ObjectiveTranspedicular screw fixation has some disadvantages such as postoperative back pain through wide muscle dissection, long operative time, and cephalad adjacent segmental degeneration (ASD). The purposes of this study are investigation and comparison of radiological and clinical results between interspinous fusion device (IFD) and pedicle screw.MethodsFrom Jan. 2008 to Aug. 2009, 40 patients underwent spinal fusion with IFD combined with posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). In same study period, 36 patients underwent spinal fusion with pedicle screw fixation as control group. Dynamic lateral radiographs, visual analogue scale (VAS), and Korean version of the Oswestry disability index (K-ODI) scores were evaluated in both groups.ResultsThe lumbar spine diseases in the IFD group were as followings; spinal stenosis in 26, degenerative spondylolisthesis in 12, and intervertebral disc herniation in 2. The mean follow up period was 14.24 months (range; 12 to 22 months) in the IFD group and 18.3 months (range; 12 to 28 months) in pedicle screw group. The mean VAS scores was preoperatively 7.16±2.1 and 8.03±2.3 in the IFD and pedicle screw groups, respectively, and improved postoperatively to 1.3±2.9 and 1.2±3.2 in 1-year follow ups (p<0.05). The K-ODI was decreased significantly in an equal amount in both groups one year postoperatively (p<0.05). The statistics revealed a higher incidence of ASD in pedicle screw group than the IFD group (p=0.029).ConclusionPosterior IFD has several advantages over the pedicle screw fixation in terms of skin incision, muscle dissection and short operative time and less intraoperative estimated blood loss. The IFD with PLIF may be a favorable technique to replace the pedicle screw fixation in selective case.
Resection of retroperitoneal tumors is usually perfomed using the anterior retroperitoneal approach. Our report presents an innovative method utilizing a robotic surgical system. A 50-yr-old male patient visited our hospital due to a known paravertebral mass. Magnetic resonance imaging showed a well-encapsulated mass slightly abutting the abdominal aorta and left psoas muscle at the L4-L5 level. The tumor seemed to be originated from the prevertebral sympathetic plexus or lumbosacral trunk and contained traversing vessels around the tumor capsule. A full-time robotic transperitoneal tumor resection was performed. Three trocars were used for the robotic camera and working arms. The da Vinci Surgical System® provided delicate dissection in the small space and the tumor was completely removed without damage to the surrounding organs and great vessels. This case demonstrates the feasibility of robotic resection in retroperitoneal space. Robotic surgery offered less invasiveness in contrast to conventional open surgery.
use of the da Vinci Surgical System to perform an anterior spinal procedure was shown to be safe and effective in a swine animal model. The utilization of this advanced technology shows promise to reduce the incidence of complications compared with other approaches. It requires further testing in animal models and cadavers, along with serial comparisons to current procedures.
Although retroperitoneal approach for spinal fusion has never been attempted with robotic surgical system, we could demonstrate the possibility with swine model. Further studies and development of appropriate instruments will bring minimally invasive spine surgery to a new era.
Although en bloc resection is the ideal modality for treatment of chordoma, such a procedure is often associated with a significant risk of surgical morbidity due to the tumor location. Therefore, piecemeal resection followed by postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy, including proton radiotherapy or radiosurgery, should be considered in such cases.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.