European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society
-
Review Meta Analysis
Minimally invasive versus open surgery for degenerative lumbar pathologies:a systematic review and meta-analysis.
With the increase in life expectancy and consequent aging of the population, degenerative lumbar spine diseases tend to increase its number exponentially. Several treatment options are available to treat degenerative spinal diseases, such as laminectomies, posterior fusions, and interbody fusions, depending on their locations, correction necessities, and surgeon philosophy. With the advance in technology and surgical knowledge, minimally invasive techniques (MIS) arose as a solution to reduce surgical morbidity, while maintaining the same benefits as the traditionally/open surgeries. Several studies investigated the possible advantages of MIS techniques against the traditional open procedures. However, those articles are usually focused only on one technique or on one pathology. ⋯ Minimally invasive techniques are a remarkably interesting option to traditional open surgeries, as these procedures showed a significant reduction in blood loss, hospitalization time, complications, and surgical costs.
-
To determine whether the open or the minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (O-TLIF, MI-TLIF) is the favored treatment, we provide first meta-analyses using prospective studies with at least two years follow-up only and present the clinical relevance of statistical results for the first time. ⋯ After at least two years, O-TLIF and MI-TLIF can be considered equally efficacious, which simplifies surgeons' decision between both treatments, however, with the safety outcome measure postoperative complications per case and the perioperative outcome measures EBL and LOS in favor of MI-TLIF. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I: Well conducted meta-analyses, systematic reviews, or RCTs with a low risk of bias.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
What is success of treatment? Expected outcome scores in cervical radiculopathy patients were much higher than the previously reported cut-off values for success.
Treatment success can be defined by asking a patient how they perceive their condition compared to prior to treatment, but it can also be defined by establishing success criteria in advance. We evaluated treatment outcome expectations in patients undergoing surgery or non-operative treatment for cervical radiculopathy. ⋯ The expected improvement after treatment of cervical radiculopathy was much higher than the previously reported cut-off values for success. Patients with cervical radiculopathy had higher expectations to surgical treatment.
-
Interbody fusion is commonly utilized for arthrodesis and stability among patients undergoing spine surgery. Over the last few decades, interbody device materials, such as titanium and polyetheretherketone (PEEK), have been replacing traditional autografts and allografts for interbody fusion. As such, with the exponential growth of bioengineering, a large variety cage surface technologies exist. Different combinations of cage component materials and surface modifications have been created to optimize interbody constructs for surgical use. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of common surface technologies, their performance in the clinical setting, and recent modifications and material combinations. ⋯ Interbody devices have rapidly evolved over the last few decades. Biomaterial and biomechanical modifications have allowed for continued design optimization. While titanium has a high osseointegrative capacity, it also has a high elastic modulus and is radio-opaque. PEEK, on the other hand, has a lower elastic modulus and is radiolucent, though PEEK has poor osseointegrative capacity. Surface modifications, material development advancements, and hybrid material devices have been utilized in search of an optimal spinal implant which maximizes the advantages and minimizes the disadvantages of each interbody material.
-
Implant leakage is the most common complication of vertebral augmentation. Alternative injectable materials must demonstrate intravascular safety comparable to or better than polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA). This study assessed the systemic effects of a triphasic calcium-based implant or PMMA injected directly into the femoral vein in a large animal model designed to mimic severe intravascular implant leakage. ⋯ Acute systemic effects of intravascular AGN1 appeared to be comparable to or less than that of intravascular PMMA. Furthermore, in this preliminary study, the severity and incidence of pulmonary histological changes were lower for AGN1 compared to PMMA.