Navigation and Robotic-Assisted Single-Position Prone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technique, Feasibility, Safety, and Case Series

Single-position prone lateral interbody fusion is a recently introduced technical modification of the minimally invasive retroperitoneal transpsoas approach for lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). Several technical descriptions of single-position prone LLIF have been published with traditional f...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:World neurosurgery 2021-08, Vol.152, p.221-230.e1
Hauptverfasser: North, Robert Y., Strong, Michael J., Yee, Timothy J., Kashlan, Osama N., Oppenlander, Mark E., Park, Paul
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Single-position prone lateral interbody fusion is a recently introduced technical modification of the minimally invasive retroperitoneal transpsoas approach for lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). Several technical descriptions of single-position prone LLIF have been published with traditional fluoroscopy for guidance. However, there has been no investigation of either three-dimensional computed tomography–based navigation for prone LLIF or integration with robotic assistance platforms with the prone lateral technique. This study evaluated the feasibility and safety of spinal navigation and robotic assistance for single-position prone LLIF. Retrospective review of medical records and a prospectively acquired database for a single center was performed to examine immediate and 30-day clinical and radiographic outcomes for consecutive patients undergoing single-position prone LLIF with spinal navigation and/or robotic assistance. Nine patients were treated, 4 women and 5 men. Mean age was 65.4 years (range, 46–75 years), and body mass index was 30.2 kg/m2 (range, 24–38 kg/m2). The most common surgical indication was adjacent segment disease (44.4%), followed by pseudarthrosis (22.2%), spondylolisthesis (11.1%), degenerative disc disease (11.1%), and recurrent stenosis (11.1%). Postoperative approach-related complications included pain-limited bilateral hip flexor weakness (4/5) and pain-limited left knee extension weakness (4/5) in 1 patient (11.1%) and right lateral thigh numbness and dysesthesia in 1 patient (11.1%). All cages were placed within quarters 2–3, signifying the middle portion of the disc space. There were no instances of misguidance by navigation. Integration of spinal navigation and robotic assistance appears feasible, accurate, and safe as an alternative to fluoroscopic guidance for single-position LLIF.
ISSN:1878-8750
1878-8769
DOI:10.1016/j.wneu.2021.05.097