Anterior to psoas (ATP) fusion of the lumbar spine: evolution of a technique facilitated by changes in equipment

Comparison of Nonneurological Structures at Risk During Anterior-to-Psoas Versus Transpsoas Surgical Approaches Using Abdominal CT Imaging From L1 to S1

BACKGROUND

The kidneys, ribs, liver, spleen, and iliac crests can pose access-related issues to the disc space during both anterior-to-psoas (ATP) and transpsoas (TP) surgical approaches. The aim of this study was to identify and compare the presence and degree of obstruction caused by these structures for the ATP and TP approaches bilaterally from L1 to S1 using abdominal computed tomography.

METHODS

Presence of obstruction by a given structure was recorded if the structure was within ATP or TP borders. Degree of obstruction was calculated as the quotient of the structure measurement within the ATP or TP approach divided by the entire corridor length at the point of obstruction.

RESULTS

The percentage of time the left kidney was present during the ATP vs TP approaches at L1 to L2 was 44% vs 89% (P < 0.001), at L2 to L3 was 26% vs 75% (P < 0.001), and at L3 to L4 was 5% vs 19% (P < 0.001). For the right kidney, these values were 37% vs 78% (P < 0.001), 43% vs 71% (P < 0.001), and 11% vs 18% (P < 0.001). The percentage of time the left rib was present during ATP vs TP approaches was 41% vs 81% (P < 0.001) at L1 to L2 and 11% vs 26% (P = 0.413) at L2 to L3. With respect to the liver, the ATP approach was obstructed 56%, 30%, and 9% of the time at the levels of L1 to L2, L2 to L3, and L3 to L4; the liver was not present in L1 to L4 TP approach.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to both characterize and compare nonneurological structures at risk during ATP and TP fusion approaches bilaterally from L1 to S1 using abdominal computed tomography. Findings suggest the ATP approach poses less structures at risk relative to the TP approach with respect to the kidneys, ribs, and iliac crests bilaterally. The TP approach offers advantages compared with ATP approach with respect to the liver and spleen.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Findings from this study are clinically relevant for ATP and TP surgical approach planning.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3

Cage Obliquity and Radiological Outcomes in Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective radiological study.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine whether cage obliquity affects radiological outcomes in oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The OLIF cage enters the disk space in the oblique direction and is then turned to the true orthogonal orientation. However, orthogonal cage placement is often hindered by cage rotation limitations. Few studies have examined the degree of cage obliquity and its effects in OLIF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study involved 171 levels in 118 consecutive patients who underwent OLIF between L2-L3 and L4-L5 with a minimum two-year follow-up. Cage obliquity was divided into three groups on postoperative axial computed tomography images; cage obliquity <10° (group 1), cage obliquity ≥10° and <20° (group 2), and cage obliquity ≥20° (group 3). The radiological outcomes included anterior/posterior disk height, intervertebral disk angle, foraminal height, fusion, and cage subsidence. Postoperative complications related to cage obliquity were examined.

RESULTS

The mean cage obliquity of the 171 cages was 11.3±6.9°. Cage obliquity was greater at the L4-L5 level (13.4±6.4°) than at other levels (L2-L3 and L3-L4: 6.5±7.0° and 10.1±6.2°, respectively) ( P <0.05). There were no significant differences in radiological outcomes among the groups. There were two cases of postoperative contralateral neurological symptoms in group 3.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that the orthogonal cage rotation in OLIF achieved adequate lateral cage placement. Although accurate cage rotation can be limited at the lower lumbar segments, radiological outcomes were not affected by cage obliquity.

The anatomical feasibility of anterior intra- and extra-bifurcation approaches to L5-S1: an anatomic study based on lumbar MRI

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The anterior approach at L5-S1 has many advantages, however, vascular complications are challenging for spinal surgeons who may not be familiar with the variability of vascular anatomy. There are three different anterior approaches (intra-bifurcation approach and extra-bifurcation: left-, and right-sided prepsoas approaches) described in previous studies to respond to the variability of anterior vascular anatomy for reduction in vascular injury, while no guidance for the choice of approach preoperatively.

PURPOSE

To analyze the anatomical feasibility of three anterior approaches to access the L5-S1 disc space according to a practical framework.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) from patients who visited our outpatient clinic were reviewed, with 150 cases meeting the inclusion criteria.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The following radiographic parameters were measured on axial T2-weighted MRI at the lower endplate of L5 and the upper endplate of S1: width of the vascular corridor, position of the left and right common iliac vein (CIV), and presence of perivascular adipose tissue (PAT). Moreover, we designed a safe line to evaluate the feasibility of left- and right-sided prepsoas approaches. Cases of lumbosacral transitional vertebrae were identified.

METHODS

The feasibility of the intra-bifurcation approach was determined by the width of the vascular corridor, presence of PAT, and the position of the CIV. The feasibility of the prepsoas approach was determined by the relative position of the CIV to the safe line, presence of PAT, and the intersection point of the CIV and vertebral body.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight percent, 64.7%, and 75.3% cases allowed the intra-bifurcation, left-, and right-sided prepsoas approach to L5-S1, respectively. The cases in this study had at least one of three anterior approaches to access L5-S1 disc space, and 74% of cases had more than one anatomical feasibility of anterior approach. The right-sided prepsoas approach was feasible in the majority of cases because of the vertical course of the right CIV with a significantly higher proportion of presence of PAT. Patients with lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (24 cases) may prefer the prepsoas approaches, and only six cases (25.0%) were determined to be feasible for the intra-bifurcation approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study proposes a practical framework to determine whether the three different anterior approaches are feasible access at L5-S1. According to the framework, all cases had the anatomical feasibility of using an anterior approach to access L5-S1, and three-fourths of cases had a replaceable anterior approach when encountering intraoperative difficulties.

Elimination of Lumbar Plexus Injury by Changing the Entry Point and Traction Direction of the Psoas Major Muscle in Transpsoas Lateral Lumbar Spine Surgery

Background and Objectives: The lateral approach is commonly used for anterior column reconstruction, indirect decompression, and fusion in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases and spinal deformities. However, intraoperative lumbar plexus injury may occur. This is a retrospective comparative study to investigate and compare neurological complications between the conventional lateral approach and a modified lateral approach at L4/5. Materials and Methods: Patients with a lumbar degenerative disease requiring single-level intervertebral fusion at L4/5 were included and categorized into group X and group A. Patients in group X underwent conventional extreme lateral interbody fusion, while those in group A underwent a modified surgical procedure that included splitting of the anterior third of the psoas muscle, which was dilated by the retractor on the anterior third of the intervertebral disc. The incidence of lumbar plexus injury, defined as a decrease of ≥1 grade on manual muscle testing of hip flexors and knee extensors and sensory impairment of the thigh for ≥3 weeks, on the approach side, was investigated. Results: Each group comprised 50 patients. No significant between-group differences in age, sex, body mass index, and approach side were observed. There was a significant between-group difference in intraoperative neuromonitoring stimulation value (13.1 ± 5.4 mA in group X vs. 18.5 ± 2.3 mA in group A, p < 0.001). The incidence of neurological complications was significantly higher in group X than in group A (10.0% vs. 0.0%, respectively, p < 0.05). Conclusions: In our modified procedure, the anterior third of the psoas muscle was entered and split, and the intervertebral disc could be reached without damaging the lumbar plexus. When performing lumbar surgery using the lateral approach, lumbar plexus injury can be avoided by following surgical indication criteria based on the location of the lumbar plexus with respect to the psoas muscle and changing the transpsoas approach to the intervertebral disc.

Lumbar Sympathetic Trunk Injury: An Underestimated Complication of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVE

Lumbar sympathetic trunk (LST) injury is one of the major complications after oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). LST injury often manifests as unequal skin temperature in lower limbs after operation, and there may be a large number of missed diagnoses due to the lack of attention and different diagnostic methods. The study aimed to investigate the incidence and clinical characteristics of LST injury after OLIF.

METHODS

The data of patients with lumbar degenerative diseases who underwent OLIF in our hospital from April 2016 to October 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Finally, a total of 54 patients were included. There were 10 males and 44 females, aged 58.4 ± 10.9 years. The skin temperature of lower limbs was measured before and a day after surgery. The patients were followed up at 1 week, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 2 years after the surgery. Likert five-point scale was used to evaluate the discomfort caused by LST injury. Injury severity score was introduced to grade injury degree according to the recovery time of postoperative symptoms. The chi-square test was used to analyze the association of incidence of lumbar sympathetic trunk (LST) injury with contributing factors, such as gender and number of surgical segments.

RESULTS

The unequal temperature was not found before surgery in all the patients. Postoperatively, 16 cases (29.6%) had difference of skin temperature more than 0.5 °C and were diagnosed with LST injury. Eight patients (14.8%) had self-perception of skin temperature differences, and 12 patients (22.2%) had other symptoms, such as muscle pain, numbness, and weakness, which were not statistically different between patients with and without lumbar sympathetic trunk injury (p > 0.05). In the 16 patients with LST injury, the difference of skin temperature between the two legs was 0.6 ± 0.1 °C on the first day, and the temperature difference lasted for 1.5-~12 months. According to Likert five-point scale, two cases (12.5%) were poor, and 14 cases (87.5%) were moderate immediately after surgery. Fifteen cases improved to some extent 6 weeks to 12 months after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative LST injury is mainly manifested by different temperature of lower limbs. The incidence was higher in patients with multi-segment OLIF than in those with single-segment OLIF, and the subjective experience of most patients with LST injury was moderate discomfort.

A modified oblique lumbar interbody fusion: A better way to establish an exposure under direct microscopic vision

Study design

This is a retrospective study.

Objective

To demonstrate a modified oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OILF) technique for L1-L5.

Methods

The modified technique splits anterior portion of psoas belly to access the oblique corridor (OC) anteroinferior to psoas, minimizing psoas manipulation and retraction and avoiding nerve injury while offering excellent microscopic visualization. Psoas weakness and neurovascular complication rates in patients treated with traditional OLIF (T-OLIF) or anteroinferior psoas OLIF (AP-OLIF) were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical outcomes were also reviewed.

Results

A total of 162 cases treated with T-OLIF (n = 73) and AP-OLIF (n = 89) for degenerative lumbar disease were included. The mean operative time and blood loss were less with AP-OLIF (P < 0.01). Approach related complications were 14 (19.1%) with T-OLIF and 4 (4.5%) with AP-OLIF. Postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores improved in both T-OIF and AP-OIF groups (P < 0.01).

Conclusion

The modified OLIF technique (AP-OLIF) is characterized by an easy exposure of the lumbar spine under direct microscopic vision, resulting in less psoas weakness and neurovascular injury.

Assessing the differences in operative and patient-reported outcomes between lateral approaches for lumbar fusion: a systematic review and indirect meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Anterior-to-psoas lumbar interbody fusion (ATP-LIF), more commonly referred to as oblique lateral interbody fusion, and lateral transpsoas lumbar interbody fusion (LTP-LIF), also known as extreme lateral interbody fusion, are the two commonly used lateral approaches for performing a lumbar fusion procedure. These approaches help overcome some of the technical challenges associated with traditional approaches for lumbar fusion. In this systematic review and indirect meta-analysis, the authors compared operative and patient-reported outcomes between these two select approaches using available studies.

METHODS

Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach, the authors conducted an electronic search using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases for studies published before May 1, 2019. Indirect meta-analysis was conducted on fusion rate, cage movement (subsidence plus migration), permanent deficits, and transient deficits; results were depicted as forest plots of proportions (effect size [ES]).

RESULTS

A total of 63 studies were included in this review after applying the exclusion criteria, of which 26 studies investigated the outcomes of ATP-LIF, while 37 studied the outcomes of LTP-LIF. The average fusion rate was found to be similar between the two groups (ES 0.97, 95% CI 0.84-1.00 vs ES 0.94, 95% CI 0.91-0.97; p = 0.561). The mean incidence of cage movement was significantly higher in the ATP-LIF group compared with the LTP-LIF group (stand-alone: ES 0.15, 95% CI 0.06-0.27 vs ES 0.09, 95% CI 0.04-0.16 [p = 0.317]; combined: ES 0.18, 95% CI 0.07-0.32 vs ES 0.02, 95% CI 0.00-0.05 [p = 0.002]). The mean incidence of reoperations was significantly higher in patients undergoing ATP-LIF than in those undergoing LTP-LIF (ES 0.02, 95% CI 0.01-0.03 vs ES 0.04, 95% CI 0.02-0.07; p = 0.012). The mean incidence of permanent deficits was similar between the two groups (stand-alone: ES 0.03, 95% CI 0.01-0.06 vs ES 0.05, 95% CI 0.01-0.12 [p = 0.204]; combined: ES 0.03, 95% CI 0.01-0.06 vs ES 0.03, 95% CI 0.00-0.08 [p = 0.595]). The postoperative changes in visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were both found to be higher for ATP-LIF relative to LTP-LIF (VAS: weighted average 4.11 [SD 2.03] vs weighted average 3.75 [SD 1.94] [p = 0.004]; ODI: weighted average 28.3 [SD 5.33] vs weighted average 24.3 [SD 4.94] [p < 0.001]).

CONCLUSIONS

These analyses indicate that while both approaches are associated with similar fusion rates, ATP-LIF may be related to higher odds of cage movement and reoperations as compared with LTP-LIF. Furthermore, there is no difference in rates of permanent deficits between the two procedures.

Single Level Spondylolisthesis Associated Sagittal Plane Imbalance Corrected by Pre-Psoas Interbody Fusion Using Anterior Column Release with 30° Expandable Hyperlordotic Cage

Background: Loss of lumbar lordosis caused by single level degenerative spondylolisthesis can trigger significant sagittal plane imbalance and failure to correct lumbopelvic parameters during lumbar fusion can lead to poor outcome or worsening deformity. Anterior column release (ACR) through a pre-psoas approach allows the placement of a hyperlordotic cage (HLC) to improve lumbar lordosis, but it is unclear if the amount of cage lordosis affects radiological outcomes in real-life patient conditions. Methods: Three patients were treated with ACR and 30° expandable HLC for positive sagittal imbalance secondary to single-level spondylolisthesis. Patients reported baseline and post-operative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Numeric Pain Score (NRS). Radiographic parameters of sagittal balance included lumbar lordosis (LL), sagittal vertical axis (SVA) and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI-LL). Results: Surgical indications were sagittal plane imbalance caused by L4–L5 degenerative spondylolisthesis (n = 2) and L3–L4 spondylolisthesis secondary to adjacent segmental degeneration (n = 1). Average post-operative length of stay was 3 days (range 2–4) and estimated blood loss was 266 mL (range 200–300). NRS and ODI improved in all patients. All experienced improvements in LL (x¯preop = 33°, x¯postop = 56°), SVA (x¯preop = 180 mm, x¯postop = 61 mm) and PI-LL (x¯preop = 26°, x¯postop = 5°). Conclusion: ACR with expandable HLC can restore sagittal plane balance associated with single-level spondylolisthesis. Failure to perform ACR with HLC placement during pre-psoas interbody fusion may result in under correction of lordosis and poorer outcome for these patients.

Application of Offset Dingo Instruments in Anterior to Psoas (ATP)/Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) Procedure: A Retrospective Study of 80 Patients

OBJECTIVE

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) is a minimally invasive lumbar fusion procedure that has flourished in recent years. However, complications related to the anterior-to-psoas (ATP) approach have been reported. The purpose of this study was to assess the OLIF technique using offset design "Dingo" instruments for the treatment of degenerative lumbar disorders.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed to identify patients between March 2018 and November 2020 who underwent OLIF with conventional or modified instruments with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. Demographic data were recorded. Operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay were compared between cohorts. Imaging parameters were measured and compared between cohorts before and after surgery. Clinical outcomes were assessed at each follow-up visit. All complications were reviewed.

RESULTS

A total of 80 consecutive patients were included. The mean follow-up times for the conventional group and modified group were 14.5 months and 16.3 months, respectively. The incidence of hip flexion weakness was 27.5% and 7.5% for the conventional cohort and modified cohort, respectively. The modified group was associated with a shorter operation time, shorter length of hospital stay, higher postoperative disk height and better cage position. The symptoms of all patients improved after surgery. At 1-week follow-up, the modified group showed significantly better clinical scores.

CONCLUSIONS

OLIF with modified instruments and techniques shows promising outcomes in reducing approach-related complications. Additionally, the modified technique is associated with a better cage position, shorter length of hospital stay and less postoperative pain in the early period.

Clinical presentation and surgical anatomy of sympathetic nerve injury during lumbar spine surgery: a narrative review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To highlight the surgical anatomy, procedural variations, presentation, and management of sympathetic nerve injury after surgery of the lumbar spine.

METHODS

PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for publications that were completed between 1951 and 2021. Relevant full-text articles published in the English language were selected and critically reviewed.

KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS

Sympathetic injury is a highly variable postsurgical complication with a greater incidence after an anterior or oblique approach to the lumbar spine compared to posterior and lateral approaches. The direct and extreme lateral approaches reduce the need to disturb sympathetic nerves thus reducing the risk of complications. It can present in multiple manners, including complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) and retrograde ejaculation. These complications can be transient and resolve spontaneously or be treated with medications, physical therapy, and spinal blocks. The severity of the conditions and extent of recovery can vary drastically, with some patients never fully recovering.

CONCLUSIONS

To access the lumbar spine, there are operational approaches and techniques that should be used to decrease the risk of intraoperative injury. It is crucial to understand the advantages and risks to different approaches and take the necessary steps to minimize complications. Early identification of dysfunction and adequate management of symptoms are imperative to effectively manage patients with lumbar sympathetic trunk and sympathetic nerve fiber injuries.

Efficacy and safety of a modified lateral lumbar interbody fusion in L4-5 lumbar degenerative diseases compared with traditional XLIF and OLIF: a retrospective cohort study of 156 cases

BACKGROUND

The authors designed a modified lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) procedure named as XOLIF and compared the efficacy and safety with traditional LLIF procedures.

METHODS

Patients were divided into XLIF, OLIF, and XOLIF group according to the surgical approach. Cases of psoas major and vascular space stenosis, psoas major muscle elevation, psoas major muscle hypertrophy, and high iliac crest were recorded. Basic information, composition ratio of specific cases, Visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), interbody fusion rate and complications were compared between the 3 groups.

RESULTS

The study included 156 cases of L4-5 LLIF. There was no statistical difference in age, gender, BMI among the three groups. Cases with stenosis between psoas muscle and artery accounted for 11.8 and 18.4% of the XLIF and XOLIF group, respectively, while no case of this type had undergone OLIF surgery, the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The proportions of high iliac crest cases in the OLIF and XOLIF group were 12.5 and 18.4%, respectively, while the XLIF group with vertical approach is not suitable for cases with high iliac crest. The postoperative VAS and ODI of the three groups were significantly improved compared with those before operation. There were 51 cases (32.7%) of complications including 21cases in XLIF group, 20 cases in OLIF Group and 10 cases in XOLIF group. XOLIF group has more advantages in reducing lumbar plexus injury and the risk of vascular injury.

CONCLUSIONS

XOLIF showed good clinical efficacy and technical advantages with a low incidence of intraoperative and postoperative complications, especially in the specific cases.

Oblique lateral interbody fusion combined with lateral plate fixation for the treatment of degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine: A retrospective study

Oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) is a minimally invasive decompression technique used in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases (LDDs). It is usually combined with posterior pedicle screw fixation to decrease perioperative complications. Few studies have reported the efficacy of OLIF combined with lateral plate instrumentation (OLIF-LP) for the treatment of LDDs.The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of OLIF combined with lateral plate instrumentation for the treatment of LDDs.From May 2020 to September 2020, the clinical data of 52 patients who underwent OLIF-LP were analyzed. The operation time, blood loss, and complications were recorded. The radiological parameters, visual analog scale score, and Oswestry Disability Index were evaluated.The average operation time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay were 75.41 ± 11.53 minutes, 39.57 ± 9.22 mL, and 7.22 ± 1.85 days, respectively. The visual analog scale score and Oswestry Disability Index both improved significantly after surgery (7.23 ± 1.26 vs 2.15 ± 0.87; 60.27 ± 7.91 vs 21.80 ± 6.32, P < .01). The postoperative disk height was 13.02 ± 8.83 mm, which was much greater than the preoperative value. The postoperative foraminal height improved significantly (16.18 ± 3.49 vs 21.54 ± 2.12 mm, P < .01), and the cross-sectional area improved from 88.95 ± 14.79 to 126.53 ± 8.83 mm2 (P < .001). The radiological fusion rate was 88% at the last follow-up. No major complications, such as ureteral injury, vascular injury, or vertebral body fracture, occurred.Use of the OLIF-LP technique can help avoid lumbar posterior surgery and minimize the operative time and blood loss. OLIF-LP can achieve 1-stage intervertebral fusion and instrumentation through a single small incision.

Incidence of major and minor vascular injuries during lateral access lumbar interbody fusion procedures: a retrospective comparative study and systematic literature review

During lateral lumbar fusion, the trajectory of implant insertion approaches the great vessels anteriorly and the segmental arteries posteriorly, which carries the risk of vascular complications. We aimed to analyze vascular injuries for potential differences between oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) procedures at our institution. This was coupled with a systematic literature review of vascular complications associated with lateral lumbar fusions. A retrospective chart review was completed to identify consecutive patients who underwent lateral access fusions. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used for the systematic review with the search terms "vascular injury" and "lateral lumbar surgery." Of 260 procedures performed at our institution, 211 (81.2%) patients underwent an LLIF and 49 (18.8%) underwent an OLIF. There were no major vascular complications in either group in this comparative study, but there were four (1.5%) minor vascular injuries (2 LLIF, 0.95%; 2 OLIF, 4.1%). Patients who experienced vascular injury experienced a greater amount of blood loss than those who did not (227.5 ± 147.28 vs. 59.32 ± 68.30 ml) (p = 0.11). In our systematic review of 63 articles, major vascular injury occurred in 0-15.4% and minor vascular injury occurred in 0-6% of lateral lumbar fusions. The systematic review and comparative study demonstrate an increased rate of vascular injury in OLIF when compared to LLIF. However, vascular injuries in either procedure are rare, and this study aids previous literature to support the safety of both approaches.

Rating the incidence of iatrogenic vascular injuries in thoracic and lumbar spine surgery as regards the approach: A PRISMA-based literature review

PURPOSE

To assess the rate, timing of diagnosis, and repairing strategies of vascular injuries in thoracic and lumbar spine surgery as their relationship to the approach.

METHODS

PubMed, Medline, and Embase databases were utilized for a comprehensive literature search based on keywords and mesh terms to find articles reporting iatrogenic vascular injury during thoracic and lumbar spine surgery. English articles published in the last ten years were selected. The search was refined based on best match and relevance.

RESULTS

Fifty-six articles were eligible, for a cumulative volume of 261 lesions. Vascular injuries occurred in 82% of instrumented procedures and in 59% during anterior approaches. The common iliac vein (CIV) was the most involved vessel, injured in 49% of anterior lumbar approaches. Common iliac artery, CIV, and aorta were affected in 40%, 28%, and 28% of posterior approaches, respectively. Segmental arteries were injured in 68% of lateral approaches. Direct vessel laceration occurred in 81% of cases and recognized intraoperatively in 39% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Incidence of iatrogenic vascular injuries during thoracic and lumbar spine surgery is low but associated with an overall mortality rate up to 65%, of which less than 1% for anterior approaches and more than 50% for posterior ones. Anterior approaches for instrumented procedures are at risk of direct avulsion of CIV. Posterior instrumented fusions are at risk for injuries of iliac vessels and aorta. Lateral routes are frequently associated with lesions of segmental vessels. Suture repair and endovascular techniques are useful in the management of these severe complications.

Intraoperative Neuromonitoring and Lumbar Spinal Instrumentation: Indications and Utility

Multimodal intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring (IONM) can be utilized as an adjunct to lumbar spinal instrumentation in order to aid with avoidance of neurologic complications. The most commonly utilized modalities include somatosensory-evoked potentials, motor-evoked potentials, and electromyography. Somatosensory-evoked potentials (SSEPs) allow for continuous assessment of the dorsal columns of the spinal cord and are therefore most useful during procedures with a posterior approach to the cervical and thoracic spine. Motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) and electromyography (EMG) can be applied intermittently to assess motor nerve function. The utility of each individual modality can be largely dependent on the surgical approach. Approaches to lumbar spinal instrumentation can be generally categorized as anterior, lateral, and posterior. For lateral approaches, electromyography can be helpful in identifying neural structures crossing the surgical field to prevent injury. In posterior and anterior approaches, somatosensory-evoked potentials and motor-evoked potentials can be used to assess nerve injury during and after maneuvers for decompression and instrumentation. Additionally, during the placement of pedicle screws, direct stimulation with triggered electromyography can be used to detect the pedicle cortex's breach. The efficacy of intraoperative neuromonitoring is dependent on prompt and accurate recognition of changes in signals. This is then followed by accurate recognition of the cause for these changes and appropriate responses by the surgeon, anesthesiologist, and monitoring personnel to correct the change.

Comparison of clinical outcomes and spino-pelvic sagittal balance in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: Minimally invasive oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF)

Spino-pelvic sagittal parameters are closely related to the lumbar degenerative diseases. The present study aims to compare clinical results and spino-pelvic sagittal balance treated with oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis at single segment.We retrospectively reviewed and compared 28 patients who underwent OLIF (OLIF group) and 35 who underwent TLIF (TLIF group). Radiological results were evaluated with disc height (DH), foraminal height (FH), fused segment lordosis (FSL), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI), and sacral slope (SS). Clinical results were evaluated with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and VAS for back and leg pain.The OLIF group showed higher improvement of DH and FH than the TLIF group at all time points after surgery (P < .05). No significant differences were found in PT, PI, and SS between the 2 groups (P > .05). Significant restoration of spino-pelvic sagittal balance was observed in the 2 groups after surgery. Significant differences in postoperative lumbar lordosis and fused segment lordosis were found between the 2 groups (P < .05). Significant difference in the improvement of symptoms was observed between the 2 groups. The OLIF group had lower VAS scores for back pain and ODI compared after surgery (P < .05).It can be concluded that there are exactly differences in improvement of radiographic parameters between 2 approaches, which confirmed that OLIF is better in restoring spinal alignment. Besides, due to the unique minimally invasive approach, OLIF did exhibit a greater advantage in early recovery after surgery.

Lumbar Spinal Fusion Using Lateral Oblique (Pre-psoas) Approach (Review)

Lumbar spinal fusion is one of the most common operations in spinal surgery. For its implementation, anterolateral (pre-psoas) approach (oblique lumbar interbody fusion, OLIF) is now increasingly used due to its high efficacy and safety. However, there is still little information on the clinical and radiological results of using this technique.

The aim of the study was to analyze the safety and efficacy of OLIF in the treatment of lumbar spine disorders as presented in the literature.

Efficacy and radiographic analysis of oblique lumbar interbody fusion in treating lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with sagittal imbalance

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of OLIF (oblique lumbar interbody fusion) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with sagittal imbalance. Fifty-nine patients were included in our analysis. Included patients were divided into 2 groups according to the surgical techniques: PLIF (posterior lumbar interbody fusion) (n = 31) and OLIF + PSF (OLIF combined with posterior spinal fixation) (n = 28). Perioperative radiographic parameters, complications, and clinical outcome from each group were assessed and compared. The operation time for both groups was 165.1 min in the OLIF group and 182.1 min in the PLIF group (P < 0.05). The intraoperative blood loss was 190.6 ml in the OLIF group and 356.3 ml in the PLIF group (P < 0.05). The number of intraoperative and postoperative complications for both groups was 7 in the OLIF group and 11 in the PLIF group. Significant clinical improvement was observed in VAS scores and ODI when comparing preoperative evaluation and final follow-up. The preoperative SVA (the distance from the posterosuperior corner of S1body to the C7 plumb line), PI (pelvic incidence), LL (lumbar lordosis), PI-LL mismatch, DH (disc height), and lumbar Cobb angles of both groups were similar. The postoperative and final follow-up SVA, LL, PI-LL mismatch, and disc height were improved in both groups, and a statistical difference was found between both groups (P < 0.05). An improvement of SVA, LL, PI-LL mismatch, and disc height at the OLIF group was better than that found at the PLIF group. An improvement in radiographic and clinical outcomes for the OLIF group was better than that seen for the PLIF group. Then, OLIF had a more curative effect in lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with sagittal imbalance.

Neutral hip position for the oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) approach increases the retroperitoneal oblique corridor

BACKGROUND

The prepsoas lateral approach for spinal fusion, oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF), is considered one of the minimally invasive spinal fusion methods and is gaining popularity due to improved outcomes with copious supporting evidence. To date, no publication has studied the various positions of the left hip in actual patients which might affect the retroperitoneal oblique corridor (ROC). The study aimed to find the relevancy of the left hip position and the size of ROC.

METHODS

We recruited 40 consecutive patients who needed diagnostic MRI from the out-patient clinic. MRI scan from L2 to L5 was performed in the supine, right lateral decubitus with hip flexion, and right lateral decubitus with hip in a neutral position. The retroperitoneal oblique corridor (ROC) was measured at the intervertebral disc level and compared.

RESULTS

ROC of the hip in neutral position was significantly larger than hip flexion in all levels (p < 0.05); there was no significant difference in the ROC among levels (p = 0.22). ROC seems to be largest at L2/3 followed by L3/4 and L4/5 respectively in all positions.

CONCLUSIONS

The retroperitoneal oblique corridors of L2 to L5 were significantly increased when the hip is in the neutral position, while the psoas cross-sectional area and anterior thickness were minimized in this position. Surgeons might benefit from a neutral position of the left hip in the oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) procedure. In conclusion, the retroperitoneal oblique corridors of L2 to L5 were significantly increased when the hip is in the neutral position, while the psoas cross-sectional area and anterior thickness were minimized in this position. Surgeons might benefit from a neutral position of the left hip in the oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion procedure.

Reliability of the new modified Moro's classification and oblique corridor grading to assess the feasibility of oblique lumbar interbody fusion

Introduction

The modified Moro's classification (MMC) of psoas morphology and oblique corridor (OC) grading were recently proposed. Their reliability needs to be tested.

Methods

T2 weighted lumbar disc level axial-cut MRI images of patients with degenerative spondylosis were distributed to five spine surgeons. The inter and intra-rater reliability of MMC and OC grading were calculated based on their ratings.

Results

Based on kappa statistics, we inferred that both MMC and OC grading are reliable measures.

Conclusion

Both MMC and OC grading, in combination, can be used to predict the feasibility of oblique lumbar interbody fusion and aid in patient selection.

The Oblique Corridor at L4-L5: A Radiographic-Anatomical Study Into the Feasibility for Lateral Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional radioanatomical study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to analyze the prevalence, size, and location of the oblique corridor (OC), and the morphology of the psoas muscle at the L4-L5 disc level.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion via the OC has the advantage of avoiding injury to the psoas muscle and lumbar plexus. However, the varying anatomy of major vascular structures and the iliopsoas may preclude a safe oblique access to the L4-L5 level.

METHODS

Five hundred axial magnetic resonance images of the L4-L5 disc level were shortlisted. OCs were categorized into four grades: Grade 0 = no corridor, Grade 1 = small corridor (≤1 cm), Grade 2 = moderate corridor (1-2 cm) and Grade 3 = large corridor (>2 cm). OC location was labeled as antero-oblique, oblique, or oblique-lateral. Psoas morphology was categorized based on a modified Moro's classification, where the anterior section was further subdivided into types AI-AIV. Oblique approach was considered nonviable either when there was no corridor due to vascular obstruction (Grade 0) or when the psoas was high-rising (Types AII-AIV).

RESULTS

10.5% of the selected 449 patients had no measurable OC (grade 0) at the L4-L5 level. There were 35% and 37.2% patients with a grade 1and 2 OC, respectively. The location of the OC was anterior oblique, oblique, and oblique lateral in 3.7%, 89.6%, and 6.7%, respectively. According to the modified Moro's classification, 19.4% had a high-rising psoas. Predominantly, psoas was either in line with the disc (Type I; 30.7%) or low-rising (Type AI; 47.4%).

CONCLUSION

Twenty-five percent of the patients did not have an accessible OC either due to obstruction by vascular structures or due to a high-rising psoas. Hence, proper evaluation of the relevant anatomy preoperatively is recommended for early adopters of this technique, as varying anatomy precludes universal suitability of oblique lateral interbody fusion for the L4-L5 level.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Factors Influencing Early Disc Height Loss Following Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Study Design

Retrospective radiological analysis.

Purpose

To analyze the factors influencing early disc height loss following lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF).

Overview of Literature

Postoperative disc height loss can occur naturally as a result of mechanical loading. This phenomenon is enabled by the yielding of the polyaxial screw heads and settling of the cage to the endplates. When coupled with cage subsidence, there can be significant reduction in the foraminal space which ultimately compromises the indirect decompression achieved by LLIF.

Methods

Seventy-two cage levels in 37 patients aged 62±10.2 years who underwent single or multilevel LLIF for degenerative spinal conditions were selected. Their preoperative and postoperative follow-up radiographs were used to measure the anterior disc height (ADH), posterior disc height (PDH), mean disc height (MDH), disc space angle (DSA), and segmental angle. Correlations between the loss of disc height and several factors, including age, construct length, preoperative lordosis, postoperative lordosis, disc height, cage dimensions, and cage position, were analyzed.

Results

We found that the lateral interbody cages significantly increased ADH, PDH, MDH, and DSA after surgery (p <0.0001). However, there was a loss of disc height over time. All postoperative disc height parameters, especially the amount of increase in MDH (r =0.413, p <0.0001) after surgery, showed a significant positive association with early disc height loss. The levels demonstrating a significant (≥25%) height loss were those that exhibited a substantial height increase (128.3%, 4.6±3.0 to 10.5±5.6 mm) postoperatively. However, the levels that showed less than 25% height loss were those that exhibited, on average, only a 57.4% height increase post-operatively.

Conclusions

The greater the postoperative increase in disc height, the greater the disc height loss throughout early follow-up. Therefore, achieving an optimal disc height rather than overcorrection is an important surgical strategy to adopt when performing LLIF.

Development and Application of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

The present study reviewed the relevant recent literature regarding the development and application of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF), with a particular focus on its application and associated complications. The study evaluated the rationality of this technique and demonstrated the direction of future research by collecting data on previous operative outcomes and complications. A literature search was performed in Pubmed and Web of Science, including the following keywords and abbreviations: anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF), extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF), oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF), adjacent segment disease (ASD), and adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS). A search of literature published from January 2005 to January 2019 was conducted and all studies evaluating development and application of OLIF were included in the review. According to the literature, the indications for OLIF are various. OLIF has excellent orthopaedic effects in degenerative scoliosis patients and the incidence of bony fusion is higher than for other approaches. It also provides a better choice for revision surgery. It has various advantages in many aspects, but the complications cannot be ignored. As a new minimally invasive technique, the advantages of OLIF are obvious, but further evaluation is needed to compare its operation‐related data with that of traditional open surgery. In addition, more prospective studies are required to compare minimally invasive and open spinal surgery to confirm its specific efficacy, risk, advantages, learning curve, and ultimate clinical efficacy.

Efficacy and radiographic analysis of oblique lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

Background

To compare the clinical efficacy and radiographic analysis of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in treating degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS).

Methods

Grade I DLS patients admitted to the Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University were retrospectively reviewed. In sum, 78 patients that underwent OLIF (n = 31) and PLIF (n = 47) treatment of DLS were recruited. Clinical data including clinical and radiological evaluations were collected pre-operatively and at each follow-up. Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), lumbar lordosis (LL), disc height (DH), and fusion rates were compared between the OLIF and PLIF groups.

Results

The operation time for both groups was 131.3 ± 14.6 min in the OLIF group and 156.9 ± 37.4 min in the PLIF group (P < 0.001). The intraoperative blood loss was 163.6 ± 63.9 ml in the OLIF group and 496.8 ± 122.6 ml in the PLIF group (P < 0.001). The length of the surgical incision was 4.63 ± 0.57 cm in the OLIF group and 11.83 ± 1.37 cm in the PLIF group (P < 0.001). The number of intraoperative and post-operative complications for both groups was 10 in the OLIF group and 20 in the PLIF group. Significant clinical improvement (P < 0.05) was observed in JOA scores and ODI when comparing pre-operative evaluation and final follow-up. After statistical analysis, there was no significant difference in the preoperative JOA scores between the two groups. There was no significant difference when comparing pre-operative LL and DH for either group. Post-operative reexamination was improved as compared to pre-operative exams. And the improvement of DH was better in the OLIF group as compared to the PLIF group.

Conclusions

For DLS patients, both OLIF and PLIF can achieve good results. Furthermore, OLIF displays marked advantages including smaller surgical incisions, shorter anesthesia times, decreased intraoperative blood loss, and post-operative pain better relieved.

Complications for minimally invasive lateral interbody arthrodesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing prepsoas and transpsoas approaches

OBJECTIVE

Minimally invasive anterolateral retroperitoneal approaches for lumbar interbody arthrodesis have distinct advantages attractive to spine surgeons. Prepsoas or transpsoas trajectories can be employed with differing complication profiles because of the inherent anatomical differences encountered in each approach. The evidence comparing them remains limited because of poor quality data. Here, the authors sought to systematically review the available literature and perform a meta-analysis comparing the two techniques.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A database search was used to identify eligible studies. Prepsoas and transpsoas studies were compiled, and each study was assessed for inclusion criteria. Complication rates were recorded and compared between approach groups. Studies incorporating an analysis of postoperative subsidence and pseudarthrosis rates were also assessed and compared.

RESULTS

For the prepsoas studies, 20 studies for the complications analysis and 8 studies for the pseudarthrosis outcomes analysis were included. For the transpsoas studies, 39 studies for the complications analysis and 19 studies for the pseudarthrosis outcomes analysis were included. For the complications analysis, 1874 patients treated via the prepsoas approach and 4607 treated with the transpsoas approach were included. In the transpsoas group, there was a higher rate of transient sensory symptoms (21.7% vs 8.7%, p = 0.002), transient hip flexor weakness (19.7% vs 5.7%, p < 0.001), and permanent neurological weakness (2.8% vs 1.0%, p = 0.005). A higher rate of sympathetic nerve injury was seen in the prepsoas group (5.4% vs 0.0%, p = 0.03). Of the nonneurological complications, major vascular injury was significantly higher in the prepsoas approach (1.8% vs 0.4%, p = 0.01). There was no difference in urological or peritoneal/bowel injury, postoperative ileus, or hematomas (all p > 0.05). A higher infection rate was noted for the transpsoas group (3.1% vs 1.1%, p = 0.01). With regard to postoperative fusion outcomes, similar rates of subsidence (12.2% prepsoas vs 13.8% transpsoas, p = 0.78) and pseudarthrosis (9.9% vs 7.5%, respectively, p = 0.57) were seen between the groups at the last follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Complication rates vary for the prepsoas and transpsoas approaches owing to the variable retroperitoneal anatomy encountered during surgical dissection. While the risks of a lasting motor deficit and transient sensory disturbances are higher for the transpsoas approach, there is a reciprocal reduction in the risks of major vascular injury and sympathetic nerve injury. These results can facilitate informed decision-making and tailored surgical planning regarding the choice of minimally invasive anterolateral access to the spine.

Complications and Prevention Strategies of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion Technique

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the early complications and causes of oblique lateral interbody fusion, and put forward preventive measures.

METHODS

There were 235 patients (79 males and 156 females) analyzed in our study from October 2014 to May 2017. The average age was 61.9 ± 0.21 years (from 32 to 83 years). Ninety-one cases were treated with oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) alone (OLIF alone group) and 144 with OLIF combined with posterior pedicle screw fixation through the intermuscular space approach (OLIF combined group). In addition, 137/144 cases in the combined group were primarily treated by posterior pedicle screw fixation, while the treatments were postponed in 7 cases. There were 190 cases of single fusion segments, 11 of 2 segments, 21 of 3 segments, and 13 of 4 segments. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were observed.

RESULTS

Average follow-up time was 15.6 ± 7.5 months (ranged from 6 to 36 months). Five cases were lost to follow-up (2 cases from the OLIF alone group and 3 cases from the OLIF combined group). There were 7 cases of vascular injury, 22 cases of endplate damage, 2 cases of vertebral body fracture, 11 cases of nerve injury, 18 cases of cage sedimentation or cage transverse shifting, 3 cases of iliac crest pain, 1 case of right psoas major hematoma, 2 cases of incomplete ileus, 1 case of acute heart failure, 1 case of cerebral infarction, 3 case of left lower abdominal pain, 9 cases of transient psoas weakness, 3 cases of transient quadriceps weakness, and 8 cases of reoperation. The complication incidence was 32.34%. Thirty-three cases occurred in the OLIF alone group, with a rate of 36.26%, and 43 cases in the group of OLIF combined posterior pedicle screw fixation, with a rate of 29.86%. Fifty-seven cases occurred in single-segment fusion, with a rate of 30.0% (57/190), 4 cases occurred in two-segment fusion, with a rate of 36.36% (4/11), 9 cases occurred in three-segment fusion, with a rate of 42.86% (9/21), and 6 cases occurred in four-segment fusion, with a rate of 46.15% (6/13).

CONCLUSION

In summary, OLIF is a relatively safe and very effective technique for minimally invasive lumbar fusion. Nonetheless, it should be noted that OLIF carries the risk of complications, especially in the early stage of development.

Malposition of Cage in Minimally Invasive Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Introduction

Minimally invasive oblique lumbar interbody fusion is one of the novel lateral lumbar interbody fusion techniques for which the successful early results have been reported. However, new complications were increasingly reported from ongoing studies.

Case Presentation

We report a case of an unusual complication of minimally invasive oblique lumbar interbody fusion associated with contralateral nerve root compression due to deep and posterior position of polyetheretherketone cage and discussion of the operating technique for repositioning polyetheretherketone cage.

Conclusion

Malposition of polyetheretherketone cage can cause contralateral nerve root compression and neurological complication. The surgical technique to proper pull the polyetheretherketone cage back into the acceptable position should be considered and well prepared.

Complications on minimally invasive oblique lumbar interbody fusion at L2-L5 levels: a review of the literature and surgical strategies

Fusion is the cornerstone in the treatment of an unstable degenerative lumbar spinal disease. Various techniques have been developed. Amongst these techniques exists the oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF), which is the ante-psoas approach. Adequate restoration of disc height with large cages placed in the intervertebral space, indirect decompression, and correction of sagittal and coronal alignment can be achieved with OLIF procedure with the advantage of minimal risk for the psoas muscle and lumbar plexus. Nevertheless, this technique entails complications directly associated with the anatomical location where the fusion takes place. This surgical area is a window between the left lateral border of the aorta, or the left common iliac artery, and the anterior belly of the left psoas muscle. Vascular complications associated with the injury of the main vessels, segmental artery or iliolumbar vein of the lumbar spine have been reported, as well as urologic lesions due to ureter transgression, amongst others. Although these complications have been described in the literature, an article that complements this information with technical advice for its avoidance is yet to be published. This article is a review of the most frequent complications associated with the OLIF procedure in L2-L5 lumbar levels, as well as a description of technical strategies for the prevention of such complications.

Morphometric anatomy of the lumbar sympathetic trunk with respect to the anterolateral approach to lumbar interbody fusion: a cadaver study

BACKGROUND

An approach to lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) utilizing an oblique corridor anterior to the psoas muscle was first described by Mayer in 1997 and subsequently by other authors. The only consistent structure of note in this corridor is the lumbar sympathetic trunk (LST), which at times must be mobilized in order to perform a discectomy and interbody fusion, thereby placing the LST at risk. This study was designed to describe the morphometric anatomy of the LST in relation to surgically relevant landmarks for the anterolateral approach to the lumbar spine at L3/L4 to L5/S1.

METHODS

Twenty-four embalmed cadavers (13 males, 11 females, age range, 50-89) were dissected to expose the LST. Bilateral measurements were recorded using a calliper under direct visualization, using the midsagittal plane of the lumbar spine as the reference landmark. The points were then marked with radio-opaque needles, and 14 cadavers were scanned with CT to validate the measurements.

RESULTS

Of 48 LSTs, there was minimal difference in the direction of its course between sides; 14/24 specimens had concordant directions. The majority (n=28) had a medial to lateral cephalocaudal course. If osteophytes were present at the L4/L5 level, the majority of LSTs (n=7, of 8) were displaced lateral to the osteophyte. At the L5/S1 level, half of the cases with osteophytes (n=3, of 6) stretched the LST over the top of the osteophyte. The LST was adherent to the L4/L5 disc space bilaterally in 93% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

With the development of lumbar fusion techniques which utilize an oblique corridor and the retraction of psoas muscle, LST has become an important neural structure to define, protect and mobilize. In our morphometric analysis of 24 specimens, the position has been identified and quantified, and this paper notes variations, particularly distortions caused by degenerative processes. In this study, the LST ran in a medial to lateral direction from L3 to S1, and osteophytes typically displace and adhere to the LST.