior fusion procedures have been reported, reports of complication rates for revision anterior fusion procedures are relatively rare. Concern exists chiefly about the risk to vascular and visceral structures because of scar tissue formation from the original anterior exposure.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of 129 consecutive anterior revision lumbar surgeries in 108 patients operated between 1998 and 2003. There were 40 men and 68 women. The age of patients ranged from 25 to 83 (average 50.6 years). Patients were excluded if surgery was for tumor or infection. Patients were divided into 2 groups; those with revision surgery at the same level and those with revision surgery at an adjacent level. Outcome measures included all perioperative complications. Statistical analysis included Student t test and nonparametric sign-rank.

RESULTS

The number of surgical levels treated for revision was similar between the 2 groups (1 level 69%; 2 levels 19%; 3 or more levels 12%). Revision cases at the same operative level had a higher overall complication rate (42%) compared with extensions (20%; P = 0.007). This difference was primarily because of vein lacerations (23.7% vs. 3.6%, P = 0.002). There were 2 ureteral problems, both successfully salvaged. There were no arterial injuries or deaths.

CONCLUSION

Complication rates for revision lumbar surgery in this series were 3 to 5 times higher than reported for primary lumbar exposures. Complication rates were significantly higher for revision anterior lumbar fusions at the same segment, which were typically in the lower lumbar spine, compared with cases involving extensions, which were typically in the upper lumbar spine.

Access strategies for revision or explantation of the Charité lumbar artificial disc replacement

BACKGROUND

Several lumbar disc prostheses are being developed with the goal of preserving mobility in patients with degenerative disc disease. The disadvantage of lumbar artificial disc replacement (ADR) compared with anterior interbody fusion (ALIF) is the increased potential for displacement or component failure. Revision or removal of the device is complicated by adherence of the aorta, iliac vessels, and the ureter to the operative site. Because of these risks of anterior lumbar procedures, vascular surgeons usually provide access to the spine. We report our experience with secondary exposure of the lumbar spine for revision or explantation of the Charité disc prosthesis.

METHODS

Between January 2001 and May 2006, 19 patients with prior implantation of Charité Artificial Discs required 21 operations for repositioning or removal of the device. Two patients had staged removal of prostheses at two levels. One patient had simultaneous explantation at two levels. The mean age was 49 years (range, 31 to 69 years; 56% men, 42% women). The initial ADR was performed at our institution in 14 patients (74%). The mean time from implantation to reoperation was 7 months (range, 9 days to 4 years). The levels of failure were L3-4 in one, L4-5 in nine, and L5-S1 in 12.

RESULTS

The ADR was successfully removed or revised in all patients that underwent reoperation. Three of the 12 procedures at L5-S1 were performed through the same retroperitoneal approach as the initial access. One of these three, performed after a 3-week interval, was converted to a transperitoneal approach because of adhesions. The rest of the L5-S1 prostheses were exposed from a contralateral retroperitoneal approach. Four of the L4-5 prostheses were accessed from the original approach and five from a lateral, transpsoas exposure (four left, one right). The only explantation at L3-4 was from a left lateral transpsoas approach. Nineteen of the 22 ADR were converted to ALIF. Two revisions at L5-S1 involved replacement of the entire prosthesis. One revision at L4-5 required only repositioning of an endplate. Access-related complications included, in one patient each, iliac vein injury, temporary retrograde ejaculation, small-bowel obstruction requiring lysis, and symptomatic, large retroperitoneal lymphocele. There were no permanent neurologic deficits, deep vein thromboses, or deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Owing to vascular and ureteral fixation, anterior exposure of the lumbar spine for revision or explantation of the Charité disc replacement should be performed through an alternative approach unless the procedure is performed < or = 2 weeks of the index procedure. The L5-S1 level can be accessed through the contralateral retroperitoneum. Reoperation at L3-4 and L4-5 usually requires explantation and fusion that is best accomplished by way of a lateral transpsoas exposure.

Ureteral injuries: CT diagnosis

Ureteral injury is a rare, yet very serious, complication of various abdominal, pelvic, and even spinal procedures. It is often clinically unsuspected as symptoms are nonspecific and the patient may present weeks and even months after the injury. Therefore the diagnosis of ureteral injury is often delayed, leading to more serious morbidity. A ureteral injury may be first diagnosed on CT in a patient evaluated after surgery. A high index of suspicion is essential and a CT study should then include a delayed scan in order to establish the diagnosis of ureteral injury resulting in a urinoma. This may obviate the need for additional invasive imaging studies or unnecessary exploration.

Adapting innovative motion-preserving technology to spinal surgical practice: what should we expect to happen?

STUDY DESIGN

A literature-based review of approach-related morbidity and a conjectural analysis of potential complications of disc arthroplasty based on experience with total joint arthroplasty.

OBJECTIVE

To describe predictable complications of disc arthroplasty and possible strategies for minimizing or treating these complications.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There is a significant experience with anterior approach-related morbidity in spinal surgery. There is also extensive experience with extremity total joint arthroplasty. The combination of these experiences should predict certain occurrences that will occur with the advent of disc arthroplasty in the spine.

METHODS

Review of the medical literature associated with anterior approach to the lumbar spine for spinal fusion was done. Sequential steps for performance of disc arthroplasty and possible problems with each step were evaluated and possible complications identified. Parallel experience in total joint arthroplasty was reviewed for possible predictive experience.

RESULTS

There are definable approach-related morbidities that will occur, regardless of prosthesis design and implantation technique. Prosthesis design involves a series of tradeoffs for risks and benefits. Revisions are inevitable; rate of revision and time to revision remain to be determined.

CONCLUSIONS

Disc arthroplasty will offer benefits over current fusion techniques. It will come at a cost and certain complications are entirely predictable. There will be deaths from the procedure, due to thromboembolic phenomenon or due to uncontrollable hemorrhage from irreparable vascular injury, especially on repeat operations. There will be prostheses that dislodge. There will be infections that require device removal, a very high-risk procedure. There will be a deterioration of results in the hands of the general medical community as opposed to the hands of the initial investigators, a learning curve if you will. The access surgeon will be critical to minimizing morbidity. Design considerations compete with anatomic constraints. Material choices all have pros and cons. Spine surgeons as a whole are excited about this opportunity, but we must be diligent to minimize these predictable adverse events to make the risk benefit profile the best that it can be for our patients.

Video-assisted versus open anterior lumbar spine fusion surgery: a comparison of four techniques and complications in 135 patients

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective review involved 135 patients undergoing anterior interbody fusion using four different approaches: transperitoneal video-assisted surgery with insufflation, retroperitoneal endoscopic video-assisted surgery, minilaparotomy retroperitoneal surgery, and traditional oblique muscle-splinting retroperitoneal surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To describe and compare the operative procedure and perioperative complications of four different interbody fusion techniques.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Although anterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery has a long history, several new and innovative approaches have been introduced recently. In contrast to the traditional oblique muscle-splitting retroperitoneal flank incision, the following have been used: a "minilaparotomy" open extraperitoneal approach through a small midline incision, a transperitoneal video-assisted insufflation technique, and a video-assisted gasless retroperitoneal endoscopic technique.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed using the hospital records, operating room records, and clinic charts of 135 consecutive patients (50 men and 85 women) who underwent surgery between December 1993 and February 1998. Cases were included if either bone grafts alone or cylindrical cages with bone graft inside were used. Cases with anterior instrumentation using plates or rods were excluded. Diagnoses included degenerative disc disease, spondylolisthesis, or pseudarthrosis of a previous lumbosacral fusion. Patients with tumors or infection were excluded. The patients all were adults ranging in age from 17 to 83 years. Among the 135 patients, 12 had undergone previous anterior spine fusion surgery and 64 had undergone prior abdominal surgery.

RESULTS

The onset of new radicular pain or numbness, not experienced by the patient before surgery, occurred in six patients (18%; all with transperitoneal video-assisted surgery using insufflation). Vascular problems occurred in five patients (3.7% overall): two in the transperitoneal video-assisted group (5.9% of the group) and three in the minilaparotomy group (8.7% of the group). Retrograde ejaculation occurred in 4 of the 50 male patients (8% of the group): three in the transperitoneal video-assisted group (25% of the group) and one in the minilaparotomy group (2% of the group). Two patients had ureteral injuries (1.5% overall): one each in the retroperitoneal endoscopic and minilaparotomy groups. Conversion to open procedures was performed in seven patients (11% of the video-assisted procedures). The reasons for conversion included two major vessel lacerations and five peritoneal tears in the retroperitoneal video-assisted group.

CONCLUSIONS

A comparative analysis of four techniques for approaching the lower lumbar spine to perform arthrodesis in 135 patients showed an incidence of complications consistent with the literature for video-assisted techniques, but higher than for open techniques. For these and other reasons, the video-assisted approaches have been abandoned by the surgeons of this report.

Review: Complications of Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery

COMPLICATIONS OF MINIMALLY invasive spinal surgery can be related to anesthesia, patient positioning, and surgical technique. The performance of successful minimally invasive spinal surgery is beset with several technical challenges, including the limited tactile feedback, two-dimensional video image quality of three-dimensional anatomy, and the manual dexterity needed to manipulate instruments through small working channels, which all account for a very steep learning curve. Knowledge of possible complications associated with particular minimally invasive spinal procedures can aid in their avoidance. This article reviews complications associated with minimally invasive spinal surgery in the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine by reviewing reported data of sufficient detail or with sufficient numbers of patients. In addition, possible complications associated with anesthesia use, patient positioning, and surgical techniques during thoracoscopic and laparoscopic spinal procedures are reviewed.

Perirectal urinoma from ureteral injury incurred during spinal surgery mimicking rectal perforation on computed tomography scan

STUDY DESIGN

A case of a perirectal urinoma from a ureteral injury incurred during spinal surgery is reported.

OBJECTIVES

To report ureteral injury as a rare complication of spinal surgery with misleading CT findings, and to emphasize the necessity of delayed scans in the diagnosis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

A ureteral injury is a rare complication of spinal surgery. In such a case, extravasated urine collects in the retroperitoneum and pelvis. This fluid opacifies after intravenous contrast, and delayed scans are necessary in the diagnosis. As clinical findings are usually nonspecific, CT is essential for the correct diagnosis.

METHODS

A 55-year-old woman underwent discectomy and insertion of a disc prosthesis through an anterior left retroperitoneal approach. Fever and abdominal pain developed after 3 days. Computed tomography scan was performed to evaluate the patient's symptoms.

RESULTS

Computed tomography with repeated delayed scans showed an opacifying fluid collection surrounding the rectum, remote from the site of surgery, yet compatible with a urinoma. Antegrade pyelography demonstrated an injury of the left ureter with extravasating urine, dissecting caudally. After a temporary nephrostomy, the patient recovered.

CONCLUSIONS

Although ureteral injury after abdominal surgery is not so uncommon, it is very rarely incurred during spinal surgery. Because symptoms are usually nonspecific, the radiologist should be aware of this possible complication, and should perform CT with intravenous contrast material and with delayed scans because a rapid-sequence helical CT may not yet show opacification of the fluid present in the abdomen. This is the hallmark of the diagnosis.