Rodrigo Amaral

Stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion – complications and perioperative results

Objectives Historically, anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) was related to high rates of intraoperative complications and adverse events related to interbody devices. In recent decades, there have been technical adjustments, and cages that are more suitable have emerged. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and complication rate of the use of stand-alone mini-ALIF using a self-locking cage. Methods Retrospective single center study. Inclusion criteria: retroperitoneal mini-ALIF for single-level fusion (L5S1); self-locking cage; DDD/stenosis and grade I spondylolisthesis. Exclusion criteria: posterior supplementation, previous fusion/arthroplasty. Endpoints: surgery data, intraoperative and perioperative adverse events related both to surgical access and to the intersomatic device. Results Eighty-seven cases were enrolled. Median surgical time was 90 min; median blood loss was 100 mL. The median length of stay in the ICU was zero days; median hospital stay was one day. Ten cases had an adverse event (11.5%): four major adverse events (4.6%; 3 L bleeding; DVT; retroperitoneal haematoma; incisional hernia), and seven minor events (8%; peritoneum injury; minor vascular injury; events related to the cage). No cases of retrograde ejaculation were observed. There was improvement in pain, physical restriction, and quality of life (p < 0.001). Conclusions The mini-ALIF procedure performed for single-level fusion at the distal lumbar level demonstrated low adverse event rates related to both the surgical approach and to the intersomatic device, with reduced hospital stay and satisfactory perioperative clinical results.

Dupuytren contracture: comparative study between partial fasciectomy and percutaneous fasciectomy

Objectives To compare the clinical results obtained by using the techniques of open limited fasciectomy (FP) and percutaneous needle fasciectomy (FPC) in patients with Dupuytrens contracture after one year follow up. Methods Thirty-three patients and a total of 50 fingers with Dupuytrens contracture were divided non-randomly and evaluated after undergoing procedures with FP or FPC. The results were evaluated based on the Tubiana classification, DASH score (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand), time until return to professional activities, total passive extension deficit (DTEP), the relationship between the extension deficit and DASH, recurrence and complications. Results Twenty-six fingers were treated with FPC technique and 24 fingers with FP. The DTEP was significantly lower in FP group (10.23°) when compared to FPC group (23.46°) at 12 months postoperatively (p = 0.038). The remaining items assessed did not show any statistically significant differences. Conclusion Total passive extension deficit at 12 months is lower in the group of open limited fasciectomy. There are no significant differences between groups FP and FPC over the classification of Tubiana, the DASH score, time until return to professional activities and the incidence of recurrence.

Rational decision making in a wide scenario of different minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion approaches and devices

With the proliferation of a variety of modern MIS spine surgery procedures, it is mandatory that the surgeon dominate all aspects involved in surgical indication. The information related to the decision making in patient selection for specific procedures is mandatory for surgical success. The objective of this study is to present decision-making criteria in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) selection for a variety of patients and pathologies. In this article, practicing surgeons who specialize in various MIS approaches for spinal fusion were engaged to provide expert opinion and literature review on decision making criteria for several MIS procedures. Pros, cons, relative limitations, and case examples are provided for patient selection in treatment with MIS posterolateral fusion (MIS-PLF), mini anterior lumbar interbody fusion (mini-ALIF), lateral interbody fusion (LLIF), MIS posterior lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-PLIF) and MIS transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). There is a variety of aspects to consider when deciding which modern MIS surgical approach is most appropriate to use based on patient and pathologic characteristics. The surgeon must adapt them to the characteristic of each type of patients, helping them to choose the most effective and efficient therapeutic option for each case.

Influence of psychosocial distress in the results of elective lumbar spine surgery

BACKGROUND Low back pain can be caused by several pathological entities and its perception can be altered by external factors, for example by some psychological and social factors. The objective of this study was to compare surgical outcomes in patients with or without psychosocial issues. METHODS Single center, retrospective and comparative study. Patients with indication to elective lumbar spine surgery were screened for some psychosocial factors. As a result of the screening, patients were divided in two groups: mild psychosocial issues (green group) or moderate psychosocial issues (yellow group). The groups were compared using the following variables: demographic and clinical history, depression (HAD-D), anxiety (HAD-A), pain levels [visual analogue scale (VAS)], disability [Oswestry disability index (ODI)] and quality of life [EuroQol 5D (EQ-5D)] at preop and 6-12 months follow-up. RESULTS A total of 136 patients were included (51% female) in this study. The 62.5% were allocated at the green group, and 37.5% in the yellow group. Similar pain levels were observed at preop, but the green group evolved with superior improvement in pain levels after surgery (P=0.003). In the ODI and EQ-5D scales, the green group had already shown lower clinical disability at preop (P=0.009 and P=0.003, respectively) and evolved with better outcomes at the final evaluation (P=0.049 and P=0.017). VAS, ODI and EQ-5D scores improved from baseline similarly in both groups. CONCLUSIONS Presurgical screening identify the presence of psychological distress. Psychosocial factors are correlated with poorer clinical outcomes, both in the baseline and after the surgery. Despite the differences between found, even patients with mild psychosocial impairment can experience clinical improvement with surgery.

History and Rationale for the Minimally Invasive Lateral Approach

The minimally invasive lateral approach, since its first technical report [1], has been shown to be a less invasive alternative to access the anterior column of the thoracolumbar spine, providing direct visualization of the spinal structures while reducing adjacent vascular, sympathetic, and visceral trauma associated with open anterior approaches. In addition, less blood loss, less postoperative pain, shorter hospital stay, and faster return to daily activities are associated with this technique [2–5]. The lateral approach has been utilized in an increasingly number of surgical indications. It was first described to treat low back pain associated with degenerative disc disease above L5 level, avoiding patients with severe central canal stenosis [6]. Over the years, indications were extrapolated, showing that indirect decompression of the neural structures can be achieved by disc height restoration [7], and ligamentotaxis can derotate the vertebral body, providing coronal alignment [8–12]. Other published indications, with or without posterior supplementation, are adjacent level disease, pseudoarthrosis, trauma, infection, sagittal alignment, spondylolisthesis revision surgeries, and total disc replacement [13–25]. The scientific evidence has been growing and being highlighted in high-impact publications in the literature, showing its advantages, efficacy, and safety related to this technique. These advances make surgeons responsible for learning and using these new techniques and technologies in order to provide their patients better clinical and radiological results with less complications.