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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
- Commentary on “Perioperative Clinical Features and Long-term Prognosis After Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion (OLIF), OLIF With Anterolateral Screw Fixation, or OLIF With Percutaneous Pedicle Fixation: A Comprehensive Treatment Strategy for Patients With
Chang Il Ju
Neurospine.2023; 20(2): 550. CrossRef - Pearls and Pitfalls of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion: A Comprehensive Narrative Review
Hyoungmin Kim, Bong-Soon Chang, Sam Yeol Chang
Neurospine.2022; 19(1): 163. CrossRef - Radiation Dose Reduction and Surgical Efficiency Improvement in Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Assisted by Intraoperative O-arm Navigation: A Retrospective Observational Study
Junfeng Gong, Xinle Huang, Liwen Luo, Huan Liu, Hao Wu, Ying Tan, Changqing Li, Yu Tang, Yue Zhou
Neurospine.2022; 19(2): 376. CrossRef - Novel C‐arm‐based planning robotic spinal surgery in a cadaver model using quantitative accuracy assessment methodology
Sangman Park, Hyung Cheol Kim, Yeongha Jeong, Dongyun Kim, Seungjae Ryu, Seongpung Lee, Yongyeob Cha, Sungteac Hwang, Donggi Woo, Hongho Kim, Dong Ah Shin, Yoon Ha, Keung Nyun Kim, Do Heum Yoon, Seong Yi
The International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery.2022;[Epub] CrossRef - Single-Position Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation under O-Arm Navigation: A Retrospective Comparative Study
Hyung Cheol Kim, Yeong Ha Jeong, Sung Han Oh, Jong Min Lee, Chang Kyu Lee, Seong Yi, Yoon Ha, Keung Nyun Kim, Dong Ah Shin
Journal of Clinical Medicine.2022; 12(1): 312. CrossRef - Oblique lateral interbody fusion in heterogenous lumbar diseases: Anterolateral screw fixation vs. posterior percutaneous pedicle screw fixation – A single center experience
Meng-Ting Wu, Tzu-Tsao Chung, Shao-Ching Chen, Tzu-Jen Kao, Wen-Shin Song
Frontiers in Surgery.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
