Oblique lateral interbody fusion at L5-S1: feasibility, surgical approach window, incision line, and influencing factors.

Approach window Incision line L5-S1 Oblique lateral interbody fusion Safe corridor

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:
26 Feb 2024
Historique:
received: 04 02 2023
accepted: 20 10 2023
medline: 27 2 2024
pubmed: 27 2 2024
entrez: 27 2 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

The primary aim of this study was to describe the feasibility, surgical approach window (SAW), and incision line (IL) for oblique lateral interbody fusion at L5-S1 (OLIF51) using computed tomography (CT). A secondary aim was to identify associations among approach characteristics and demographic and anthropometric factors. We performed a radiographic study of 50 male and 50 female subjects who received abdominal CT imaging. SAW was measured as the distance from the midline to the medial border of the iliac vessel. IL was measured at the skin surface corresponding to the distance between the center of the disc space and SAW lateral margin. OLIF51 feasibility was defined as the existence of at least a 1-cm SAW without retraction of soft tissues. For the left side, the OLIF51 SAW and IL were 12.1 ± 4.6 and 175.1 ± 55.3 mm. For the right side, these measures were 10.0 ± 4.3 and 185.0 ± 52.5 mm. Correlations of r = 0.648 (p < 0.001) and r = 0.656 (p < 0.001) were observed between weight and IL on the left and right sides, respectively. OLIF51 was not feasible 23% of the time. To our knowledge, this is the largest CT study to determine the feasibility of performing an OLIF51. Without the use of retraction, OLIF51 is not feasible 23% of the time. Left-sided OLIF51 allows for a larger surgical approach window and smaller incision compared to the right side. Larger incisions are required for adequate surgical exposure in patients with higher weight.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38409532
doi: 10.1007/s00586-023-08017-4
pii: 10.1007/s00586-023-08017-4
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Références

Mayer HM (1997) A new microsurgical technique for minimally invasive anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 22:691–9
doi: 10.1097/00007632-199703150-00023 pubmed: 9089943
Mobbs RJ, Phan K, Malham G, Seex K, Rao PJ (2015) Lumbar interbody fusion: techniques, indications and comparison of interbody fusion options including PLIF, TLIF, MI-TLIF, OLIF/ATP LLIF and ALIF. J Spine Surg 1(1):2–18. https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2414-469X.2015.10.05.PMID:27683674;PMCID:PMC5039869
doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2414-469X.2015.10.05.PMID:27683674;PMCID:PMC5039869 pubmed: 27683674 pmcid: 5039869
Orita S, Shiga Y, Inage K et al (2020) Technical and conceptual review on the L5–S1 oblique lateral interbody fusion surgery (OLIF51). Spine Surg Relat Res 5(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2020-0086
doi: 10.22603/ssrr.2020-0086 pubmed: 33575488 pmcid: 7870318
Mobbs RJ, Phan K, Daly D et al (2015) Approach-related complications of anterior lumbar interbody fusion: results of a combined spine and vascular surgical team. Glob Spine J 6(2):147–154
doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1557141
Chung HW, Lee HD, Jeon CH, Chung NS (2021) Comparison of surgical outcomes between oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). Clin Neurol Neurosurg 209:106901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clineuro.2021.106901 . (Epub 2021 Aug 21 PMID: 34464832)
doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2021.106901 pubmed: 34464832
Kim JS, Choi WS, Sung JH (2016) 314 Minimally invasive oblique lateral interbody fusion for L4–5: clinical outcomes and perioperative complications—proquest. Neurosurgery 63(Suppl 1):190–191
doi: 10.1227/01.neu.0000489803.65103.84
Julian Li JX, Mobbs RJ, Phan K (2018) Morphometric MRI imaging study of the corridor for the oblique lumbar interbody fusion technique at L1–L5. World Neurosurg 111:e678–e685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.12.136
doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.12.136 pubmed: 29294391
Zhang F, Xu H, Yin B et al (2017) Does right lateral decubitus position change retroperitoneal oblique corridor? A radiographic evaluation from L1 to L5. Eur Spine J Off Publ Eur Spine Soc Eur Spinal Deform Soc Eur Sect Cerv Spine Res Soc 26(3):646–650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4645-7
doi: 10.1007/s00586-016-4645-7
Kim H, Chang BS, Chang SY (2022) Pearls and pitfalls of oblique lateral interbody fusion: a comprehensive narrative review. Neurospine 19(1):163–176. https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.2143236.618
doi: 10.14245/ns.2143236.618 pubmed: 35378589 pmcid: 8987540
Cooke RE Jr, Gaeta MG et al (2000) Picture archiving and communication systems. Health Devices 29(11):385–390
Tesoriero JA, Eddy P, Hasso AN (2015) PACS used while on-call: a national survey of radiology program directors and chief residents. J Digit Imaging 28(2):205–212. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-014-9741-9
doi: 10.1007/s10278-014-9741-9 pubmed: 25384539
Liu L, Liang Y, Zhang H, Wang H, Guo C, Pu X et al (2016) Imaging anatomical research on the operative windows of oblique lumbar interbody fusion. PLoS ONE 11(9):e0163452. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0163452
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0163452 pubmed: 27685646 pmcid: 5042505
Epic Systems (2023) Epic: about https://www.epic.com/about . Accessed 27 Jan 2023
Ratner B (2009) The correlation coefficient: Its values range between +1/−1, or do they? J Targ Meas Anal Mark 17(2):139–142. https://doi.org/10.1057/jt.2009.5
doi: 10.1057/jt.2009.5
Koo TK, Li MY (2016) A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 15(2):155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012 pubmed: 27330520 pmcid: 4913118
Shrout PE, Fleiss JL (1979) Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 86(2):420–428. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.86.2.420
doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.86.2.420 pubmed: 18839484
Molinares DM, Davis TT, Fung DA (2016) Retroperitoneal oblique corridor to the L2–S1 intervertebral discs: an MRI study. J Neurosurg Spine 24(2):248–255. https://doi.org/10.3171/2015.3.SPINE13976 . (Epub 2015 Oct 9 PMID: 26451662)
doi: 10.3171/2015.3.SPINE13976 pubmed: 26451662
Davis TT, Hynes RA, Fung DA et al (2014) Retroperitoneal oblique corridor to the L2–S1 intervertebral discs in the lateral position: an anatomic study. J Neurosurg Spine 21(5):785–793. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.7.SPINE13564
doi: 10.3171/2014.7.SPINE13564 pubmed: 25216400
Wang K, Zhang C, Wu H, Chen Z, Chou D, Jian F (2019) The anatomic characteristics of the retroperitoneal oblique corridor to the L1–S1 intervertebral disc spaces. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 44(12):E697–E706. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002951
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002951 pubmed: 30475333
Woods KR, Billys JB, Hynes RA (2017) Technical description of oblique lateral interbody fusion at L1–L5 (OLIF25) and at L5–S1 (OLIF51) and evaluation of complication and fusion rates. Spine J 17(4):545–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2016.10.026
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2016.10.026 pubmed: 27884744
Zairi F, Sunna TP, Westwick HJ et al (2017) Mini-open oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) approach for multi-level discectomy and fusion involving L5–S1: preliminary experience. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 103(2):295–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2016.11.016
doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2016.11.016 pubmed: 28089666
Mun HY, Ko MJ, Kim YB, Park SW (2020) Usefulness of oblique lateral interbody fusion at L5–S1 level compared to transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 63(6):723–729. https://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2018.0215
doi: 10.3340/jkns.2018.0215 pubmed: 31295977
Song SJ, Shin MH, Kim JT (2019) Anatomical feasibility of right oblique approach for L5–S1 oblique lumbar interbody fusion. World Neurosurg 132:e403–e408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2019.08.135
doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.08.135 pubmed: 31476457
Deukmedjian AR, Le TV, Dakwar E, Martinez CR, Uribe JS (2012) Movement of abdominal structures on magnetic resonance imaging during positioning changes related to lateral lumbar spine surgery: a morphometric study: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 16(6):615–623. https://doi.org/10.3171/2012.3.SPINE1210
doi: 10.3171/2012.3.SPINE1210 pubmed: 22462569
Gandhi SV, Dugan R, Farber SH, Godzik J, Alhilali L, Uribe JS (2022) Anatomical positional changes in the lateral lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J Off Publ Eur Spine Soc Eur Spinal Deform Soc Eur Sect Cerv Spine Res Soc 31(9):2220–2226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-022-07195-x
doi: 10.1007/s00586-022-07195-x

Auteurs

Rusheel Nayak (R)

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Loma Linda University Health, Loma Linda, CA, USA.

Jacob Razzouk (J)

School of Medicine, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA, USA.

Omar Ramos (O)

Twin Cities Spine Center, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Shaurya Mehta (S)

University of California Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA.

Gideon Harianja (G)

School of Medicine, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA, USA.

Nathaniel Wycliffe (N)

Department of Radiology, Loma Linda University Health, Loma Linda, CA, USA.

Olumide Danisa (O)

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Loma Linda University Health, Loma Linda, CA, USA.

Wayne Cheng (W)

Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Jerry L. Pettis VA Medical Center, 25805 Barton Road A106, Loma Linda, CA, 92354, USA. md4spine@yahoo.com.

Classifications MeSH