Biportal endoscopic decompression, debridement, and interbody fusion, combined with percutaneous screw fixation for lumbar brucellosis spondylitis

Retrospective Analysis of the Efficacy and Safety of Endoscopic Spinal Tuberculosis Focus Removal versus Posterior Pedicle Lesion Removal, Bone Grafting, and Internal Fixation Combined with Drug Chemotherapy for Thoracolumbar Tuberculosis

Objective

This study aims to investigate the clinical efficacy of endoscopic spinal tuberculosis focus removal, posterior pedicle lesion removal, bone grafting, and internal fixation combined with drug chemotherapy in treating thoracolumbar tuberculosis. It also seeks to summarize strategies for preventing complications and provide a reference for clinical treatment.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 105 patients with spinal tuberculosis treated in our hospital from January 2018 to December 2022. Patients were divided into two groups: Group A (n=38), who underwent endoscopic spinal tuberculosis focus removal, and Group B (n=67), who underwent posterior pedicle lesion removal, bone grafting, and internal fixation. All patients received preoperative quadruple anti-tuberculosis drug chemotherapy (Isoniazid, Rifampicin, Pyrazinamide, Ethambutol) for 2-4 weeks. We recorded and compared parameters such as operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, recovery time, hospital stay, blood transfusion, and complications. We also compared pre- and postoperative lumbar VAS, ODI, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, Procalcitonin, D-Dimer, Neutrophil to Lymphocyte ratio, hemoglobin, total protein, and Cobb angle to evaluate kyphotic deformity and correction.

Results

Preoperative data including age, sex, body mass index, segment involvement, past medical history, smoking history, preoperative erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein, Procalcitonin, D-Dimer, Neutrophil to Lymphocyte ratio, hemoglobin, total protein, lumbar VAS score, lumbar ODI score, and spinal Cobb's angle showed no significant difference between the groups (P>0.05). Main postoperative indicators revealed that Group A had significantly lower lumbar VAS scores, higher hemoglobin and total protein levels, and a lower recurrence rate than Group B at the last follow-up (P<0.05). Secondary postoperative indicators showed that Group A required significantly less blood transfusion, had shorter operative time, less intraoperative blood loss, shorter postoperative hospitalization time, and lower Cobb Angle than Group B (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Endoscopic spinal tuberculosis focus removal can achieve comparable safety to posterior pedicle lesion removal, bone grafting, and internal fixation, with shorter operation time, less intraoperative bleeding, lower postoperative recurrence rate, and less postoperative drainage. This method can effectively improve blood sedimentation, lumbar function, restore Cobb angle, and reduce pain, making it worthy of promotion and application.

The Method of Portal Making in Lumbar Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Surgery with Different Operative Approaches According to the Constant Anatomical Landmarks of the Lumbar Spine: A Review of the Literature

STUDY DESIGN

Review.

OBJECTIVE

Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy (UBE) is a minimally invasive surgery that is gaining recognition and being employed in clinical practice. Nevertheless, the precise method for determining UBE portals' location varies depending on the originator's preferences or the anatomical structure's proximity to the portal positions. Consequently, the relationship among UBE portals' locations is messy. This study aims to elaborate on the specific portal localization and explore the positional association and commonality among different UBE approaches' portals.

METHODS

The following keywords are used to search in the PubMed, Ovid, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, Scopus, CNKI, and Wanfang database: "Biportal endoscopic spinal surgery", "Two portal endoscopic spinal surgery", "Percutaneous biportal endoscopic decompression", "Unilateral biportal endoscopy", "Irrigation endoscopic discectomy", "UBE" and "BESS".

RESULTS

After screening, 29 pieces of literature are included. The study summarizes different UBE approach portal localizations, categorized by fusion or non-fusion surgery and pathological classification. The study presents an inaugural method for categorizing the lumber into four surgical intervals based on bone landmarks and assigns different UBE approaches to the appropriate intervals based on their characteristics, making the selection of UBE surgical approaches' portal locations more flexible. Additionally, the study provides an overview of the indications, complications, and distinct benefits associated with each interval, further refining the novel UBE portal interval localization method.

CONCLUSION

The study clarifies the interrelationship and commonality between the portals of different UBE approaches and proposes a new UBE portal interval localization method to enhance surgeons' understanding and proficiency in UBE procedures.

Brucella Spondylitis: Current Knowledge and Recent Advances

The most prevalent zoonotic disease is brucellosis, which poses a significant threat for worldwide public health. Particularly in endemic areas, spinal involvement is a major source of morbidity and mortality and can complicate the course of the disease. The diagnosis of Brucella spondylitis is challenging and should be suspected in the appropriate epidemiological and clinical context, in correlation with microbiological and radiological findings. Treatment depends largely on the affected parts of the body. Available treatment options include antibiotic administration for an adequate period of time and, when appropriate, surgical intervention. In this article, we examined the most recent data on the pathophysiology, clinical manifestation, diagnosis, and management of spinal brucellosis in adults.

Comparative Study on the Efficacy of Two Perioperative Chemotherapy Regimens for Lumbar Brucellosis

Objective

The clinical efficacy of perioperative chemotherapy regimen (rifampicin, doxycycline, levofloxacin, ceftriaxone) was evaluated for lumbar brucellosis spondylitis patients with neurological injury.

Methods

In Beijing Ditan Hospital affiliated with Capital Medical University, 32 patients with lumbar brucellosis spondylitis underwent surgery and triple perioperative chemotherapy (rifampicin, doxycycline, levofloxacin) between 2011 and 2021 due to neurological injury, and 34 patients matched up with the triple group underwent rifampicin, doxycycline, levofloxacin, and ceftriaxone. Both groups were compared in terms of changes in inflammation index, low back/leg pain, lumbar function, neurological function, and adverse drug reactions.

Results

There was no significant difference in erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), low back pain visual analogue scale (VAS), leg pain VAS, lumbar Oswestry disability index (ODI) and nerve function injury rate between the two groups before chemotherapy (P>0.05). The ESR, CRP at 1 week and 2 weeks after chemotherapy and 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month postoperatively in the quadruple group were significantly lower than those in the triple group, which is the same to ESR 3 months postoperatively (P<0.05). The low back pain VAS, leg pain VAS and lumbar ODI in the quadruple group were significantly lower than those in the triple group at 1 month and 3 months postoperatively (P<0.05). The recovery rate of neurological function in the quadruple group was significantly higher than that in the triple group at 3 and 6 months postoperatively (P<0.05). Both groups did not experience significantly different perioperative and postoperative adverse reactions (P>0.05).

Conclusion

For lumbar brucellosis spondylitis with neurological injury, quadruple perioperative chemotherapy of rifampicin, doxycycline, levofloxacin and ceftriaxone can significantly reduce perioperative inflammation, and improve low back/leg pain, as well as promoting neurological function recovery in the short term.

A single-arm retrospective study of the clinical efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis

Objective

The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-TLIF) for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

Methods

Patients who underwent UBE-TLIF due to single-segment LSS between August 2019 and July 2021 were retrospectively included in the study. Clinical outcomes evaluated include operative time, estimated blood loss (including postoperative drainage), time to ambulation, postoperative hospital stay, complications, visual analog scale (VAS) scores of low back pain and leg pain, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and modified Macnab criteria. Interbody bony fusion at the index level was assessed using Bridwell grading criteria.

Results

A total of 73 patients (29 males and 44 females) were enrolled in this study. All surgeries were successfully performed without intraoperative conversion to open surgery. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed optimal direct neural decompression after UBE-TLIF. The mean operative time was 150.89 ± 15.58 min. The mean estimated blood loss was 126.03 ± 17.85 ml (postoperative drainage was 34.84 ± 8.31 ml). Time to ambulation was 2.0 ± 0.75 days after the procedure. Postoperatively, the mean hospital stay was 5.96 ± 1.38 days. VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain, JOA, and ODI were significantly improved postoperatively compared with those before the operation, and differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). Excellent and good outcomes were reported by 87.67% of patients according to the modified Macnab criteria at the final follow-up. A total of nine perioperative complications occurred, with an incidence of 12.33%. X-ray or computerized tomography (CT) 6 months after the procedure showed that 37 cases (50.68%) presented with segmental fusion, 30 cases (41.10%) showed incomplete fusion, and 6 cases (8.22%) showed no signs of fusion. However, bony fusion was achieved in all cases at the final follow-up.

Conclusions

UBE-TLIF for LSS has the advantages of less surgical invasiveness and fast postoperative recovery.