• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.66 no.2
• /
• pp.155-161
• /
• 2023

Objective : To analyze the anatomical location of the ureter in relation to lateral lumbar interbody fusion and evaluate the potential risk of ureteral injury. Methods : One hundred eight patients who performed contrast-enhanced computed tomographic scans were enrolled in this study. The location of the ureter from L2-L3 to L4-L5 was evaluated. The distances between the ureter and psoas muscle, intervertebral disc, and retroperitoneal vessels were also recorded bilaterally. Results : Over 30% of the ureters were close to the working corridor of extreme lumbar interbody fusion at L2-L3. Most of the ureters were close to working corridor of oblique lumbar interbody fusion, especially at L4-L5. The distance from the ureter to the great vessels on the left side was significantly narrowing from L2-L3 to L4-L5 (28.8±9.5 mm, 22.0±8.0 mm, 15.5±8.4 mm), and it was significantly larger than that on the right side (12.3±6.1 mm, 7.4±5.7 mm, 5.4±4.4 mm). Conclusion : Our findings indicate that the location of the ureter varies widely among individuals. To avoid unexpected damage to the ureter, it is imperative to directly visualize it and verify the ureter is not in the surgical pathway during lateral lumbar interbody fusion.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.66 no.1
• /
• pp.33-43
• /
• 2023

Objective : To compare the outcomes of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF), and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in terms of global sagittal alignment. Methods : From January 2007 to December 2019, 141 adult patients who underwent multilevel interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disorders were enrolled. Regarding the approach, patients were divided into the ALIF (n=23), OLIF (n=60), and TLIF (n=58) groups. Outcomes, including local radiographic parameters and global sagittal alignment, were then compared between the treatment groups. Results : Regarding local radiographic parameters, ALIF and OLIF were superior to TLIF in terms of the change in the anterior disc height (7.6±4.5 mm vs. 6.9±3.2 mm vs. 4.7±2.9 mm, p<0.001), disc angle (-10.0°±6.3° vs. -9.2°±5.2° vs. -5.1°±5.1°, p<0.001), and fused segment lordosis (-14.5°±11.3° vs. -13.8°±7.5° vs. -7.4°±9.1°, p<0.001). However, regarding global sagittal alignment, postoperative lumbar lordosis (-42.5°±9.6° vs. -44.4°±11.6° vs. -40.6°±12.3°, p=0.210), pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (7.9°±11.3° vs. 6.7°±11.6° vs. 11.5°±13.0°, p=0.089), and the sagittal vertical axis (24.3±28.5 mm vs. 24.5±34.0 mm vs. 25.2±36.6 mm, p=0.990) did not differ between the groups. Conclusion : Although the anterior approaches were superior in terms of local radiographic parameters, TLIF achieved adequate global sagittal alignment, comparable to the anterior approaches.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.63 no.6
• /
• pp.723-729
• /
• 2020

Objective : The use of oblique lateral interbody fusion at the L5-S1 level (OLIF51) is increasing, but no study has directly compared OLIF51 and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) at the L5-S1 level. We evaluated the usefulness of OLIF51 by comparing clinical and radiologic outcomes with those of TLIF at the same L5-S1 level. Methods : We retrospectively reviewed and compared 74 patients who underwent OLIF51 (OLIF51 group) and 74 who underwent TLIF at the L5-S1 level (TLIF51 group). Clinical outcomes were assessed with the visual analogue scale for back pain and leg pain and the Oswestry Disability Index. Mean disc height (MDH), foraminal height (FH), disc angle (DA), fusion rate, and subsidence rate were measured for radiologic outcomes. Results : The OLIF51 group used significantly higher, wider, and larger-angled cages than the TLIF51 group (p<0.001). The postoperative MDH and FH were significantly greater in the OLIF51 group than in the TLIF51 group (p<0.001). The postoperative DA was significantly larger in the OLIF51 group than in the TLIF51 group by more than 10º (p<0.001). The fusion rate was 81.1% and 87.8% at postoperative 6 months in the OLIF51 and TLIF51 groups, respectively, and the TLIF51 group showed a higher fusion rate (p<0.05). The subsidence rate was 16.2% and 25.3% in the OLIF51 and TLIF51 groups, respectively, and the OLIF51 group showed a lower subsidence rate (p<0.05). Conclusion : OLIF51 was more effective for the indirect decompression of foraminal stenosis, providing strong mechanical support with a larger cage, and making a greater lordotic angle with a high-angle cage than with TLIF.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.66 no.6
• /
• pp.703-715
• /
• 2023

Objective : This retrospective study investigated the factors that affect cage obliquity angle despite orthogonal maneuvers performed during oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) and assessed the relationship between cage obliquity angle and radiological outcomes post-surgery. Methods : Twenty-nine males who underwent L4-L5 OLIF for lumbar degenerative disease between 2019 and 2021 with a followup duration greater than 12 months were analyzed. Radiological parameters were measured including psoas muscle volume, total psoas area index (total psoas muscle area [cm²]/height squared [m²]), distance from the iliac artery to the origin of the psoas muscle (DIAPM), angle between the origin of the psoas muscle and the center of the vertebral disc (APCVD), iliac crest height, disc height, lumbar flexibility (lumbar flexion angle minus extension angle), cage location ratio, cage-induced segmental lumbar lordosis (LL) (postoperative index level segmental LL minus used cage angle), foraminal height changes, fusion grade. Results : DIAPM, APCVD, iliac crest height, postoperative index level segmental LL, and cage-induced segmental LL were significantly correlated with OLIF cage obliquity angle. However, other radiological parameters did not correlate with cage obliquity. Based on multiple regression analysis, the predictive equation for the OLIF cage obliquity angle was 13.062-0.318×DIAPM+0.325×1APCVD+0.174×iliac crest height. The greater the cage obliquity, the smaller the segmental LL compared to the cage angle used. Conclusion : At the L4-L5 level, OLIF cage obliquity was affected by DIAPM, APCVD, and iliac crest height, and as the cage obliquity angle increases, LL agnle achievable by the used cage could not be obtained.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.64 no.3
• /
• pp.447-459
• /
• 2021

Objective : Oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) is becoming the preferred treatment for degenerative lumbar diseases. As beginners, we performed 143 surgeries over 19 months. In these consecutive cases, we analyzed the learning curve and reviewed the complications in our experience. Methods : This was a retrospective study; however, complications that were well known in the previous literature were strictly recorded prospectively. We followed up the changes in estimated blood loss (EBL), operation time, and transient psoas paresis according to case accumulation to analyze the learning curve. Results : Complication-free patients accounted for 43.6% (12.9%, early stage 70 patients and 74.3%, late stage 70 patients). The most common complication was transient psoas paresis (n=52). Most of these complications occurred in the early stages of learning. C-reactive protein normalization was delayed in seven patients (4.89%). The operation time showed a decreasing trend with the cases; however, EBL did not show any significant change. Notable operation-induced complications were cage malposition, vertebral body fracture, injury to the ureter, and injury to the lumbar vein. Conclusion : According to the learning curve, the operation time and psoas paresis decreased. It is important to select an appropriately sized cage along with clear dissection of the anterior border of the psoas muscle to prevent OLIF-specific complications.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.62 no.4
• /
• pp.432-441
• /
• 2019

Objective : Few studies have reported direct comparative data of lumbar spine angles between direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF) and oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF). The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical and radiological outcomes of DLIF and OLIF, and determine influential factors. Methods : The same surgeon performed DLIF from May 2011 to August 2014 (n=201) and OLIF from September 2014 to September 2016 (n=142). Radiological parameters, cage height, cage angle (CA), cage width (CW), and cage location were assessed. We checked the cage location as the distance (mm) from the anterior margin of the disc space to the anterior metallic indicator of the cage in lateral images. Results : There were significant differences in intervertebral foramen height (FH; $22.0{\pm}2.4$ vs. $21.0{\pm}2.1mm$, p<0.001) and sagittal disc angle (SDA; $8.7{\pm}3.3$ vs. $11.3{\pm}3.2^{\circ}$, p<0.001) between the DLIF and OLIF groups at 7 days postoperatively. CA ($9.6{\pm}3.0$ vs. $8.1{\pm}2.9^{\circ}$, p<0.001) and CW ($21.2{\pm}1.6$ vs. $19.2{\pm}1.9mm$, p<0.001) were significantly larger in the OLIF group compared to the DLIF group. The cage location of the OLIF group was significantly more anterior than the DLIF group ($6.7{\pm}3.0$ vs. $9.1{\pm}3.6mm$, p<0.001). Cage subsidence at 1 year postoperatively was significantly worse in the DLIF group compared to the OLIF group ($1.0{\pm}1.5$ vs. $0.4{\pm}1.1mm$, p=0.001). Cage location was significantly correlated with postoperative FH (${\beta}=0.273$, p<0.001) and postoperative SDA (${\beta}=-0.358$, p<0.001). CA was significantly correlated with postoperative FH (${\beta}=-0.139$, p=0.044) and postoperative SDA (${\beta}=0.236$, p=0.001). Cage location (${\beta}=0.293$, p<0.001) and CW (${\beta}=-0.225$, p<0.001) were significantly correlated with cage subsidence. Conclusion : The cage location, CA, and CW seem to be important factors which result in the different-radiological outcomes between DLIF and OLIF.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.65 no.1
• /
• pp.74-83
• /
• 2022

Objective : Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) is a surgical technique that utilizes a large interbody cage to indirectly decompress neural elements. The position of the cage relative to the vertebral body could affect the degree of foraminal decompression. Previous studies determined the position of the cage using plain radiographs, with conflicting results regarding the influence of the position of the cage to the degree of neural foramen decompression. Because of the cage obliquity, computed tomography (CT) has better accuracy than plain radiograph for the measurement of the obliquely inserted cage. The objective of this study is to find the correlation between the position of the OLIF cage with the degree of indirect decompression of foraminal stenosis using CT and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Methods : We review imaging of 46 patients who underwent OLIF from L2-L5 for 68 levels. Segmental lordosis (SL) was measured in a plain radiograph. The positions of the cage were measured in CT. Spinal canal cross-sectional area (SCSA), and foraminal crosssectional area (FSCA) measurements using MRI were taken into consideration. Results : Patients' mean age was 69.7 years. SL increases 3.0±5.1 degrees. Significant increases in SCSA (33.3%), FCSA (43.7% on the left and 45.0% on the right foramen) were found (p<0.001). Multiple linear regression analysis shows putting the cage in the more posterior position correlated with more increase of FSCA and decreases SL correction. The position of the cage does not affect the degree of the central spinal canal decompression. Obliquity of the cage does not result in different degrees of foraminal decompression between right and left side neural foramen. Conclusion : Cage position near the posterior part of the vertebral body increases the decompression effect of the neural foramen while putting the cage in the more anterior position correlated with increases SL.