Warning: mkdir(): Permission denied in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 87 Warning: chmod() expects exactly 2 parameters, 3 given in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 88 Warning: fopen(/home/virtual/e-kjs/journal/upload/ip_log/ip_log_2025-11.txt): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 95 Warning: fwrite() expects parameter 1 to be resource, boolean given in /home/virtual/lib/view_data.php on line 96 Impact of Spinal Navigation on the Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion
Neurospine Search

CLOSE


Park: Impact of Spinal Navigation on the Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion
ns-2040518-059i1.jpg
A less invasive retroperitoneal pre-psoas approach to the lumbar spine was first proposed by Mayer in 1997 [1]. Since then, it has been further refined with the introduction of specialized tubular retractors, instrumentation, and implants to facilitate a more minimally invasive approach for anterior interbody fusion. Also known as the oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF), the approach is used to treat a variety of degenerative spinal conditions including deformity [2].0 As with any minimally invasive procedure, the OLIF has the benefit of decreased exposure-related morbidity resulting in decreased blood loss, less postoperative pain, and potentially faster recovery [3,4].
One of the biggest difficulties with a minimally invasive approach has been the decrease in direct visualization of the surrounding anatomy. This can result in disorientation and the potential for a complication to occur. Compared to a traditional open operation, minimally invasive procedures, therefore, depend more heavily on fluoroscopic guidance for localization and orientation. Unfortunately, this results in increased radiation exposure to the surgeon and staff as well as a perceived increase in operative time.
In this issue of Neurospine, the impact of using spinal navigation for OLIF was evaluated in a large series of 214 patients [5]. A high accuracy of 94.86% for cage placement was noted. Notably, the overall rate and types of complications were relatively low and were within expectation for the OLIF procedure. These results suggest that navigation assisted OLIF is safe and effective with the advantage of markedly decreased radiation exposure. Given that radiation exposure is an underrecognized occupational hazard to spinal surgeons, the impact of navigation on surgeon health cannot be over emphasized.
As a caveat, although there have been many studies confirming the accuracy of navigation, it should be noted that there is the possibility of navigation error. One well-known etiology for error, for example, is inadvertent displacement of the patient reference frame. Consequently, navigation should not be blindly followed. Rather confirmation of navigation accuracy should be periodically performed throughout the procedure. The other drawback of 3-dimensional (3D) navigation is the potential for increased radiation exposure to the patient.
In my opinion, the advantages of a navigation assisted OLIF are more prominent with multilevel cases and for treatment of deformity. Typically, only 1 intraoperative image acquisition is required for treatment of up to 4 disc levels so that the balance of radiation exposure to the patient with traditional fluoroscopic versus navigation guidance is more equitable. There is also increased operative efficiency when multiple levels are treated. In addition, the ability to use trajectory views with 3D navigation is of particular benefit when dealing with the rotational component of a spinal deformity.

REFERENCES

1. Mayer HM. A new microsurgical technique for minimally invasive anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1997 22:691. -9. discussion 700.
crossref pmid
2. Park SW, Ko MJ, Kim YB, et al. Correction of marked sagittal deformity with circumferential minimally invasive surgery using oblique lateral interbody fusion in adult spinal deformity. J Orthop Surg Res 2020 15:13.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
3. Li HM, Zhang RJ, Shen CL. Radiographic and clinical outcomes of oblique lateral interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar disease. World Neurosurg 2019 122:e627-38.
crossref pmid
4. Lin GX, Akbary K, Kotheeranurak V, et al. Clinical and radiologic outcomes of direct versus indirect decompression with lumbar interbody fusion: a matched-pair comparison analysis. World Neurosurg 2018 119:e898-909.
crossref pmid
5. Xi Z, Chou D, Mummaneni PV, et al. The navigated oblique lumbar interbody fusion: accuracy rate, effect on surgical time, and complications. Neurospine 2020 17:260-7.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
  • gs_medical
  • TOOLS
    Share :
    Facebook Twitter Linked In Google+
    METRICS Graph View
    • 6 Web of Science
    • 6 Crossref
    • 5 Scopus
    • 5,598 View
    • 115 Download
    Journal Impact Factor 3.6
    SURGERY: Q1
    CLINICAL NEUROLOGY: Q1
    Asia Spine 2025
    Asia Spine 2025
    × Asia Spine 2025
    Related articles in NS

    Risk Factors of Unsatisfactory Outcomes Requiring Additional Intervention Following Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion2024 September;21(3)

    History and Evolution of the Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion2022 September;19(3)

    Successful Criteria for Indirect Decompression With Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion2022 September;19(3)

    Intraoperative Neuromonitoring During Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion2021 September;18(3)

    Uniportal Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion2020 July;17(Suppl 1)



    Editorial Office
    Department of Neurosurgery, CHA Bundang Medical Center,
    CHA University School of Medicine,
    59 Yatap-ro, Bundang-gu, Seongnam 13496, Korea
    Tel: +82-31-780-1924  Fax: +82-31-780-5269  E-mail: support@e-neurospine.org
    The Korean Spinal Neurosurgery Society
    #407, Dong-A Villate 2 Town, 350 Seocho-daero, Seocho-gu, Seoul 06631, Korea
    Tel: +82-2-585-5455  Fax: +82-2-2-523-6812  E-mail: ksns1987@neurospine.or.kr
    Business License No.: 209-82-62443

    Copyright © The Korean Spinal Neurosurgery Society.

    Developed in M2PI

    Zoom in Close layer