The Difference in Surgical Site Infection Rates Between Open and Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery for Degenerative Lumbar Pathology: A Retrospective Single Center Experience of 1442 Cases

Mueller, Kyle; Zhao, David; Johnson, O Kenneth; Sandhu, Faheem A.; Voyadzis, Jean-Marc

doi:10.1093/ons/opy221

Cited by 43 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are several MIS tissue-sparing approaches that have been shown to lead to lower blood loss, lower transfusion rates, shorter hospital stay, less pain, lower opioid intake, faster recovery, and lower cost of care. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] Open posterior lumbar fusion allows for direct visualization of anatomic landmarks for accurate decompression and hardware placement while minimizing the risk of nerve or blood vessel damage. Such direct visualization requires extensive dissection of muscles off the posterior spinal elements all the way out to the tips of the transverse processes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single Position Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Posterior Instrumentation Utilizing Computer Navigation and Robotic Assistance: Retrospective case review and surgical technique considerations

Sinkov¹,

Lockey

Cunningham

2022

Global Spine Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Objective To determine safety and short-term outcomes of single-position lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) with bilateral posterior instrumentation and robotic assistance. The article also describes surgical technique considerations for the procedure. Methods 20 patients underwent single-position LLIF with posterior instrumentation and robotic assistance. The patients were followed for a minimum of 3 months post-operatively. Results Average operative time was 211 ± 34 minutes, average blood loss was 51.25 ± 17 cc’s, and average length of stay was 1.4 ± .75 days. There were no intraoperative complications, readmissions, revision surgeries, and no incidence of hardware malposition. Significant improvement in pain and ODI scores was noted at 3 month follow up. Conclusions The study demonstrated safety and short-term clinical efficacy of minimally invasive single-position lateral lumbar interbody fusion with bilateral posterior instrumentation utilizing robotic assistance and navigation. There are certain surgical technique considerations that must be followed to ensure optimal surgical workflow and predictable outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single Position Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Posterior Instrumentation Utilizing Computer Navigation and Robotic Assistance: Retrospective case review and surgical technique considerations

Sinkov¹,

Lockey

Cunningham

2022

Global Spine Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[28][29][30] In this study, superficial infection, deep infection and organ/space infection were not distinguished since the deep fascia tissue might not heal in the early stage after surgery. 31 Only patients who underwent surgery via the posterior approach were included because the posterior approach is the classic approach and is commonly used in spinal surgery for lumbar disc herniation, spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis. 24,32 Therefore, the impact of the results and conclusion of this study should be limited to those surgeries performed via the posterior approach.…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Diagnostic Value of Blood Next-Generation Sequencing in Early Surgical Site Infection After Spine Surgery

Zhang

Ding

2023

IJGM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To determine the diagnostic value of blood next-generation sequencing (NGS) in early surgical site infection after spine surgery. Because the blood is sterile in healthy individuals, it is expected that blood NGS is both sensitive and specific for the detection of infection. Methods: A total of 28 patients with definitive spinal surgical site infections and controls (n=30) were retrospectively included. The postoperative results of NGS and culture on different samples, such as blood and drainage fluid, were obtained and compared to evaluate the diagnostic value of blood NGS. The diagnostic value parameters (sensitivity, specificity, etc.) were calculated. Results: Among the four bacteriological exam methods, blood NGS was both sensitive and specific for the determination of infection after spine surgery. The sensitivities of blood and drainage fluid NGS were similar (0.82 vs 0.89, P=0.617). However, the specificities of the two assessments differed, which were 0.97 for blood NGS and 0.40 for drainage fluid NGS (P<0.001). The sensitivities of bacterial culture were lower than those of NGS (blood: 0.82 vs 0.25, P<0.001; drainage fluid: 0.89 vs 0.61, P<0.001), regardless of the sample type. However, the specificities of bacterial culture were equal to or higher than those of NGS (blood: 0.97 vs 0.97, P=1.000; drainage fluid: 0.40 vs 0.80, P=0.002). Conclusion:This article emphasizes the superiority of blood NGS in infection detection and bacterial determination in patients undergoing spine surgery. Compared with traditional drainage fluid bacterial culture and NGS, blood NGS was more sensitive and specific, and its extensive application could be expected.

show abstract

“…The criteria for consideration were as follows: (3) at least one clinic result or perioperative data were presented in the article; (4) the patients had degenerative disc disorders (disc herniation, canal stenosis, or spondylolisthesis); this study excludes the patient who underwent open TLIF or MIS-TLIF for other illnesses. These patients were likewise eliminated from the study [ 18 , 19 ].…”

Section: Literature Surveymentioning

confidence: 99%

Meta-Analysis of the Clinical Effect of MIS-TLF Surgery in the Treatment of Minimally Invasive Surgery of the Orthopaedic Spine

Yang

Xin

Xiao

2022

Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has already had a significant impact on surgical treatment (spine). Because they are less invasive, minimally invasive treatments are often preferred over open spine surgery. MIS and open spine surgery in terms of posterior lumbar fusion (PLF), lumbar disc herniation (LDH), and cervical disc herniation (CDH) were all observational studies based on randomized controlled trials. Seventeen RCTs and six observational studies were conducted. Chemotherapy had no effect on the long-term alleviation of the neck or arm pain in patients with CDH. In LDH, MIS was superior in terms of pain relief, rehospitalization rates, and improvement in quality of life. At the expense of increased perioperative endoscopic, readmission, and revision rates, MIS achieved a significant reduction in 2-year expenditures, fewer medical problems, and improved Oswestry score ratings. There is no evidence to support the use of MIS over open surgery for lumbar or cervical process disc herniation. In comparison, MIS-TLIF has several advantages, in addition to lower revision/readmission rates. However, MIS significantly increases the surgeon’s radiation exposure, regardless of the patient’s sign. However, the effect on patients is unknown. These findings could help patients make better decisions when comparing open spine surgery to minimally invasive spine surgery, especially given how much advertising is out there for MIS.

show abstract

The Difference in Surgical Site Infection Rates Between Open and Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery for Degenerative Lumbar Pathology: A Retrospective Single Center Experience of 1442 Cases

Cited by 43 publications

References 53 publications

Single Position Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Posterior Instrumentation Utilizing Computer Navigation and Robotic Assistance: Retrospective case review and surgical technique considerations

Single Position Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Posterior Instrumentation Utilizing Computer Navigation and Robotic Assistance: Retrospective case review and surgical technique considerations

The Diagnostic Value of Blood Next-Generation Sequencing in Early Surgical Site Infection After Spine Surgery

Meta-Analysis of the Clinical Effect of MIS-TLF Surgery in the Treatment of Minimally Invasive Surgery of the Orthopaedic Spine

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About