Evaluating the Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Techniques in Spinal Surgery

Syeda Maimoona  Batool; Afiyat  Ahmad; Owais Nawaz Khan; Waseem Ahmad  Jadoon; Faisal Iqbal Jadoon; Tariq Khan

doi:10.62497/IRABCS.2024.64

Authors

Syeda Maimoona Batool Khyber Medical College Peshawar, Pakistan Author https://orcid.org/0009-0008-1335-244X
Afiyat Ahmad Khyber Medical College Peshawar, Pakistan Author https://orcid.org/0009-0002-3283-9778
Owais Nawaz Khan Khyber Medical College Peshawar, Pakistan Author https://orcid.org/0009-0000-4757-1714
Waseem Ahmad Jadoon Combined Military Hospital Nowshehra, Pakistan Author https://orcid.org/0009-0003-6483-6210
Faisal Iqbal Jadoon Khyber Medical College Peshawar, Pakistan Author https://orcid.org/0009-0003-6483-6210
Tariq Khan Khyber Medical College Peshawar, Pakistan Author https://orcid.org/0009-0004-4869-7529

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62497/IRABCS.2024.64

Keywords:

Minimally invasive spinal surgery, pain relief, functional improvement, quality of life, complications, recurrence rate

Abstract

Background: There may be benefits to minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) versus open surgeries. The results of MISS are assessed in this research in terms of safety, quality of life, pain alleviation, and functional improvement.

Methods: Data from 136 patients who had MISS procedures performed at Peshawar's Khyber Teaching Hospital (KTH) between April 2022 and March 2024 were examined. Data from pre-, during-, and post-operation were gathered. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was used to measure functional status, the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was used to measure pain, and the SF-36 Health Survey was used to measure quality of life. SPSS version 25 was used for the statistical analysis, with a significance level of p < 0.05.

Results: The mean VAS ratings of the patients decreased from 7.8 preoperatively to 2.2 after 12 months (p < 0.001), indicating considerable pain alleviation. There was a significant improvement in function as well; within the same time period, ODI scores decreased from 48% to 15% (p < 0.001). The SF-36 physical and mental component scores increased from 32 and 40 preoperatively to 54 and 53 at 12 months, respectively (p < 0.001), indicating a significant improvement in quality of life. 10% of patients had postoperative problems; there were no long-term neurological impairments, and 5% of cases returned.

Conclusion: MISS successfully reduces pain, improves function, and improves quality of life while retaining a low incidence of problems and recurrences. These findings support the wider use of MISS for spinal disorders and point to the need of further studies with bigger sample numbers and longer follow-up periods.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Syeda Maimoona Batool, Khyber Medical College Peshawar, Pakistan

MBBS
Afiyat Ahmad, Khyber Medical College Peshawar, Pakistan

MBBS
Owais Nawaz Khan, Khyber Medical College Peshawar, Pakistan

MBBS
Waseem Ahmad Jadoon, Combined Military Hospital Nowshehra, Pakistan

FCPS Trainee Medical Officer
Faisal Iqbal Jadoon, Khyber Medical College Peshawar, Pakistan

MBBS
Tariq Khan, Khyber Medical College Peshawar, Pakistan

MBBS

References

Sharif S, Afsar A. Learning curve and minimally invasive spine surgery. World neurosurgery. 2018 Nov 1;119:472-8.

Patel K, Harikar MM, Venkataram T, Chavda V, Montemurro N, Assefi M, Hussain N, Yamamoto V, Kateb B, Lewandrowski KU, Umana GE. Is Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery Superior to Endoscopic Spine Surgery in Postoperative Radiologic Outcomes of Lumbar Spine Degenerative Disease? A Systematic Review. Journal of Neurological Surgery Part A: Central European Neurosurgery. 2024 Mar;85(02):182-91.

Li HM, Zhang RJ, Shen CL. Accuracy of pedicle screw placement and clinical outcomes of robot-assisted technique versus conventional freehand technique in spine surgery from nine randomized controlled trials: a meta-analysis. Spine. 2020 Jan 15;45(2):E111-9.

Keric N, Doenitz C, Haj A, Rachwal-Czyzewicz I, Renovanz M, Wesp DM, Boor S, Conrad J, Brawanski A, Giese A, Kantelhardt SR. Evaluation of robot-guided minimally invasive implantation of 2067 pedicle screws. Neurosurgical focus. 2017 May 1;42(5):E11.

Kang T, Park SY, Kang CH, Lee SH, Park JH, Suh SW. Is biportal technique/endoscopic spinal surgery satisfactory for lumbar spinal stenosis patients?: a prospective randomized comparative study. Medicine. 2019 May 1;98(18):e15451.

Soffin EM, Vaishnav AS, Wetmore DS, Barber L, Hill P, Gang CH, Beckman JD, Albert TJ, Qureshi SA. Design and implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program for minimally invasive lumbar decompression spine surgery: initial experience. Spine. 2019 May 1;44(9):E561-70.

Hyun SJ, Kim KJ, Jahng TA, Kim HJ. Minimally invasive robotic versus open fluoroscopic-guided spinal instrumented fusions: a randomized controlled trial.

Hawasli AH, Khalifeh JM, Chatrath A, Yarbrough CK, Ray WZ. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with expandable versus static interbody devices: radiographic assessment of sagittal segmental and pelvic parameters. Neurosurgical focus. 2017 Aug 1;43(2):E10.

D’Souza M, Gendreau J, Feng A, Kim LH, Ho AL, Veeravagu A. Robotic-assisted spine surgery: history, efficacy, cost, and future trends. Robotic Surgery: Research and Reviews. 2019 Nov 7:9-23.

Hammad A, Wirries A, Ardeshiri A, Nikiforov O, Geiger F. Open versus minimally invasive TLIF: literature review and meta-analysis. Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research. 2019 Dec;14:1-21.

Menger RP, Savardekar AR, Farokhi F, Sin A. A cost-effectiveness analysis of the integration of robotic spine technology in spine surgery. Neurospine. 2018 Sep;15(3):216.

Heo DH, Lee DC, Park CK. Comparative analysis of three types of minimally invasive decompressive surgery for lumbar central stenosis: biportal endoscopy, uniportal endoscopy, and microsurgery. Neurosurgical focus. 2019 May 1;46(5):E9.

Ghasem A, Sharma A, Greif DN, Alam M, Al Maaieh M. The arrival of robotics in spine surgery: a review of the literature. Spine. 2018 Dec 1;43(23):1670-7.

Choi KC, Shim HK, Hwang JS, Shin SH, Lee DC, Jung HH, Park HA, Park CK. Comparison of surgical invasiveness between microdiscectomy and 3 different endoscopic discectomy techniques for lumbar disc herniation. World neurosurgery. 2018 Aug 1;116:e750-8.

Vaishnav AS, Saville P, McAnany S, Kirnaz S, Wipplinger C, Navarro-Ramirez R, Hartl R, Yang J, Gang CH, Qureshi SA. Retrospective review of immediate restoration of lordosis in single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a comparison of static and expandable interbody cages. Operative neurosurgery. 2020 May 1;18(5):518-23.

Elsarrag M, Soldozy S, Patel P, Norat P, Sokolowski JD, Park MS, Tvrdik P, Kalani MY. Enhanced recovery after spine surgery: a systematic review. Neurosurgical focus. 2019 Apr 1;46(4):E3.

Soffin EM, Wetmore DS, Beckman JD, Sheha ED, Vaishnav AS, Albert TJ, Gang CH, Qureshi SA. Opioid-free anesthesia within an enhanced recovery after surgery pathway for minimally invasive lumbar spine surgery: a retrospective matched cohort study. Neurosurgical Focus. 2019 Apr 1;46(4):E8.

Xu DS, Walker CT, Godzik J, Turner JD, Smith W, Uribe JS. Minimally invasive anterior, lateral, and oblique lumbar interbody fusion: a literature review. Annals of translational medicine. 2018 Mar;6(6).