Full-endoscopic transforaminal procedure to treat the single-level adjacent segment disease after posterior lumbar spine fusion: 1–2 years follow-up

Xiaoming Liu; Zhonghan Liu; Yaqin Pan; Yufeng Huang; Desheng Wu; Zhaoyu Ba; Xiaoming Liu; Zhonghan Liu; Yaqin Pan; Yufeng Huang; Desheng Wu; Zhaoyu Ba

doi:10.3934/mbe.2019393

Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering

2019, Volume 16, Issue 6: 7829-7838. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019393

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

Full-endoscopic transforaminal procedure to treat the single-level adjacent segment disease after posterior lumbar spine fusion: 1–2 years follow-up

1.
Department of Spinal Surgery, Shanghai East Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, 150 Jimo Rd., Shanghai 200120, China
2.
Department of Orthopedics, Tongren Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 1111 XianXia Road, Shanghai 200336, China

Received: 21 March 2019 Accepted: 22 August 2019 Published: 27 August 2019

Adjacent segment disease (ASD) is one of the potential risks after lumbar spine surgery with instrumentation. Revision surgery needs to be performed on patients suffered from ASD. The traditional open surgery takes severe injury to the body. We investigated the clinical outcome of using full-endoscopic transforaminal procedure to treat the single-level adjacent segment diseases after posterior lumbar fusion. 33 patients (average 71 years, ranged 65–84 years old) underwent full-endoscopic transforaminal procedure were involved. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) score and visual analogue scale (VAS) score were used to evaluate the clinical effect. The complication, hospital stay, hospitalization costs and blood loss were investigated according to the patient's records. The mean VAS score was 1.8 and mJOA score was 5.4 postoperatively. Improvement rate was 78%. The mean ODI was 14.6 postoperatively. The mean length of hospital stay, hospitalization costs and blood loss was 2.5 days, 00 and 15 mL, respectively. No complication or recurrence was observed in any of the patients at the final follow-up. Full-endoscopic transforaminal procedure is a safe and effective technique. It is economical, acceptable and mini-invasive. Of course, it also can shorten the length of hospital stay and decrease bleeding. For revision surgery to treat ASD, this technique can achieve good clinical effects.
- adjacent segment disease,
- lumbar spine,
- full-endoscopic transforaminal,
- revision surgery,
- recurrence
Citation: Xiaoming Liu, Zhonghan Liu, Yaqin Pan, Yufeng Huang, Desheng Wu, Zhaoyu Ba. Full-endoscopic transforaminal procedure to treat the single-level adjacent segment disease after posterior lumbar spine fusion: 1–2 years follow-up[J]. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(6): 7829-7838. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019393

Related Papers:

Abstract

Adjacent segment disease (ASD) is one of the potential risks after lumbar spine surgery with instrumentation. Revision surgery needs to be performed on patients suffered from ASD. The traditional open surgery takes severe injury to the body. We investigated the clinical outcome of using full-endoscopic transforaminal procedure to treat the single-level adjacent segment diseases after posterior lumbar fusion. 33 patients (average 71 years, ranged 65–84 years old) underwent full-endoscopic transforaminal procedure were involved. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) score and visual analogue scale (VAS) score were used to evaluate the clinical effect. The complication, hospital stay, hospitalization costs and blood loss were investigated according to the patient's records. The mean VAS score was 1.8 and mJOA score was 5.4 postoperatively. Improvement rate was 78%. The mean ODI was 14.6 postoperatively. The mean length of hospital stay, hospitalization costs and blood loss was 2.5 days, 00 and 15 mL, respectively. No complication or recurrence was observed in any of the patients at the final follow-up. Full-endoscopic transforaminal procedure is a safe and effective technique. It is economical, acceptable and mini-invasive. Of course, it also can shorten the length of hospital stay and decrease bleeding. For revision surgery to treat ASD, this technique can achieve good clinical effects.

References

[1]	J. N. Weinstein, S. D. Boden and H. An, Emerging technology in spine: Should we rethink the past or move forward in spite of the past?, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 28 (2003), S1.
[2]	T. Lund and T. R. Oxland, Adjacent level disk disease–is it really a fusion disease?, Orthop. Clin. North Am., 42 (2011), 529–541.
[3]	A. S. Hilibrand and M. Robbins, Adjacent segment degeneration and adjacent segment disease: The consequences of spinal fusion?, Spine J., 4 (2004), S190–194.
[4]	M. D. Helgeson, A. J. Bevevino and A. S. Hilibrand, Update on the evidence for adjacent segment degeneration and disease, Spine J., 13 (2013), 342–351.
[5]	T. Takahashi, J. Hanakita, M. Minami, et al., Surgical outcome and postoperative work status of lumbar discogenic pain following transforaminal interbody fusion, Neurol. Med. Chir. (Tokyo), 51 (2011), 101–107.
[6]	M. Fukui, K. Chiba, M. Kawakami, et al., JOA back pain evaluation questionnaire (JOABPEQ)/JOA cervical myelopathy evaluation questionnaire (JOACMEQ). The report on the development of revised versions. April 16, 2007, J. Orthop. Sci. 14 (2009), 348–365.
[7]	S. C. Humphreys, S. D. Hodges, A. G. Patwardhan, et al., Comparison of posterior and transforaminal approaches to lumbar interbody fusion, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 26 (2001), 567–571.
[8]	H. Nakashima, N. Kawakami, T. Tsuji, et al., Adjacent segment disease after posterior lumbar Interbody Fusion: Based on cases with a Minimum of 10 Years of Follow-up, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 40 (2015), E831–841.
[9]	Y. P. Charles, L. V. Lima, S. Persohn, et al., Influence of an auxiliary facet system on intervertebral discs and adjacent facet joints, Spine J., 13 (2013), 1293–1300.
[10]	J. S. Harrop, J. A. Youssef, M. Maltenfort, et al., Lumbar adjacent segment degeneration and disease after arthrodesis and total disc arthroplasty, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 33 (2008), 1701–1707.
[11]	Y. Aota, K. Kumano and S. Hirabayashi, Postfusion instability at the adjacent segments after rigid pedicle screw fixation for degenerative lumbar spinal disorders, J. Spinal Disord., 8 (1995), 464–473.
[12]	S. Etebar and D. W. Cahill, Risk factors for adjacent segment failure following lumbar fixation with rigid instrumentation for degenerative instability, J. Neurosurg., 90 (1999), 163–169.
[13]	J. Anandjiwala, J. Y. Seo and K. Y. Ha, Adjacent segment degeneration after instrtmented posterolateral lumbar fusion: A prospective cohort study with a minimum five year follow-up, Eur. Spine J., 20 (2011), 1951–1960.
[14]	X. Liu, Y. Wang, X. Wu, et al., Impact of surgical approaches on the lumbar multifidus muscle: An experimental study using sheep as models, J. Neurosurg. Spine, 12 (2010), 570–576.
[15]	T. S. Whitecloud III, J. M. Davis and P. M. Olive, Operative treatment of the degenerated segment adjacent to a lumbar fusion, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 19 (1994), 531–536.
[16]	J. D. Schlegel, J. A. Smith and R. L. Schleusener, Lumbar motion segment pathology adjacent to thoracolumbar, lumbar, and lumbosacral fusions, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 21 (1996), 970–981.
[17]	F. M. Phillips, G. D. Carlson, H. H. Bohlman, et al., Results of surgery for spinal stenosis adjacent to previous lumbar fusion, J. Spinal Disord., 13 (2000), 432–437.
[18]	W. J. Chen, P. L. Lai, C. C. Niu, et al., Surgical treatment of adjacent instability after lumbar spine fusion, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 26 (2001), 519–524.
[19]	P. Park, H. J. Garton, V. C. Gala, et al., Adjacent segment disease after lumbar or lumbosacral fusion: Review of the literature, Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 29 (2004), 1938–1944.
[20]	D. Y. Lee, C. S. Shim, Y. Ahn, et al., Comparison of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and open lumbar microdiscectomy for recurrent disc herniation, J. Korean Neurosurg. Soc., 46 (2009), 515–521.
[21]	S. H. Lee, S. E. Chung, Y. Ahn, et al., Comparative radiologic evaluation of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and open microdiscectomy: A matched cohort analysis, Mt. Sinai. J. Med., 73 (2006), 795–801.

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2019 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)