Bowel position does not preclude safe access in prone trans-psoas surgery.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Yi Yuen Wang, Gabriel Pokorny, Bryden Dawes
{"title":"Bowel position does not preclude safe access in prone trans-psoas surgery.","authors":"Yi Yuen Wang, Gabriel Pokorny, Bryden Dawes","doi":"10.1007/s10143-025-03809-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There are conflicting reports of the safety of surgical approach to the lateral spine during prone transpsoas surgery based on cadaveric and radiological data however a lack of true clinical data assessing safety is available. The objective of the study is to introduce a grading system assessing the safety of the surgical approach corridor in prone transpsoas surgery specifically in relation to bowel position, and the impact of the bowel position on bowel complications after prone transpsoas (PTP) surgery. Retrospective review of prospectively collated data. A 5-point grading system of bowel overlay was established. Consecutive patients undergoing prone transpsoas surgery across eighteen months were reviewed and graded using the 5-point grading system. Exclusions for prone transpsoas surgery was the configuration of the psoas musculature and retroperitoneal vessels. No consideration was given in regard to the bowel position pre-operatively. Analysis of grade in comparison to BMI, side of approach and levels were performed with the primary outcome measure being bowel injury. One hundred and forty patients were included in the study, all of whom underwent posterior pedicle screw fixation at 207 spinal levels. Mean age was 72.0 ± 9.9 with a female (N = 93) preponderance and an average BMI of 28.2 ± 4.9 kg/m<sup>2</sup>. There was a correlation with higher bowel overlay grade with lower BMI. When categorized into high (grades 3-5) or low (0-2) overlay grades, 96 patients had a low-grade overlay (68.5%), and 44 patients had a high-grade overlay (31.43%). There was no bowel complication encountered in any grade of bowel overlay. The presence of bowel overlying the lateral disc in the prone position is not a contraindication to the PTP approach. While academically interesting, anatomical and radiological studies reporting narrowing of the retroperitoneal space in the prone position have little clinical relevance when considering the safety of the approach for PTP surgery.</p>","PeriodicalId":19184,"journal":{"name":"Neurosurgical Review","volume":"48 1","pages":"688"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurosurgical Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-025-03809-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There are conflicting reports of the safety of surgical approach to the lateral spine during prone transpsoas surgery based on cadaveric and radiological data however a lack of true clinical data assessing safety is available. The objective of the study is to introduce a grading system assessing the safety of the surgical approach corridor in prone transpsoas surgery specifically in relation to bowel position, and the impact of the bowel position on bowel complications after prone transpsoas (PTP) surgery. Retrospective review of prospectively collated data. A 5-point grading system of bowel overlay was established. Consecutive patients undergoing prone transpsoas surgery across eighteen months were reviewed and graded using the 5-point grading system. Exclusions for prone transpsoas surgery was the configuration of the psoas musculature and retroperitoneal vessels. No consideration was given in regard to the bowel position pre-operatively. Analysis of grade in comparison to BMI, side of approach and levels were performed with the primary outcome measure being bowel injury. One hundred and forty patients were included in the study, all of whom underwent posterior pedicle screw fixation at 207 spinal levels. Mean age was 72.0 ± 9.9 with a female (N = 93) preponderance and an average BMI of 28.2 ± 4.9 kg/m2. There was a correlation with higher bowel overlay grade with lower BMI. When categorized into high (grades 3-5) or low (0-2) overlay grades, 96 patients had a low-grade overlay (68.5%), and 44 patients had a high-grade overlay (31.43%). There was no bowel complication encountered in any grade of bowel overlay. The presence of bowel overlying the lateral disc in the prone position is not a contraindication to the PTP approach. While academically interesting, anatomical and radiological studies reporting narrowing of the retroperitoneal space in the prone position have little clinical relevance when considering the safety of the approach for PTP surgery.

在俯卧位腰大肌移位手术中,肠位不排除安全进入。
基于尸体和放射学数据,关于俯卧位转腰肌手术中外侧脊柱手术入路的安全性有相互矛盾的报道,然而缺乏真正的临床数据来评估安全性。本研究的目的是介绍一种分级系统,评估俯卧位转腰肌手术入路的安全性,特别是与肠道位置的关系,以及肠道位置对俯卧位转腰肌手术后肠道并发症的影响。前瞻性整理资料的回顾性分析。建立肠覆盖的5点分级系统。对连续18个月接受俯卧位腰肌转肌手术的患者进行回顾,并使用5分制进行评分。俯卧位腰肌移位手术的排除因素是腰肌组织和腹膜后血管的结构。术前未考虑肠道位置。以肠损伤为主要结局指标,对与BMI比较的分级、入路侧和水平进行分析。140例患者被纳入研究,所有患者在207个脊柱节段接受后路椎弓根螺钉固定。平均年龄72.0±9.9岁,女性(N = 93)居多,平均BMI为28.2±4.9 kg/m2。肠道覆盖等级越高,BMI越低。当被分为高(3-5级)或低(0-2级)覆盖等级时,96例患者为低级别覆盖(68.5%),44例患者为高级别覆盖(31.43%)。在任何级别的肠覆盖层中均未出现肠道并发症。俯卧位肠覆盖外侧椎间盘并非PTP入路的禁忌症。虽然在学术上很有趣,但在考虑PTP手术入路的安全性时,解剖和放射学研究报告的俯卧位腹膜后间隙变窄与临床相关性很小。
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
Neurosurgical Review
Neurosurgical Review 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
7.10%
发文量
191
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The goal of Neurosurgical Review is to provide a forum for comprehensive reviews on current issues in neurosurgery. Each issue contains up to three reviews, reflecting all important aspects of one topic (a disease or a surgical approach). Comments by a panel of experts within the same issue complete the topic. By providing comprehensive coverage of one topic per issue, Neurosurgical Review combines the topicality of professional journals with the indepth treatment of a monograph. Original papers of high quality are also welcome.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信