Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Evaluation and Treatment of Patients With Thoracolumbar Spine Trauma: Novel Surgical Strategies.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures has traditionally involved spinal instrumentation with fusion performed with standard open surgical techniques. Novel surgical strategies, including instrumentation without fusion and percutaneous instrumentation alone, have been considered less invasive and more efficient treatments. OBJECTIVE: To review the current literature and determine the role of fusion in instrumented fixation, as well as the role of percutaneous instrumentation, in the treatment of patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures. METHODS: The task force members identified search terms/parameters and a medical librarian implemented the literature search, consistent with the literature search protocol (see Appendix I), using the National Library of Medicine PubMed database and the Cochrane Library for the period from January 1, 1946 to March 31, 2015. RESULTS: A total of 906 articles were identified and 38 were selected for full-text review. Of these articles, 12 articles met criteria for inclusion in this systematic review. CONCLUSION: There is grade A evidence for the omission of fusion in instrumented fixation for thoracolumbar burst fractures. There is grade B evidence that percutaneous instrumentation is as effective as open instrumentation for thoracolumbar burst fractures. QUESTION: Does the addition of arthrodesis to instrumented fixation improve outcomes in patients with thoracic and lumbar burst fractures? RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that in the surgical treatment of patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures, surgeons should understand that the addition of arthrodesis to instrumented stabilization has not been shown to impact clinical or radiological outcomes, and adds to increased blood loss and operative time. Strength of Recommendation: Grade A. QUESTION: How does the use of minimally invasive techniques (including percutaneous instrumentation) affect outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for thoracic and lumbar fractures compared to conventional open techniques? RECOMMENDATION: Stabilization using both open and percutaneous pedicle screws may be considered in the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures as the evidence suggests equivalent clinical outcomes. Strength of Recommendation: Grade B The full version of the guideline can be reviewed at: https://www.cns.org/guideline-chapters/congress-neurological-surgeons-systematic-review-evidence-based-guidelines/chapter_12.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Evaluation and Treatment of Patients With Thoracolumbar Spine Trauma: Timing of Surgical Intervention.

QUESTION: Does early surgical intervention improve outcomes for patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures? RECOMMENDATIONS: There is insufficient and conflicting evidence regarding the effect of timing of surgical intervention on neurological outcomes in patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures. Strength of Recommendation: Grade Insufficient It is suggested that "early" surgery be considered as an option in patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures to reduce length of stay and complications. The available literature has defined "early" surgery inconsistently, ranging from <8 h to <72 h after injury. Strength of Recommendation: Grade B The full version of the guideline can be reviewed at: https://www.cns.org/guideline-chapters/congress-neurological-surgeons-systematic-review-evidence-based-guidelines/chapter_10.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Evaluation and Treatment of Patients With Thoracolumbar Spine Trauma: Classification of Injury.

QUESTION 1: Are there classification systems for fractures of the thoracolumbar spine that have been shown to be internally valid and reliable (ie, do these instruments provide consistent information between different care providers)? RECOMMENDATION 1: A classification scheme that uses readily available clinical data (eg, computed tomography scans with or without magnetic resonance imaging) to convey injury morphology, such as Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Scale or the AO Spine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification System, should be used to improve characterization of traumatic thoracolumbar injuries and communication among treating physicians. Strength of Recommendation: Grade B. QUESTION 2: In treating patients with thoracolumbar fractures, does employing a formally tested classification system for treatment decision-making affect clinical outcomes? RECOMMENDATION 2: There is insufficient evidence to recommend a universal classification system or severity score that will readily guide treatment of all injury types and thereby affect outcomes. Strength of Recommendation: Grade Insufficient The full version of the guideline can be reviewed at: https://www.cns.org/guideline-chapters/congress-neurological-surgeons-systematic-review-evidence-based-guidelines/chapter_2.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Evaluation and Treatment of Patients With Thoracolumbar Spine Trauma: Hemodynamic Management.

QUESTION: Does the active maintenance of arterial blood pressure after injury affect clinical outcomes in patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures? RECOMMENDATIONS: There is insufficient evidence to recommend for or against the use of active maintenance of arterial blood pressure after thoracolumbar spinal cord injury. Grade of Recommendation: Grade Insufficient However, in light of published data from pooled (cervical and thoracolumbar) spinal cord injury patient populations, clinicians may choose to maintain mean arterial blood pressures >85 mm Hg in an attempt to improve neurological outcomes. Consensus Statement by the Workgroup The full version of the guideline can be reviewed at: https://www.cns.org/guideline-chapters/congress-neurological-surgeons-systematic-review-evidence-based-guidelines/chapter_6.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Evaluation and Treatment of Patients With Thoracolumbar Spine Trauma: Pharmacological Treatment.

QUESTION: Does the administration of a specific pharmacologic agent (eg, methylprednisolone) improve clinical outcomes in patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures and spinal cord injury? RECOMMENDATION: There is insufficient evidence to make a recommendation; however, the task force concluded, in light of previously published data and guidelines, that the complication profile should be carefully considered when deciding on the administration of methylprednisolone. Strength of recommendation: Grade Insufficient The full version of the guideline can be reviewed at: https://www.cns.org/guideline-chapters/congress-neurological-surgeons-systematic-review-evidence-based-guidelines/chapter_5.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Evaluation and Treatment of Patients with Thoracolumbar Spine Trauma: Executive Summary.

BACKGROUND: The thoracic and lumbar ("thoracolumbar") spine are the most commonly injured region of the spine in blunt trauma. Trauma of the thoracolumbar spine is frequently associated with spinal cord injury and other visceral and bony injuries. Prolonged pain and disability after thoracolumbar trauma present a significant burden on patients and society. OBJECTIVE: To formulate evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for the care of patients with injuries to the thoracolumbar spine. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed using the National Library of Medicine PubMed database and the Cochrane Library for studies relevant to thoracolumbar spinal injuries based on specific clinically oriented questions. Relevant publications were selected for review. RESULTS: For all of the questions posed, the literature search yielded a total of 6561 abstracts. The task force selected 804 articles for full text review, and 78 were selected for inclusion in this overall systematic review. CONCLUSION: The available evidence for the evaluation and treatment of patients with thoracolumbar spine injuries demonstrates considerable heterogeneity and highly variable degrees of quality. However, the workgroup was able to formulate a number of key recommendations to guide clinical practice. Further research is needed to counter the relative paucity of evidence that specifically pertains to patients with only thoracolumbar spine injuries. The full version of the guideline can be reviewed at: https://www.cns.org/guideline-chapters/congress-neurological-surgeons-systematic-review-evidence-based-guidelines/chapter_1.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Evaluation and Treatment of Patients With Thoracolumbar Spine Trauma: Radiological Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Radiological evaluation of traumatic thoracolumbar fractures is used to classify the injury and determine the optimal treatment plan. Currently, there remains a lack of consensus regarding appropriate radiological protocol. Most clinicians use a combination of plain radiographs, 3-dimensional computed tomography with reconstructions, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). OBJECTIVE: To determine, through evidence-based guidelines review: (1) whether the use of MRI to identify ligamentous integrity predicted the need for surgical intervention; and (2) if there are any radiological findings that can assist in predicting clinical outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed using the National Library of Medicine/PubMed database and the Cochrane Library for studies relevant to thoracolumbar trauma. Clinical studies specifically addressing the radiological evaluation of thoracolumbar spine trauma were selected for review. RESULTS: Two of 2278 studies met inclusion criteria for review. One retrospective review (Level III) and 1 prospective cohort (Level III) provided evidence that the addition of an MRI scan in acute thoracic and thoracolumbar trauma can predict the need for surgical intervention. There was insufficient evidence that MRI can help predict clinical outcomes in patients with acute traumatic thoracic and thoracolumbar spine injuries. CONCLUSION: This evidence-based guideline provides a Grade B recommendation that radiological findings in patients with acute thoracic or thoracolumbar spine trauma can predict the need for surgical intervention. This evidence-based guideline provides a grade insufficient recommendation that there is insufficient evidence to determine if radiographic findings can assist in predicting clinical outcomes in patients with acute thoracic and thoracolumbar spine injuries. QUESTION 1: Are there radiographic findings in patients with traumatic thoracolumbar fractures that can predict the need for surgical intervention? RECOMMENDATION 1: Because MRI has been shown to influence the management of up to 25% of patients with thoracolumbar fractures, providers may use MRI to assess posterior ligamentous complex integrity, when determining the need for surgery. Strength of Recommendation: Grade B. QUESTION 2: Are there radiographic findings in patients with traumatic thoracolumbar fractures that can assist in predicting clinical outcomes? RECOMMENDATION 2: Due to a paucity of published studies, there is insufficient evidence that radiographic findings can be used as predictors of clinical outcomes in thoracolumbar fractures. Strength of Recommendation: Grade Insufficient The full version of the guideline can be reviewed at: https://www.cns.org/guideline-chapters/congress-neurological-surgeons-systematic-review-evidence-based-guidelines/chapter_3.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Evaluation and Treatment of Patients with Thoracolumbar Spine Trauma: Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment.

QUESTION 1: Does the surgical treatment of burst fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine improve clinical outcomes compared to nonoperative treatment? RECOMMENDATION 1: There is conflicting evidence to recommend for or against the use of surgical intervention to improve clinical outcomes in patients with thoracolumbar burst fracture who are neurologically intact. Therefore, it is recommended that the discretion of the treating provider be used to determine if the presenting thoracic or lumbar burst fracture in the neurologically intact patient warrants surgical intervention. Strength of Recommendation: Grade Insufficient. QUESTION 2: Does the surgical treatment of nonburst fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine improve clinical outcomes compared to nonoperative treatment? RECOMMENDATION 2: There is insufficient evidence to recommend for or against the use of surgical intervention for nonburst thoracic or lumbar fractures. It is recommended that the decision to pursue surgery for such fractures be at the discretion of the treating physician. Strength of Recommendation: Grade Insufficient The full version of the guideline can be reviewed at: https://www.cns.org/guideline-chapters/congress-neurological-surgeons-systematic-review-evidence-based-guidelines/chapter_1.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Evaluation and Treatment of Patients With Thoracolumbar Spine Trauma: Prophylaxis and Treatment of Thromboembolic Events.

QUESTION 1: Does routine screening for deep venous thrombosis prevent pulmonary embolism (or venous thromboembolism (VTE)-associated morbidity and mortality) in patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures? RECOMMENDATION 1: There is insufficient evidence to recommend for or against routine screening for deep venous thrombosis in preventing pulmonary embolism (or VTE-associated morbidity and mortality) in patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures. Strength of Recommendation: Grade Insufficient. QUESTION 2: For patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures, is one regimen of VTE prophylaxis superior to others with respect to prevention of pulmonary embolism (or VTE-associated morbidity and mortality)? RECOMMENDATION 2: There is insufficient evidence to recommend a specific regimen of VTE prophylaxis to prevent pulmonary embolism (or VTE-associated morbidity and mortality) in patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures. Strength of Recommendation: Grade Insufficient. QUESTION 3: Is there a specific treatment regimen for documented VTE that provides fewer complications than other treatments in patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures? RECOMMENDATION 3: There is insufficient evidence to recommend for or against a specific treatment regimen for documented VTE that would provide fewer complications than other treatments in patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures. Strength of Recommendation: Grade Insufficient. RECOMMENDATION 4: Based on published data from pooled (cervical and thoracolumbar) spinal cord injury populations, the use of thromboprophylaxis is recommended to reduce the risk of VTE events in patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures. Consensus Statement by the Workgroup The full version of the guideline can be reviewed at: https://www.cns.org/guideline-chapters/congress-neurological-surgeons-systematic-review-evidence-based-guidelines/chapter_7.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Evaluation and Treatment of Patients With Thoracolumbar Spine Trauma: Neurological Assessment.

QUESTION 1: Which neurological assessment tools have demonstrated internal reliability and validity in the management of patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures (ie, do these instruments provide consistent information between different care providers)? RECOMMENDATION 1: Numerous neurologic assessment scales (Functional Independence Measure, Sunnybrook Cord Injury Scale and Frankel Scale for Spinal Cord Injury) have demonstrated internal reliability and validity in the management of patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures. Unfortunately, other contemporaneous measurement scales (ie, American Spinal Cord Injury Association Impairment Scale) have not been specifically studied in patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures. Strength of Recommendation: Grade C. QUESTION 2: Are there any clinical findings (eg, presenting neurological grade/function) in patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures that can assist in predicting clinical outcomes? RECOMMENDATION 2: Entry American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale grade, sacral sensation, ankle spasticity, urethral and rectal sphincter function, and AbH motor function can be used to predict neurological function and outcome in patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures (Table I https://www.cns.org/guideline-chapters/congress-neurological-surgeons-systematic-review-evidence-based-guidelines/chapter_4_table1). Strength of Recommendation: Grade B The full version of the guideline can be reviewed at: https://www.cns.org/guideline-chapters/congress-neurological-surgeons-systematic-review-evidence-based-guidelines/chapter_4.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Evaluation and Treatment of Patients With Thoracolumbar Spine Trauma: Nonoperative Care.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic and lumbar burst fractures in neurologically intact patients are considered to be inherently stable, and responsive to nonsurgical management. There is a lack of consensus regarding the optimal conservative treatment modality. The question remains whether external bracing is necessary vs mobilization without a brace after these injuries. OBJECTIVE: To determine if the use of external bracing improves outcomes compared to no brace for neurologically intact patients with thoracic or lumbar burst fractures. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed using the National Library of Medicine PubMed database and the Cochrane Library for studies relevant to thoracolumbar trauma. Clinical studies specifically comparing external bracing to no brace for neurologically intact patients with thoracic or lumbar burst fractures were selected for review. RESULTS: Three studies out of 1137 met inclusion criteria for review. One randomized controlled trial (level I) and an additional randomized controlled pilot study (level II) provided evidence that both external bracing and no brace equally improve pain and disability in neurologically intact patients with burst fractures. There was no difference in final clinical and radiographic outcomes between patients treated with an external brace vs no brace. One additional level IV retrospective study demonstrated equivalent clinical outcomes for external bracing vs no brace. CONCLUSION: This evidence-based guideline provides a grade B recommendation that management either with or without an external brace is an option given equivalent improvement in outcomes for neurologically intact patients with thoracic and lumbar burst fractures. The decision to use an external brace is at the discretion of the treating physician, as bracing is not associated with increased adverse events compared to no brace. QUESTION: Does the use of external bracing improve outcomes in the nonoperative treatment of neurologically intact patients with thoracic and lumbar burst fractures? RECOMMENDATION: The decision to use an external brace is at the discretion of the treating physician, as the nonoperative management of neurologically intact patients with thoracic and lumbar burst fractures either with or without an external brace produces equivalent improvement in outcomes. Bracing is not associated with increased adverse events compared to not bracing. Strength of Recommendation: Grade B The full version of the guideline can be reviewed at: https://www.cns.org/guideline-chapters/congress-neurological-surgeons-systematic-review-evidence-based-guidelines/chapter_8.

Congress of Neurological Surgeons Systematic Review and Evidence-Based Guidelines on the Evaluation and Treatment of Patients with Thoracolumbar Spine Trauma: Surgical Approaches.

QUESTION: Does the choice of surgical approach (anterior, posterior, or combined anterior-posterior) improve clinical outcomes in patients with thoracic and lumbar fractures? RECOMMENDATIONS: In the surgical treatment of patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures, physicians may use an anterior, posterior, or a combined approach as the selection of approach does not appear to impact clinical or neurological outcomes. Strength of Recommendation: Grade B With regard to radiologic outcomes in the surgical treatment of patients with thoracolumbar fractures, physicians may utilize an anterior, posterior, or combined approach because there is conflicting evidence in the comparison among approaches. Strength of Recommendation: Grade Insufficient With regard to complications in the surgical treatment of patients with thoracolumbar fractures, physicians may use an anterior, posterior, or combined approach because there is conflicting evidence in the comparison among approaches. Strength of Recommendation: Grade Insufficient The full version of the guideline can be reviewed at: https://www.cns.org/guideline-chapters/congress-neurological-surgeons-systematic-review-evidence-based-guidelines/chapter_11.

The technological development of minimally invasive spine surgery.

Minimally invasive spine surgery has its roots in the mid-twentieth century with a few surgeons and a few techniques, but it has now developed into a large field of progressive spinal surgery. A wide range of techniques are now called "minimally invasive," and case reports are submitted constantly with new "minimally invasive" approaches to spinal pathology. As minimally invasive spine surgery has become more mainstream over the past ten years, in this paper we discuss its history and development.

Minimally invasive thoracic microendoscopic diskectomy: surgical technique and case series.

OBJECTIVE: To present operative details and clinical follow-up of a series of patients with thoracic disk herniation treated with the minimally invasive technique of thoracic microendoscopic diskectomy (TMED). METHODS: TMED was performed in 16 consecutive patients (age range, 18-79 years old) with 18 thoracic disk herniations. One patient with a calcified herniation in a direct ventral location was not included in this series. Patients were positioned prone, and a tubular retractor system was placed through a muscle dilating approach. The procedure was performed with endoscopic visualization. Outcomes were assessed using modified McNab criteria. RESULTS: There were no complications, and no case required conversion to an open procedure. The mean operative time was 153 minutes per level, and mean blood loss was 69 mL per level. Mean hospital stay was 21 hours. At a mean follow-up of 24 months (median, 22 months), 13 patients (81%) had excellent or good outcomes, 1 patient (6%) had a fair outcome, and 2 patients (13%) had poor outcomes. The two patients with poor outcomes had neurologic diagnoses (multiple sclerosis and multiple systems atrophy) that were ultimately found to be responsible for their symptoms and deficits. CONCLUSIONS: TMED is a safe and effective minimally invasive posterolateral approach for the treatment of thoracic disk herniations that lacks the morbidity associated with traditional approaches.

Surgical site infection rates after minimally invasive spinal surgery.

OBJECT: Postoperative surgical site infections (SSIs) have been reported after 2-6% of spinal surgeries in most large series. The incidence of SSI can be < 1% after decompressive procedures and > 10% after instrumented fusions. Anecdotal evidence has suggested that there is a lower rate of SSI when minimally invasive techniques are used. METHODS: A retrospective review of prospectively collected databases of consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive spinal surgery was performed. Minimally invasive spinal surgery was defined as any spinal procedure performed through a tubular retractor system. All surgeries were performed under standard sterile conditions with preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis. The databases were reviewed for any infectious complications. Cases of SSI were identified and reviewed for clinically relevant details. The incidence of postoperative SSIs was then calculated for the entire cohort as well as for subgroups based on the type of procedure performed, and then compared with an analogous series selected from an extensive literature review. RESULTS: The authors performed 1338 minimally invasive spinal surgeries in 1274 patients of average age 55.5 years. The primary diagnosis was degenerative in nature in 93% of cases. A single minimally invasive spinal surgery procedure was undertaken in 1213 patients, 2 procedures in 58, and 3 procedures in 3 patients. The region of surgery was lumbar in 85%, cervical in 12%, and thoracic in 3%. Simple decompressive procedures comprised 78%, instrumented arthrodeses 20%, and minimally invasive intradural procedures 2% of the collected cases. Three postoperative SSIs were detected, 2 were superficial and 1 deep. The procedural rate of SSI for simple decompression was 0.10%, and for minimally invasive fusion/fixation was 0.74%. The total SSI rate for the entire group was only 0.22%. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive spinal surgery techniques may reduce postoperative wound infections as much as 10-fold compared with other large, modern series of open spinal surgery published in the literature.

Minimally invasive posterolateral thoracic corpectomy: cadaveric feasibility study and report of four clinical cases.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the feasibility of and initial clinical experience with a novel minimally invasive posterolateral thoracic corpectomy technique. METHODS: Seven procedures were performed on 6 cadavers to determine the feasibility of thoracic corpectomy using a minimally invasive approach. The posterolateral thoracic corpectomies were performed with expandable 22 mm diameter tubular retractor paramedian incisions. The posterolateral aspects of the vertebral bodies were accessed extrapleurally, and complete corpectomies were performed. Intraprocedural fluoroscopy and postoperative computed tomography were used to assess the degree of decompression. In addition, 2 clinical cases of T6 burst fracture, 1 T4-T5 plasmacytoma, and 1 T12 colon cancer metastasis were treated using this minimally invasive approach. RESULTS: In the cadaveric study, an average of 93% of the ventral canal and 80% of the corresponding vertebral body were removed. The pleura and intrathoracic contents were not violated. Adequate exposure was obtained to allow interbody grafting between the adjacent vertebral bodies. The procedures were successfully performed in the 4 clinical cases using a minimally invasive technique, and the patients demonstrated good outcomes. CONCLUSION: Based on this study, minimally invasive posterolateral thoracic corpectomy safely and successfully allows complete spinal canal decompression without the tissue disruption associated with open thoracotomy. This approach may improve the complication rates that accompany open or even thoracoscopic approaches for thoracic corpectomy and may even allow surgical intervention in patients with significant comorbidities.

Minimally invasive posterior osteotomies.

OBJECTIVE: Surgery for thoracolumbar deformity can lead to significant muscle injury, excessive blood loss, and severe postoperative pain. The aim of the following studies was to determine the feasibility of minimally invasive posterior thoracic corpectomy and thoracolumbar osteotomy techniques for deformity in human cadavers and select clinical cases. METHODS: Human cadaveric specimens were procured for thoracic corpectomy and Smith-Petersen and pedicle subtraction osteotomy using a minimally invasive approach. Post-procedural computed tomography was used to assess the degree of decompression following corpectomy and the extent of bone resection after osteotomy. Pre and post-osteotomy closure Cobb angles were measured to evaluate the degree of correction achieved. RESULTS: The minimally invasive lateral extracavitary approach for thoracic corpectomy provided adequate exposure and allowed excellent spinal canal decompression while minimizing tissue disruption. Nearly complete osteotomies of both types could be achieved through a tubular retractor with a modest change in Cobb angle. CONCLUSION: These techniques may play a role in deformity surgery for select cases with further technological advancements.

Inability to ventilate the lungs of a patient with tracheal anomaly and in prone position.

We present the case of an otherwise asymptomatic patient with a rare congenital airway abnormality of the tracheobronchial tree, who developed a complete airway obstruction after being placed in the prone position. The tracheal bronchus, accessory bronchus arising from the trachea superior to its bifurcation at the carina, was identified by fiberoptic bronchoscopic examination. An endotracheal tube can migrate into a tracheal bronchus causing pulmonary atelectasis, hypoxia, or both.

Minimally invasive far lateral microendoscopic discectomy for extraforaminal disc herniation at the lumbosacral junction: cadaveric dissection and technical case report.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Extraforaminal lumbar disc herniations (ELDHs) at the lumbosacral junction are an uncommon cause of L5 radiculopathy. The surgical anatomy of the extraforaminal space at L5-S1 is uniquely challenging for the various open surgical approaches that have been described for ELDHs in general. Reports specifically describing minimally invasive surgical approaches to lumbosacral ELDHs are lacking. PURPOSE: To report the novel use of a far lateral microendoscopic (FLMED) approach to lumbosacral ELDH. To better define the unique anatomical features of extraforaminal approaches to the lumbosacral junction as they apply to minimal access techniques. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: A cadaveric investigation and clinical case were performed at a single institution. A thorough review of the literature was conducted. PATIENT SAMPLE: A single patient with an extraforaminal disc herniation at the lumbosacral junction underwent evaluation and surgery. OUTCOME MEASURES: The patient's self-reported pain levels were documented. Physiologic outcome was judged on pre- and postoperative motor and sensory examinations. Functional capacity was assessed by work status and ability to perform activities of daily living. METHODS: FLMED was performed in two fresh human cadavers at the lumbosacral junction. Qualitative assessments of the surgical anatomy were made, and intraoperative fluoroscopy and endoscopic photographs were obtained to document the findings. A patient with refractory pain and sensorimotor deficits from compression of the L5 nerve root by an ELDH underwent FLMED. The literature was carefully reviewed for the epidemiology of ELDHs at the lumbosacral junction and the surgical techniques used to treat them. RESULTS: The posterolateral surgical corridor to the lumbosacral disc was consistently constrained by the sacral ala and to a lesser extent the lateral facet and L5 transverse process. Resection of the superior ala exposed the exiting nerve root and provided ample access to the disc. In the clinical case, the patient enjoyed immediate pain relief, was discharged in 3 hours, and returned to full work and social activities. Follow-up neurological examination revealed no sensory or motor deficit. CONCLUSIONS: FLMED offers a safe and efficacious approach to ELDHs at the lumbosacral junction by combining satisfactory visualization for adequate resection of the sacral ala with the benefits of reduced tissue injury and faster recovery times that accompany minimally invasive techniques.

Minimally invasive lumbar spinal decompression in the elderly: outcomes of 50 patients aged 75 years and older.

OBJECTIVE: Lumbar spinal stenosis and spondylosis are major causes of morbidity among the elderly. Surgical decompression is an effective treatment, but many elderly patients are not considered as candidates for surgery based on age or comorbidities. Minimally invasive surgical techniques have recently been developed and used successfully for the treatment of lumbar spinal disease. Our objective was to examine the safety and efficacy of minimally invasive lumbar spinal surgery for elderly patients. METHODS: We reviewed demographic information, pre- and postoperative Visual Analog Scale pain scores, Oswestry Disability Index scores, and Short-Form 36 scores of prospectively accrued patients who underwent minimally invasive decompression of lumbar degenerative disease at two institutions between January 2002 and December 2005. Data from patients who were at least 75 years old were selected. Statistical analysis methods included paired t test, multiple linear regression, and linear mixed effects modeling. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients with a mean age of 81 years met the study criteria (median follow-up period, 7 mo; mean follow-up period, 10 mo). No major complications or deaths occurred. Fifty patients had sufficient outcomes data for analysis. Visual Analog Scale pain scores decreased from 5.7 to 2.2 for back pain and from 5.7 to 2.3 for symptomatic leg pain (P < 0.05). Oswestry Disability Index scores decreased from 48 to 27; Short-Form 36 Body Pain and Physical Function scores also showed statistically significant improvements after surgery (P < 0.05). The longitudinal analysis demonstrated durability of the symptom relief. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive lumbar spine decompression is a safe and efficacious treatment for elderly patients with spinal stenosis and spondylosis. Elderly patients should be considered good candidates for lumbar surgical decompression using minimally invasive techniques.