Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11434/217
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMalham, Gregoryen
dc.contributor.authorBlecher, Carl-
dc.contributor.otherParker, Rhiannonen
dc.contributor.otherGoss, Benen
dc.date2015-02-14en
dc.date.accessioned2015-06-10T02:21:49Zen
dc.date.available2015-06-10T02:21:49Zen
dc.date.issued2015-04en
dc.identifier.citationEur Spine J. 2015 Apr;24 Suppl 3:339-45en
dc.identifier.issn0940-6719en
dc.identifier.issn1432-0932en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11434/217en
dc.description.abstractThe lateral approach for anterior interbody fusion allows placement of a large footprint intervertebral spacer to indirectly decompress the neural elements through disc height restoration and resultant soft tissue changes. However, it is not well understood under what circumstances indirect decompression in lateral approach surgery is sufficient. This report aimed to evaluate clinical scenarios where indirect decompression was and was not sufficient in symptom resolution when using lateral interbody fusion. A prospective study was undertaken of 122 consecutive patients treated with lateral interbody fusion without direct decompression. Pre- and postoperative symptomatology was assessed to evaluate the extent of neural decompression following implantation with a lateral polyetheretherketone spacer. Failure to improve or resolve preoperative radicular pain was considered a failure of indirect decompression and indicated these patients for additional posterior decompressive surgery. Unplanned second stage decompression was required in 11 patients. Of these patients, 7/11 early in this series had pathology that was underappreciated including spondylolisthesis from high grade facet arthropathy with instability (3), bony lateral recess stenosis (3) and both spondylolisthesis/stenosis (1). Three patients had iatrogenic leg pain through cage misplacement. There was one failure of indirect decompression that could not be explained through retrospective analysis of the patient’s record. Indirect decompression clearly has a role in minimizing the amount of surgery that is required. However, it is important to consider the circumstances where this technique may be effective and preoperative considerations that may improve patient selection.en
dc.publisherSpringeren
dc.subjectIndirect Decompressionen
dc.subjectLateral Interbody Fusionen
dc.subjectLeg Painen
dc.subjectLumbaren
dc.subjectSpinal Stenosisen
dc.subjectLateral Polyetheretherketone Spaceren
dc.subjectNeural Decompressionen
dc.subjectNeurosciences Clinical Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Victoria, Australia-
dc.subjectEpworth Medical Imaging, Victoria, Australia-
dc.titleClinical results and limitations of indirect decompression in spinal stenosis with laterally implanted interbody cages: results from a prospective cohort study.en
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00586-015-3807-3en
dc.identifier.journaltitleEuropean Spine Journalen
dc.description.pubmedurihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25681117en
dc.description.affiliatesNuVasive Australia & NZ Pty Ltd, Melbourne, VIC, 3101, Australiaen
dc.type.studyortrialProspective Cohort Studyen
dc.type.contenttypeTexten
Appears in Collections:Neurosciences
Pain Management

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in Epworth are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.