Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2011.50.5.441

Minimally Invasive Multi-Level Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using a Percutaneously Inserted Spinal Fixation System : Technical Tips, Surgical Outcomes  

Kim, Hyeun-Sung (Department of Neurosurgery, Daejeon Hurisarang Hospital)
Park, Keun-Ho (Department of Orthopedic, Jeonju Korea Hospital)
Ju, Chag-Il (Department of Neurosurgery, College of Medicine, Chosun University)
Kim, Seok-Won (Department of Neurosurgery, College of Medicine, Chosun University)
Lee, Seung-Myung (Department of Neurosurgery, College of Medicine, Chosun University)
Shin, Ho (Department of Neurosurgery, College of Medicine, Chosun University)
Publication Information
Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society / v.50, no.5, 2011 , pp. 441-445 More about this Journal
Abstract
Objective : There are technical limitations of multi-level posterior pedicle screw fixation performed by the percutaneous technique. The purpose of this study was to describe the surgical technique and outcome of minimally invasive multi-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and to determine its efficacy. Methods : Forty-two patients who underwent mini-open PLIF using the percutaneous screw fixation system were studied. The mean age of the patients was 59.1 (range, 23 to 78 years). Two levels were involved in 32 cases and three levels in 10 cases. The clinical outcome was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) and Low Back Outcome Score (LBOS). Achievement of radiological fusion, intra-operative blood loss, the midline surgical scar and procedure related complications were also analyzed. Results : The mean follow-up period was 25.3 months. The mean LBOS prior to surgery was 34.5, which was improved to 49.1 at the final follow up. The mean pain score (VAS) prior to surgery was 7.5 and it was decreased to 2.9 at the last follow up. The mean estimated blood loss was 238 mL (140-350) for the two level procedures and 387 mL (278-458) for three levels. The midline surgical scar was 6.27 cm for two levels and 8.25 cm for three level procedures. Complications included two cases of asymptomatic medial penetration of the pedicle border. However, there were no signs of neurological deterioration or fusion failure. Conclusion : Multi-level, minimally invasive PLIF can be performed effectively using the percutaneous transpedicular screw fixation system. It can be an alternative to the traditional open procedures.
Keywords
Posterior lumbar interbody fusion; Percutaneous; Minimally invasive surgery;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
Times Cited By Web Of Science : 0  (Related Records In Web of Science)
Times Cited By SCOPUS : 0
연도 인용수 순위
1 Kim KH, Park JY, Chin DK : Fusion criteria for posterior lumbar interbody fusion with intervertebral cages : The significance of traction spur. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 46 : 328-332, 2009   DOI
2 Lowery GL, Kulkarni SS : Posterior percutaneous spine instrumentation. Eur Spine J 9 Suppl 1 : S126-S130, 2000   DOI
3 Mummaneni PV, Haid RW, Rodts GE : Lumbar interbody fusion : state-of-the-art technical advances. Invited submission from the Joint Section Meeting on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves, March 2004. J Neurosurg Spine 1 : 24-30, 2004   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Ota M, Neo M, Fujibayashi S, Takemoto M, Nakamura T : Advantages of the paraspinal muscle splitting approach in comparison with conventional midline approach for s1 pedicle screw placement. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35 : E452-E457, 2010   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Wang JC, Mummaneni PV, Haid RW : Current treatment strategies for the painful lumbar motion segment : posterolateral fusion versus interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30 : S33-S43, 2005   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Wang MY, Anderson DG, Poelstra KA, Ludwig SC : Minimally invasive posterior fixation. Neurosurgery 63 : 197-203, 2008   DOI
7 Wetzel FT, LaRocca H : The failed posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 16 : 839-845, 1991   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Yashiro K, Homma T, Hokari Y, Katsumi Y, Okumura H, Hirano A : The Steffee variable screw placement system using different methods of bone grafting. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 16 : 1329-1334, 1991   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Bogduk N, Wilson AS, Tynan W : The human lumbar dorsal rami. J Anat 134 : 383-397, 1982
10 Anand N, Baron EM, Thaiyananthan G, Khalsa K, Goldstein TB : Minimally invasive multilevel percutaneous correction and fusion for adult lumbar degenerative scoliosis : a technique and feasibility study. J Spinal Disord Tech 21 : 459-467, 2008   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Greenough CG, Fraser RD : Assessment of outcome in patients with low-back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 17 : 36-41, 1992   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Kawaguchi Y, Matsui H, Tsuji H : Back muscle injury after posterior lumbar spine surgery. A histologic and enzymatic analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 21 : 941-944, 1996   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Khoo LT, Palmer S, Laich DT, Fessler RG : Minimally invasive percutaneous posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurgery 51 : S166-S181, 2002