DOCSLIB.ORG

Lumbar Extracavitary Corpectomy with a Single Stage Circumferential Arthrodesis: Surgical Technique and Clinical Series

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lumbar Extracavitary Corpectomy with a Single Stage Circumferential Arthrodesis: Surgical Technique and Clinical Series An Original Study Lumbar Extracavitary Corpectomy With a Single Stage Circumferential Arthrodesis: Surgical Technique and Clinical Series Kern Singh, MD, and Daniel K. Park, MD vertebral body and pathological condition, this visual- Abstract ization may result in iatrogenic morbidity to an often- Circumferential arthrodesis and reconstruction is neces- times critically ill patient.7 Posterolateral approaches sary after a lumbar corpectomy in the setting of malig- allow for excellent ventral decompression with safe nancy and infection. The advent of expandable cage visualization of the neural elements.2,6,8,9 The lateral technology now allows for safe anterior column recon- extracavitary approach was first popularized by Larson struction via a posterior approach with no transection and colleagues10 in 1976. The unique anatomy of the and minimal retraction of the lumbar spinal nerve roots. Fifteen patients underwent a single-stage, circum- lumbar spine and the inability to perform the spinal ferential corpectomy and anterior spinal reconstruction reconstruction around the lumbar nerve roots has lim- with an expandable cage via a midline, posterior, lat- ited its widespread acceptance. Other criticisms of the eral lumbar extracavitary approach. Posterior segmental lateral extracavitary technique have been its association pedicle screw fixation and iliac crest bone graft was with increased blood loss and poor visualization across used in all cases. the midline.5,11-13 The extent of visualization is debat- Fifteen lumbar extracavitary corpectomy nerve root- able, and in most cases, a unilateral approach may be sparing procedures have been performed to date, with performed safely to the contralateral pedicle. A bilat- at least 1-year follow-up (12 tumors/3 infections). No eral approach is appropriate in situations of primary patient suffered any neurological complications. One malignancy or solitary metastatic disease where an en patient suffered from a postoperative myocardial infarc- bloc spondylectomy is advisable. tion 10 days after the procedure. Two patients had medi- cal complications that were treated without sequelae. With the advent of expandable metallic cages, an We present a technical description and case series all-posterior spinal reconstruction can be accomplished of patients undergoing a single-stage, circumferential without sacrificing the lumbar spinal nerve roots. corpectomy and anterior spinal reconstruction with an Recently, Hunt and colleagues11 described the use of expandable cage via a midline, posterior, lateral lumbar an expandable cage in a single patient. The following extracavitary approach with at least 1-year follow-up. manuscript presents a clinical series of 15 patients The technique is safe, technically feasible, and obvi- treated for lumbar osteomyelitis and metastatic spinal ates an anterior approach in this oftentimes critically ill disease via a single-stage, circumferential corpectomy patient population. and anterior spinal reconstruction with an expandable cage via a midline, posterior, lateral lumbar extracavi- nfections and metastatic disease of the lumbar tary approach with at least 1-year follow-up. spine are common clinical entities that often neces- sitate a complex spinal decompression and recon- Materials & Methods struction.1-3 Traditionally, these pathological con- Between September 2005 and August 2006, 15 patients Iditions have been treated by a staged anterior and underwent a single-stage, circumferential corpectomy posterior decompression and fusion.4-6 While an ante- and anterior spinal reconstruction with an expandable rior approach provides excellent visualization of the cage via a midline, posterior, lateral lumbar extra- cavitary approach. Posterior segmental pedicle screw fixation and iliac crest bone graft was used in all cases Dr. Singh is Assistant Professor, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois. (Table). Indications for surgical intervention included Dr. Park is Staff Spine Surgeon, Department of Orthopaedic 12 tumors with vertebral body collapse and retropul- Surgery, William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan. sion of bone fragments into the spinal canal, and 3 patients with progressive spinal infections and resultant Address correspondence to: Kern Singh, MD, Assistant Professor, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University spinal deformity despite appropriate antibiotic therapy. Medical Center, 1611 W Harrison St, Suite 300, Chicago, IL 60612 (tel, 312-432-2373; fax, 312-942-1516; e-mail, kern. Operative Technique [email protected]). The patient was placed on a Jackson radiolucent spine Am J Orthop. 2012;41(7):316-320. Copyright Quadrant HealthCom frame (Mizuho OS, Union City, California) that allows Inc. 2012. All rights reserved. for log-rolling in the standard prone position. This table 316 The American Journal of Orthopedics® www.amjorthopedics.com K. Singh and D. K. Park * * Figure 1. Transpedicular screws are placed bilaterally into L3 Figure 2. A wide L3-4 laminectomy and complete facetectomy and L5. The left L3-4 facet capsule is identified representing the of L3-4 on the left is completed. This allows for the skeletoniza- L4 pedicle entrance. tion of the left L4 pedicle which is identified with the letter P. A white asterisk (*) denotes the L3 and L4 exiting nerve root. A cobb elevator is seen on the lateral edge of the vertebral body. allows for both tilting and simultaneous use of an image Note that the left L4 transverse process has been resected. amplifier. A standard midline posterior subperiosteal dissection is carried out above and below the injured caudad working space between the nerve roots, which vertebral body. Transpedicular screws are placed bilat- becomes critical during the expandable cage placement. erally above and below the involved vertebra (Figure At this point, the transverse process of the affected 1). The number of levels to be instrumented is variable, vertebra is resected using a kerrison rongeur, exposing depending on the bone quality, severity of deformity, the lateral edge of the vertebral body. Subperiosteal dis- and pathology to be addressed. We typically advocate section is performed with a cobb and packing sponge 2 levels of fixation above and below the level of pathol- around the vertebral body. Subperiosteal dissection ogy. A rod is placed unilaterally (ie, contralateral to the is much more technically challenging in situations of side of the pediculectomy/corpectomy) and gentle dis- infections where tissue planes becomes adherent. We traction is applied across the segments to be addressed advise a slow dissection ensuring a subperiosteal expo- to stabilize these segments during the decompression. sure limiting the blood loss and potential for inadver- The corpectomy is initiated by skeletonizing the cor- tent vascular injury in the anterior abdominal cavity. responding pedicle. Laminectomies and completed face- A high-speed burr is then used to remove the lateral tectomies are performed at the level of the pathology as pedicle and vertebral body wall. The medial edge of the well as above and below the involved vertebrae (Figure pedicle is left intact to protect the exiting nerve root. 2). This step is essential to maximize the cephalad- With the dorsal cortex of the vertebral body and the Table. Patient Demographic, Disease and Surgical Information Estimated Preoperative Postoperative Case Surgical Blood Loss Neurological Neurological Follow-up Number Age/Sex Pathology (Level) Levels (mL) Status (Frankel) Status (Frankel) (Months) 1 78/m Metastatic Prostate CA (L4) L2-S1 3200 Incomplete C Incomplete C 13 2 45/f Recurrent Giant Cell (L2) T12-L4 800 Incomplete D Intact E 23 3 58/f Metastatic Endometrial CA (L5) L3-Pelvis 2600 Incomplete C Incomplete C 19 4 62/m Metastatic Prostate CA (L1) T11-L3 1800 Incomplete D Incomplete D 19 5 68/f Metastatic Breast CA (L3) L1-L5 1800 Intact E Intact E 24 6 57/f Metastatic Breast CA (L4) L2-S1 2100 Incomplete D Incomplete D 18 7 64/m Osteomyelitis/Discitis (L1/2) T11-L4 2500 Intact E Intact E 22 8 46/m Telengiectatic Osteosarcoma (L1) T11-L3 1400 Intact E Intact E 14 9 44/m Lymphoma (L5) L3-S1 1300 Incomplete D Intact E 13 10 44/f Osteomyelitis/Discitis (L3/4) L1-S1 3800 Intact E Intact E 26 11 73/m Metastatic Prostate CA (L2) T12-L4 2400 Incomplete C Incomplete C 22 12 68/f Metastatic Breast CA (L4) L2-S1 2700 Incomplete D Intact E 14 13 65/m Metastatic Prostate CA (L3) L1-L5 3100 Incomplete D Incomplete D 17 14 69/f Metastatic Breast CA (L4) L2-S1 3400 Intact E Intact E 18 15 71/f Osteomyelitis/Discitis (L2-3) T12-L5 3700 Intact E Intact E 21 www.amjorthopedics.com July 2012 317 Lumbar Extracavitary Corpectomy With a Single Stage Circumferential Arthrodesis * + Figure 3. The L4 vertebral body has been resected and the Figure 5. The cage is then rotated 90° within the corpectomy site defect is represented by the large black arrow. The asterisk (*) and expanded as demonstrated by the photograph. denotes the L3 nerve root and the plus sign (+) denotes the L4 nerve root. + * Figure 6. The cage is then fully engaged within the corpectomy site with minimal retraction of the exiting nerve roots (* L3 nerve root, + L4 nerve root). created into an egg-shell, the end plates and dorsal cor- Figure 4. An expandable interbody cage is placed parallel to tex are depressed into the defect. We have found that the exiting L3 and L4 nerve roots as marked by the 2 k-wires. preserving the dorsal cortex minimizes epidural bleed- Note that the cage is perpendicular to the dural sac while it is ing into the operative site (Figure 3). At this point, if the advanced into corpectomy defect. contralateral vertebral wall needs to be resected, then facetectomies can be performed on the opposite side. In medial wall of the pedicle intact, the surgeon can safely most situations, this is unnecessary and the bone pre- work as the neural elements are protected. A combina- served serves as an enlarged posterolateral fusion bed. tion of ring curettes is used to perform the discectomy The most challenging part of the procedure occurs above and below the involved vertebrae.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Modified Plate-Only Open-Door Laminoplasty Versus Laminectomy and Fusion for the Treatment of Cervical Stenotic Myelopathy
    n Feature Article Modified Plate-only Open-door Laminoplasty Versus Laminectomy and Fusion for the Treatment of Cervical Stenotic Myelopathy LILI YANG, MD; YIFEI GU, MD; JUEQIAN SHI, MD; RUI GAO, MD; YANG LIU, MD; JUN LI, MD; WEN YUAN, MD, PHD abstract Full article available online at Healio.com/Orthopedics. Search: 20121217-23 The purpose of this study was to compare modified plate-only laminoplasty and lami- nectomy and fusion to confirm which of the 2 surgical modalities could achieve a better decompression outcome and whether a significant difference was found in postopera- tive complications. Clinical data were retrospectively reviewed for 141 patients with cervical stenotic myelopathy who underwent plate-only laminoplasty and laminectomy and fusion between November 2007 and June 2010. The extent of decompression was assessed by measuring the cross-sectional area of the dural sac and the distance of spinal cord drift at the 3 most narrowed levels on T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Clinical outcomes and complications were also recorded and compared. Significant en- largement of the dural sac area and spinal cord drift was achieved and well maintained in both groups, but the extent of decompression was greater in patients who underwent Figure: T2-weighted magnetic resonance image laminectomy and fusion; however, a greater decompression did not seem to produce a showing the extent of decompression assessed by better clinical outcome. No significant difference was observed in Japanese Orthopaedic measuring the cross-sectional area of the dural sac Association and Nurick scores between the 2 groups. Patients who underwent plate-only (arrow). laminoplasty showed a better improvement in Neck Dysfunction Index and visual ana- log scale scores.
    [Show full text]
  • Anterior Reconstruction Techniques for Cervical Spine Deformity
    Neurospine 2020;17(3):534-542. Neurospine https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.2040380.190 pISSN 2586-6583 eISSN 2586-6591 Review Article Anterior Reconstruction Techniques Corresponding Author for Cervical Spine Deformity Samuel K. Cho 1,2 1 1 1 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7511-2486 Murray Echt , Christopher Mikhail , Steven J. Girdler , Samuel K. Cho 1Department of Orthopedics, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA Department of Orthopaedics, Icahn 2 Department of Neurological Surgery, Montefiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 425 NY, USA West 59th Street, 5th Floor, New York, NY, USA E-mail: [email protected] Cervical spine deformity is an uncommon yet severely debilitating condition marked by its heterogeneity. Anterior reconstruction techniques represent a familiar approach with a range Received: June 24, 2020 of invasiveness and correction potential—including global or focal realignment in the sagit- Revised: August 5, 2020 tal and coronal planes. Meticulous preoperative planning is required to improve or prevent Accepted: August 17, 2020 neurologic deterioration and obtain satisfactory global spinal harmony. The ability to per- form anterior only reconstruction requires mobility of the opposite column to achieve cor- rection, unless a combined approach is planned. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion has limited focal correction, but when applied over multiple levels there is a cumulative ef- fect with a correction of approximately 6° per level. Partial or complete corpectomy has the ability to correct sagittal deformity as well as decompress the spinal canal when there is an- terior compression behind the vertebral body.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Spine Coding Basics
    2019 Spine Coding Basics Presenter: Kerri Larson, CPC Directory of Coding and Audit Services 2019 Spine Surgery 01 Spine Surgery Terminology & Anatomy 02 Spine Procedures 03 Case Study 04 Diagnosis 05 Q & A Spine Surgery Terminology & Anatomy Spine Surgery Terminology & Anatomy Term Definition Arthrodesis Fusion, or permanent joining, of a joint, or point of union of two musculoskeletal structures, such as two bones Surgical procedure that replaces missing bone with material from the patient's own body, or from an artificial, synthetic, or Bone grafting natural substitute Corpectomy Surgical excision of the main body of a vertebra, one of the interlocking bones of the back. Cerebrospinal The protective body fluid present in the dura, the membrane covering the brain and spinal cord fluid or CSF Decompression A procedure to remove pressure on a structure. Diskectomy, Surgical removal of all or a part of an intervertebral disc. discectomy Dura Outermost of the three layers that surround the brain and spinal cord. Electrode array Device that contains multiple plates or electrodes. Electronic pulse A device that produces low voltage electrical pulses, with a regular or intermittent waveform, that creates a mild tingling or generator or massaging sensation that stimulates the nerve pathways neurostimulator Spine Surgery Terminology & Anatomy Term Definition The space that surrounds the dura, which is the outermost layer of membrane that surrounds the spinal canal. The epidural space houses the Epidural space spinal nerve roots, blood and lymphatic vessels, and fatty tissues . Present inside the skull but outside the dura mater, which is the thick, outermost membrane covering the brain or within the spine but outside Extradural the dural sac enclosing the spinal cord, nerve roots and spinal fluid.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of the Cervical Spine Alignment Following Laminoplasty and Laminectomy
    Spinal Cord (1999) 37, 20± 24 ã 1999 International Medical Society of Paraplegia All rights reserved 1362 ± 4393/99 $12.00 http://www.stockton-press.co.uk/sc Analysis of the cervical spine alignment following laminoplasty and laminectomy Shunji Matsunaga1, Takashi Sakou1 and Kenji Nakanisi2 1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Kagoshima University; 2Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Kagoshima University, Sakuragaoka, Kagoshima, Japan Very little detailed biomechanical examination of the alignment of the cervical spine following laminoplasty has been reported. We performed a comparative study regarding the buckling- type alignment that follows laminoplasty and laminectomy to know the mechanical changes in the alignment of the cervical spine. Lateral images of plain roentgenograms of the cervical spine were put into a computer and examined using a program we developed for analysis of the buckling-type alignment. Sixty-four patients who underwent laminoplasty and 37 patients who underwent laminectomy were reviewed retrospectively. The subjects comprised patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) and those with ossi®cation of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL). The postoperative observation period was 6 years and 7 months on average after laminectomy, and 5 years and 6 months on average following laminoplasty. Development of the buckling-type alignment was found in 33% of patients following laminectomy and only 6% after laminoplasty. Development of buckling-type alignment following laminoplasty appeared markedly less than following laminectomy in both CSM and OPLL patients. These results favor laminoplasty over laminectomy from the aspect of mechanics. Keywords: laminoplasty; laminectomy; buckling; kyphosis; swan-neck deformity Introduction In 1930, Eiselberg1 reported a case of postoperative of postoperative abnormal alignment from the aspect kyphosis of the spine following laminectomy from the of the presence or absence of buckling-type alignment.
    [Show full text]
  • Lumbar Laminectomy
    Patient Education Lumbar Laminectomy Description The spine consists of five separate divisions: cervical (seven vertebrae), thoracic (12 vertebrae), lumbar (five vertebrae), the sacrum, and the coccyx. Each vertebra, interlocks with the segment above and below it through the superior and inferior articular processes. Between each vertebra is an intervertebral disc that provides cushioning for the spine. The lamina and pedicle, along with the vertebral body, provide the borders that create the spinal canal, which the spinal cord runs through to transmit nerve signals. There are several different scenarios or conditions that may produce symptoms that would lead your physician to further Medical Illustration © 2016 Nucleus Medical Art, Inc. investigate, and possibly recommend this surgery. Stenosis causing Radicular Pain Spinal stenosis is the narrowing of the articular spaces within the spine; this may impinge on the nerves or the spinal cord. This is a degenerative process and may eventually lead to further changes on the spine over time. Radicular symptoms are pain, numbness, weakness, tingling, etc., that radiate along a specific nerve root (or dermatome) to other parts of the body outside of the spine. Surgical correction of this problem may include a minimally invasive decompression (shaving bone away to create more space around the nerve), often referred to as laminectomy (removing part or all of the lamina in order to provide more space and relieve impingement). In some cases, movement of one vertebrae slipping against another (spondylolisthesis), may require a vertebral fusion. This may be performed open vs. minimally invasive. Disc Herniation Herniation of the intervertebral disc may be due to an acute traumatic incident.
    [Show full text]
  • Modern Advances in Joint Replacement and Rapid Recovery
    Modern Advances in Joint Replacement and Rapid Recovery UCSF Osher Mini-Med School Lecture Series Jeffrey Barry, M.D. Assistant Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery Division of Adult Reconstruction University of California, San Francisco Disclosures . No relevant disclosures to this talk About Me . Bay Area Native . UCSF - U Can Stay Forever Outline . Burden of Disease and Epidemiology . The Basics of Hip and Knee Replacement . What’s improving over the last decade - Longevity - Pain Management - Hospital Stay - Thromboembolism prophylaxis - Risk Reduction Question What is the most common inpatient surgery performed in the US? 1. Percutaneous coronary angioplasty 2. Total hip replacement 3. Lumbar Laminectomy 4. Appendectomy 5. Total knee replacement Burden of Disease . Arthritis = most common cause of disability in the US . 22.7% of adults have doctor-diagnosed arthritis - 43.2% of patients with arthritis report activity limitations due to disease . By 2030: - 3.5 million TKA (673%) - 570,000 THA (174%) . Curve updated 2014 – just as predicted! Causes of Increased Utilization . Aging Population . Patients receiving arthroplasty at a younger age - Improvements in technology - Obesity Why Replace a Joint? Arthritis arthro – joint itis – inflammation What is Arthritis – Disease of Cartilage . Cartilage Degeneration - Pain - Limp - Swelling - Loss of range of motion - Eventual deformity Arthritis Affects on Your Life • Quality of Life • Independence • Movement, Walking, Exercise • Self-image • Self-esteem • Family Life • Sleep • Everything and Everybody Causes of Arthritis . Osteoarthritis - “wear and tear” . Inflammatory arthritis . Trauma, old fractures . Infection . Osteonecrosis - “lack of oxygen to the bone” . Childhood/ developmental disease Diagnosis . Clinical Symptoms + Radiographic . Radiographs – Standing or Weight bearing! . MRI is RARELY needed!!! - Expensive - Brings in other issues - Unnecessary treatment - Unnecessary explanations Knee Arthritis .
    [Show full text]
  • Two-Level Cervical Corpectomy—Long-Term Follow-Up Reveals the High Rate of Material Failure in Patients, Who Received an Anterior Approach Only
    Neurosurgical Review (2019) 42:511–518 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-018-0993-6 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Two-level cervical corpectomy—long-term follow-up reveals the high rate of material failure in patients, who received an anterior approach only Simon Heinrich Bayerl1 & Florian Pöhlmann1 & Tobias Finger1 & Vincent Prinz1 & Peter Vajkoczy 1 Received: 25 August 2017 /Revised: 20 November 2017 /Accepted: 5 December 2017 /Published online: 18 June 2018 # Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018 Abstract In contrast to a one-level cervical corpectomy, a multilevel corpectomy without posterior fusion is accompanied by a high material failure rate. So far, the adequate surgical technique for patients, who receive a two-level corpectomy, remains to be elucidated. The aim of this study was to determine the long-term clinical outcome of patients with cervical myelopathy, who underwent a two-level corpectomy. Outcome parameters of 21 patients, who received a two-level cervical corpectomy, were retrospectively analyzed concerning reoperations and outcome scores (VAS, Neck Disability Index (NDI), Nurick scale, mod- ified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score (mJOAS), Short Form 36-item Health Survey Questionnaire (SF-36)). The failure rate was determined using postoperative radiographs. The choice over the surgical procedures was exercised by every surgeon individually. Therefore, a distinction between two groups was possible: (1) anterior group (ANT group) with a two-level corpectomy and a cervical plate, (2) anterior/posterior group (A/P group) with two-level corpectomy, cervical plate, and addi- tional posterior fusion. Both groups benefitted from surgery concerning pain, disability, and myelopathy. While all patients of the A/P group showed no postoperative instability, one third of the patients of the ANT group exhibited instability and clinical deterioration.
    [Show full text]
  • The Need for Structural Allograft Biomechanical Guidelines
    8 The Need for Structural Allograft Biomechanical Guidelines Satoshi Kawaguchi, MD Robert A. Hart, MD Abstract Because of their osteoconductive properties, structural bone allografts retain a theoretic advantage in biologic performance compared with artifi cial interbody fusion devices and endoprostheses. Current regulations have addressed the risks of disease transmission and tissue contamination, but comparatively few guidelines exist regarding donor eligibility and bone processing issues with a potential effect on the mechanical integrity of structural allograft bone. The lack of guidelines appears to have led to variation among allograft providers in terms of processing and donor screening regarding issues with recognized mechanical effects. Given the relative lack of data on which to base reasonable screening standards, a basic biomechanical evaluation was performed on one source of structural bone allograft, the femoral ring. Of the tested parameters, the minimum and maximum cortical wall thicknesses of femoral ring allograft were most strongly correlated with the axial compressive load to failure of the graft, suggesting that cortical wall thickness may be a useful screening tool for compressive resistance expected from fresh cortical bone allograft. Development of further biomechanical and clinical data to direct standard development appears warranted. Instr Course Lect 2015;64:87–93. Surgical implantation of structural al- form with limited anatomic modifi - by the US FDA as well as through vol- lograft bone continues to increase de- cations, modern tissue processing in- untary participation with the American spite advances in modern alternatives cludes preparations of amalgams of Association of Tissue Banks (AATB). to allograft, including spine interbody allograft bone tissue of specifi c shapes Guidelines for allograft bone products fusion devices and peripheral joint en- and sizes to suit specifi c surgical needs.
    [Show full text]
  • Lumbar Laminectomy Or Laminotomy
    Patient Instructions: Lumbar Laminectomy or Laminotomy Surgical Technique A lumbar laminectomy or laminotomy is a surgical approach performed from the back of the lumbar spine. It is usually done through an incision in the middle of the back. Using minimally invasive techniques a small window of bone is drilled in the lamina to allow the surgeon to unpinch the underlying nerves (laminotomy), or in more severe cases the bone is removed completely on both sides to allow nerves on both sides of the spinal canal to be decompressed (laminectomy). It is done using an operating microscope and microsurgical technique. It is used to treat spinal stenosis or lateral recess stenosis and alleviate the pain and/or numbness that occurs in a patients lower back or legs. It can many times be performed on an outpatient basis without the need for an overnight stay in a hospital. Before Surgery • Seven days prior to surgery, please do not take any anti-inflammatory NSAID medications (Celebrex, Ibuprofen, Aleve, Naprosyn, Advil, etc.) as this could prolong your bleeding time during surgery. • Do not eat or drink anything after midnight the day before surgery. This means nothing to drink the morning of surgery except you may take your normal medication with a sip of water if needed. This includes your blood pressure medicine, which in general should be taken. Consult your surgeon or primary care doctor regarding insulin if you take it. • Please do not be late to check in on the day of surgery or it may be cancelled. • Please bring your preoperative folder with you to the surgery and have it when you check in.
    [Show full text]
  • Musculoskeletal Program CPT Codes and Descriptions
    Musculoskeletal Program CPT Codes and Descriptions Spine Surgery Procedure Codes CPT CODES DESCRIPTION Allograft, morselized, or placement of osteopromotive material, for spine surgery only (List separately in addition 20930 to code for primary procedure) 20931 Allograft, structural, for spine surgery only (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Autograft for spine surgery only (includes harvesting the graft); local (eg, ribs, spinous process, or laminar 20936 fragments) obtained from same incision (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Autograft for spine surgery only (includes harvesting the graft); morselized (through separate skin or fascial 20937 incision) (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Autograft for spine surgery only (includes harvesting the graft); structural, bicortical or tricortical (through separate 20938 skin or fascial incision) (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) 20974 Electrical stimulation to aid bone healing; noninvasive (nonoperative) Osteotomy of spine, posterior or posterolateral approach, 3 columns, 1 vertebral segment (eg, pedicle/vertebral 22206 body subtraction); thoracic Osteotomy of spine, posterior or posterolateral approach, 3 columns, 1 vertebral segment (eg, pedicle/vertebral 22207 body subtraction); lumbar Osteotomy of spine, posterior or posterolateral approach, 3 columns, 1 vertebral segment (eg, pedicle/vertebral 22208 body subtraction); each additional vertebral segment (List separately in addition to code for
    [Show full text]
  • Differences Between Subtotal Corpectomy and Laminoplasty for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy
    Spinal Cord (2010) 48, 214–220 & 2010 International Spinal Cord Society All rights reserved 1362-4393/10 $32.00 www.nature.com/sc ORIGINAL ARTICLE Differences between subtotal corpectomy and laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy S Shibuya1, S Komatsubara1, S Oka2, Y Kanda1, N Arima1 and T Yamamoto1 1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Kagawa University, Kagawa, Japan and 2Oka Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Clinic, Kagawa, Japan Objective: This study aimed to obtain guidelines for choosing between subtotal corpectomy (SC) and laminoplasty (LP) by analysing the surgical outcomes, radiological changes and problems associated with each surgical modality. Study Design: A retrospective analysis of two interventional case series. Setting: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kagawa University, Japan. Methods: Subjects comprised 34 patients who underwent SC and 49 patients who underwent LP. SC was performed by high-speed drilling to remove vertebral bodies. Autologous strut bone grafting was used. LP was performed as an expansive open-door LP. The level of decompression was from C3 to C7. Clinical evaluations included recovery rate (RR), frequency of C5 root palsy after surgery, re-operation and axial pain. Radiographic assessments included sagittal cervical alignment and bone union. Results: Comparisons between the two groups showed no significant differences in age at surgery, preoperative factors, RR and frequency of C5 palsy. Progression of kyphotic changes, operation time and volumes of blood loss and blood transfusion were significantly greater in the SC (two- or three- level) group. Six patients in the SC group required additional surgery because of pseudoarthrosis, and four patients underwent re-operation because of adjacent level disc degeneration.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of a Spine Registry Rate Among Smokers Undergoing
    No Difference in Functional Outcome but Higher Revision Rate Among Smokers Undergoing Cervical Artificial Disc Replacement: Analysis of a Spine Registry Lee Wen-Shen, Maksim Lai Wern Sheng, William Yeo, Tan Seang Beng, Yue Wai Mun, Guo Chang Ming and Mohammad Mashfiqul Arafin Siddiqui Int J Spine Surg published online 29 December 2020 http://ijssurgery.com/content/early/2020/12/17/7140 This information is current as of October 2, 2021. Email Alerts Receive free email-alerts when new articles cite this article. Sign up at: http://ijssurgery.com/alerts The International Journal of Spine Surgery 2397 Waterbury Circle, Suite 1, Aurora, IL 60504, Phone: +1-630-375-1432 © 2020 ISASS. All RightsDownloaded Reserved. from http://ijssurgery.com/ by guest on October 2, 2021 International Journal of Spine Surgery, Vol. 00, No. 00, 0000, pp. 000–000 https://doi.org/10.14444/7140 ÓInternational Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery No Difference in Functional Outcome but Higher Revision Rate Among Smokers Undergoing Cervical Artificial Disc Replacement: Analysis of a Spine Registry LEE WEN-SHEN, MBBS (HONS),1,2 MAKSIM LAI WERN SHENG, MBBS,1 WILLIAM YEO,3 TAN SEANG BENG, MBBS, FRCS,1 YUE WAI MUN, MBBS, FRCS,1 GUO CHANG MING, MBBS, FRCS,1 MOHAMMAD MASHFIQUL ARAFIN SIDDIQUI, MBBS, FRCS1 1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore 2Department of Surgery, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Australia, 3Statistics and Clinical Research, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore ABSTRACT Background: Smoking is a known predictor of negative outcomes in spinal surgery. However, its effect on the functional outcomes and revision rates after ADR is not well-documented.
    [Show full text]