Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Meta-analysis of the Fusion Rates. What is the Optimal Graft Material?

Neurosurgery 81:958–971, 2017

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is an increasingly popular procedure with several potential advantages over traditional open TLIF.

OBJECTIVE: The current study aimed to compare fusion rates of different graft materials used in MIS-TLIF, via meta-analysis of the published literature.

METHODS: A Medline search was performed and a database was created including patient’s type of graft, clinical outcome, fusion rate, fusion assessment modality, and duration of follow-up. Meta-analysis of the fusion rate was performed using StatsDirect software (StatsDirect Ltd, Cheshire, United Kingdom).

RESULTS: A total of 1533 patients from 40 series were included. Fusion rates were high, ranging from 91.8% to 99%. The imaging modalities used to assess fusion were computed tomography scans (30%) and X-rays (70%). Comparison of all recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein (rhBMP) series with all non-rhBMP series showed fusion rates of 96.6% and 92.5%, respectively. The lowest fusion rate was seen with isolated use of autologous local bone (91.8%). The highest fusion ratewas observed with combination of autologous local bone with bone extender and rhBMP (99.1%). The highest fusion rate without the use ofBMPwas seen with autologous local bone+bone extender (93.1%). The reported complication rate ranged from 0% to 35.71%. Clinical improvement was observed in all studies.

CONCLUSION: Fusion rates are generally high with MIS-TLIF regardless of the graft material used. Given the potential complications of iliac bone harvesting and rhBMP, use of other bone graft options for MIS-TLIF is reasonable. The highest fusion rate without the use of rhBMP was seen with autologous local bone plus bone extender (93.1%).

 

The cranial orbital buttress technique for nonsyndromic unicoronal and metopic craniosynostosis

The cranial orbital buttress technique for nonsyndromic unicoronal and metopic craniosynostosis

Neurosurg Focus 38 (5):E4, 2015

Current craniosynostosis procedures can result in complications due to absorbable plates and screws or other specialized expensive hardware. The authors propose the cranial orbital buttress (COB) technique of frontoorbital remodeling for metopic and unicoronal synostoses, wherein no plates or screws are used. They hypothesize that, with this technique, aesthetically acceptable outcomes for unicoronal and metopic synostosis can be achieved. In this article, they present this technique and compare the results with current frontoorbital remodeling practices.

METHODS The authors conducted a retrospective chart review of cases in which patients with nonsyndromic unicoronal or metopic synostosis underwent cranio-orbital surgery at their institution from 1985 through 2009. Operative parameters, surgical variations, and complications were analyzed. The COB technique uses a 1-piece switch, hemiforeheads, or multiple pieces for forehead remodeling. The supraorbital bar is reconstructed in patients with metopic synostosis using a double wedge or greenstick fracture technique, and in patients with unicoronal synostosis a hinge procedure based on a 1.5-orbital osteotomy is used. The supraorbital bar is advanced and supported in place by bone graft(s) inserted at the lateral aspect(s) of the orbit(s) to form a buttress, with fixation done using absorbable sutures.

RESULTS A total of 79 cases met the criteria for inclusion in the study. Twenty-nine patients had metopic synostosis, 3 had combined metopic and sagittal synostoses, and 47 had unicoronal synostosis. The patients’ mean age at surgery was 11.4 ± 10.1 months and the mean operative time was 183.4 ± 41.0 minutes. The mean length of hospital stay was 3.7 ± 1.2 days. The mean blood loss was 150.0 ± 125.6 ml, and 33% of patients required a blood transfusion (mean volume 206.9 ± 102.3 ml). In metopic synostosis, hemiforeheads were used most often (24/29, 83%), and the supraorbital bar was remodeled using a bilateral intracranial orbital osteotomy followed by a double wedge modification (23/29,79%) or a greenstick fracture (4/29 14%) for milder cases. Forehead remodeling for unicoronal synostosis was by a forehead switch (39/47, 83%) and the supraorbital bar was remodeled using a 1.5-orbital intracranial orbital osteotomy (34/47, 72%) such that the bar was advanced on the abnormal side and hinged at the midline of the normal orbit. Perioperative complications occurred in 19% of cases and included dural tears (16%), inconsequential subdural hematoma (1.3%), and nasal greenstick fracture (1.3%). The total reoperation rate was 7.6% (cranioplasties for irregular contours, 6.3%; scar revision, 1.3%).

CONCLUSIONS The COB remodeling technique is simple and efficient, gives acceptable outcomes, and is less resource intensive than previous techniques reported in the literature.