Skip to main content

Minimally Invasive Spondylodesis Via Percutaneous Approach with Tubular Retractors

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Minimally Invasive Spine Intervention
  • 337 Accesses

Abstract

Open spondylodesis is one of the largest spinal surgeries and is associated with extensive access trauma. There is sometimes considerable blood loss and not infrequently wound healing problems. In this operation, the use of minimally invasive procedures can therefore reduce the access trauma particularly significantly. Spondylodesis aims to achieve a stable connection of vertebrae for life. This goal is typically achieved with a dorsal transpedicular screw-rod system and the apposition of bone in the disc space or at the facet joints. Only bony fusion of the involved vertebrae can ensure permanent stability, as screw-rod systems alone usually cannot permanently withstand the high load. After about 4–5 years, fatigue fractures of the systems or material loosening occur. Until the end of the 1990s, open dorsoventral, usually two-stage surgery with insertion of an iliac crest span for ventral support was the method of choice for spondylodesis. A reduction in surgical and access trauma was achieved by introducing cages for ventral support. These are filled with local bone from the dorsal spine access area for fusion, eliminating the need for iliac crest removal and the additional trauma of the ventral approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Cole JS IV, Jackson TR (2007) Minimally invasive lumbar discectomy in obese patients. Neurosurgery 61(3):539–544. discussion 544

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deininger MH, Unfried MI, Vougioukas VI, Hubbe U (2009) Minimally invasive dorsal percutaneous spondylodesis for the treatment of adult pyogenic spondylodiscitis. Acta Neurochir 151(11):1451–1457

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Desai A, Bekelis K, Ball PA, Lurie J, Mirza SK, Tosteson TD et al (2013) Variation in outcomes across centers after surgery for lumbar stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis in the spine patient outcomes research trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38(8):678–691

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Foley KT, Gupta SK (2002) Percutaneous pedicle screw fixation of the lumbar spine: preliminary clinical results. J Neurosurg 97(1 Suppl):7–12

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Foley KT, Holly LT, Schwender JD (2003) Minimally invasive lumbar fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28(15 Suppl):S26–S35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Franke J, Greiner-Perth R, Boehm H, Mahlfeld K, Grasshoff H, Allam Y et al (2009) Comparison of a minimally invasive procedure versus standard microscopic discotomy: a prospective randomised controlled clinical trial. Eur Spine J 18(7):992–1000

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Galbusera F, Volkheimer D, Reitmaier S, Berger-Roscher N, Kienle A, Wilke H-J (2015) Pedicle screw loosening: a clinically relevant complication? Eur Spine J 24(5):1005–1016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harms J, Rolinger H (1982) A one-stager procedure in operative treatment of spondylolistheses: dorsal traction-reposition and anterior fusion (author’s transl). Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 120(3):343–347

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Holly LT, Schwender JD, Rouben DP, Foley KT (2006) Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: indications, technique, and complications. Neurosurg Focus 20(3):E6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Karikari IO, Isaacs RE (2010) Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion a review of techniques and outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35(26S):294–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khan NR, Clark AJ, Lee SL, Venable GT, Rossi NB, Foley KT (2015) Surgical outcomes for minimally invasive vs open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosurgery 77(6):847–874

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kim CW, Siemionow K, Anderson DG, Phillips FM (2011) The current state of minimally invasive spine surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93(6):582–596

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Klingler JH, Volz F, Krüger MT, Kogias E, Rölz R, Scholz C, Sircar R, Hubbe U (2015) Accidental durotomy in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: frequency, risk factors, and management. ScientificWorldJournal 2015:532628

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Li F, Huo H, Yang X, Xiao Y, Xing W, Xia H (2014) Comment on Tian et al.: minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a meta-analysis based on the current evidence. Eur Spine J 23(4):927–928

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • McAfee PC, Regan JJ, Geis WP, Fedder IL (1998) Minimally invasive anterior retroperitoneal approach to the lumbar spine. Emphasis on the lateral BAK. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 23(13):1476–1484

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Park P, Foley KT (2008) Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with reduction of spondylolisthesis: technique and outcomes after a minimum of 2 years’ follow-up. Neurosurg Focus 25(2):E16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pereira P, Buzek D, Franke J, Senker W, Kosmala A, Hubbe U et al (2015) Surgical data and early postoperative outcomes after minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion: results of a prospective, multicenter, observational data-monitored study. PLoS One 10(3):e0122312

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Schwender JD, Holly LT, Rouben DP, Foley KT (2005) Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): technical feasibility and initial results. J Spinal Disord Tech 18(Suppl):S1–S6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tian N-F, Mao F-M (2014) Answer to the letter to the editor of Feng Li et al. entitled “minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a meta-analysis based on the current evidence” by Tian N-F et al. Eur Spine J 23(4):929–930

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Tian N-F, Wu Y-S, Zhang X-L, Xu H-Z, Chi Y-L, Mao F-M (2013) Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a meta-analysis based on the current evidence. Eur Spine J 22(8):1741–1749

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Wiesner L, Kothe R, Ruther W (1999) Anatomic evaluation of two different techniques for the percutaneous insertion of pedicle screws in the lumbar spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 24(15):1599–1603

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to U. Hubbe .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hubbe, U. (2023). Minimally Invasive Spondylodesis Via Percutaneous Approach with Tubular Retractors. In: Jerosch, J. (eds) Minimally Invasive Spine Intervention. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-63814-9_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-63814-9_20

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-63813-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-63814-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics