10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Risk Factors of Cage Subsidence Following Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

      , , ,
      World Neurosurgery
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Complications and Morbidities of Mini-open Anterior Retroperitoneal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion in 179 Patients

            Study Design A retrospective study including 179 patients who underwent oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) at one institution. Purpose To report the complications associated with a minimally invasive technique of a retroperitoneal anterolateral approach to the lumbar spine. Overview of Literature Different approaches to the lumbar spine have been proposed, but they are associated with an increased risk of complications and a longer operation. Methods A total of 179 patients with previous posterior instrumented fusion undergoing OLIF were included. The technique is described in terms of: the number of levels fused, operative time and blood loss. Persurgical and postsurgical complications were noted. Results Patients were age 54.1 ± 10.6 with a BMI of 24.8 ± 4.1 kg/m2. The procedure was performed in the lumbar spine at L1-L2 in 4, L2-L3 in 54, L3-L4 in 120, L4-L5 in 134, and L5-S1 in 6 patients. It was done at 1 level in 56, 2 levels in 107, and 3 levels in 16 patients. Surgery time and blood loss were, respectively, 32.5 ± 13.2 minutes and 57 ± 131 ml per level fused. There were 19 patients with a single complication and one with two complications, including two patients with postoperative radiculopathy after L3-5 OLIF. There was no abdominal weakness or herniation. Conclusions Minimally invasive OLIF can be performed easily and safely in the lumbar spine from L2 to L5, and at L1-2 for selected cases. Up to 3 levels can be addressed through a 'sliding window'. It is associated with minimal blood loss and short operations, and with decreased risk of abdominal wall weakness or herniation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Hounsfield units for assessing bone mineral density and strength: a tool for osteoporosis management.

              Measurements obtained from clinical computed tomography examinations may yield information leading to the diagnosis of decreased bone mineral density, without added expense to the patient. The purpose of the present study was to determine if Hounsfield units, a standardized computed tomography attenuation coefficient, correlate with bone mineral density and compressive strength.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                World Neurosurgery
                World Neurosurgery
                Elsevier BV
                18788750
                March 2024
                March 2024
                : 183
                : 180-186
                Article
                10.1016/j.wneu.2023.12.110
                38145652
                b74b757f-8678-4c73-b5e5-f805afd4f079
                © 2024

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                https://www.elsevier.com/legal/tdmrep-license

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-017

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-037

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-012

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-029

                https://doi.org/10.15223/policy-004

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content6,646

                Cited by3

                Most referenced authors406