Short-Term Results of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Pedicle Screw with Cortical Bone Trajectory Compared with Conventional Trajectory

STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study. PURPOSE: To evaluate clinical and radiological results of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) performed with cortical bone trajectory (CBT) pedicle screw insertion with those of TLIF using 'conventional' or percutaneous pedicle screw insertion. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: CBT is a new trajectory for pedicle screw insertion in the lumbar spine; clinical and radiological results of TLIF using pedicle screws inserted with CBT are unclear. METHODS: In total, 26 patients (11 males, 15 females) were enrolled in this retrospective study and divided into three groups: TLIF with pedicle screw insertion by conventional minimally invasive methods via the Wiltse approach (M-TLIF, n=10), TLIF with percutaneous pedicle screw insertion (P-TLIF, n=6), and TLIF with pedicle screw insertion with CBT (CBT-TLIF, n=10). Surgical results and preand postoperative radiological findings were evaluated and compared. RESULTS: Intraoperative blood loss was significantly less with CBT-TLIF (p=0.03) than with M-TLIF. Postoperative lordotic angles did not differ significantly among the three groups. Complete fusions were obtained in 10 of 12 levels (83%) with M-TLIF, in seven levels (100%) with P-TLIF, and in 10 of 11 levels (91%) with CBT-TLIF. On postoperative computed tomography, correct positioning was seen in 84.1% of M-TLIF screws, 88.5% of P-TLIF screws, and 90% of CBT-TLIF screws. CONCLUSIONS: CBT-TLIF resulted in less blood loss and a shorter operative duration than M-TLIF or P-TLIF. Postoperative rates of bone union, maintenance of lordotic angles, and accuracy of pedicle screw positions were similar among the three groups.

Seguridad y eficacia de la colocación del catéter de diálisis peritoneal aguda por punción en pacientes con síndrome urémico hemolítico asociado a diarrea / Safety and efficacy of percutaneous acute peritoneal dialysis catheter placement in patients with post-diarrheal hemolytic uremic syndrome

Introducción: La diálisis peritoneal aguda (DPA) es la modalidad dialítica preferentemente seleccionada para niños con injuria renal aguda por síndrome urémico hemolítico postdiarreico (SUH D+). Evaluamos la seguridad y eficacia de la colocación por punción percutánea del catéter de DPA con anestesia local en niños con SUH D+. Pacientes y métodos: Se revisaron las historias clínicas de todos los pacientes con SUH D+ internados entre el 1 de enero de 1998 y el 31 de diciembre de 2008 en el Hospital de Pediatría Prof. Dr. Juan P. Garrahan. La seguridad se evaluó por la presencia de eventos adversos mayores relacionados con la colocación del catéter (per foración de vísceras y/o vasos mayores abdominales, sangrado que requiera transfusión) y menores (infección del sitio de salida y peritonitis dentro de las 48 hs del procedimiento). La eficacia se evaluó a través de la colocación exitosa del catéter y su buen funcionamiento. Además se registró la necesidad de recambio luego de su uso por mal funcionamiento. Resultados: Identificamos 149 pacientes que realizaron DPA, edad de 20.2 meses (rango 2,9-111) y peso de 11,35 kg (rango 5-24.4). Recuento de plaquetas previo al procedimiento de 89000 (22000-148000) mm3. Seguridad: el único efecto adverso detectado fue el desarrollo de peritonitis en un paciente. No se registró perforación de órganos ni de vasos mayores abdominales, ni sangrado severo, ni infección del sitio de salida. Eficacia: en todos los casos el catéter fue colocado exitosamente y en 48 pacientes (32.2%) hubo que recambiarlo por mal funcionamiento. Tanto la colocación como el recambio fueron realizadas en todos los casos por el nefrólogo al pie de la cama. Conclusión: la colocación del catéter de DPA por punción es un procedimiento seguro y eficaz.

ntroduction: Acute peritoneal dialysis (DPA) is the dialytictreatment of choice for children with acute kidney injury dueto post-diarrheal hemolytic uremic syndrome (D+HUS). In thisstudy safety and efficacy of percutaneous placement of anAPD catheter under local anesthesia in children with D+HUSwas assessed. Patients and methods: We reviewed the cli-nical charts of all patients with D+HUS admitted to thePediatric Hospital Prof. Dr. Juan P. Garrahan betweenJanuary 1, 1998 and December 31, 2008. Safety was eva-luated based on the presence of major (perforation of theviscera and/or major abdominal vessels, bloody dialysaterequiring red-blood-cell transfusion) and minor (exit-siteinfection and peritonitis within 48 hs of the procedure) adverse events associated with catheter insertion. Efficacy was assessed based on successful catheter insertion and func-tioning. Additionally, the need for catheter replacement dueto malfunction was recorded. Results: We identified 149patients with a mean age of 20.2 months (range, 2.9-111)and weight of 11.35 kg (range, 5-24.4) who underwent APD.Median platelet count previous to the procedure was 89000(range, 22000-148000) mm3. Safety: The only adverse eventfound was the development of peritonitis in one patient.Organ or major vessel perforation, severe bleeds, or exit-site infection were not observed. Efficacy: In all patients the catheter was successfully inserted and in 48 patients (32.2%) the catheter had to be replaced due to malfunctioning. Both placement and replacement were performed by a nephrologist at the bedside in all cases. Conclusion: Percutaneous APD catheter insertion is a safe and efficacious procedure.