Search results for: spondylolisthesis

Authors: Sangram A. Sathe, Neha A. Madgulkar, Shruti S. Raut, S. P. Wadkar

Abstract:

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgeries have nowadays became popular for treatment of degenerated spinal disorders. The interbody fusion technique like TLIF maintains load bearing capacity of the spine and a suitable disc height. Currently many techniques have been introduced to cure Spondylolisthesis. This surgery provides greater rehabilitation of degenerative spines. While performing this TLIF surgery existing methods use guideway, which is a troublesome surgery technique as the use of two separate instruments is required to perform this surgery. This paper presents a concept which eliminates the use of guideway. This concept also eliminates problems that occur like reverting the cage. The concept discussed in this paper also gives high accuracy while performing surgery.

Keywords: TLIF, spondylolisthesis, spine, instruments

Procedia PDF Downloads 302

Authors: Daniel Scherman, Daniel Madani, Shanu Gambhir, Marcus Ling Zhixing, Yingda Li

Abstract:

Objective: This study aims to identify clinical factors that may predict failed endoscopic lumbar spine surgery to guide surgeons with patient selection during the initial learning curve. Methods: This is an Australasian prospective analysis of the first 105 patients to undergo lumbar endoscopic spine decompression by 3 surgeons. Modified MacNab outcomes, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analogue Score (VAS) scores were utilized to evaluate clinical outcomes at 6 months postoperatively. Descriptive statistics and Anova t-tests were performed to measure statistically significant (p<0.05) associations between variables using GraphPad Prism v10. Results: Patients undergoing endoscopic lumbar surgery via an interlaminar or transforaminal approach have overall good/excellent modified MacNab outcomes and a significant reduction in post-operative VAS and ODI scores. Regardless of the anatomical location of disc herniations, good/excellent modified MacNab outcomes and significant reductions in VAS and ODI were reported post-operatively; however, not in patients with calcified disc herniations. Patients with central and foraminal stenosis overall reported poor/fair modified MacNab outcomes. However, there were significant reductions in VAS and ODI scores post-operatively. Patients with subarticular stenosis or an associated spondylolisthesis reported good/excellent modified MacNab outcomes and significant reductions in VAS and ODI scores post-operatively. Patients with disc herniation and concurrent degenerative stenosis had generally poor/fair modified MacNab outcomes. Conclusion: The outcomes of endoscopic spine surgery are encouraging, with a low complication and reoperation rate. However, patients with calcified disc herniations, central canal stenosis or a disc herniation with concurrent degenerative stenosis present challenges during the initial learning curve and may benefit from traditional open or other minimally invasive techniques.

Keywords: complications, lumbar disc herniation, lumbar endoscopic spine surgery, predictors of failed endoscopic spine surgery

Procedia PDF Downloads 89