Cargando…

Biomechanical Effects of a Unilateral Approach to Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression

Minimally invasive (MI) lumbar decompression became a common approach to treat lumbar stenosis. This approach may potentially mitigate postoperative increases in segmental motion. The goal of this study was to evaluate modifications to segmental motion in the lumbar spine following a MI unilateral a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Smith, Zachary A., Vastardis, Georgios A., Carandang, Gerard, Havey, Robert M., Hannon, Sean, Dahdaleh, Nader, Voronov, Leonard I., Fessler, Richard G., Patwardhan, Avinash G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3962436/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24658010
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0092611
_version_ 1782308436920238080
author Smith, Zachary A.
Vastardis, Georgios A.
Carandang, Gerard
Havey, Robert M.
Hannon, Sean
Dahdaleh, Nader
Voronov, Leonard I.
Fessler, Richard G.
Patwardhan, Avinash G.
author_facet Smith, Zachary A.
Vastardis, Georgios A.
Carandang, Gerard
Havey, Robert M.
Hannon, Sean
Dahdaleh, Nader
Voronov, Leonard I.
Fessler, Richard G.
Patwardhan, Avinash G.
author_sort Smith, Zachary A.
collection PubMed
description Minimally invasive (MI) lumbar decompression became a common approach to treat lumbar stenosis. This approach may potentially mitigate postoperative increases in segmental motion. The goal of this study was to evaluate modifications to segmental motion in the lumbar spine following a MI unilateral approach as compared to traditional facet-sparing and non-facet sparing decompressions. Six human lumbar cadaveric specimens were used. Each specimen was tested in flexion-extension 0 N and 400 N of follower preload), axial rotation, and lateral bending. Each testing condition was evaluated following three separate interventions at L4–L5: 1) Minimally invasive decompression, 2) Facet-sparing, bilateral decompression, and 3) Bilateral decompression with a wide facetectomy. Range of motion following each testing condition was compared to intact specimens. Both MI and traditional decompression procedures create significant increases in ROM in all modes of loading. However, when compared to the MI approach, traditional decompression produces significantly larger increase in ROM in flexion-extension (p<0.005) and axial rotation (p<0.05). It additionally creates increased ROM with lateral bending on the approach side (p<0.05). Lateral bending on the non-approach side is not significantly changed. Lastly, wide medial facet removal (40% to 50%) causes significant hypermobility, especially in axial rotation. While both MI and traditional lumbar decompressions may increase post-operative ROM in all conditions, a MI approach causes significantly smaller increase in ROM. With an MI approach, increased movement with lateral bending is only toward the approach side. Further, non-facet sparing decompression is further destabilizing in all loading modes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3962436
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39624362014-03-24 Biomechanical Effects of a Unilateral Approach to Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression Smith, Zachary A. Vastardis, Georgios A. Carandang, Gerard Havey, Robert M. Hannon, Sean Dahdaleh, Nader Voronov, Leonard I. Fessler, Richard G. Patwardhan, Avinash G. PLoS One Research Article Minimally invasive (MI) lumbar decompression became a common approach to treat lumbar stenosis. This approach may potentially mitigate postoperative increases in segmental motion. The goal of this study was to evaluate modifications to segmental motion in the lumbar spine following a MI unilateral approach as compared to traditional facet-sparing and non-facet sparing decompressions. Six human lumbar cadaveric specimens were used. Each specimen was tested in flexion-extension 0 N and 400 N of follower preload), axial rotation, and lateral bending. Each testing condition was evaluated following three separate interventions at L4–L5: 1) Minimally invasive decompression, 2) Facet-sparing, bilateral decompression, and 3) Bilateral decompression with a wide facetectomy. Range of motion following each testing condition was compared to intact specimens. Both MI and traditional decompression procedures create significant increases in ROM in all modes of loading. However, when compared to the MI approach, traditional decompression produces significantly larger increase in ROM in flexion-extension (p<0.005) and axial rotation (p<0.05). It additionally creates increased ROM with lateral bending on the approach side (p<0.05). Lateral bending on the non-approach side is not significantly changed. Lastly, wide medial facet removal (40% to 50%) causes significant hypermobility, especially in axial rotation. While both MI and traditional lumbar decompressions may increase post-operative ROM in all conditions, a MI approach causes significantly smaller increase in ROM. With an MI approach, increased movement with lateral bending is only toward the approach side. Further, non-facet sparing decompression is further destabilizing in all loading modes. Public Library of Science 2014-03-21 /pmc/articles/PMC3962436/ /pubmed/24658010 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0092611 Text en © 2014 Smith et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Smith, Zachary A.
Vastardis, Georgios A.
Carandang, Gerard
Havey, Robert M.
Hannon, Sean
Dahdaleh, Nader
Voronov, Leonard I.
Fessler, Richard G.
Patwardhan, Avinash G.
Biomechanical Effects of a Unilateral Approach to Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression
title Biomechanical Effects of a Unilateral Approach to Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression
title_full Biomechanical Effects of a Unilateral Approach to Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression
title_fullStr Biomechanical Effects of a Unilateral Approach to Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression
title_full_unstemmed Biomechanical Effects of a Unilateral Approach to Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression
title_short Biomechanical Effects of a Unilateral Approach to Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression
title_sort biomechanical effects of a unilateral approach to minimally invasive lumbar decompression
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3962436/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24658010
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0092611
work_keys_str_mv AT smithzacharya biomechanicaleffectsofaunilateralapproachtominimallyinvasivelumbardecompression
AT vastardisgeorgiosa biomechanicaleffectsofaunilateralapproachtominimallyinvasivelumbardecompression
AT carandanggerard biomechanicaleffectsofaunilateralapproachtominimallyinvasivelumbardecompression
AT haveyrobertm biomechanicaleffectsofaunilateralapproachtominimallyinvasivelumbardecompression
AT hannonsean biomechanicaleffectsofaunilateralapproachtominimallyinvasivelumbardecompression
AT dahdalehnader biomechanicaleffectsofaunilateralapproachtominimallyinvasivelumbardecompression
AT voronovleonardi biomechanicaleffectsofaunilateralapproachtominimallyinvasivelumbardecompression
AT fesslerrichardg biomechanicaleffectsofaunilateralapproachtominimallyinvasivelumbardecompression
AT patwardhanavinashg biomechanicaleffectsofaunilateralapproachtominimallyinvasivelumbardecompression