Defining a safe working zone for lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a radiographic, cross-sectional study.


Journal

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
ISSN: 1432-0932
Titre abrégé: Eur Spine J
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9301980

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 2021
Historique:
received: 07 07 2020
accepted: 30 09 2020
revised: 02 09 2020
pubmed: 13 10 2020
medline: 24 6 2021
entrez: 12 10 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To present a radiographic analysis of the anatomy of the lumbar plexus and retroperitoneal blood vessels with respect to psoas morphology and safe working zones (SWZ) for LLIF. A retrospective radiographic analysis of 158 MRI scans was performed. Selected morphometric measurements were performed at L1-L2, L2-L3, L3-L4 and L4-L5 levels: disc anteroposterior distance, psoas anteroposterior distance, lumbar plexus-anterior disc distance, lumbar plexus-anterior psoas distance, vena cava-anterior disc distance and calculation of SWZ in psoas on both left and right sides. The morphometric measurements were analysed for differences with sex and the level. All the morphometric parameters differed significantly at all levels between males and females. The SWZ was significantly wider on the left side compared to the right-at L2-L3, L3-L4 and L4-L5 levels in females and at L3-L4 and L4-L5 levels in males. The SWZ at L4-L5 was narrowest on both left and right sides-and significantly reduced compared to other levels. 6.9% patients had a SWZ > 20 mm on the left side, and 44.9% patients had SWZ < 20 mm on the right side. With caudal progression of levels, the lumbar plexus and psoas muscle migrated anteriorly and the vena cava/right iliac vein migrated posteriorly. A detailed study of preoperative MRI scans should be carried out in patients planned for LLIF-particularly, at L4-L5 level and in females. A left-sided trans-psoas approach is safer to perform compared to the right side-a right-sided approach should be avoided at L4-L5 considering the narrow SWZ at that level.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33044660
doi: 10.1007/s00586-020-06624-z
pii: 10.1007/s00586-020-06624-z
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

164-172

Références

Albee FH (1911) Transplantation of a portion of the tibia into the spine for pott’s disease: a preliminary report. J Am Med Assoc 57:885–886
doi: 10.1001/jama.1911.04260090107012
Hibbs RA (1911) An operation for progressive spinal deformities. A preliminary report of three cases from the service of the orthopaedic hospital. NY Med J 93:1013–1016
Talia AJ, Wong ML, Lau HC, Kaye AH (2015) Comparison of the different surgical approaches for lumbar interbody fusion. J Clinic Neurosci 22:243–251
doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2014.08.008
Ozgur BM, Aryan HE, Pimenta L, Taylor WR (2006) Extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF): a novel surgical technique for anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J 6:435–443
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2005.08.012
Rihn JA, Patel R, Makda J et al (2009) Complications associated with single–Level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J 9:623–629
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2009.04.004
Samudrala S, Khoo LT, Rhim SC, Fessler RG (1999) Complications during anterior surgery of the lumbar spine: an anatomically based study and review. Neurosurg Focus 7:E11
doi: 10.3171/foc.1999.7.6.12
Le TV, Baaj AA, Dakwar E et al (2012) Subsidence of polyetheretherketone intervertebral cages in minimally invasive lateral retroperitoneal transpsoas lumbar interbody fusion. Spine 37:1268–1273
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182458b2f
Laws CJ, Coughlin DG, Lotz JC et al (2012) Direct lateral approach to lumbar fusion is a biomechanically equivalent alternative to the anterior approach: an in vitro study. Spine 37(10):819–825
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31823551aa
Kwon B, Kim DH (2016) Lateral lumbar interbody fusion: indications, outcomes, and complications. JAAOS-J Am Acad Ortho Surg 24:96–105
doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-14-00208
Guérin P, Obeid I, Gille O et al (2011) Safe working zones using the minimally invasive lateral retroperitoneal transpsoas approach: a morphometric study. Surg Radiol Anat 33:665–671
doi: 10.1007/s00276-011-0798-6
Rodgers WB, Gerber EJ, Patterson J (2011) Intraoperative and early postoperative complications in extreme lateral interbody fusion: an analysis of 600 cases. Spine 36:26–32
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181e1040a
Pumberger M, Hughes AP, Huang RR et al (2012) Neurologic deficit following lateral lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J 21(6):1192–1199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-2087-9
doi: 10.1007/s00586-011-2087-9 pubmed: 22130617
Fujibayashi S, Kawakami N, Asazuma T et al (2017) Complications associated with lateral interbody fusion: nationwide survey of 2998 cases during the first 2 years of its use in Japan. Spine 42:1478–1484
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002139
Lykissas MG, Aichmair A, Hughes AP et al (2014) Nerve injury after lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a review of 919 treated levels with identification of risk factors. Spine J 14:749–758
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.066
Moro T, Kikuchi S, Konno S, Yaginuma H (2003) An anatomic study of the lumbar plexus with respect to retroperitoneal endoscopic surgery. Spine 28:423–427
pubmed: 12616150
Benglis DM, Vanni S, Levi AD (2009) An anatomical study of the lumbosacral plexus as related to the minimally invasive transpsoas approach to the lumbar spine. J Neurosurg Spine 10:139–144
doi: 10.3171/2008.10.SPI08479
Uribe JS, Arredondo N, Dakwar E, Vale FL (2010) Defining the safe working zones using the minimally invasive lateral retroperitoneal transpsoas approach: an anatomical study. J Neurosurg Spine 13:260–266
doi: 10.3171/2010.3.SPINE09766
Uribe JS, Vale FL, Dakwar E (2010) Electromyographic monitoring and its anatomical implications in minimally invasive spine surgery. Spine 35:S368–S374
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182027976
Regev GJ, Chen L, Dhawan M et al (2009) Morphometric analysis of the ventral nerve roots and retroperitoneal vessels with respect to the minimally invasive lateral approach in normal and deformed spines. Spine 34(12):1330–1335
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a029e1
Hu W-K, He S-S, Zhang S-C et al (2011) An MRI study of psoas major and abdominal large vessels with respect to the X/DLIF approach. Eur Spine J 20:557–562
doi: 10.1007/s00586-010-1609-1
Barber SM, Boghani Z, Steele W et al (2017) Variation in psoas muscle location relative to the safe working zone for L4/5 lateral transpsoas interbody fusion: a morphometric analysis. World Neurosurg 107:396–399
doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.07.178
Yusof MI, Nadarajan E, Abdullah MS (2014) The morphometric study of L3–L4 and L4–L5 lumbar spine in Asian population using magnetic resonance imaging: feasibility analysis for transpsoas lumbar interbody fusion. Spine 39:E811–E816
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000368
Voyadzis J-M, Felbaum D, Rhee J (2014) The rising psoas sign: an analysis of preoperative imaging characteristics of aborted minimally invasive lateral interbody fusions at L4–5: report of 3 cases. J Neurosurg: Spine 20:531–537
Louie PK, Narain AS, Hijji FY et al (2017) Radiographic analysis of psoas morphology and its association with neurovascular structures at L4-5 with reference to lateral approaches. Spine 42:E1386–E1392
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002303
Kepler CK, Bogner EA, Herzog RJ, Huang RC (2011) Anatomy of the psoas muscle and lumbar plexus with respect to the surgical approach for lateral transpsoas interbody fusion. Eur Spine J 20:550–556. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-010-1593-5
doi: 10.1007/s00586-010-1593-5 pubmed: 20938787
Buckland AJ, Beaubrun BM, Isaacs E et al (2018) Psoas morphology differs between supine and sitting magnetic resonance imaging lumbar spine: implications for lateral lumbar interbody fusion. Asian Spine J 12:29–36. https://doi.org/10.4184/asj.2018.12.1.29
doi: 10.4184/asj.2018.12.1.29 pubmed: 29503679 pmcid: 5821929
Assina R, Majmundar NJ, Herschman Y, Heary RF (2014) First report of major vascular injury due to lateral transpsoas approach leading to fatality: case report. J Neurosurg Spine 21:794–798
doi: 10.3171/2014.7.SPINE131146
Mai HT, Schneider AD, Alvarez AP et al (2019) Anatomic considerations in the lateral transpsoas interbody fusion. Clinic Spine Surg 32:215–221
doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000760
Menezes CM, de Andrade LM, da Silva Herrero CFP et al (2015) Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance (DW-MR) neurography of the lumbar plexus in the preoperative planning of lateral access lumbar surgery. Eur Spine J 24:817–826
doi: 10.1007/s00586-014-3598-y

Auteurs

Bhavuk Garg (B)

Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.

Nishank Mehta (N)

Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India. mehta.nishank@gmail.com.

Vivek Vijayakumar (V)

Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.

Anupam Gupta (A)

Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH