Cargando…
Comparison Perioperative Factors During Minimally Invasive Pre-Psoas Lateral Interbody Fusion of the Lumbar Spine Using Either Navigation or Conventional Fluoroscopy
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective clinical study. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare intraoperative conditions and clinical results of patients undergoing pre-psoas oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) using navigation or conventional fluoroscopy (C-ARM) techniques. METHODS: Forty-two pat...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5624381/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28989845 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568217716149 |
_version_ | 1783268235297161216 |
---|---|
author | Zhang, Yue-Hui White, Ian Potts, Eric Mobasser, Jean-Pierre Chou, Dean |
author_facet | Zhang, Yue-Hui White, Ian Potts, Eric Mobasser, Jean-Pierre Chou, Dean |
author_sort | Zhang, Yue-Hui |
collection | PubMed |
description | STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective clinical study. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare intraoperative conditions and clinical results of patients undergoing pre-psoas oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) using navigation or conventional fluoroscopy (C-ARM) techniques. METHODS: Forty-two patients (22 patients by navigation and 20 by fluoroscopy) underwent the OLIF procedure at 2 medical centers, and records were reviewed. Clinical data was collected and compared between the 2 groups. Patients were followed-up with a range of 6 to 24 months. RESULTS: There were no significant differences on demographic data between groups. The navigation group had zero radiation exposure (RE) to the surgeon and radiation time compared to the C-ARM group, with total RE of 44.59 ± 26.65 mGy and radiation time of 88.30 ± 58.28 seconds (P < .05). The RE to the patient was significantly lower in the O-ARM group (9.38 mGy) compared to the C-ARM group (44.59 ± 26.65 mGy). Operating room time was slightly longer in the navigation group (2.49 ± 1.35 hours) compared to the C-ARM group (2.30 ± 1.17 hours; P > .05), although not statistically significant. No differences were found in estimated blood loss, length of hospitalization, surgery-related complications, and outcome scores with an average of 8-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with C-ARM techniques, using navigation can eliminate RE to surgeon and decrease RE to the patient, and it had no significant effect on operating time, estimated blood loss, length of hospitalization, or perioperative complications in the patients with OLIF procedure. This study shows that navigation is a safe alternative to fluoroscopy during the OLIF procedure in the treatment of degenerative lumbar conditions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5624381 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56243812017-10-06 Comparison Perioperative Factors During Minimally Invasive Pre-Psoas Lateral Interbody Fusion of the Lumbar Spine Using Either Navigation or Conventional Fluoroscopy Zhang, Yue-Hui White, Ian Potts, Eric Mobasser, Jean-Pierre Chou, Dean Global Spine J Original Articles STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective clinical study. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare intraoperative conditions and clinical results of patients undergoing pre-psoas oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) using navigation or conventional fluoroscopy (C-ARM) techniques. METHODS: Forty-two patients (22 patients by navigation and 20 by fluoroscopy) underwent the OLIF procedure at 2 medical centers, and records were reviewed. Clinical data was collected and compared between the 2 groups. Patients were followed-up with a range of 6 to 24 months. RESULTS: There were no significant differences on demographic data between groups. The navigation group had zero radiation exposure (RE) to the surgeon and radiation time compared to the C-ARM group, with total RE of 44.59 ± 26.65 mGy and radiation time of 88.30 ± 58.28 seconds (P < .05). The RE to the patient was significantly lower in the O-ARM group (9.38 mGy) compared to the C-ARM group (44.59 ± 26.65 mGy). Operating room time was slightly longer in the navigation group (2.49 ± 1.35 hours) compared to the C-ARM group (2.30 ± 1.17 hours; P > .05), although not statistically significant. No differences were found in estimated blood loss, length of hospitalization, surgery-related complications, and outcome scores with an average of 8-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with C-ARM techniques, using navigation can eliminate RE to surgeon and decrease RE to the patient, and it had no significant effect on operating time, estimated blood loss, length of hospitalization, or perioperative complications in the patients with OLIF procedure. This study shows that navigation is a safe alternative to fluoroscopy during the OLIF procedure in the treatment of degenerative lumbar conditions. SAGE Publications 2017-07-28 2017-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5624381/ /pubmed/28989845 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568217716149 Text en © The Author(s) 2017 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Zhang, Yue-Hui White, Ian Potts, Eric Mobasser, Jean-Pierre Chou, Dean Comparison Perioperative Factors During Minimally Invasive Pre-Psoas Lateral Interbody Fusion of the Lumbar Spine Using Either Navigation or Conventional Fluoroscopy |
title | Comparison Perioperative Factors During Minimally Invasive Pre-Psoas Lateral Interbody Fusion of the Lumbar Spine Using Either Navigation or Conventional Fluoroscopy |
title_full | Comparison Perioperative Factors During Minimally Invasive Pre-Psoas Lateral Interbody Fusion of the Lumbar Spine Using Either Navigation or Conventional Fluoroscopy |
title_fullStr | Comparison Perioperative Factors During Minimally Invasive Pre-Psoas Lateral Interbody Fusion of the Lumbar Spine Using Either Navigation or Conventional Fluoroscopy |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison Perioperative Factors During Minimally Invasive Pre-Psoas Lateral Interbody Fusion of the Lumbar Spine Using Either Navigation or Conventional Fluoroscopy |
title_short | Comparison Perioperative Factors During Minimally Invasive Pre-Psoas Lateral Interbody Fusion of the Lumbar Spine Using Either Navigation or Conventional Fluoroscopy |
title_sort | comparison perioperative factors during minimally invasive pre-psoas lateral interbody fusion of the lumbar spine using either navigation or conventional fluoroscopy |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5624381/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28989845 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568217716149 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhangyuehui comparisonperioperativefactorsduringminimallyinvasiveprepsoaslateralinterbodyfusionofthelumbarspineusingeithernavigationorconventionalfluoroscopy AT whiteian comparisonperioperativefactorsduringminimallyinvasiveprepsoaslateralinterbodyfusionofthelumbarspineusingeithernavigationorconventionalfluoroscopy AT pottseric comparisonperioperativefactorsduringminimallyinvasiveprepsoaslateralinterbodyfusionofthelumbarspineusingeithernavigationorconventionalfluoroscopy AT mobasserjeanpierre comparisonperioperativefactorsduringminimallyinvasiveprepsoaslateralinterbodyfusionofthelumbarspineusingeithernavigationorconventionalfluoroscopy AT choudean comparisonperioperativefactorsduringminimallyinvasiveprepsoaslateralinterbodyfusionofthelumbarspineusingeithernavigationorconventionalfluoroscopy |