Unilateral biportal endoscopic surgical decompression for symptomatic ossification of the ligamentum flavum - Is it enough to improve the clinical outcome? A case-control study

Purpose

Open decompression is currently the standard surgical procedure for symptomatic OLF. As the minimal invasive method gains popularity, UBE is considered a reliable technique with less complication. However, the outcome is still in question. This study aimed to evaluate and compare UBE versus open surgery in symptomatic OLF cases.

Methods

We evaluated 35 patients with single- or two-level thoracic OLF, underwent decompression by open or UBE. Surgery duration, estimated blood loss, and LOS were recorded as intraoperative parameters. Minimum follow-up was 1 year to evaluate clinical parameters based on the mJOA score, Frankel grade, and recovery rate (RR).

Results

The UBE procedure showed significant superiority with faster surgery (62.5 min vs. 180 min; p < 0.001), less blood loss (50 mL vs. 250 mL; p < 0.001), and shorter LOS (4 days vs. 6 days; p < 0,001). UBE patients showed notable clinical improvement on the mJOA score at 1 year (8.2 ± 0.18 vs. 6.8 ± 0.24; p = 0.015). Frankel grade improvements seen in both groups with 51.4% of subjects having at least a 1-point upgrade. RR in 1 year resulted in significant recovery in UBE group (RR-UBE 43.2 ± 17 vs. RR-open 26.3 ± 15.3; p < 0.05). No neurological deterioration or significant complication occurred after either procedure.

Conclusion

The UBE technique allows faster decompression with less blood loss and shorter LOS compared to open surgery. It was found to be a reliable treatment option in treating OLF with favorable clinical outcomes and improved patient neurological status.

Surgical treatment of traumatic fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine: A systematic review

Introduction

The treatment of traumatic thoracic and lumbar spine fractures remains controversial. To date no consensus exists on the correct choice of surgical approach and technique.

Research question

to provide a comprehensive up-to-date overview of the available different surgical methods and their quantified outcomes.

Methods

PubMed and EMBASE were searched between 2001 and 2020 using the term 'spinal fractures'. Inclusion criteria were: adults, ≥10 cases, ≥12 months follow-up, thoracic or lumbar fractures, and surgery <3 weeks of trauma. Studies were categorized per surgical technique: Posterior open (PO), posterior percutaneous (PP), stand-alone vertebral body augmentation (SA), anterior scopic (AS), anterior open (AO), posterior percutaneous and anterior open (PPAO), posterior percutaneous and anterior scopic (PPAS), posterior open and anterior open (POAO) and posterior open and anterior scopic (POAS). The PO group was used as a reference group.

Results

After duplicate removal 6042 articles were identified. A total of 102 articles were Included, in which 137 separate surgical technique cohorts were described: PO (n = 75), PP, (n = 39), SA (n = 12), AO (n = 5), PPAO (n = 1), PPAS (n = 1), POAO (n = 2) and POAS (n = 2).

Discussion and conclusion

For type A3/A4 burst fractures, without severe neurological deficit, posterior percutaneous (PP) technique seems the safest and most feasible option in the past two decades. If needed, PP can be combined with anterior augmentation to prevent secondary kyphosis. Furthermore, posterior open (PO) technique is feasible in almost all types of fractures. Also, this technique can provide for an additional posterior decompression or fusion. Overall, no neurologic deterioration was reported following surgical intervention.

Posterior-only approach in patients with poor general condition and spinal metastatic vertebral fracture

PURPOSE

The surgical treatment of spinal metastases is mostly palliative in nature and focuses on improving the quality of life of patients. The posterior transpedicular surgical approach provides circumferential 360° decompression, allows reconstruction and stabilisation to be achieved in a single session and can be performed using an open, mini-open or minimally invasive approach. We present and discuss the surgical techniques and outcomes for patients with single-level metastatic spinal disease and in poor general condition who underwent surgery via the posterior-only transpedicular corpectomy approach and reconstruction with expandable corpectomy cages.

METHODS

Patients with a single level thoracolumbar metastatic disease (T3-L5) and a Karnofsky score of ≤70, who underwent a complete posterior transpedicular corpectomy with expandable cage reconstruction of the anterior spinal column were retrospectively reviewed. Patients' demographics, SINS, modified Tokuhashi scores as well as preoperative and postoperative ASIA scale, Karnofsky scores, VAS scores and vertebral height/Cobb angle values were analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 44 patients (24 M/20 F) (mean age 53.25±21.26 years) met the inclusion criteria. The modified Tokuhashi scores were as follows: score 0-8, 5 (11.4%) patients; score 9-11, 14 (31.8%) patients; and score 12-15, 25 (56.8%) patients. There were significant improvements in the postoperative VAS scores (mean 7.7-2.9), Karnofsky scores (mean 63.3-79.6) as well as the Cobb angles (18.6-12.8°) and vertebral height. Thirtyfive patients showed improved neurological function by at least one ASIA grade, whereas 9 showed no improvement during the postoperative period.

CONCLUSIONS

This technique, which has a low complication rate and a short recovery time, can help achieve satisfactory results even in patients with poor metabolic profiles and Karnofsky scores in the preoperative period. Further clinical studies with large patient groups are warranted to confirm the results of this study.

Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) for the treatment of malignant mesothelioma

Background

Patients with recurrent malignant epithelioid mesothelioma (MM) after surgery and standard chemotherapy with cisplatin and pemetrexed have limited treatment options.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients with recurrent MM undergoing Pressurized IntraPeritoneal/Thoracal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC/PITAC) with doxorubicin 1.5 mg/m² and cisplatin 7.5 mg/m². Data were retrospectively collected in a prospective registry of patients undergoing PIPAC/PITAC. Study outcomes were microscopic tumor regression grade (TRG), survival and adverse events (v4.0 CTCAE).

Results

A total of 29 patients (m/f = 17/12) with MM with a mean age of 62.4 (range: 42 to 84) years were analyzed. A total of 74 PIPAC and 5 PITAC procedures were performed. The mean number of PIPAC applications was 2.5 (range: 0 to 10) per patient. Twenty patients (69%) had > 2 PIPAC procedure and were eligible for TRG analysis. TRG 1 to 4 was observed in 75% (15/20) of patients. Major regression (TRG 3) or complete regression (TRG 4) was observed in 20% and 10%, respectively. PIPAC induced significant tumor regression in 51.7% (15/29) of patients with a cumulative effect after repetitive PIPACs (PIPAC #1 vs. PIPAC #2: p = 0.001; PIPAC #1 vs. PIPAC #3: p = 0.001; PIPAC #1 vs. PIPAC #4: p = 0.001). Postoperative CTCAE grade 4 complications were observed in two patients (6.9%) who had cytoreductive surgery (CC2) and intraoperative PIPAC. One patient (3.4%) died due to postoperative kidney insufficiency. After a follow up of 14.4 (95% CI: 8.1 to 20.7) months after the last PIPAC/PITAC application, median overall survival was 26.6 (95% CI: 9.5 to 43.7) months (from the first application).

Conclusion

After prior abdominal surgery and systemic chemotherapy, repetitive PIPAC applications are feasible and safe for patients with end-stage MM. Furthermore, PIPAC induces significant histological regression of malignant mesothelioma in the majority of patients. PITAC is feasible, but its safety and efficacy to control malignant pleural effusion remain unclear.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-018-4363-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.