Risk Factors for Medical and Surgical Complications After Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

What Preoperative Factors Are Associated With Achieving a Clinically Meaningful Improvement and Satisfaction After Single-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis?

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to identify preoperative factors associated with clinically meaningful improvement, patient satisfaction and expectation fulfilment at 2 years follow-up in patients undergoing single-level TLIF for degenerative spondylolisthesis.

METHODS

Patients who underwent a primary, single-level TLIF for degenerative spondylolisthesis between 2006 and 2015 were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional spine registry. Baseline characteristics and PROMs including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 36-Item Short-Form Physical Component Score (SF-36 PCS), Mental Component Score (SF-36 MCS), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) back pain, and VAS leg pain were collected preoperatively, at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 2 years.

RESULTS

A total of 997 patients were included. Multivariate analyses showed that increasing age (OR 1.039, P < .001) and better preoperative ODI (OR .984, P = .018) were associated with achieving minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for VAS Back. Increasing age (OR 1.032, P = .007) and better preoperative VAS Back (OR .783, P < .001) were associated with achieving MCID for VAS Leg. Lower BMI (OR .952, P = .024) and better preoperative ODI (OR .976, P < .001) were associated with achieving MCID for SF-36 PCS. Importantly, a better preoperative SF-36 MCS was associated with MCID attainment for ODI (OR 1.038, P < .001), satisfaction (OR 1.034, P < .001) and expectation fulfilment (OR 1.024, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Patients who were older, have less preoperative disability and better preoperative mental health were significantly more likely to attain clinically meaningful improvement in PROMs and postoperative satisfaction after single-level TLIF. Identification of these factors would aid surgeons in patient selection and surgical counselling for single-level TLIF.

Spinal Anesthesia Reduces Perioperative Polypharmacy and Opioid Burden in Patients Over 65 Who Undergo Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy and opioid administration are thought to increase the risk of postoperative cognitive dysfunction and delirium in elderly patients. Spinal anesthesia (SA) holds potential to reduce perioperative polypharmacy in spine surgery. As more geriatric patients undergo spine surgery, understanding how SA can reduce polypharmacy and opioid administration is warranted. We aim to compare the perioperative polypharmacy and dose of administered opioids in patients ≥65 years who undergo transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) under SA versus general anesthesia (GA).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 200 patients receiving a single-surgeon TLIF procedure at a single academic center (2014-2021) was performed. Patients underwent the procedure with SA (n = 120) or GA (n = 80). Demographic, procedural, and medication data were extracted from the medical record. Opioid consumption was quantified as morphine milligram equivalents (MME). Statistical analyses included χ2 or Student's t-test.

RESULTS

Patients receiving SA were administered 7.45 medications on average versus 12.7 for GA patients (P < 0.001). Average perioperative opioid consumption was 5.17 MME and 20.2 MME in SA and GA patients, respectively (P < 0.001). The number of patients receiving antiemetics and opioids remained comparable postoperatively, with a mean of 32.2 MME in the GA group versus 27.5 MME in the SA group (P = 0.14). Antiemetics were administered less often as a prophylactic in the SA group (32%) versus 86% in the GA group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

SA reduces perioperative polypharmacy in patients ≥65 years undergoing TLIF procedures. Further research is necessary to determine if this reduction correlates to a decrease the incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction and delirium.

Long-Term Reoperation Rates After Open versus Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery for Degenerative Lumbar Disease: Five Year Follow-Up of 2130 Patients

BACKGROUND

Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery (MISS) is a growing alternative to Open Spine Surgery (OSS). The preservation of musculature and minimization of iatrogenic injury is hypothesized to decrease the need for reoperation by preserving normal anatomy. Our objective is to compare the relative long-term reoperation rates after MISS and OSS for the treatment of degenerative disease of the lumbar spine.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis compares the long-term reoperation rates after MISS and OSS. Eligible patients were adults with a primary lumbar intervention carried out between 5/1/2004 and 1/31/2014 to allow for at least 5 years of follow up. Patients without sufficient descriptive metrics or follow-up data were excluded. The primary outcome was the rate of lumbar spine reoperation.

RESULTS

A total of 2130 patients met the inclusion criteria-1895 underwent OSS and 235 underwent MISS. On average and across all surgery types (decompression and decompression with fusion), 28% of OSS patients required reoperation during the minimum 5-year follow up period while only 14% of MISS patients required reoperation (P = 0.001). The MISS group was statistically identical to the OSS group in all categories except that the MISS group was on average 1.8 years older (62.25 vs. 60.45, P = 0.039) and had a higher incidence of diabetes (26% vs. 17%, P = 0.000), but had a lower average body mass index than the OSS group (28.35 vs. 29.60, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

In the setting of degenerative lumbar spine disease, MISS has the potential to reduce the long-term need for reoperation when compared with OSS.

In Vivo Evidence of Early Instability and Late Stabilization in Motion Segments Immediately Superior to Anterior Cervical Arthrodesis

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to identify patient factors that affect adjacent segment kinematics after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) as measured by biplane radiography.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The etiology of adjacent segment disease (ASD) may be multifactorial. Previous studies have investigated associations between patient factors and ASD, although few attempted to link patient factors with mechanical changes in the spine that may explain ASD development. Previous studies manually measured intervertebral motion from static flexion/extension radiographs, however, manual measurements are unreliable, and those studies failed to measure intervertebral motion during rotation.

METHODS

Patients had continuous cervical spine flexion/extension and axial rotation movements captured at 30 images per second in a dynamic biplane radiography system preoperatively and 1 year after ACDF. Digitally reconstructed radiographs generated from subject-specific computed tomography scans were matched to the biplane radiographs using a validated tracking process. Dynamic kinematics and preoperative disc height were calculated from this tracking process. Preoperative magnetic resonance imagings were evaluated for disc bulge. Patient age, sex, body mass index, smoking status, diabetes, psychiatric history, presence of an inciting event, and length of symptoms were collected. Multivariate linear regression was performed to identify patient factors associated with 1-year postoperative changes in adjacent segment kinematics.

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients completed preoperative and postoperative testing. Superior adjacent segment disc height and disc bulge predicted the change in superior adjacent segment range of motion after surgery. Inferior adjacent segment disc bulge, smoking history, and the use of psychiatric medications predicted the change in inferior adjacent segment flexion/extension range of motion after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Preexisting adjacent segment disc degeneration, as indicated by disc height and disc bulge, was associated with reduced adjacent segment motion after ACDF, while lack of preexisting adjacent disc degeneration was associated with increased adjacent segment motion after ACDF. These findings provide in vivo evidence supporting early instability and late stabilization in the pathophysiology of disc degeneration.

Comparison of Perioperative and Postoperative Outcomes of Minimally Invasive and Open TLIF in Obese Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta‑Analysis

PURPOSE

Previous studies have demonstrated that minimally invasive (MI) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is comparable to the open approach in terms of efficacy and safety. However, few comparative studies of surgical procedures in patients with obesity show that they may react differently to open-TLIF (O-TLIF) and MI-LTIF approaches.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The main indicators were complications, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, and secondary indicators were operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay.

RESULTS

No significant differences in the VAS and ODI scores for back pain at the last follow-up and wound infection rates were observed between the two groups. Dural tear incidence and complication rate were significantly lower in the MI-TLIF group than that in the O-TLIF group (P = 0.002 and 0.001, respectively). No significant difference in operative time was found between the two groups. There was less blood loss and shorter hospital stay (P = 0.001 and 0.002, respectively) in the MI-TLIF group than that in the O-TLIF group.

CONCLUSION

Compared with O-TLIF, MI-TLIF is an effective and safe surgical option for patients with obesity, which resulted in similar improvements in pain and functional disability, as well as a lower complication rate.

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using the biportal endoscopic techniques versus microscopic tubular technique

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) with microscopic tubular technique is an established surgical procedure with several potential advantages, including decreased surgical-related morbidity, reduced length of hospital stay, and accelerated early rehabilitation. A recently introduced biportal endoscopic technique for spine surgery presents familiar surgical anatomy and can be conducted using a conventional approach with a minimal footprint; it is also applicable to TLIF.

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of biportal endoscopic technique transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (BE-TLIF) and microscopic tubular technique transforaminal lumbar interbody (MT-TLIF) in patients with single- or two-segment lumbar spinal stenosis with or without spondylolisthesis.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

One hundred two participants with neurogenic intermittent claudication or lumbar radiculopathy with single- or two-level lumbar spinal stenosis with or without spondylolisthesis.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) score for the back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the Short Form-36 health survey Questionnaire (SF-36). Demographic data, operative data (total operation time, estimated blood loss, amount of surgical drain, postoperative transfusion, and length of hospital stay), and laboratory results (plasma hemoglobin, serum creatine phosphokinase, and C-reactive protein) were also evaluated. The fusion rate was assessed using the Bridwell interbody fusion grading system. Postoperative complications were also noted.

METHODS

Patients were divided into two groups: group A (BE-TLIF) and group B (MT-TLIF). The clinical outcomes, including VAS-Back and VAS-Leg, ODI, and SF-36 scores, were evaluated at 1 month, 6 months, and 1 year after surgery. Differences in demographics, operative data, and the laboratory and radiological results were assessed between the two groups. The fusion rate was assessed using standard standing lumbar radiographs and computed tomography scans conducted 1 year after surgery.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine patients were analyzed in this study, 47 from group A and 32 from group B. Demographic and operative data were comparable for both the groups. The VAS-Back and SF-36 scores were more significantly improved in group A than in group B at 1 month after surgery. However, there were no significant differences between groups for the mean VAS-Back, VAS-Leg, ODI, and SF-36 scores at 1year after the surgery. Although the total operation time was significantly longer in group A, the estimated blood loss and the amount of surgical drainage was significantly higher in group B (p < .001). There were no between-group differences for the fusion rate and postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

Both BE-TLIF and MT-TLIF provided equivalent and favorable clinical outcomes and fusion rates. Further large-scale, randomized, controlled trials with long-term follow-ups are warranted.

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion - A narrative review on the present status

Minimally invasive lumbar transforaminal interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) has become the most commonly performed lumbar fusion procedure. There are multiple variables such as bone graft properties, use of rhBMP (recombinant human bone morphogenic protein), interbody cage properties, image guidance techniques, etc., that may impact the outcomes and fusion rates. Radiation exposure to the patient as well as to the operating team is an important concern. The minimally invasive anterior approaches for lumbar fusion with ability to insert larger cages and achieve better sagittal correction have added another option in management of lumbar degenerative deformities. A literature review of recent studies and systematic reviews on different aspects impacting the outcomes of MIS TLIF has been done to define the present status of the procedure in this narrative review. Iliac crest bone graft can help achieve very good fusion rate without significantly increasing the morbidity. RhBMP is most potent enhancer of fusion and the adverse effects can be avoided by surgical technique and using lower dose. The use of navigation techniques has reduced the radiation exposure to patient and the surgeons but the benefit seems to be significant only in long segment fusions.

Understanding the Future Prospects of Synergizing Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery with Ceramics and Regenerative Cellular Therapies

Transforaminal lumber interbody fusion (TLIF) is the last resort to address the lumber degenerative disorders such as spondylolisthesis, causing lower back pain. The current surgical intervention for these abnormalities includes open TLIF. However, in recent years, minimally invasive TLIF (MIS-TLIF) has gained a high momentum, as it could minimize the risk of infection, blood loss, and post-operative complications pertaining to fusion surgery. Further advancement in visualizing and guiding techniques along with grafting cage and materials are continuously improving the safety and efficacy of MIS-TLIF. These assistive techniques are also playing a crucial role to increase and improve the learning curve of surgeons. However, achieving an appropriate output through TLIF still remains a challenge, which might be synergized through 3D-printing and tissue engineering-based regenerative therapy. Owing to their differentiation potential, biomaterials such as stem/progenitor cells may contribute to restructuring lost or damaged tissues during MIS-TLIF, and this therapeutic efficacy could be further supplemented by platelet-derived biomaterials, leading to improved clinical outcomes. Thus, based on the above-mentioned strategies, we have comprehensively summarized recent developments in MIS-TLIF and its possible combinatorial regenerative therapies for rapid and long-term relief.

Reduction in complication and revision rates for robotic-guided short-segment lumbar fusion surgery: results of a prospective, multi-center study

Studies evaluating robotic guidance in lumbar fusion are limited primarily to evaluation of screw accuracy and perioperative complications. This is the first study to evaluate granular differences in short and long-term complication and revision rate profiles between robotic (RG) fluoroscopic (FG) guidance for minimally invasive short-segment lumbar fusions. A retrospective analysis of a prospective, multi-center database was performed. Complications were subdivided into surgical (further subcategorized into adjacent segment disease, new-onset back pain, radiculopathy, motor-deficit, hardware failure, pseudoarthrosis), wound, and medical complications. Complication and revision rates were compared between RG and FG groups cumulatively at 30, 90 days, and 1 year. 374 RG and 111 FG procedures were performed. RG was associated with an 86.25, 83.20, and 69.42% cumulative reduction in complication rate at 30, 90 days, and 1 year, respectively, compared to FG (p < 0.001). At all follow-up points, new-onset radiculopathy and medical complications were most prevalent in both groups. The greatest reductions in complication rates were seen for new-onset back pain (88.13%; p = 0.001) and wound complications (95.05%; p < 0.001) at 30 days, new-onset motor deficits (90.11%; p = 0.004) and wound complications (85.16%; p < 0.001) at 90 days, and new-onset motor deficits (85.16%; p = 0.002), wound (85.16%; p < 0.001), and medical complications (75.72%; p < 0.001) at 1 year. RG was associated with a 92.58% (p = 0.002) reduction in revision rate at 90 days and a 66.08% (p = 0.026) reduction at 1 year. RG was associated with significant reductions in postoperative complication rates at all follow-up time points and significant reductions in revision rates at 90 days and 1 year.

The effect of anterior lumbar interbody fusion staging order on perioperative complications in circumferential lumbar fusions performed within the same hospital admission

OBJECTIVE

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is a powerful technique that provides wide access to the disc space and allows for large lordotic grafts. When used with posterior spinal fusion (PSF), the procedures are often staged within the same hospital admission. There are limited data on the perioperative risk profile of ALIF-first versus PSF-first circumferential fusions performed within the same hospital admission. In an effort to understand whether these procedures are associated with different perioperative complication profiles, the authors performed a retrospective review of their institutional experience in adult patients who had undergone circumferential lumbar fusions.

METHODS

The electronic medicals records of patients who had undergone ALIF and PSF on separate days within the same hospital admission at a single academic center were retrospectively analyzed. Patients carrying a diagnosis of tumor, infection, or traumatic fracture were excluded. Demographics, surgical characteristics, and perioperative complications were collected and assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 373 patients, 217 of them women (58.2%), met the inclusion criteria. The mean age of the study cohort was 60 years. Surgical indications were as follows: degenerative disease or spondylolisthesis, 171 (45.8%); adult deformity, 168 (45.0%); and pseudarthrosis, 34 (9.1%). The majority of patients underwent ALIF first (321 [86.1%]) with a mean time of 2.5 days between stages. The mean number of levels fused was 2.1 for ALIF and 6.8 for PSF. In a comparison of ALIF-first to PSF-first cases, there were no major differences in demographics or surgical characteristics. Rates of intraoperative complications including venous injury were not significantly different between the two groups. The rates of postoperative ileus (11.8% vs 5.8%, p = 0.194) and ALIF-related wound complications (9.0% vs 3.8%, p = 0.283) were slightly higher in the ALIF-first group, although the differences did not reach statistical significance. Rates of other perioperative complications were no different.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing staged circumferential fusion with ALIF and PSF, there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of perioperative complications when comparing ALIF-first to PSF-first surgeries.