Journals / Journal of Turkish Spinal Surgery / 2010 / Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 3

Lomber spinal stenoz cerrahisinde anterolateral retroperitoneal yaklaşım ile paramedian yaklaşımın kozmetik ve fonksiyonel sonuçlarının karşılaştırılması

Comparison of cosmetic and functional outcomes after anterior paramedian versus anterolateral retroperitonea approaches in lumbar spinal stenosis surgery

Pages
233–240
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Patients undergoing anterior paramedian approach to lumbar spine have higher quality of life and cosmetic outcomes compared with patients having anterolateral retroperitoneal approach.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Study Design: Retrospective clinical study.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: The study reviewed 41 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis surgically treated by combined anterior and posterior routes.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Patients undergoing anterior paramedian approach to lumbar spine have higher quality of life and cosmetic outcomes compared with patients having anterolateral retroperitoneal approach.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Study Design: Retrospective clinical study. Objective: This study aimed to compare the cosmetic and functional outcomes of the patients undergoing anterior and posterior combined surgery via either anterior paramedian or anterolateral retroperitoneal approach. Summary of Background Data: Exposure of the anterior portion of the lumbar disks can be obtained through either a transperitoneal or extraperitoneal approach, utilizing a variety of skin incisions. The retroperitoneal approach is the preferred procedure because it can be performed through small skin incisions and obviates the need for bowel retraction. Methods: The study reviewed 41 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis surgically treated by combined anterior and posterior routes. In addition to posterior instrumentation, decompression and fusion; anterolateral retroperitoneal approach was performed in 14 patients (Group 1) and anterior paramedian retroperitoneal approach was done in 27 patients (Group 2) for anterior interbody fusion. An access surgeon was used in all cases. Results: The mean postoperative SRS score was 22.4 for anterolateral approach and 24.2 for anterior paramedian approach (P < 0.05). The largest difference was observed in self-image and pain control items of SRS questionaire and there was no difference observed in function and daily activities. There were 4 patients having wound problems in group1 whereas this number was 1 in group 2. All these patients were recovered by local wound debridement and primary closure. There were 5 patients developing abdominal swelling in anterolateral approach regarded as abdominal herniation. Conclusion: The anterior and anterolateral surgical approaches to the lumbar spine can be used safely if the surgeon is familiar with the anatomy and is aware of potential complications. Patients undergoing anterior paramedian approach to lumbar spine have higher quality of life and cosmetic outcomes compared with patients having anterolateral retroperitoneal approach.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada anterior-posterior ombine cerrahi uygulanan hastalarda nteromedian yaklaşım ile anterolateral etroperitoneal yaklaşımın fonksiyonel ve ozmetik sonuçlarının karşılaştırılması maçlanmıştır. Geçmiş bilgiler: Vertebtal diskin ön kısmına, eğişik insizyonlar kullanılarak önden ansperitoneal veya ekstraperitoneal aklaşımla ulaşılabilmektedir. Retroperitoneal aklaşım daha küçük kesi ve barsak etraksiyonu gerekmediğinden daha çok tercih dilmektedir. Mateyal-Metot: Bu çalıçmada anteror ve osterior yollarla kombine cerrahi tedavi ygulanan 41 spinal stenozlu hasta gözden eçirilmiştir. Posterior dekompresyon, posterior zyon ve enstrümantasyona ilaveten anterior simler arası füzyon için 14 hastada nterolateral yaklaşımla retroperitoneal girişim Grup-I), 27 hastada anterior paramedian erroperitoneal yaklaşım uygulanmıştır. meliyat, aynı cerrah tarafından yapılmıştır. Sonuçlar: Ortalama postoperatif SRS skoru, nterolateral girişim grubunda 22.4 ve anterior paramedian girişim grubunda 24.2 olarak bulanmuştur (p < 0.05). SRS anketindeki en büyük fark kişisel görünüm,ve ağrı domainleride olduğu görülmüş, fonksiyon ve günlük aktivite açısından bir fark olmadığı belirlenmiştir. İkinci gruptan 2 vakada yara yeri problemi olurken, 1. gruptan 1 hastada olduğu belirlenmiştir. Tüm bu hastalar yara debridmanı ve primer kapama ile iyileşmişlerdir. Anterolateral girişim yapılan 5 hastada abdominal herniyonu düşündüren karın şişliği görülmüştür. Çıkarımlar: Anterior ve anterolateral cerrahi yaklaşımlar potansiyel komplikasyonları ve anatomiye aşina cerrahlarca lomber spinal girişimlerde güvenle kullanılabilir. Anterior paramedian yaklaşım yapılan hastalar anterolateral yaklaşıma nazaran daha konforlu bir yaşama ve kozmetik olarak daha iyi sonuçlara sahiptirler.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZTÜRK, Ç., ENERCAN, M., KARADERELER, S., TEZER, M., AYDOĞAN, M., HAMZAOĞLU, A. (2010). Lomber spinal stenoz cerrahisinde anterolateral retroperitoneal yaklaşım ile paramedian yaklaşımın kozmetik ve fonksiyonel sonuçlarının karşılaştırılması. Journal of Turkish Spinal Surgery, Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 3, 233–240. https://ajindex.com/articles/271561

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. Brau SA, Delamarter RB, Schiffman ML, Williams LA, Watkins RG. Vascular injury during anterior lumbar surgery. Spine J 2004; 4: 409-412
  2. Brewster L, Trueger N, Schermer C, Ganayem A, Santaniello J. Infraumbilical anterior retroperitoneal exposure of the lumbar spine in 128 consecutive patients. World J Surg 2008, 32: 1414-1419
  3. Burgos J, Rapariz JM, Gonzalez-Herranz P. Anterior endoscopic approach to the thoracolumbar spine. Spine 1998; 23: 2427-2431
  4. Burns BH. An operation for spondylolisthesis. Lancet 1933; 1: 12-33
  5. Capener N. Spondylolisthesis. Betsin J Surg 1945; 19: 374
  6. Chan FL, Chow SP. Retroperitoneal fibrosis after anterior spinal fusion. Clin Radiol 1983; 34: 331-335
  7. Cloyd DW, Obenchain TG, Savin M. Transperitoneal laparoscopic approach to lumbar discectomy. Surg Laparosc Endosc 1995; 5: 85-89
  8. Cohn EB, Ignatoff JM, Keeler TC, Shapiro DE, Blum MD. Exposure of the anterior spine: technique and experience with 66 patients. J Urol 2000; 164: 416-418
  9. Dewald CJ, Millikan KW, Hammerberg KW, Doolas A, Dewald RI. An open, minimally invasive approach to the lumbar spine. Am Surg 1999; 65: 61-68
  10. Deyo RA, Tsui-Wu YJ. Descriptive epidemiology of lowback pain and its related medical care in the United States. Spine 1987; 12: 264-268
  11. Dezawa A, Yamane T, Mikami H, Miki H. Retroperitoneal laparoscopic lateral approach to the lumbar spine: a new approach, technique, and clinical trial. J Spinal Disord 2000; 13: 138-143
  12. Gumbs AA, Shah RV, Yue JJ, Sumpio B. The open anterior paramedian retroperitoneal approach for spine procedures. Arch Surg 2005; 140: 339-343
  13. Gumbs AA, Bloom ND, Bitan FD, HAnan SH. Open anterior approaches for lumbar spine procedures. Am J Surg 2007; 194: 98-102
  14. Hannon JK, Faircloth WB, Lane DR, Roderos JF, Snow LL, Weinstein LS, West JF. Comparison of insufflation vs retractional technique for laparoscopic-assisted intervertebral fusion of the lumbar spine. Surg Endosc 2000; 14: 300-304
  15. Hodgson AR, Stock FE. Anterior spinal fusion: a preliminary communication on the radical treatment of Pottʼs disease and Pottʼs paraplegia. Br J Surg 1956; 44: 266
  16. Hodgson AR, Stock FE. Anterior spine fusion for treatment of tuberculosis of the spine. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1960; 42: 295
  17. Holt RT, Majd ME, Vadhva M, et al. The efficacy of anterior spine exposure by an orthopedic surgeon. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003; 16: 477-486
  18. Horton WC, Bridwell KH, Glassman SD. The morbidity of anterior expos