Minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion in patients older than 70 years of age: Analysis of peri-and postoperative complications

Neurosurgery

Volumn 68, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 897-902

  Karikari, Isaac O ^a   Grossi, Peter M ^a   Nimjee, Shahid M ^a   Hardin, Carolyn ^a   Hodges, Tiffany R ^a   Hughes, Betsy D ^a   Brown, Christopher R ^a   Isaacs, Robert E ^a  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARTICLE; BLOOD VESSEL INJURY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEGENERATIVE DISEASE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GERIATRIC PATIENT; GRAFT DYSFUNCTION; GRAFT SUBSIDENCE; HEART INFARCTION; HUMAN; LUMBAR SPINE; LUMBAR SPINE STENOSIS; LUNG EMBOLISM; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; NERVE INJURY; ORGAN INJURY; PERIOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE HEMORRHAGE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCOLIOSIS; SPINE FUSION; SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL MORTALITY; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT DURATION; TREATMENT INDICATION; VERTEBRAL CANAL STENOSIS; WOUND INFECTION;

AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTRAOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MALE; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SPINAL FUSION; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MINIMALLY INVASIVE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 79952899668     PISSN: 0148396X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e3182098bfa     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Deyo RA, Ciol MA, Cherkin DC, Loeser JD, Bigos SJ. Lumbar spinal fusion. A cohort study of complications, reoperations, and resource use in the Medicare population. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993;18(11):1463-1470. (Pubitemid 23270910)
2. Isaacs RE, Podichetty VK, Santiago P, et al. Minimally invasive microendoscopyassisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with instrumentation. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005;3(2):98-105.
3. Podichetty VK, Spears J, Isaacs RE, Booher J, Biscup RS. Complications associated with minimally invasive decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis. Spinal Disord Tech. 2006;19(3):161-166. (Pubitemid 44284135)
4. Dhall SS, Wang MY, Mummaneni PV. Clinical and radiographic comparison of mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in 42 patients with long-term follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine. 2008;9(6):560-565.
5. Park P and Foley KT. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusionwith reduction of spondylolisthesis: technique and outcomes after a minimum of 2 years' follow-up. Neurosurg Focus. 2008;25(2):E16.
6. Carreon LY, Puno RM, Dimar JR II, Glassman SD, Johnson JR. Perioperative complications of posterior lumbar decompression and arthrodesis in older adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-A(11):2089-2092. (Pubitemid 37385904)
7. Fujita T, Kostuik JP, Huckell CB, Sieber AN. Complications of spinal fusion in adult patients more than 60 years of age. Clin North Am. 1998;29(4): 669-678. (Pubitemid 28501131)
8. Raffo CS, Lauerman WC. Predicting morbidity and mortality of lumbar spine arthrodesis in patients in their ninth decade. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006;31(1): 99-103. (Pubitemid 43348203)
9. OldridgeNB, Yuan Z, Stoll JE, RimmAR. Lumbar spine surgery andmortality among Medicare beneficiaries, 1986. Am J Public Health. 1994;84(8): 1292-1298.
10. Peng CW, Yue WM, Poh SY, Yeo W, Tan SB. Clinical and radiological outcomes of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34(13):1385-1389.