Complications of lateral plating in the minimally invasive lateral transpsoas approach

Effects of Minimally Invasive Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Accessory Rod Technique on Rod Fracture in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: Analysis of 239 Patients

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze factors associated with rod fracture (RF) in adult spinal deformity (ASD), and to assess whether the accessory rod (AR) technique can reduce RF occurrence in deformity correction in the setting of minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Instrumentation failure is the most common reason for revision surgery in ASD. Several RF reduction methods have been introduced. However, there are insufficient studies on postoperative RF after deformity correction using minimally invasive LLIF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study included 239 patients (average age 71.4 y and a minimum 2-year follow-up) with ASD who underwent long-segment fusion from T10 to sacrum with sacropelvic fixation. Patients were classified into the non-RF group and the RF group. After logistic regression analysis of the risk factors for RF, subgroup analyses were performed: pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) with two-rod (P2 group) versus PSO with two-rod and AR (P4 group), and LLIF with two-rod (L2 group) versus LLIF with two-rod and AR (L4 group).

RESULTS

RF occurred in 50 patients (21%) at an average of 25 months. RF occurred more frequently in patients who underwent PSO than in those who underwent LLIF ( P =0.002), and the use of the AR technique was significantly higher in the non-RF group ( P <0.05).Following logistic regression analysis, preoperative PI-LL mismatch, PSO, and the AR technique were associated with RF. In subgroup analyses, RF incidence was 65% (24/37 cases) of the P2 group, 8% (4/51 cases) of the P4 group, and 21% (22/105 cases) of the L2 group. In the L4 group, there was no RF.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive multilevel LLIF with the AR technique is capable of as much LL correction as conventional PSO and appears to be an effective method for reducing RF.

Coronal vertical fracture of vertebral body following minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion: risk factor analysis in consecutive case series

BACKGROUND

To investigate the incidence and risk factors of coronal vertical vertebral body fracture (CV-VBF) during lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) for degenerative lumbar disease.

METHODS

Clinical data, including age, sex, body mass index, and bone mineral density, were reviewed. Radiological assessments, such as facet joint arthrosis, intervertebral disc motion, index disc height, and cage profiles, were conducted. Posterior instrumentation was performed using either a single or staged procedure after LLIF. Demographic and surgical data were compared between patients with and without VBF.

RESULTS

Out of 273 patients (552 levels), 7 (2.6%) experienced CV-VBF. Among the 552 levels, VBF occured in 7 levels (1.3%). All VBF cases developed intraoperatively during LLIF, with no instances caused by cage subsidence during the follow-up period. Sagittal motion in segments adjacent to VBF was smaller than in others (4.6° ± 2.6° versus 6.5° ± 3.9°, P = 0.031). The average grade of facet arthrosis was 2.5 ± 0.7, indicating severe facet arthrosis. All fractures developed due to oblique placement of a trial or cage into the index disc space, leading to a nutcracker effect. These factors were not related to bone quality.

CONCLUSIONS

CV-VBF after LLIF occurred in 2.6% of patients, accounting for 1.3% of all LLIF levels. A potential risk factor for VBF involves the nutcracker-impinging effect due to the oblique placement of a cage. Thorough preoperative evaluations and surgical procedures are needed to avoid VBF when considering LLIF in patients with less mobile spine.

Interspinous-Interbody Fusion via a Strictly Lateral Surgical Approach: A Biomechanical Stabilization Comparison to Constructs Requiring Both Lateral and Posterior Approaches

Objective Lumbar fusion performed through lateral approaches is becoming more common. The interbody devices are generally supported by supplemental posterior fixation implanted through a posterior approach, potentially requiring a second incision and intraoperative repositioning of the patient. A minimally invasive lateral interspinous fixation device may eliminate the need for intraoperative repositioning and avoid disruption of the supraspinous ligament. The objective of this in vitrobiomechanical study was to investigate segmental multidirectional stability and maintenance of foraminal distraction of a lateral interspinous fixation device compared to commonly used pedicle screw and facet screw posterior fixation constructs when combined with lumbar interbody cages. Methods Six human cadaver lumbar spine specimens were subjected to nondestructive quasistatic loading in the following states: (1) intact; (2) interspinous fixation device alone and (3) with lateral interbody cage; (4) lateral lumbar interbody cage with bilateral pedicle screws; (5) lateral lumbar interbody cage with unilateral pedicle screws; and (6) lateral lumbar interbody cage with facet screws. Multidirectional pure bending in 1.5 Nm increments to 7.5 Nm, and 7.5 Nm flexion-extension bending with a 700 N compressive follower load were performed separately with optoelectronic segmental motion measurement. Relative angular motions of L2-L3, L3-L4, and L4-L5 functional spinal units were evaluated, and the mean instantaneous axis of rotation in the sagittal plane was calculated for the index level. Foraminal height was assessed during combined flexion-extension and compression loading for each test construct. Results All implant configurations significantly restricted flexion-extension motion compared with intact (p < 0.05). No significant differences were found in flexion-extension when comparing the different posterior implants combined with lateral lumbar interbody cages. All posterior fixation devices provided comparable neuroforaminal distraction and maintained distraction during flexion and extension. Conclusions When combinedwith lateral lumbar interbody cages, the minimally invasive lateral interspinous fixation device effectively stabilized the spine and maintained neuroforaminal distraction comparable to pedicle screw constructs or facet screws. These results suggest the lateral interspinous fixation device may provide a favorable alternative to other posterior systems that require patient repositioning during surgery and involve a greater disruption of native tissues.

The predictive value of psoas and paraspinal muscle parameters measured on MRI for severe cage subsidence after standalone lateral lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The effect of psoas and paraspinal muscle parameters on cage subsidence after minimally invasive techniques, such as standalone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (SA-LLIF), is unknown.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine whether the functional cross-sectional area (FCSA) of psoas and lumbar spine extensor muscles (multifidus and erector spinae), and psoas FCSA normalized to the vertebral body area (FCSA/VBA) differ among levels with severe cage subsidence after SA-LLIF when compared to levels without severe cage subsidence.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective single center cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients who underwent SA-LLIF between 2008 and 2020 for degenerative conditions using exclusively polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages, had a lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan within 12 months, a lumbar computed tomography (CT) scan within 6 months prior to surgery, and a postoperative clinical and radiographic follow-up at a minimum of 6 months were included.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Severe cage subsidence.

METHODS

MRI measurements included psoas and combined multifidus and erector spinae (paraspinal) FCSA and FCSA/VBA at the L3-L5 pedicles. Following manual segmentation of muscles on axial T2-weighted images using ITK-SNAP (version 3.8.0), the FCSA was calculated using a custom written program on Matlab (version R2019a, The MathWorks, Inc.) that used an automated pixel intensity threshold method to differentiate between fat and muscle. Mean volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) at L1/2 was measured by quantitative CT. The primary endpoint was severe cage subsidence per level according to the classification by Marchi et al. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed using generalized linear mixed models. All analyses were stratified by biological sex.

RESULTS

95 patients (45.3% female) with a total of 188 operated levels were included in the analysis. The patient population was 92.6% Caucasian with a median age at surgery of 65 years. Overall subsidence (Grades 0-III) was 49.5% (53/107 levels) in men versus 58.0% (47/81 levels) in women (p=.302), and severe subsidence (Grades II-III) was 22.4% (24/107 levels) in men versus 25.9% (21/81 levels) in women (p=.608). In men, median psoas FCSA and psoas FCSA/VBA at L3 and L4 were significantly greater in the severe subsidence group when compared to the non-severe subsidence group. No such difference was observed in women. Paraspinal muscle parameters did not differ significantly between non-severe and severe subsidence groups for both sexes. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis with adjustments for vBMD and cage length, psoas FCSA at L3 (OR 1.002; p=.020) and psoas FCSA/VBA at L3 (OR 8.655; p=.029) and L4 (OR 4.273; p=.043) were found to be independent risk factors for severe cage subsidence in men.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated that greater psoas FCSA at L3 and psoas FCSA/VBA at L3 and L4 were independent risk factors for severe cage subsidence in men after SA-LLIF with PEEK cages. The higher compressive forces the psoas exerts on lumbar segments as a potential stabilizer might explain these findings. Additional pedicle screw fixation might be warranted in these patients to avoid severe cage subsidence.

Early effect of standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion vs. combined with lateral screw fixation of the vertebral body on single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

For the treatment of single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD), oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) has clinical advantages. Whether internal fixation needs to be combined for treatment has been the subject of debate.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the early clinical effects of standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion (S-OLIF) versus OLIF combined with lateral screw fixation of the vertebral body (F-OLIF) on single-level lumbar DDD.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on the data of 34 patients for whom the OLIF technique was applied to treat single-level lumbar DDD from August 2018 to May 2021. Patients were divided into the S-OLIF (n= 18) and F-OLIF groups (n= 16). Intraoperative blood loss, operative time, and length of hospital stay were recorded. The pain visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) before and after the operation were evaluated. The disc height (DH), foraminal height (FH), fused segment lordosis (FSL), lumbar lordosis (LL), cage subsidence, and fusion by CT examination were measured before and after the operation.

RESULTS

The S-OLIF group experienced a shorter operative time and less intraoperative blood loss than the F-OLIF group, and the differences were statistically significant (p< 0.05), but the difference in the length of hospital stay was not statistically significant. The postoperative VAS score and ODI of the two groups were significantly lower than those before the operation, but the postoperative differences between the two groups were not statistically significant. Differences were not statistically significant in postoperative FH, DH, FSL and LL of the two groups. Both groups were followed up for no less than 12 months. In the two groups, fusion was achieved at the last follow-up visit.

CONCLUSION

According to short-term follow-up results, both S-OLIF and F-OLIF can achieve reliable and stable fusion and good clinical effect in the treatment of single-level lumbar DDD.

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.

Hounsfield unit value on CT as a predictor of cage subsidence following stand-alone oblique lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases

BACKGROUND

To investigate the correlation between vertebral Hounsfield unit (HU) values and cage subsidence in patients treated with stand-alone (SA) OLIF.

METHODS

A retrospective review of collected data was performed on 76 patients who underwent SA OLIF. We utilized the HU value for lumbar bone mineral density (BMD) obtained on preoperative CT. The vertebral HU values of patients with subsidence were compared to those without subsidence. The correlation between cage subsidence and clinical score was investigated.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients (21.1%) had at least radiographic evidence of interbody cage subsidence. The average cage subsidence was 2.5 ± 1.3 mm (range 0.9-4.8 mm). There were no significant differences in sex, BMI, preoperative diagnoses, or fused level (p > 0.05); however, there were significant differences between the cage subsidence group and the nonsubsidence group in age, average of the lowest T-score, and average HU value, including for the L1 vertebrae, L1-L4 horizontal plane, and L1-L4 sagittal plane (p < 0.05). The average HU value of the L1-L4 horizontal plane showed a more predictable AUC of 0.909 (95% CI, 0.834-0.984; P < 0.001) compared with the average of the lowest T-score following an AUC of 0.791 (95% CI, 0.674-0.909; P < 0.001). Based on logistic regression analysis, the average HU value of the L1-L4 horizontal plane (OR, 0.912; 95% CI, 0.861-0.966; P = 0.002) was an independent factor influencing cage subsidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with lower average HU values of the lumbar vertebrae are at a much higher risk of developing cage subsidence after SA OLIF. Measurement of preoperative HU values on preexisting CT scans could be rapid, simple and feasible.

[CT value of vertebral body predicting Cage subsidence after stand-alone oblique lumbar interbody fusion]

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the correlation between CT value and Cage subsidence in patients with lumbar degenerative disease treated with stand-alone oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF).

METHODS

The clinical data of 35 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases treated with stand-alone OLIF between February 2016 and October 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 15 males and 20 females; the age ranged from 29 to 81 years, with an average of 58.4 years. There were 39 operative segments, including 32 cases of single-segment, 2 cases of double-segment, and 1 case of three-segment. Preoperative lumbar CT was used to measure the CT values of the axial position of L 1 vertebral body, the axial and sagittal positions of L 1-4 vertebral body, surgical segment, and the axial position of upper and lower vertebral bodies as the bone mineral density index, and the lowest T value was recorded by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. The visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores were recorded before operation and at last follow-up. At last follow-up, the lumbar interbody fusion was evaluated by X-ray films of the lumbar spine and dynamic position; the lumbar lateral X-ray film was used to measure the subsidence of the Cage, and the patients were divided into subsidence group and nonsubsidence group. The univariate analysis on age, gender, body mass index, lowest T value, CT value of vertebral body, disease type, and surgical segment was performed to initially screen the influencing factors of Cage subsidence; further the logistic regression for multi-factor analysis was used to screen fusion independent risk factors for Cage subsidence. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and area under curve (AUC) were used to analyze the CT value and the lowest T value to predict the Cage subsidence. Spearman correlation analysis was used to determine the correlation between Cage subsidence and clinical results.

RESULTS

All the 35 patients were followed up 27-58 months, with an average of 38.7 months. At last follow-up, the VAS and ODI scores were significantly decreased when compared with preoperative scores ( t=32.850, P=0.000; t=31.731, P=0.000). No recurrent lower extremity radiculopathy occurred and no patient required revision surgery. Twenty-seven cases (77.1%) had no Cage subsidence (nonsubsidence group); 8 cases (22.9%) had at least radiographic evidence of Cage subsidence, the average distance of Cage subsidence was 2.2 mm (range, 1.1-4.2 mm) (subsidence group). At last follow-up, there was 1 case of fusion failure both in the subsidence group and the nonsubsidence group, there was no significant difference in the interbody fusion rate (96.3% vs. 87.5%) between two groups ( P=0.410). Univariate analysis showed that the CT value of vertebral body (L 1 axial position, L 1-4 axial and sagittal positions, surgical segment, and upper and lower vertebral bodies axial positions) and the lowest T value were the influencing factors of Cage subsidence ( P<0.05). According to ROC curve analysis, compared with AUC of the lowest T value [0.738, 95% CI (0.540, 0.936)], the AUC of the L 1-4 axis CT value was 0.850 [95% CI (0.715, 0.984)], which could more effectively predict Cage subsidence. Multivariate analysis showed that the CT value of L 1-4 axis was an independent risk factor for Cage subsidence ( P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

The CT value measurement of the vertebral body based on lumbar spine CT before stand-alone OLIF can predict the Cage subsidence. Patients with low CT values of the lumbar spine have a higher risk of Cage subsidence. However, the Cage subsidence do not lead to adverse clinical results.

Additional lateral plate fixation has no effect to prevent cage subsidence in oblique lumbar interbody fusion

Background

For lumbar degenerative diseases, cage subsidence is a serious complication and can result in the failure of indirect decompression in the oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) procedure. Whether additional lateral plate fixation was effective to improve clinical outcomes and prevent cage subsidence was still unknown. This study aimed to compare the incidence and degree of cage subsidence between stand-alone oblique lumbar interbody fusion (SA-OLIF) and OLIF combined with lateral plate fixation (OLIF + LP) for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases and to evaluate the effect of the lateral plate fixation.

Methods

This was a retrospective comparative study. 20 patients with 21 levels underwent SA-OLIF and 21 patients with 26 levels underwent OLIF + LP. We compared clinical and radiographic outcomes between two groups. Clinical evaluation included Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back pain and leg pain, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Radiographical evaluation included disc height (DH), segmental lordosis angle (SL), and subsidence rate on standing lateral radiographs. Cage subsidence was classified using Marchi’s criteria.

Results

The mean follow-up duration was 6.3 ± 2.4 months. There were no significant differences among perioperative data (operation time, estimated intraoperative blood loss, and complication), clinical outcome (VAS, ODI, and JOA) and radiological outcome (SH and SL). The subsidence rate was 19.0% (4/21) in SA-OLIF group and 19.2% (5/26) in OLIF + LP group. 81.0% in SA-OLIF group and 80.8% in OLIF + LP group had Grade 0 subsidence, 14.3% in SA-OLIF group and 15.4% in OLIF + LP group had Grade I subsidence, and 4.8% in SA-OLIF group and 3.8% in OLIF + LP group had Grade II subsidence (P = 0.984). One patient with severe cage subsidence and lateral plate migration underwent revision surgery.

Conclusions

The additional lateral plate fixation does not appear to be more effective to prevent cage subsidence in the oblique lumbar interbody fusion, compared with stand-alone technique. If severe cage subsidence occurs, it may result in lateral plate migration in OLIF combined with lateral plate fixation.

Endplate volumetric bone mineral density is a predictor for cage subsidence following lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a risk factor analysis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

It has been reported in previous studies that a decreased bone mineral density (BMD) as measured by dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is associated with subsidence. However, there is limited research on the role of volumetric BMD (vBMD) as measured by quantitative computed tomography (QCT). Further, metabolic conditions such as obesity and type 2 diabetes have been associated with poor bone quality, but the impact of these metabolic conditions on on subsidence rates following lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) remains unclear. As such, risk factors for subsidence following LLIF is an area of ongoing research.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to identify risk factors for subsidence following LLIF with a focus on metabolic conditions and vBMD as measured by QCT.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective cohort study at a single academic institution.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Consecutive patients undergoing LLIF with or without posterior screws from 2014 to 2019 at a single academic institution who had a pre-operative CT and radiological imaging including radiographs or CT scans between 5 and 14 months post-operatively to assess for cage subsidence.

OUTCOME MEASURE

Subsidence prevalence following LLIF.

METHODS

We reviewed patients undergoing LLIF with or without posterior screws from 2014 to 2019 with a follow-up ≥5 months. Cage subsidence was assessed using the grading system by Marchi et al. Endplate volumetric BMD (EP-vBMD), vertebral bone volumetric BMD (VB-vBMD), BMI, and diabetes status were measured. Univariable analysis and multivariable logistic regression analyses with a generalized mixed model were conducted. Ad hoc analysis, including receiver operative characteristic curve analysis, was used for identifying the cut-off values in significant continuous variables for subsidence. Chi-Squared and ANOVA tests were used for categorical comparisons.

RESULTS

Five hundred sixty-seven levels in 347 patients were included in the final analysis. Mean age (± SD) was 61.7 ± 11.1yrs, 50.3% were male, and 89.6% were Caucasian. Subsidence was observed in 160 levels (28.2%). Multivariable analysis demonstrated an absence of posterior screws [OR = 2.854 (1.483 - 5.215), p=.001] and decreased EP-vBMD [0.996 (0.991 - 1.000), p=.032] were associated with an increased risk of subsidence. Increased BMI and diabetes status were not associated with increased rates of subsidence. Patients without posterior screws and low EP-vBMD experienced subsidence at 44.9% of levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrated that decreased EP-vBMD and standalone status were significantly associated with increased rates of subsidence following LLIF independent of BMI or diabetes status. Further analysis demonstrated that patients with a decreased EP-vBMD and without posterior screws experienced subsidence nearly 2.5 times higher than patients with no risk factors. In patients with a low EP-vBMD undergoing LLIF, posterior screws should be considered.

An In Vitro Biomechanical Evaluation of a Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Device With Integrated Lateral Modular Plate Fixation

STUDY DESIGN

In vitro cadaveric biomechanical study.

OBJECTIVE

Biomechanically characterize a novel lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) implant possessing integrated lateral modular plate fixation (MPF).

METHODS

A human lumbar cadaveric (n = 7, L1-L4) biomechanical study of segmental range-of-motion stiffness was performed. A ±7.5 Nċm moment was applied in flexion/extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation using a 6 degree-of-freedom kinematics system. Specimens were tested first in an intact state and then following iterative instrumentation (L2/3): (1) LLIF cage only, (2) LLIF + 2-screw MPF, (3) LLIF + 4-screw MPF, (4) LLIF + 4-screw MPF + interspinous process fixation, and (5) LLIF + bilateral pedicle screw fixation. Comparative analysis of range-of-motion outcomes was performed between iterations.

RESULTS

Key biomechanical findings: (1) Flexion/extension range-of-motion reduction with LLIF + 4-screw MPF was significantly greater than LLIF + 2-screw MPF (P < .01). (2) LLIF with 2-screw and 4-screw MPF were comparable to LLIF with bilateral pedicle screw fixation in lateral bending and axial rotation range-of-motion reduction (P = 1.0). (3) LLIF + 4-screw MPF and supplemental interspinous process fixation range-of-motion reduction was comparable to LLIF + bilateral pedicle screw fixation in all directions (P ≥ .6).

CONCLUSIONS

LLIF with 4-screw MPF may provide inherent advantages over traditional 2-screw plating modalities. Furthermore, when coupled with interspinous process fixation, LLIF with MPF is a stable circumferential construct that provides biomechanical utility in all principal motions.

Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Review of Surgical Technique and Postoperative Multimodality Imaging Findings

The lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) approach is a minimally invasive surgery that can be used as an alternative to traditional lumbar interbody fusion techniques. LLIF accesses the intervertebral disk through the retroperitoneum and psoas muscle to avoid major vessels and visceral organs. The exposure of retroperitoneal structures during LLIF leads to unique complications compared with other surgical approaches. An understanding of the surgical technique and its associated potential complications is necessary for radiologists who interpret imaging before and after LLIF. Preoperative imaging must carefully assess the location of anatomic structures, including major retroperitoneal vasculature, lumbar nerve roots, lumbosacral plexus, and the genitofemoral nerve, relative to the psoas muscle. Multiple imaging modalities can be used in postoperative assessment including radiographs, CT, CT myelography, and MRI. Of these, CT is the preferred modality, because it can assess a range of complications relating to both the retroperitoneal exposure and the spinal instrumentation, as well as bone integrity and fusion status. This article describes surgical approaches for lumbar interbody fusion, comparing the approaches' indications, contraindications, advantages, and disadvantages; reviews the surgical technique of LLIF and relevant anatomic considerations; and illustrates for interpreting radiologists the normal postoperative findings and potential postsurgical complications of LLIF.

Retrospective Multicenter Assessment of Rod Fracture After Anterior Column Realignment in Minimally Invasive Adult Spinal Deformity Correction

BACKGROUND

Anterior column realignment (ACR) was developed as a minimally invasive method for treating sagittal imbalance. However, rod fracture (RF) rates associated with ACR are not known. Our objective was to assess the rate of and risk factors for RF following ACR in deformity correction surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective multicenter review of patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) who underwent ACR for deformity correction. ASD was defined as coronal Cobb angle ≥20°, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis >10°, sagittal vertical axis ≥5 cm, pelvic tilt ≥25°, or thoracic kyphosis ≥60°. Inclusion criteria were ASD, age >18 years, use of ACR, and development of RF or full radiographs obtained at least 1 year after surgery that did not demonstrate RF.

RESULTS

Ninety patients were identified, with mean follow-up of 2.3 ± 1.4 years (age, 64.1 ± 9.4; 54 [60%] women). The most common ACR location was L3/4 (42 cases; 47%). Mean fusion length was 7.5 ± 3.6 levels. Four (4.4%) of 90 patients developed RF within 12 months of surgery. RF occurred adjacent to ACR in all cases; RF was not associated with focal correction (P = 0.49), rod material (P = 0.8), degree of correction (P > 0.07), or interbody at L5/S1 (P = 0.06). RF was associated with longer fusion constructs in univariate (P = 0.002) and multivariate (P = 0.03) analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

RF occurred in 4.4% of patients with ASD who underwent ACR with a minimum of 1-year follow-up. RF was not associated with focal correction but appears to be associated with global correction and extent of fixation.

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.

Limitations and complications of minimally invasive spinal surgery in adult deformity

Minimally invasive spine (MIS) surgery has rapidly progressed from simple short segment fusions to large adult deformity corrections, with radiographic and clinical outcomes as good as those of open surgery. Anterior longitudinal ligament release (ALLR) and anterior column realignment (ACR) have been key advancements in the ability to correct deformity using MIS techniques. However, patient selection and appropriate preoperative workup is critical to obtain good outcomes and for complication avoidance. Despite favorable outcomes in spinal deformity surgery, MIS techniques are limited in (I) pronounced cervical or thoracic deformity; (II) patients with prior fusion mass; and (III) severe sagittal imbalance necessitating Schwab 5 osteotomy or higher. Guidelines for proper patient selection are needed to guide MIS spine surgeons in choosing the right candidate.

Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion-Outcomes and Complications

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is a relatively new, minimally invasive technique for interbody fusion. The goal of this review is to provide a general overview of LLIF with a special focus on outcomes and complications.

RECENT FINDINGS

Since the first description of the technique in 2006, the indications for LLIF have expanded and the rate of LLIF procedures performed in the USA has increased. LLIF has several theoretical advantages compared to other approaches including the preservation of the anterior and posterior annular/ligamentous structures, insertion of wide cages resting on the dense apophyseal ring bilaterally, and augmentation of disc height with indirect decompression of neural elements. Favorable long-term outcomes and a reduced risk of visceral/vascular injuries, incidental dural tears, and perioperative infections have been reported. However, approach-related complications such as motor and sensory deficits remain a concern. In well-indicated patients, LLIF can be a safe procedure used for a variety of indications.

Perioperative Complications in 155 Patients Who Underwent Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion Surgery: Perspectives and Indications From a Retrospective, Multicenter Survey

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective multicenter survey.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the perioperative complications of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

OLIF has been widely performed to achieve minimally invasive, rigid lumbar lateral interbody fusion. The associated perioperative complications are not yet well described.

METHODS

The participants were patients who underwent OLIF surgery under the diagnosis of degenerative lumbar diseases between April 2013 and May 2015 at 11 affiliated medical institutions. The collected data were classified into intraoperative and early-stage postoperative (≤1 mo) complications. The intraoperative complications were then subcategorized into organ damage (neural, vertebral, vascular, and others) and other complications, mainly related to instrumental failure. The collected data were also divided and analyzed based on whether the surgeon was certified to perform the surgery and the incidence of complications in the early (April 2013-March 2014) and late stages (April 2014-May 2015) of OLIF introduction.

RESULTS

In the 155 included patients, 75 complications were reported (incidence rate, 48.3%). The most common complication was endplate fracture/subsidence (18.7%), followed by transient psoas weakness and thigh numbness (13.5%) and segmental artery injury (2.6%). Almost all these complications were transient, except for three patients who had permanent damage: one had ureteral injury and two had neurological injury. Postoperative complications included surgical site infection (1.9%) and reoperation (1.9%). Whether the primary operator was experienced did not affect the incidence of complications. Regarding the introductory stage, the incidence of complications was 50% in the early stage and 38% in the late stage.

CONCLUSION

The overall incidence of perioperative complications of OLIF surgery reached 48.3%, of which only 1.9% resulted in permanent damage. Our analysis based on surgeon experience indicated that the OLIF procedure could be performed without increasing incidence of complications, under the guidance of experienced supervisors.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

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

BACKGROUND

Lateral interbody cages have been proven useful in spinal fusions. Spanning both lateral cortical rims while sparing the Anterior Longitudinal Ligament, the lateral interbody cages restore and maintain disc height while adding stability prior to supplemental fixation. The standard approach for their insertion is by a 90-degree lateral transpsoas method. This is relatively bloodless compared to other techniques although has its limitations, requiring neuro-monitoring and being, at times, very difficult at L4/5 due to iliac crest obstruction or an anterior plexus position. An oblique approach, with the patient in lateral decubitus, passes anterior to the iliac crest, retroperitoneal, and being anterior to psoas, eliminates the need for neuro-monitoring.

METHODS

Twenty-one consecutive patients underwent surgery for a total of 32 levels instrumented with the ATP technique. Mean age at the time of surgery was 62.4±7.4 years. There was a 6 months minimum clinical follow up, with imaging to assess fusion, at 6 and 12 months. Indications included symptomatic degenerative lumbar spondylosis +/- spondylolisthesis, leg and back pain. All patients were assessed with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale 100 mm for back pain (VASb) and for leg pain (VASl) preoperatively, at 3, 6 and 12 months. Last follow-up was at 12 months for 9 patients and the rest had 6 months follow up.

RESULTS

Statistical analysis showed significance for the results in ODI, VASb and VASl with improvement in all components except for one patient with worsening VASl. Eight patients had complications related to surgery which were still present at last follow-up including moderate weakness of hip flexion and EHL weakness. Lateral cutaneous nerve (LCN) palsy on the side of the approach was also seen as well as sympathectomy effect related to the mobilization of the sympathetic trunk. One patient, who also suffered from multiple sclerosis, experienced psoas abscess 3 months post op that required drainage.

CONCLUSIONS

The left sided anterior to psoas approach offers the most natural corridor to the disc space. The novel instruments and method described here allows insertion of large lateral cages between L2 to L5, without the problems associated with the transpsoas approach, particularly at L4/5.

Contralateral psoas hematoma after minimally invasive, lateral retroperitoneal transpsoas lumbar interbody fusion: a multicenter review of 3950 lumbar levels

OBJECTIVE Minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) via the retroperitoneal transpsoas approach is a technically demanding procedure with a multitude of potential complications. A relatively unknown complication is the contralateral psoas hematoma. The authors speculate that injury occurs from segmental vessel injury at the time of contralateral annulus release; however, this is not fully understood. In this multicenter retrospective review, the authors report the incidence of this contralateral complication and its neurological sequelae. METHODS This study was a retrospective chart review of all minimally invasive LLIF performed at participating institutions from 2008 to 2014. Exclusion criteria included an underlying diagnosis of trauma or neoplasia as well as lateral corpectomies or anterior column releases. Single-level, multilevel, and stand-alone constructs were included. All patients underwent preoperative MRI. Follow-up was at least 12 months. All complications and clinical outcomes were self-reported by each surgeon. RESULTS There were 3950 lumbar interbody cages placed via the retroperitoneal transpsoas approach, with 7 cases (0.18% incidence) of symptomatic contralateral psoas hematoma, 3 of which required reoperation for hematoma evacuation. Neurological outcome did not improve after reoperation. Reoperation occurred an average of 1 month after the initial operation due to a delay in diagnosis. In 1 case, segmental artery injury was confirmed at the time of surgery; in the others, segmental vessel injury was suspected, although it could not be confirmed. Neurological deficits persisted in 3 patients while the others remained neurologically intact. Two patients were receiving antiplatelet therapy prior to the procedure. CONCLUSIONS The contralateral psoas hematoma is a rare complication suspected to occur from segmental vessel injury during contralateral annulus release. Detailed review of preoperative imaging for aberrant vessel anatomy may prevent injury and subsequent neurological deficit.

Simultaneous Lateral Interbody Fusion and Posterior Percutaneous Instrumentation: Early Experience and Technical Considerations

Lumbar fusion surgery involving lateral lumbar interbody graft insertion with posterior instrumentation is traditionally performed in two stages requiring repositioning. We describe a novel technique to complete the circumferential procedure simultaneously without patient repositioning. Twenty patients diagnosed with worsening back pain with/without radiculopathy who failed exhaustive conservative management were retrospectively reviewed. Ten patients with both procedures simultaneously from a single lateral approach and 10 control patients with lateral lumbar interbody fusion followed by repositioning and posterior percutaneous instrumentation were analyzed. Pars fractures, mobile grade 2 spondylolisthesis, and severe one-level degenerative disk disease were matched between the two groups. In the simultaneous group, avoiding repositioning leads to lower mean operative times: 130 minutes (versus control 190 minutes; p = 0.009) and lower intraoperative blood loss: 108 mL (versus 93 mL; NS). Nonrepositioned patients were hospitalized for an average of 4.1 days (versus 3.8 days; NS). There was one complication in the control group requiring screw revision. Lateral interbody fusion and percutaneous posterior instrumentation are both readily accomplished in a single lateral decubitus position. In select patients with adequately sized pedicles, performing simultaneous procedures decreases operative time over sequential repositioning. Patient outcomes were excellent in the simultaneous group and comparable to procedures done sequentially.

Systematic Review of Thigh Symptoms after Lateral Transpsoas Interbody Fusion for Adult Patients with Degenerative Lumbar Spine Disease

BACKGROUND

Lateral transpsoas interbody fusion (LTIF) is a minimally invasive technique for achieving lumbar spinal fusion. While it has many advantages over open techniques it carries with it a distinct set of risks, most commonly post-operative ipsilateral thigh pain, weakness and sensory disturbances. It is vital for both the surgeon and patient to understand the risks for and outcomes of injury associated with this procedure. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to evaluate the incidence, risks, and long-term clinical outcomes of post-operative thigh symptoms in patients treated with LTIF.

METHODS

We conducted a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Collaboration Library, using keywords and MeSH terms, for English-language literature published through September 2014, as well as reference lists from key articles. Studies were then manually filtered to retrieve articles that met inclusion criteria. We were interested in studies that reported postoperative lower extremity symptoms after LTIF, such as pain, weakness and changes in sensation. The strength of evidence was determined based on precepts outlined by the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE).

RESULTS

A total of 392 articles were initially retrieved, with 24 ultimately meeting criteria for inclusion. The incidence of any post-operative thigh symptom varied, ranging as high as 60.7%, with 9.3% of patients experiencing a motor deficit related to direct nerve injury. Several studies reported cases of persistent symptoms at 6 months follow up. Additionally, inclusion of the L4-5 disc space and a longer duration of surgery were both identified as risks for developing postoperative thigh symptoms.

CONCLUSION

The risk of postoperative thigh symptoms after LTIF is high. Thigh pain, paresthesias and weakness were the most commonly reported symptoms. While most patients' symptoms resolved by 6 months follow up, several studies reported patients with symptoms persistent as far as 12 months removed from surgery. Surgery at the L4-5 disc space and longer surgical duration place the patient at greater risk for developing postoperative and long-term thigh symptoms.

Direct lateral retroperitoneal approach for the surgical treatment of lumbar discitis and osteomyelitis

OBJECT

The medical management of discitis and osteomyelitis with long-term antibiotic therapy and bracing usually results in eradicated infection. Surgical management is appropriate when medical management fails and in some cases with pyogenic deformity or neurological deficit. The success of surgery depends on adequate debridement of the necrotic infected disc and vertebral body, along with anterior column reconstruction and vertebral stabilization. Debridement is typically performed via an anterior retroperitoneal approach, which can necessitate mobilization of the great vessels for proper exposure. Mobilization can be technically difficult and lead to vascular injury. The purpose of this study was to evaluate an alternative technique for the surgical treatment of lumbar discitis and osteomyelitis using a direct lateral retroperitoneal approach, which allows for thorough debridement and anterior column reconstruction while avoiding the need to mobilize the great vessels.

METHODS

A retrospective chart analysis was performed for all patients who had presented with lumbar discitis and osteomyelitis and had undergone surgical management via the direct lateral retroperitoneal approach in the period from 2006 to 2013. Collected data included surgical blood loss, perioperative complications (wound infection, vascular injury, approach-related complications, and neurological injury), need for secondary procedures, microbiological and laboratory results, and efficacy of infection eradication. Imaging studies were reviewed as well.

RESULTS

Ten patients, 7 male and 3 female, underwent this procedure at the authors' institution in the defined period. Average blood loss was 272 ml (range 150-800 ml, with 800 ml in the only 2-level case). There were no vascular injuries. Average follow-up was 680 days, although 4 patients did not complete the follow-up beyond 6 months. Eight patients underwent immediate posterior pedicle screw instrumentation. Two patients did not undergo posterior instrumentation, and one of these developed a kyphotic deformity that required a secondary posterior procedure. Infection was eradicated in all patients according to a history, physical examination, imaging studies, and laboratory parameters (complete blood count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and C-reactive protein). One patient developed a painful neuroma at the iliac crest harvest site, and one patient had a retroperitoneal hematoma. Otherwise, there were no approach-related neurological injuries or complications. Neither was there any postoperative surgical site infection.

CONCLUSIONS

The direct lateral approach for the surgical treatment of lumbar discitis and osteomyelitis allows for thorough debridement and spinal reconstruction without the need to mobilize the great vessels. This technique effectively eradicated infection in all cases, with reasonable blood loss and no vascular injuries. This approach should be considered as an alternative to the open anterior approach. The authors recommend posterior instrumentation to prevent the development of kyphosis.

Impaired bone mineral density as a predictor of graft subsidence following minimally invasive transpsoas lateral lumbar interbody fusion

PURPOSE

The LLIF procedure is a useful stand-alone and adjunct surgical approach for many spinal conditions. One complication of LLIF is subsidence of the interbody graft into the vertebral bodies, resulting in severe pain, impaired arthrodesis and potentially fracture of the body. Low bone density, as measured by T score on DEXA scanning, has also been postulated to increase the risk of subsidence.

METHODS

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was performed on all patients who underwent LLIF at this institution consisting of 712 levels in 335 patients. Patients with subsidence following LLIF were recorded. We utilized the T score obtained from the femoral neck DEXA scans, which is used to determine overall fracture risk. The T score of patients with subsidence was compared to those without subsidence.

RESULTS

20 of 57 (35 %) patients without subsidence had a DEXA T score between -1.0 and -2.4 consistent osteopenia, one patient (1.8 %) exhibited a T score less than -2.5, consistent with osteoporosis. 13 patients of 23 (57 %) with subsidence exhibited a T score between -1.0 and -2.4, consistent with osteopenia, five (22 %) exhibited a T score of -2.5 or less, consistent with osteoporosis. The mean DEXA T score in patients with subsidence was -1.65 (SD 1.04) compared to -0.45 (SD 0.97) in patients without subsidence (p < 0.01). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for patients with a T score of -1.0 or less was 80.1 %.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with DEXA T scores less than -1.0 who undergo stand-alone LLIF are at a much higher risk of developing graft subsidence. Further, they are at an increased risk of requiring additional surgery. In patients with poor bone quality, consideration could be made to supplement the LLIF cage with posterior instrumentation.

Safety and the anatomy of the retroperitoneal lateral corridor with respect to the minimally invasive lateral lumbar intervertebral fusion approach

Safe and reproducible outcomes of the lateral lumbar intervertebral fusion (LLIF) procedure rely on meticulous care and understanding of the anatomy of the lateral corridor. This review aims to describe the different important anatomic considerations when performing LLIF and offer technical notes that may help increase the safety of this procedure. The LLIF procedure is divided into 5 stages: patient positioning, abdominal wall dissection, retroperitoneal space dissection, deployment of the surgical retractors, and diskectomy. Each stage is preformed in a distinct anatomic compartment that may cause different typical complications.

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.

Clinical outcome and fusion rates after the first 30 extreme lateral interbody fusions

Introduction. The lateral transpsoas approach for lumbar interbody fusion (XLIF) is gaining popularity. Studies examining a surgeon's early experience are rare. We aim to report treatment, complication, clinical, and radiographic outcomes in an early series of patients. Methods. Prospective data from the first thirty patients treated with XLIF by a single surgeon was reviewed. Outcome measures included pain, disability, and quality of life assessment. Radiographic assessment of fusion was performed by computed tomography. Results. Average follow-up was 11.5 months, operative time was 60 minutes per level and blood loss was 50 mL. Complications were observed: clinical subsidence, cage breakage upon insertion, new postoperative motor deficit and bowel injury. Approach side-effects were radiographic subsidence and anterior thigh sensory changes. Two patients required reoperation; microforaminotomy and pedicle screw fixation respectively. VAS back and leg pain decreased 63% and 56%, respectively. ODI improved 41.2% with 51.3% and 8.1% improvements in PCS and MCS. Complete fusion (last follow-up) was observed in 85%. Conclusion. The XLIF approach provides superior treatment, clinical outcomes and fusion rates compared to conventional surgical approaches with lowered complication rates. Mentor supervision for early cases and strict adherence to the surgical technique including neuromonitoring is essential.

Clinical outcomes of extreme lateral interbody fusion in the treatment of adult degenerative scoliosis

Introduction. The use of extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF) and other lateral access surgery is rapidly increasing in popularity. However, limited data is available regarding its use in scoliosis surgery. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of adults with degenerative lumbar scoliosis treated with XLIF. Methods. Thirty consecutive patients with adult degenerative scoliosis treated by a single surgeon at a major academic institution were followed for an average of 14.3 months. Interbody fusion was completed using the XLIF technique with supplemental posterior instrumentation. Validated clinical outcome scores were obtained on patients preoperatively and at most recent follow-up. Complications were recorded. Results. The study group demonstrated improvement in multiple clinical outcome scores. Oswestry Disability Index scores improved from 24.8 to 19.0 (P < 0.001). Short Form-12 scores improved, although the change was not significant. Visual analog scores for back pain decreased from 6.8 to 4.6 (P < 0.001) while scores for leg pain decreased from 5.4 to 2.8 (P < 0.001). A total of six minor complications (20%) were recorded, and two patients (6.7%) required additional surgery. Conclusions. Based on the significant improvement in validated clinical outcome scores, XLIF is effective in the treatment of adult degenerative scoliosis.

The lateral transpsoas approach to the lumbar and thoracic spine: A review

Background:

In the last several years, the lateral transpsoas approach to the thoracic and lumbar spine, also known as extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF) or direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF), has become an increasingly common method to achieve fusion. Several recent large series describe several advantages to this approach, including less tissue dissection, smaller incisions, decreased operative time, blood loss, shorter hospital stay, reduced postoperative pain, enhanced fusion rates, and the ability to place instrumentation through the same incision. Indications for this approach have expanded and now include degenerative disease, tumor, deformity, and infection.

Methods:

A lateral X-ray confirms that the patient is in a truly lateral position. Next, a series of tubes and dilators are used, along with fluoroscopy, to identify the mid-position of the disk to be incised. After continued dilation, the optimal site to enter the disk space is the midpoint of the disk, or a position slightly anterior to the midpoint of the disk. XLIF typically allows for a larger implant to be inserted compared to TLIF or PLIF, and, if necessary, instrumentation can be inserted percutaneously, which would allow for an overall minimally invasive procedure.

Results:

Fixation techniques appear to be equal between XLIF and more traditional approaches. Some caution should be exercised because common fusion levels of the lumbar spine, including L4-5 and L4-S1, are often inaccessible. In addition, XLIF has a unique set of complications, including neural injuries, psoas weakness, and thigh numbness.

Conclusion:

Additional studies are required to further evaluate and monitor the short and long-term safety, efficacy, outcomes, and complications of XLIF procedures.