Fig. 30.1
(a) A 4-cm skin incision (solid arrow) is made in the lateral abdominal region along the fibers of the external oblique muscle. The level of the L4–L5 disk (dotted arrow) was located using the C-arm. (b) External oblique, internal oblique, and transverse abdominal muscles are dissected along the direction of their fibers. (c) The intervertebral disk is exposed using handheld retractors and Steinman pins. (d) Skin closure
Up to three disks can be approached using the same 4-cm incision through a “sliding window” technique without the need to extend the incision, by taking advantage of the mobility of the abdominal wall. The described minimally invasive technique is well suited for exposure of L2–L3 to L4–L5 disks, but rarely, L1–L2 and L5–S1 disks can also be exposed. Exposure of L1–L2 disk is limited by the chest cage and can be performed only in the presence of relatively horizontal and mobile floating ribs. As for L5–S1 disk, its access is limited by the iliac wing and by the need to mobilize iliac vessels.
After diskectomy (Fig. 30.2a), vertebral endplates are prepared in order to expose the subchondral bone. The cage is filled with bone graft and/or substitute (Fig. 30.2b) and inserted in a press-fit fashion into the exposed disk spaces that remained open after the posterior procedure (Fig. 30.2c). If required, autogenous iliac graft can also be harvested from the same incision. Abdominal muscle planes are closed sequentially and the skin is closed using subcutaneous and subcuticular sutures (Fig. 30.1d). Although the procedures were performed without magnifying loupes or surgical microscope, it can be used for improved vision. In addition, a headlight or better a small light inserted in the wound by the retractors can be useful especially in deepest or overweight patients.
Fig. 30.2
(a) Exposure of disk space. (b) Filling of banana-shaped PEEK cage using bone substitute. (c) Cage inserted into exposed disk space after endplate preparation
30.3 Results
Here are described main results about the first 179 patients of our series [15].
The main results and main complications are still the same, even if we reach the top of the learning curve.
Patients were aged 54.1 ± 10.6 years (range: 14.9–77.4). There were 148 females and 31 males aged 54.5 ± 11.0 years (range: 14.9–77.4) and 52.2 ± 8.7 years (range: 27.2–67.7), respectively. There were 118 primary cases and 61 revision cases. There were few occurrences of revision after previous anterior approach. Diagnosis at time of surgery is shown in Table 30.1. Weight and BMI were, respectively, 67.1 ± 14.5 kg (range: 35–116) and 24.8 ± 4.1 kg/m2 (range: 15.6–38.6).
Table 30.1
Diagnosis at time of surgery
Diagnosis | Number of patients |
---|---|
Primary surgery | |
Spinal deformity | 65 |
Spondylolisthesis | 32 |
Degenerative disk disease/facet arthrosis | 19 |
Post-traumatic kyphosis | 2 |
Revision surgery | |
Pseudarthrosis | 18 |
Adjacent segment disease | 18 |
Spinal deformity or imbalance | 13 |
Spinal stenosis/post-laminectomy syndrome | 10 |
Spondylolisthesis | 2 |
Four patients with scoliosis and one patient with L4–L5 degenerative spondylolisthesis had a right-sided approach.
Details of the levels approached with the respective operative blood loss, operative time, and length of hospital stay are provided in Table 30.2. The procedure was performed at L1–L2 in 4, L2–L3 in 54, L3–L4 in 120, L4–L5 in 134, and L5–S1 in 6 patients.
Table 30.2
Levels approached with respective operative blood loss, operative time, and length of hospital stay
Approach | Number of patients | Operative blood loss (ml) | Operative time (min) | Length of hospital stay (days) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Single-level | 55 | 53.9 ± 78.3 | 42.4 ± 16.8 | 6.5 ± 2.3 |
L1–L2 | 1 | 150 | 50 | 4 |
L2–L3 | 5 | 60.0 ± 82.2 | 44.0 ± 17.1 | 8.2 ± 1.9 |
L3–L4 | 7 | 41.4 ± 35.2 | 37.9 ± 16.0 | 6.1 ± 2.6 |
L4–L5 | 43 | 53.0 ± 83.5 | 42.7 ± 17.4 | 6.4 ± 2.3 |
Two-level | 108 | 124.1 ± 319.1 | 57.4 ± 14.8 | 7.5 ± 4.0 |
L1–L3 | 2 | 200.0 ± 212.1 | 67.5 ± 10.6 | 12.5 ± 2.1 |
L2–L4 | 29 | 104.5 ± 104.5 | 58.3 ± 14.9 | 7.9 ± 4.0 |
L2–L3, L4–L5 | 2 | 500.0 ± 707.1 | 72.5 ± 17.7 | 4.0 ± 1.4 |
L3–L5 | 68 | 123.6 ± 378.6 | 55.7 ± 15.0 | 7.2 ± 4.0 |
L4–S1 | 6 | 75.0 ± 61.2 | 63.2 ± 10.1 | 8.0 ± 3.5 |
Three-level | 16 | 93.8 ± 106.3 | 70.3 ± 26.4 | 6.7 ± 3.4 |
L1–L4 | 1 | 200 | 75 | 16 |
L2–L5 | 15 | 86.7 ± 106.0 | 70.0 ± 27.3 | 6.1 ± 2.3 |
The procedure was done at a single level for 31 %, two levels for 60 %, and three levels for 9 % of patients. Figure 30.3 shows radiographs of a patient with three-level OLIF at L2–L5, while Fig. 30.4 shows two different patients with L1–L3 and L4–S1 OLIF, demonstrating the potential use of the described technique for approaching L1–L2 and L5–S1 levels, respectively.
Fig. 30.3
Preoperative (a, b) and postoperative (c, d) radiographs of a 45-year-old female with degenerative scoliosis undergoing three-level OLIF, showing the presence of radiopaque markers of the interbody cages from L2 to L5 (full arrows)
Fig. 30.4
Postoperative radiographs of two different patients undergoing OLIF at L1–L3 (a, b) and L4–S1 (c, d)
In three patients of this series, and very few of all the patients treated, the procedure was aborted for one level mainly due to the too narrow disk space and sometimes due to an iliolumbar vein too important in regard to the disk L4–L5 whose mobilization would be too risky. Sometimes, approaching L2–L3 level was not possible due to a prominent rib cage, and only L3–L5 OLIF was performed.
Operative blood loss was 99.5 ± 254.0 ml for all patients, averaging 56.8 ± 131.3 ml per level. It was lowest for single-level approaches (53.9 ± 78.3 ml) and highest for two-level approaches (124.1 ± 319.1). In 98 % of cases, operative blood loss was 400 ml or less.
As for operative time, it was 53.8 ± 18.7 min for all patients with an average of 32.5 ± 13.2 min per level. It was lowest for single-level surgery (42.4 ± 16.8 min), increasing to 57.4 ± 14.8 min for two-level and 70.3 ± 26.4 min for three-level approaches. The length of hospital stay was 7.1 ± 3.5 days for all patients. It was similar for patients undergoing single-level (6.5 ± 2.3 days), two-level (7.5 ± 4.0 days), and three-level (6.7 ± 3.4 days) procedures. However, some patients had to stay longer at the hospital while waiting for transfer in a rehabilitation center. Now, this length of hospital stay has decreased to 4–5 days. Maybe the length of stay could be less, but due to our health system policy, patient must stay four nights in the hospital.