Single-Position Prone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Increases Operative Efficiency and Maintains Safety in Revision Lumbar Spinal Fusion

Author:

Buckland Aaron J.123ORCID,Proctor Dylan J.4,Thomas J. Alex5,Protopsaltis Themistocles S.3,Ashayeri Kimberly3,Braly Brett A.6

Affiliation:

1. Melbourne Orthopaedic Group, Melbourne, Vic Australia

2. Spine and Scoliosis Research Associates Australia, Melbourne, Vic Australia

3. NYU Langone Health, New York, NY

4. University of Melbourne, Parkville, Vic Australia

5. Atlantic Neurosurgical and Spine Specialists, Wilmington, NC

6. The Spine Clinic of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma City, OK

Abstract

Study Design. Multi-centre retrospective cohort study. Objective. To evaluate the feasibility and safety of the single-position prone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) technique for revision lumbar fusion surgery. Background Context. Prone LLIF (P-LLIF) is a novel technique allowing for placement of a lateral interbody in the prone position and allowing posterior decompression and revision of posterior instrumentation without patient repositioning. This study examines perioperative outcomes and complications of single position P-LLIF against traditional Lateral LLIF (L-LLIF) technique with patient repositioning. Method. A multi-centre retrospective cohort study involving patients undergoing 1 to 4 level LLIF surgery was performed at 4 institutions in the US and Australia. Patients were included if their surgery was performed via either: P-LLIF with revision posterior fusion; or L-LLIF with repositioning to prone. Demographics, perioperative outcomes, complications, and radiological outcomes were compared using independent samples t-tests and chi-squared analyses as appropriate with significance set at P<0.05. Results. 101 patients undergoing revision LLIF surgery were included, of which 43 had P-LLIF and 58 had L-LLIF. Age, BMI and CCI were similar between groups. The number of posterior levels fused (2.21 P-LLIF vs. 2.66 L-LLIF, P=0.469) and number of LLIF levels (1.35 vs. 1.39, P=0.668) was similar between groups.Operative time was significantly less in the P-LLIF group (151 vs. 206 min, P=0.004). EBL was similar between groups (150mL P-LLIF vs. 182mL L-LLIF, P=0.31) and there was a trend toward reduced length of stay in the P-LLIF group (2.7 vs. 3.3d, P=0.09). No significant difference was demonstrated in complications between groups. Radiographic analysis demonstrated no significant differences in preoperative or postoperative sagittal alignment measurements. Conclusion. P-LLIF significantly improves operative efficiency when compared to L-LLIF for revision lumbar fusion. No increase in complications was demonstrated by P-LLIF or trade-offs in sagittal alignment restoration. Level of Evidence. Level 4

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Neurology (clinical),Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3