Advertisement

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

, Volume 470, Issue 6, pp 1621–1632 | Cite as

Complications of the Lateral Transpsoas Approach for Lumbar Interbody Arthrodesis: A Case Series and Literature Review

  • D’Mitri A. SofianosEmail author
  • Michael R. Briseño
  • Joshua Abrams
  • Alpesh A. Patel
Symposium: Complications of Spine Surgery

Abstract

Background

The lateral transpsoas approach to the lumbar spine was developed to eliminate the need for an anterior-approach surgeon and retraction of the great vessels and has the potential for shorter operative times. However, the reported complications associated with this approach vary.

Questions/purposes

We identified the incidence of complications associated with the lateral transpsoas approach to the lumbar spine.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 45 patients who underwent a lateral transpsoas approach to the spine for various diagnoses between January 1, 2006, and October 31, 2010. The patients’ average age was 63.3 years. Sixteen (35.6%) patients had prior lumbar spinal surgery. Twenty-one patients (46.7%) underwent supplemental posterior instrumentation. Minimum followup was 0 months (mean, 11 months; range, 0–34 months).

Results

Eighteen of the 45 patients (40%) had complications: 10 (22.2%) developed postoperative iliopsoas weakness, three had quadriceps weakness, and one experienced foot drop. Eight patients (17.8%) developed anterior thigh hypoesthesia, which did not fully resolve in seven of the eight patients at an average of 9 months’ followup. Three patients had postoperative radiculopathies, one a durotomy, and one died postoperatively from a pulmonary embolism.

Conclusions

We found a 40% incidence of complications and a nontrivial frequency and severity of postoperative weakness, numbness, and radicular pain in patients who underwent a lateral transpsoas approach to the spine. Given the expanding use of the approach, a thorough understanding of the risks associated with it is essential for patient education, medical decision making, and identifying methods of reducing such complications.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Keywords

Interbody Fusion Visual Analog Pain Scale Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Anterior Lumber Interbody Fusion Quadriceps Weakness 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Baker JK, Reardon PR, Reardon MJ, Heggeness MH. Vascular injury in anterior lumbar surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993;18:2227–2230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Benglis DM, Elhammady MS, Levi AD, Vanni S. Minimally invasive anterolateral approaches for the treatment of back pain and adult degenerative deformity. Neurosurgery. 2008;63(3 Suppl):191–196.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bergey DL, Villavicencio AT, Goldstein T, Regan JJ. Endoscopic lateral transpsoas approach to the lumbar spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004;29:1681–1688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brau SA, Delamarter RB, Schiffman ML, Williams LA, Watkins RG. Vascular injury during anterior lumbar surgery. Spine J. 2004;4:409–412.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cho KJ, Suk SI, Park SR, Kim JH, Kim SS, Choi WK, Lee KY, Lee SR. Complications in posterior fusion and instrumentation for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32:2232–2237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Czerwein J, Thakur N, Migliori S, Lucas P, Palumbo M. Complications of anterior lumbar surgery. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2011;19:251–258.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dakwar E, Cardona RF, Smith DA, Uribe JS. Early outcomes and safety of the minimally invasive, lateral retroperitoneal transpsoas approach for adult degenerative scoliosis. Neurosurg Focus. 2010;28:E8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dhall SS, Wang MY, Mummaneni PV. Clinical and radiographic comparison of mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in 42 patients with long-term followup. J Neurosurg Spine. 2008;9:560–565.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    DiPaola CP, Molinari RW. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2008;16:130–139.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fantini GA, Pappou IP, Girardi FP, Sandhu HS, Cammisa FP Jr. Major vascular injury during anterior lumbar spinal surgery: incidence, risk factors, and management. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32:2751–2758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Flynn JC, Price CT. Sexual complications of anterior fusion of the lumbar spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1984;9:489–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Isaacs R, Hyde J, Goodrich J, Rodgers W, Phillips F. A prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter evaluation of extreme lateral interbody fusion for the treatment of adult degenerative scoliosis: perioperative outcomes Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:S322–S330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Karikari IO, Nimjee SM, Hardin CA, Hughes BD, Hodges TR, Mehta AI, Choi J, Brown CR, Isaacs RE. Extreme lateral interbody fusion approach for isolated thoracic and thoracolumbar spine diseases: initial clinical experience and early outcomes. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2011;24:368–375.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kepler CK, Sharma AK, Huang RC. Lateral transpsoas interbody fusion (LTIF) with plate fixation and unilateral pedicle screws: a preliminary report. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2011;24:363–367.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Knight RQ, Schwaegler P, Hanscom D, Roh J. Direct lateral lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative conditions: early complication profile. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2009;22:34–37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ozgur B, Agarwal V, Nail E, Pimenta L. Two-year clinical and radiographic success of minimally invasive lateral transpsoas approach for the treatment of degenerative lumbar conditions. SAS J. 2010;4:41–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ozgur BM, Aryan HE, Pimenta L, Taylor WR. Extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF): a novel surgical technique for anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J. 2006;6:435–443.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Park P, Foley KT. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with reduction of spondylolisthesis: technique and outcomes after a minimum of 2 years’ follow-up. Neurosurg Focus. 2008;25:E16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pimenta L. Lateral endoscopic transpsoas retroperitoneal approach for lumbar spine surgery. Paper presented at the VIII Brazilian Spine Society Meeting. May 2001. Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pimenta L, Oliveira L, Schaffa T, Coutinho E, Marchi L. Lumbar total disc replacement from an extreme lateral approach: clinical experience with a minimum of 2 years’ follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine. 2011;14:38–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rajaraman V, Vingan R, Roth P, Heary RF, Conklin L, Jacobs GB. Visceral and vascular complications resulting from anterior lumbar interbody fusion. J Neurosurg. 1999;91(1 Suppl):60–64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Regev GJ, Chen L, Dhawan M, Lee YP, Garfin SR, Kim CW. Morphometric analysis of the ventral nerve roots and retroperitoneal vessels with respect to the minimally invasive lateral approach in normal and deformed spines. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34:1330–1335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Riedel CJ. Open anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Clin Neurosurg. 2000;47:534–540.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rihn JA, Patel R, Makda J, Hong J, Anderson DG, Vaccaro AR, Hilibrand AS, Albert TJ. Complications associated with single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J. 2009;9:623–629.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rodgers WB, Cox CS, Gerber EJ. Experience and early results with a minimally invasive technique for anterior column support through extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF®). US Musculoskel Rev. 2007;2:28–32.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rodgers WB, Cox CS, Gerber EJ. Early complications of extreme lateral interbody fusion in the obese. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2010;23:393–397.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rodgers WB, Gerber EJ, Patterson J. Intraoperative and early postoperative complications in extreme lateral interbody fusion: an analysis of 600 cases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36:26–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Santillan A, Patsalides A, Gobin YP. Endovascular embolization of iatrogenic lumbar artery pseudoaneurysm following extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF). Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2010;44:601–603.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sasso RC, Best NM, Mummaneni PV, Reilly TM, Hussain SM. Analysis of operative complications in a series of 471 anterior lumbar interbody fusion procedures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005;30:670–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sasso RC, Kenneth Burkus J, LeHuec JC. Retrograde ejaculation after anterior lumbar interbody fusion: transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal exposure. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28:1023–1026.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Scaduto AA, Gamradt SC, Yu WD, Huang J, Delamarter RB, Wang JC. Perioperative complications of threaded cylindrical lumbar interbody fusion devices: anterior versus posterior approach. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2003;16:502–507.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sharma AK, Kepler CK, Girardi FP, Cammisa FP, Huang RC, Sama AA. Lateral lumbar interbody fusion: clinical and radiographic outcomes at 1 year: a preliminary report. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2011;24:242–250.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tohmeh AG, Rodgers WB, Peterson MD. Dynamically evoked, discrete-threshold electromyography in the extreme lateral interbody fusion approach. J Neurosurg Spine. 2011;14:31–37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tormenti MJ, Maserati MB, Bonfield CM, Okonkwo DO, Kanter AS. Complications and radiographic correction in adult scoliosis following combined transpsoas extreme lateral interbody fusion and posterior pedicle screw instrumentation. Neurosurg Focus. 2010;28:E7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Villavicencio AT, Burneikiene S, Bulsara KR, Thramann JJ. Perioperative complications in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus anterior-posterior reconstruction for lumbar disc degeneration and instability. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2006;19:92–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wang MY, Mummaneni PV. Minimally invasive surgery for thoracolumbar spinal deformity: initial clinical experience with clinical and radiographic outcomes. Neurosurg Focus. 2010;28:E9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    White AP, Vaccaro AR, Zdeblick T. Counterpoint: physician-industry relationships can be ethically established, and conflicts of interest can be ethically managed. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32(11 Suppl):S53–S57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • D’Mitri A. Sofianos
    • 1
    Email author
  • Michael R. Briseño
    • 2
  • Joshua Abrams
    • 2
  • Alpesh A. Patel
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of OrthopaedicsUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUSA
  2. 2.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryStanford UniversityPalo AltoUSA

Personalised recommendations