Does Minimally Invasive Hemilaminectomy for Intradural Extramedullary Tumor Resection Prevent Postlaminectomy Kyphosis or Lordosis Loss?

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive hemilaminectomy is a safe and effective alternative to open laminectomy for treating intradural extramedullary tumors. There are no reports of postoperative kyphosis after this approach. This study aims to determine whether performing minimally invasive spine surgery hemilaminectomy for intradural extramedullary tumors can prevent the development of postlaminectomy kyphosis (PLK) or lordosis loss. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty-five patients with spinal intradural extramedullary tumors who underwent minimally invasive hemilaminectomy surgery and complete pre and postoperative radiologic imaging were included. The effect of the surgical approach on the spinal sagittal axis was assessed by comparing pre- versus postoperative segmental and local Cobb angles at different spinal levels, considering anatomical localization (cervical, thoracic, lumbar, and transition segments) and functional features (mobile, semi-rigid, and transition segments), as well as the extent of the surgical approach (1, 2, or 3 levels) and follow-up. RESULTS: None of the patients had an increase in thoracic kyphosis nor a loss of cervical or lumbar lordosis greater than or equal to 10° after undergoing the minimally invasive spine surgery hemilaminectomy approach. More than 5° of increase in kyphosis was detected on 7.4% and 11.1%, for the segmental and the local angles, respectively; meanwhile, for patients with loss of lordosis, this deviation was detected in 5.3%, for both angles. The occurrence of PLK was more common than that of lordosis loss, but mainly manifested in postoperative angle impairment of less than 5°. No significant differences were evidenced, considering the approach length. CONCLUSIONS: Hemilaminectomy represents a promising approach for preventing PLK and postlaminectomy lordosis loss following intradural extramedullary tumor resection.

Understanding the Landscape of Spinal Injections: Insights and Challenges from Latin America.

INTRODUCTION: Low back pain (LBP) and neck pain (NP) are primary causes of disability, with LBP being a frequent reason for medical consultations. After conservative and pharmacological treatments, spinal injections are considered the next option. Despite multiple guidelines, spinal blocks remain controversial in terms of indication, technique, and operator, leading to considerable inter-institutional variability. The absence of regional studies in Latin America on how spinal surgeons handle spinal injections prompts the objectives of this study: to evaluate spinal surgeons' knowledge and experience, analyze techniques, and identify barriers and challenges in implementing spinal injections, including resource limitations, technology access, and training. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was performed using a questionnaire specifically designed by the authors. RESULTS: 260 spinal surgeons from Latin America participated and answered a 17-question questionnaire. 75% performed their own spinal blocks and they are willing to keep on learning new techniques on the field. The most frequent block, was the lumbar facet injection (80%). And the great majority (76%) used fluoroscopy in their practice. CONCLUSION: The study addresses a critical gap in the literature by focusing on spinal interventions in Latin America, where there is a notable lack of regional studies. The majority of the surgeons enrolled perform their own spinal injections, and they are interested in keep on learning. The findings not only contribute to the global discourse on spinal care but also offer a basis for the development of region-specific guidelines and educational initiatives.