Abstract
Surgery of spinal pathology should include: high cure rates, possibility of simply intervening on patients already treated, low recurrence rate, absence of contraindications, minimal side effects, no complications in the short, medium and long term, no acute or chronic toxicity, absence of requiring long hospitalization, short convalescence, maximum conservativity of spinal biomechanics in treated district, reduction of the need of post-operative use of orthopedic devices (busts, corsets etc.), low cost.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Antonacci MD, Eismont FJ (2001) Neurologic complications after lumbar spine surgery. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 9:137–145
Young PM, Berquist TH, Bancroft LW et al (2007) Complications of spinal instrumentation. Radiographics 27:775–789
Murtagh RD, Quencer RM, Castellvi AE et al (2011) New techniques in lumbar spinal instrumentation: what the radiologist needs to know. Radiology 260:317–330
Rutherford EE, Tarplett LJ, Davies EM et al (2007) Lumbar spine fusion and stabilization: hardware, techniques, and imaging appearances. Radiographics 27:1737–1749
Annertz M, Jonsson B, Stromqvist B et al (1995) Serial MRI in the early postoperative period after lumbar discectomy. Neuroradiology 37:177
Gallucci M, Caulo M, Masciocchi C (2001) il Rachide operato. In Compendio di Risonanza magnetica a cura di Dal Pozzo G, Utet Ed, pp 1047–1071
Arts M, Brand R, van der Kallen B et al (2011) Does minimally invasive lumbar disc surgery result in less muscle injury than conventional surgery? A randomized controlled trial. Eur Spine J 20:51–57
Bilsky HM (2000) Transpedicular approach for thoracic disk herniations. Neurosurg Focus 9:E3
Celestre PC, Pazmiño PR, Mikhael MM et al (2012) Minimally invasive approaches to the cervical spine. Orthop Clin North Am 43:137–147
Hirano Y, Mizuno J, Takeda M et al (2012) Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy: early clinical experience. Neurol Med Chir 52:625–630
Jho HD (1999) Endoscopic transpedicular thoracic discectomy. J Neurosurgery Spine 91:151–156
Davis AR (1994) A long-term outcome analysis of 984 surgically treated herniated lumbar discs. J Neurosurg 80:415–421
Hauger O, Obeid I, Pelé E (2010) Imaging of the fused spine. J Radiol 91:1035–1048
Hunter TB, Yoshino MT, Dzioba RB et al (2004) Medical devices oh the head, neck and spine. Radiographics 24:257–285
Nakashima H, Yukawa Y, Ito K et al (2011) Posterior approach for cervical fracture-dislocations with traumatic disc herniation. Eur Spine J 20:387–394
Lee CK (1993) Accelerated degeneration of the segment adjacent to a lumbar fusion. Spine 18:2106–2117
Lee CS, Hwang CJ, Lee SW et al (2009) Risk factors for adjacent segment disease after lumbar fusion. Eur Spine J 18:1637–1643
Stoll TM, Dubois G, Schwarzenbach O et al (2002) The dynamic neutralization system for the spine: a multicenter study of a novel non-fusion system. Eur Spine 11:S170–S178
van den Erenbeemt KD, Ostelo RW, van Royen BJ et al (2010) Total disc replacement surgery for symptomatic degenerative lumbar disc disease: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Spine J 19:1262–1280
Murtagh RD, Quencer RM, Cohen DS et al (2009) Normal and abnormal imaging findings in lumbar total disk replacement: devices and complications. Radiographics 29:105–118
Lindsey DP, Swanson KE, Fuchs P et al (2003) The effects of an interspinous implant on the kinematics of the instrumented and adjacent levels in the lumbar spine. Spine 28:2192–2197
Sobottke R, Schlüter-Brust K, Kaulhausen T et al (2009) Interspinous implants (X Stop, Wallis, Diam) for the treatment of LSS: is there a correlation between radiological parameters and clinical outcome? Eur Spine J 18:1494–1503
Wilke HJ, Drumm J, Häussler K et al (2008) Biomechanical effect of different lumbar interspinous implants on flexibility and intradiscal pressure. Eur Spine J 17:1049–1056
Zucherman JF, Hsu KY, Hartjien CA et al (2005) A multicenter, prospective, randomized trial evaluating the X stop interspinous process decompression system for treatment of neurogenic intermittent claudicatio: two-year follow-up results. Spine 30:1351–1358
Senegas J (2002) Mechanical supplementation by non-rigid fixation in degenerative intervertebral lumbar segment: the Wallis system. Eur Spine J 11:S164–S169
Guizzardi G, Petrini P, Fabrizi AP (2005) The use of DIAM (interspinous stress-breaker device) in the DDD: Italian multicenter clinical experience. Spinal Arthroplasty Society, New York
Eif M, Schenke H (2005) The interspinous-U: Indications, experience, and results. Spinal Arthroplasty Society, New York
Chacko AG, Joseph M, Turel MK et al (2012) Multilevel oblique corpectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy preserves segmental motion. Eur Spine J 21:1360–1367
Hernandez R, Neroni M, Fiore C et al (2001) Cervical arthrodesis with interbody fusion titanium cages for cervical degenerative disease. Acta Medica Romana 39:383–394
Kim K, Isu T, Morimoto D et al (2012) Cervical anterior fusion with the Williams-Isu method: clinical review. J Nippon Med Sch 79:37–45
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag Italia
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Scarabino, T., Brandini, V., Santoro, M., Mignini, R. (2014). Surgery. In: Scarabino, T., Pollice, S. (eds) Imaging Spine After Treatment. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-5391-5_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-5391-5_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Milano
Print ISBN: 978-88-470-5390-8
Online ISBN: 978-88-470-5391-5
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)