A comparison of mini-open and open approaches for resection of thoracolumbar intradural spinal tumors

Abstract

Object Standard approaches to thoracic intradural tumors often involve a large incision and significant tissue destruction. Minimally invasive techniques have been applied successfully for a variety of surgical decompression procedures but have been rarely used for the removal of intradural thoracolumbar tumors. In this paper, the authors compare the clinical outcome of mini-open resection of intradural thoracolumbar tumors with a standard open technique. Methods The authors retrospectively reviewed their series of 18 consecutive mini-open thoracolumbar, intradural, tumor resection cases and compared the outcomes with a profile-matched cohort of 9 cases of open intradural tumor resection. Operative statistics, functional outcome, and complications were compared. Results Tumors were removed successfully using both approaches, except for 1 case in the mini-open cohort in which only biopsy was performed for a diffusely infiltrating tumor (glioblastoma). There was no statistically significant difference in operative duration, American Spinal Injury Association scale score improvement, or back pain visual analog scale score improvement between groups. However, the mini-open group demonstrated a significantly lower estimated blood loss (153 vs 372 ml, respectively) and a significantly shorter length of hospitalization (4.9 vs 8.2 days, respectively). There was 1 complication of pseudomeningocele formation in the mini-open cohort and 1 complication of cerebral infarction in the open cohort. Mean follow-up length was 16 months in the mini-open group compared with 20 months in the open group. Conclusions The mini-open approach allows for adequate treatment of intradural thoracolumbar tumors with comparable outcomes to standard, open approaches. The mini-open approach is associated with less blood loss and a shorter length of stay compared with standard open surgery.