Laparoscopic assisted fusion of the lumbosacral spine

A biomechanical and histologic analysis of the open versus laparoscopic technique in an animal model

Lee H Riley, Jason C. Eck, Hiroyuki Yoshida, Jeffrey M. Toth, Nguyen Cahn, Tae Hong Lim, Linda M. McGrady

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Study Design. An animal model for laparoscopic lumbosacral fusion. Objectives. To compare the biomechanical and histologic results of open to laparoscopic lumbosacral discectomy and fusion in an animal model. Background Data. Early clinical reports of laparoscopic lumbosacral fusions are encouraging, but animal experiments have not been reported. Methods. Ten pigs (50-80 kg) were divided into two groups. Group 1 underwent an open anterior lumbosacral discectomy and fusion at L7-S1 using autologous bone graft and a titanium MOSS (DePuy Motech) cage, Group 2 was identical to Group 1 except that a laparoscopic technique was used. The animals were killed at 3 months, and the lumbosacral spines were harvested for biomechanical and histologic testing. Results. Estimated blood loss and average length of operation, respectively, for the two groups were: Group 1, 50 mL, 2 hours 50 minutes; and Group 2, 40 mL, 3 hours 40 minutes. There were no perioperative or post- operative complications in either group. Motion analysis results showed less motion in lateral bending, flexion, and extension than in the intact specimen in both groups. Tensile testing showed that the stiffness was significantly greater in the open group than in the laparoscopic group (P <0.004). Histologic examination showed a less extensive discectomy and less bone growth in the implant in the laparoscopic group. Inadequate decortication of end-plates occurred in two animals who underwent laparoscopy. Conclusions, Although lumbosacral discectomy and implant insertion can be performed using the laparoscopic technique, the construct may not have the same biomechanical strength as that attained with the open procedure. Laparoscopic-assisted lumbosacral fusion surgery requires additional investigation before it is widely used in clinical situations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1407-1412
Number of pages6
JournalSpine
Volume22
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 15 1997

Fingerprint

Diskectomy
Spine
Animal Models
Bone Development
Titanium
Laparoscopy
Swine
Transplants
Bone and Bones

Keywords

  • Animal model
  • Biomechanical testing
  • Fusion
  • Laparoscopy
  • Lumbosacral spine
  • Swine

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physiology
  • Clinical Neurology
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Laparoscopic assisted fusion of the lumbosacral spine : A biomechanical and histologic analysis of the open versus laparoscopic technique in an animal model. / Riley, Lee H; Eck, Jason C.; Yoshida, Hiroyuki; Toth, Jeffrey M.; Cahn, Nguyen; Lim, Tae Hong; McGrady, Linda M.

In: Spine, Vol. 22, No. 12, 15.06.1997, p. 1407-1412.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Riley, Lee H ; Eck, Jason C. ; Yoshida, Hiroyuki ; Toth, Jeffrey M. ; Cahn, Nguyen ; Lim, Tae Hong ; McGrady, Linda M. / Laparoscopic assisted fusion of the lumbosacral spine : A biomechanical and histologic analysis of the open versus laparoscopic technique in an animal model. In: Spine. 1997 ; Vol. 22, No. 12. pp. 1407-1412.
@article{d5174018a7e943d3aac28f26fe811f11,
title = "Laparoscopic assisted fusion of the lumbosacral spine: A biomechanical and histologic analysis of the open versus laparoscopic technique in an animal model",
abstract = "Study Design. An animal model for laparoscopic lumbosacral fusion. Objectives. To compare the biomechanical and histologic results of open to laparoscopic lumbosacral discectomy and fusion in an animal model. Background Data. Early clinical reports of laparoscopic lumbosacral fusions are encouraging, but animal experiments have not been reported. Methods. Ten pigs (50-80 kg) were divided into two groups. Group 1 underwent an open anterior lumbosacral discectomy and fusion at L7-S1 using autologous bone graft and a titanium MOSS (DePuy Motech) cage, Group 2 was identical to Group 1 except that a laparoscopic technique was used. The animals were killed at 3 months, and the lumbosacral spines were harvested for biomechanical and histologic testing. Results. Estimated blood loss and average length of operation, respectively, for the two groups were: Group 1, 50 mL, 2 hours 50 minutes; and Group 2, 40 mL, 3 hours 40 minutes. There were no perioperative or post- operative complications in either group. Motion analysis results showed less motion in lateral bending, flexion, and extension than in the intact specimen in both groups. Tensile testing showed that the stiffness was significantly greater in the open group than in the laparoscopic group (P <0.004). Histologic examination showed a less extensive discectomy and less bone growth in the implant in the laparoscopic group. Inadequate decortication of end-plates occurred in two animals who underwent laparoscopy. Conclusions, Although lumbosacral discectomy and implant insertion can be performed using the laparoscopic technique, the construct may not have the same biomechanical strength as that attained with the open procedure. Laparoscopic-assisted lumbosacral fusion surgery requires additional investigation before it is widely used in clinical situations.",
keywords = "Animal model, Biomechanical testing, Fusion, Laparoscopy, Lumbosacral spine, Swine",
author = "Riley, {Lee H} and Eck, {Jason C.} and Hiroyuki Yoshida and Toth, {Jeffrey M.} and Nguyen Cahn and Lim, {Tae Hong} and McGrady, {Linda M.}",
year = "1997",
month = "6",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1097/00007632-199706150-00021",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "1407--1412",
journal = "Spine",
issn = "0362-2436",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Laparoscopic assisted fusion of the lumbosacral spine

T2 - A biomechanical and histologic analysis of the open versus laparoscopic technique in an animal model

AU - Riley, Lee H

AU - Eck, Jason C.

AU - Yoshida, Hiroyuki

AU - Toth, Jeffrey M.

AU - Cahn, Nguyen

AU - Lim, Tae Hong

AU - McGrady, Linda M.

PY - 1997/6/15

Y1 - 1997/6/15

N2 - Study Design. An animal model for laparoscopic lumbosacral fusion. Objectives. To compare the biomechanical and histologic results of open to laparoscopic lumbosacral discectomy and fusion in an animal model. Background Data. Early clinical reports of laparoscopic lumbosacral fusions are encouraging, but animal experiments have not been reported. Methods. Ten pigs (50-80 kg) were divided into two groups. Group 1 underwent an open anterior lumbosacral discectomy and fusion at L7-S1 using autologous bone graft and a titanium MOSS (DePuy Motech) cage, Group 2 was identical to Group 1 except that a laparoscopic technique was used. The animals were killed at 3 months, and the lumbosacral spines were harvested for biomechanical and histologic testing. Results. Estimated blood loss and average length of operation, respectively, for the two groups were: Group 1, 50 mL, 2 hours 50 minutes; and Group 2, 40 mL, 3 hours 40 minutes. There were no perioperative or post- operative complications in either group. Motion analysis results showed less motion in lateral bending, flexion, and extension than in the intact specimen in both groups. Tensile testing showed that the stiffness was significantly greater in the open group than in the laparoscopic group (P <0.004). Histologic examination showed a less extensive discectomy and less bone growth in the implant in the laparoscopic group. Inadequate decortication of end-plates occurred in two animals who underwent laparoscopy. Conclusions, Although lumbosacral discectomy and implant insertion can be performed using the laparoscopic technique, the construct may not have the same biomechanical strength as that attained with the open procedure. Laparoscopic-assisted lumbosacral fusion surgery requires additional investigation before it is widely used in clinical situations.

AB - Study Design. An animal model for laparoscopic lumbosacral fusion. Objectives. To compare the biomechanical and histologic results of open to laparoscopic lumbosacral discectomy and fusion in an animal model. Background Data. Early clinical reports of laparoscopic lumbosacral fusions are encouraging, but animal experiments have not been reported. Methods. Ten pigs (50-80 kg) were divided into two groups. Group 1 underwent an open anterior lumbosacral discectomy and fusion at L7-S1 using autologous bone graft and a titanium MOSS (DePuy Motech) cage, Group 2 was identical to Group 1 except that a laparoscopic technique was used. The animals were killed at 3 months, and the lumbosacral spines were harvested for biomechanical and histologic testing. Results. Estimated blood loss and average length of operation, respectively, for the two groups were: Group 1, 50 mL, 2 hours 50 minutes; and Group 2, 40 mL, 3 hours 40 minutes. There were no perioperative or post- operative complications in either group. Motion analysis results showed less motion in lateral bending, flexion, and extension than in the intact specimen in both groups. Tensile testing showed that the stiffness was significantly greater in the open group than in the laparoscopic group (P <0.004). Histologic examination showed a less extensive discectomy and less bone growth in the implant in the laparoscopic group. Inadequate decortication of end-plates occurred in two animals who underwent laparoscopy. Conclusions, Although lumbosacral discectomy and implant insertion can be performed using the laparoscopic technique, the construct may not have the same biomechanical strength as that attained with the open procedure. Laparoscopic-assisted lumbosacral fusion surgery requires additional investigation before it is widely used in clinical situations.

KW - Animal model

KW - Biomechanical testing

KW - Fusion

KW - Laparoscopy

KW - Lumbosacral spine

KW - Swine

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030984944&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030984944&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/00007632-199706150-00021

DO - 10.1097/00007632-199706150-00021

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 1407

EP - 1412

JO - Spine

JF - Spine

SN - 0362-2436

IS - 12

ER -