Search

Study Design: Prospective case series., Objective: SSPSS (single step pedicle screw system) was developed for minimally invasive spine surgery. We performed this study to report on safety, workflow, and our initial clinical experience with this novel technique., Methods: The prospective study was conducted on patients who underwent pedicle screw fixation between October 2017 and April 2018 using a novel single step 3D navigated pedicle screw system for MIS. Outcome measurements were obtained from intraoperative computerized tomography. The images were evaluated to determine pedicle wall penetration. We used a grading system to assess the severity of the pedicle wall penetration. Breaches were classified as grade 1 (<2 mm), grade 2 (2-4 mm), or grade 3 (<4 mm), 1 and as cranial, caudal, medial, and lateral., Results: Our study includes 135 screws in 24 patients. SSPSS eliminated K-wires and multiple steps traditionally necessary for MIS pedicle screw insertion. The median time per screw was 2.45 minutes. 3 screws were corrected intraoperatively. Pedicle wall penetration occurred in 14 screws (10%). Grade 1 breaches occurred in 4 screws (3%) and grade 2 breaches occurred in 10 screws (7%). Lateral breaches were observed more often than medial breaches. The accuracy rate in our study was 90% (Grade 0 breach). No revision surgeries were needed and no complications occurred., Conclusions: Our study suggests that SSPSS could be a safe, accurate, and efficient tool. Our accuracy rate is comparable to that found in the literature.

Background: Optimal management of anti-CD20-treated patients with multiple sclerosis (pwMS) is an important clinical task during the current severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic., Objectives: To characterize humoral and cellular immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations/infections in a longitudinal cohort of anti-CD20 treated ( n  = 175) and anti-CD20 therapy-naïve ( n  = 41) pwMS., Methods: Anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein immunoglobulin G (IgG) and IgA, virus neutralizing capacity, IgG avidity and SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were determined., Results: Following two SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations, not only SARS-CoV-2 spike protein IgG and IgA, but also neutralizing capacity and avidity of SARS-CoV-2 IgG were lower in anti-CD20-treated ( n  = 51) than in anti-CD20 therapy-naïve pwMS ( n  = 14) and in healthy controls (HC, n  = 19). However, in all anti-CD20-treated pwMS vaccinated twice ( n  = 26) or infected with SARS-CoV-2 ( n  = 2), in whom SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were measured, SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were detectable, at levels similar to those of twice-vaccinated anti-CD20 therapy-naïve pwMS ( n  = 7) and HC ( n  = 19). SARS-CoV-2-S1 IgG levels ( r  = 0.42, p  = 0.002), antibody avidity ( r  = 0.7, p  < 0.001), and neutralizing capacity ( r  = 0.44, p  = 0.03) increased with time between anti-CD20 infusion and second vaccination. Based on detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, SARS-CoV-2 infections occurred in 4 out of 175 (2.3%) anti-CD20-treated pwMS, all of whom recovered fully., Conclusions: These findings should inform treatment decisions and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination management in pwMS.

Innovative technology and techniques have revolutionized minimally invasive spine surgery (MIS) within the past decade. The introduction of navigation and image-guided surgery has greatly affected spinal surgery and will continue to make surgery safer and more efficient. Eventually, it is conceivable that fluoroscopy will be completely replaced with image guidance. These advancements, among others such as robotics and virtual and augmented reality technology, will continue to drive the value of 3-dimensional navigation in MIS. In this review, we cover pertinent features of navigation in MIS and explore their evolution over time. Moreover, we aim to discuss the key features germane to surgical advancement, including technique and technology development, accuracy, overall health care costs, operating room time efficiency, and radiation exposure., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: RH is a consultant for Ulrich, Brainlab, DePuy-Synthes, and has royalties from Zimmer. The other authors have no disclosures., (© The Author(s) 2020.)

Study Design: Systematic review., Objective: To date there is no consensus among surgeons as to what defines an MIS-TLIF (transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using minimally invasive spine surgery) compared to an open or mini-open TLIF. This systematic review aimed to examine the MIS-TLIF techniques reported in the recent body of literature to help provide a definition of what constitutes the MIS-TLIF, based on the consensus of the majority of surgeons., Methods: We created a database of articles published about MIS-TLIF between 2010 and 2018. We evaluated the technical components of the MIS-TLIF including instruments and incisions used as well the order in which key steps are performed., Results: We could identify several patterns for MIS-TLIF performance that seemed agreed upon by the majority of MIS surgeons: use of paramedian incisions; use of a tubular retractor to perform a total facetectomy, decompression, and interbody cage implantation; and percutaneous insertion of the pedicle-screw rod constructs with intraoperative imaging., Conclusion: Based on this review of the literature, the key features used by surgeons performing MIS TLIF include the use of nonexpandable or expandable tubular retractors, a paramedian or lateral incision, and the use of a microscope or endoscope for visualization. Approaches using expandable nontubular retractors, those that require extensive subperiosteal dissection from the midline laterally, or specular-based retractors with wide pedicle to pedicle exposure are far less likely to be promoted as an MIS-based approach. A definition is necessary to improve the communication among spine surgeons in research as well as patient education., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: RH has received funding from AOSpine, Brainlab, DePuy Synthes, Lanx, and the Carol and Grace Hansen Spinal Research Foundation. The other authors have no personal, financial, or institutional interest in any of the drugs, materials, or devices described in this article., (© The Author(s) 2019.)

Background: In patients with symptomatic lumbar stenosis undergoing lateral transpsoas approach for lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) surgery, it is not always clear when indirect decompression is sufficient in order to achieve symptom resolution. Indirect decompression failure (IDF), defined as "postoperative persistent symptoms of nerve compression with or without a second direct decompression surgery to reach adequate symptom resolution," is not widely reported. This information, however, is critical to better understand the indications, the potential, and the limitations of indirect decompression., Objective: The purpose of this study was to systematically review the current literature on IDF after LLIF., Methods: A literature search was performed on PubMed. We included randomized controlled trials and prospective, retrospective, case-control studies, and case reports. Information on sample size, demographics, procedure, number and location of involved levels, follow-up time, and complications were extracted., Results: After applying the exclusion criteria, we included 9 of the 268 screened articles that reported failure. A total of 632 patients were screened in these articles and detailed information was provided. Average follow-up time was 21 months. Overall reported incidence of IDF was 9%., Conclusion: Failures of decompression via LLIF are inconsistently reported and the incidence is approximately 9%. IDF failure in LLIF may be underreported or misinterpreted as a complication. We propose to include the term "IDF" as described in this article to differentiate them from complications for future studies. A better understanding of why IDF occurs will allow surgeons to better plan surgical intervention and will avoid revision surgery., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Roger Härtl is a consultant for Ulrich, Brainlab, DePuy-Synthes, and he has royalties from Zimmer. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (© The Author(s) 2019.)

The purpose of this review is to describe how a curriculum for minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) was developed and implemented. The authors discuss the curriculum roadmap, its target audience, and the educational process for teaching general skills and specific procedures in MISS. Initiated by AOSpine, a panel of experts within spinal surgery from multiple centers formed the minimally invasive spine surgery task force. Together, task force members redefined the standards and milestones of the MISS education and training. Therefore, we conclude that the MISS task force created a structured curriculum which will have a positive influence on daily practice for surgeons and patients worldwide., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: RH has received funding from AOSpine, Brainlab, DePuy Synthes, Lanx., (© The Author(s) 2020.)

Study Design: Case studies., Objectives: To demonstrate that muscle generated pain (MGP) may be a cause of pain in patients who have undergone minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS)., Methods: A physical examination including electrical stimulation of putative pain generating muscles to identify the presence of lowered thresholds for depolarization of muscle nociceptors, and an examination of strength and flexibility of key muscles in the upper and lower body, may identify multiple etiologies of MGP. Treatment of identified muscles consisted of muscle/tendon injections to identified sensitized muscles followed by exercises incorporating relaxation limbering and stretching., Results: Postsurgical pain was eliminated and mobility restored in both presented cases replicating success in prior published studies., Conclusions: Understanding the pathophysiological mechanisms of muscle pain may facilitate the evaluation and treatment of MGP in MISS patients diagnosed with failed back surgery syndrome., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2019.)

Study Design: Technical note, retrospective case series., Objective: Lumbar stenosis can be effectively treated using tubular unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD). For multilevel stenosis, a multilevel ULBD through separate, alternating crossover approaches has been described as the "slalom technique." To increase efficacy, we introduced this approach with 2 microscopes simultaneously., Methods: We collected data on 13 patients, with multilevel lumbar stenosis, operated at our institution between 2015 and 2016 by the aforementioned technique. We assessed surgical time (ST), estimated blood loss (EBL), complications, and revision surgeries. Furthermore, we provide a stepwise instruction for performing the tandem microscopic slalom technique in a safe and efficient manner., Results: The mean age of the patients was 68 ± 8 years. The ST per level was 68 ± 19 minutes with an EBL per level of 39 ± 30 mL. We had no intraoperative complications and none of our patients required a revision surgery during a mean follow-up of 12 months., Conclusions: We have shown that this technique is feasible and can be performed safely for multisegmental lumbar spinal stenosis with minimal tissue trauma and low EBL. Furthermore, randomized controlled studies with a larger sample size may be necessary to drive any final conclusions., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Roger Härtl receives consultant fees from DePuy Synthes, Brainlab, and Ulrich and royalties from Zimmer Biomet., (© The Author(s) 2019.)