The Technological Development of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery

Minimally invasive spine surgery has its roots in the mid-twentieth century with a few surgeons and a few techniques, but it has now developed into a large field of progressive spinal surgery. A wide range of techniques are now called \ minimally invasive,\ and case reports are submitted constantly with new \ minimally invasive\ approaches to spinal pathology. As minimally invasive spine surgery has become more mainstream over the past ten years, in this paper we discuss its history and development. © 2014 Laura A. Snyder et al

Cost-effectiveness of microendoscopic discectomy versus conventional open discectomy in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation: a prospective randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN51857546]

BACKGROUND: Open discectomy is the standard surgical procedure in the treatment of patients with long-lasting sciatica caused by lumbar disc herniation. Minimally invasive approaches such as microendoscopic discectomy have gained attention in recent years. Reduced tissue trauma allows early ambulation, short hospital stay and quick resumption of daily activities. A comparative cost-effectiveness study has not been performed yet. We present the design of a randomised controlled trial on cost-effectiveness of microendoscopic discectomy versus conventional open discectomy in patients with lumbar disc herniation. METHODS/DESIGN: Patients (age 18–70 years) presenting with sciatica due to lumbar disc herniation lasting more than 6–8 weeks are included. Patients with disc herniation larger than 1/3 of the spinal canal diameter, or disc herniation less than 1/3 of the spinal canal diameter with concomitant lateral recess stenosis or sequestration, are eliglible for participation. Randomisation into microendoscopic discectomy or conventional unilateral transflaval discectomy will take place in the operating room after induction of anesthesia. The length of skin incision is equal in both groups. The primary outcome measure is the functional assessment of the patient, measured by the Roland Disability Questionnaire for Sciatica, at 8 weeks and 1 year after surgery. We will also evaluate several other outcome parameters, including perceived recovery, leg and back pain, incidence of re-operations, complications, serum creatine kinase, quality of life, medical consumption, absenteeism and costs. The study is a randomised prospective multi-institutional trial, in which two surgical techniques are compared in a parallel group design. Patients and research nurses are kept blinded of the allocated treatment during the follow-up period of 2 years. DISCUSSION: Currently, open discectomy is the golden standard in the surgical treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Whether microendoscopic discectomy is more cost-effective than unilateral transflaval discectomy has to be determined by this trial

Minimally Invasive Laminectomy for Lumbar Stenosis with Case Series of Patients with Multi-level (3 or More Levels) Stenosis

Lumbar stenosis is the most common pathology seen and treated by spine surgeons. It is often seen in the elderly population who frequently have multiple medical co-morbidities. Traditional approaches remove the spinous process and detach paraspinous muscles to achieve adequate canal decompression. This approach can damage the posterior tension band leading to permanent muscle damage, scar tissue formation, iatrogenic flatback syndrome, and increase risk of adjacent segment disease requiring reoperation. Performing lumbar laminectomy in a cost-effective manner is critical in effectively treating patients with lumbar stenosis. This chapter reviews a minimally invasive muscle-sparing approach to treating lumbar stenosis. The technique is performed through a tubular retractor. Direct decompression of the spinal stenosis is achieved while preserving the paraspinous muscle attachments and spinous process. This technique has multiple advantages and can potentially reduce load stress on adjacent levels and subsequent adjacent level pathology leading to further surgical intervention. In addition, the procedure shows how facet fusion is performed using the patient’s own locally harvested drilled morselized autograph to achieve bilateral facet fusion. By fusing the facets, we have shown that restenosis at the operative level is less likely to occur. This chapter will review a case series of multilevel lumbar stenosis including clinical outcomes