Biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion using a large polyetheretherketone cage: preliminary results.

IF 2.3 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Sang-Min Park, Hyun-Jin Park, Ki-Han You, Ho-Joong Kim, Jin S Yeom
{"title":"Biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion using a large polyetheretherketone cage: preliminary results.","authors":"Sang-Min Park, Hyun-Jin Park, Ki-Han You, Ho-Joong Kim, Jin S Yeom","doi":"10.31616/asj.2025.0010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective study.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aimed to introduce biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (BELIF) using a large polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage, describe the surgical technique, and evaluate its clinical and radiological outcomes.</p><p><strong>Overview of literature: </strong>Biportal endoscopic techniques have emerged as a promising approach in spine surgery, and BELIF is reported to have good surgical outcomes. The use of large PEEK cage in lumbar interbody fusion has gained attention owing to their potential biomechanical advantages. Despite the potential benefits of BELIF with large PEEK cages, studies on its effectiveness and safety are lacking.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twelve consecutive patients underwent single-level BELIF for lumbar degenerative disease. The technique involves two small portals, one each for endoscopy and instruments. A large PEEK cage was inserted through a posterolateral approach. Clinical outcomes, including a Visual Analog Scale for back and leg pain, the Oswestry Disability Index, and the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, were assessed preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Fusion status was evaluated using computed tomography (CT) at 12 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean patient age was 69.1±7.2 years, with operations predominantly at the L4-5 level (83%). The mean operation time was 149.7±37.4 minutes, and the average surgical drainage was 201.4±59.7 mL. All clinical outcome measures showed significant improvement at 12 months (p<0.05). Fusion was achieved in 83.3% of patients. Cage subsidence (>1 mm) occurred in one patient (8.3%). Complications included one case each of incidental durotomy, wrong-site surgery, and wound dehiscence and three cases of asymptomatic hematoma.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>BELIF using a large PEEK cage demonstrated promising clinical outcomes and fusion rates. The technique offers enhanced visualization and enables direct neural decompression while minimizing tissue trauma. The use of a large PEEK cage may contribute to improved stability and reduced subsidence risk.</p>","PeriodicalId":8555,"journal":{"name":"Asian Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2025.0010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study design: Retrospective study.

Purpose: This study aimed to introduce biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (BELIF) using a large polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage, describe the surgical technique, and evaluate its clinical and radiological outcomes.

Overview of literature: Biportal endoscopic techniques have emerged as a promising approach in spine surgery, and BELIF is reported to have good surgical outcomes. The use of large PEEK cage in lumbar interbody fusion has gained attention owing to their potential biomechanical advantages. Despite the potential benefits of BELIF with large PEEK cages, studies on its effectiveness and safety are lacking.

Methods: Twelve consecutive patients underwent single-level BELIF for lumbar degenerative disease. The technique involves two small portals, one each for endoscopy and instruments. A large PEEK cage was inserted through a posterolateral approach. Clinical outcomes, including a Visual Analog Scale for back and leg pain, the Oswestry Disability Index, and the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, were assessed preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Fusion status was evaluated using computed tomography (CT) at 12 months.

Results: The mean patient age was 69.1±7.2 years, with operations predominantly at the L4-5 level (83%). The mean operation time was 149.7±37.4 minutes, and the average surgical drainage was 201.4±59.7 mL. All clinical outcome measures showed significant improvement at 12 months (p<0.05). Fusion was achieved in 83.3% of patients. Cage subsidence (>1 mm) occurred in one patient (8.3%). Complications included one case each of incidental durotomy, wrong-site surgery, and wound dehiscence and three cases of asymptomatic hematoma.

Conclusions: BELIF using a large PEEK cage demonstrated promising clinical outcomes and fusion rates. The technique offers enhanced visualization and enables direct neural decompression while minimizing tissue trauma. The use of a large PEEK cage may contribute to improved stability and reduced subsidence risk.

研究设计目的:本研究旨在介绍使用大型聚醚醚酮(PEEK)保持架的双ortal内窥镜腰椎椎间融合术(BELIF),描述手术技术,并评估其临床和放射学结果:文献概述:双腔镜内窥镜技术已成为脊柱手术中一种前景广阔的方法,据报道,BELIF具有良好的手术效果。在腰椎椎间融合术中使用大型 PEEK 骨架因其潜在的生物力学优势而备受关注。尽管使用大型 PEEK 保持架进行 BELIF 具有潜在的优势,但目前还缺乏对其有效性和安全性的研究:方法:12 名连续的腰椎退行性疾病患者接受了单水平 BELIF 治疗。该技术包括两个小切口,内窥镜和器械各一个。通过后外侧入路插入大型 PEEK 骨架。临床结果包括腰腿痛视觉模拟量表、Oswestry残疾指数和欧洲生活质量-5维度,分别在术前、术后3个月、6个月和12个月进行评估。12个月时使用计算机断层扫描(CT)对融合状态进行评估:患者平均年龄(69.1±7.2)岁,主要在 L4-5 水平进行手术(83%)。平均手术时间为(149.7±37.4)分钟,平均手术引流量为(201.4±59.7)毫升。所有临床结果均显示,1例患者(8.3%)在12个月后病情明显好转(P1 mm)。并发症包括偶发性穹隆切开术、错位手术和伤口裂开各1例,无症状血肿3例:结论:使用大型 PEEK 骨架的 BELIF 具有良好的临床效果和融合率。该技术增强了可视性,可直接进行神经减压,同时将组织创伤降至最低。使用大型 PEEK 保持架有助于提高稳定性和降低下沉风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Asian Spine Journal
Asian Spine Journal ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
108
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信