Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2024; 59(02): e153-e159
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1785462
Artigo de Atualização
Coluna

Acesso à coluna lombossacral: Visão atual

Article in several languages: português | English
Allan Hiroshi de Araujo Ono 
1   Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil
,
Aécio Rubens Dias Pereira Filho 
2   Hospital Vera Cruz, Campinas, SP, Brasil
,
Fernando Flores de Araujo 
1   Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil
,
Raphael Marthus Marcon 
1   Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil
,
Alexandre Fogaça Cristante 
1   Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil
,
Tarcisio Eloy de Pessoa Barros Filho 
3   Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil
› Author Affiliations Suporte Financeiro Este estudo não recebeu qualquer financiamento específico de fontes públicas, comerciais ou sem fins lucrativos.
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Resumo

A abordagem cirúrgica da coluna lombossacral tem sido objeto de estudos anatômicos experimentais e científicos desde a era hipocrática. Contudo, foi no século XX que, com a evolução da assepsia e da antibioticoterapia, a cirurgia da coluna começou a evoluir em velocidade vertiginosa e as diversas possibilidades de vias de acesso tornaram-se objetos de desenvolvimento e discussão. Desta forma, as doenças da coluna lombossacral podem ser acessadas de diferentes maneiras e posições, desde a abordagem posterior tradicional em decúbito ventral até as abordagens anterior, oblíqua, lateral e endoscópica. O presente artigo traz vias de acesso de última geração para a coluna lombossacral. O objetivo deste artigo é elucidar as possibilidades de acesso à coluna lombar para quaisquer finalidades, como descompressão, fusão, ressecções tumorais, reconstrução ou correção de deformidades, independentemente do tipo de implante ou seu posicionamento.

Palavras-chave

artrodese - coluna vertebral/cirurgia - fusão vertebral - região lombossacral

Trabalho desenvolvido pelo Grupo de Coluna, Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia do Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil.




Publication History

Received: 08 February 2023

Accepted: 04 September 2023

Article published online:
10 April 2024

© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • Referências

  • 1 Lee SH, Jeong SK, Bae J. Evolution of Spine Surgery as a Request of Endoscopic and Microscopic Laser to Technology. In: Bae J, Lee SH. editors. Laser Spine Surgery. Springer, Singapore; 2021: 1-8 . Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-2206-9_1
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Jones ET, Pickett JC. An operation for progressive spinal deformities. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988; (229) 2-3
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Capener N. Spondylolisthesis. Br J Surg 1932; 19 (75) 374-386
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 de Kunder SL, Rijkers K, Caelers IJMH, de Bie RA, Koehler PJ, van Santbrink H. Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Historical Overview and a Future Perspective. Spine 2018; 43 (16) 1161-1168
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Mayer HM. A History of Endoscopic Lumbar Spine Surgery: What Have We Learnt?. BioMed Res Int 2019; 2019: 4583943
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Allain J, Dufour T. Anterior lumbar fusion techniques: ALIF, OLIF, DLIF, LLIF, IXLIF. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2020; 106 (1S): S149-S157
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Goodrich JT. History of spine surgery in the ancient and medieval worlds. Neurosurgical focus 2004; 16 (01) 1-13
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Hides JA, Stokes MJ, Saide M, Jull GA, Cooper DH. Evidence of lumbar multifidus muscle wasting ipsilateral to symptoms in patients with acute/subacute low back pain. Spine 1994; 19 (02) 165-172
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Posterior approach. Accessed November 16, 2022. Available from: https://surgeryreference.aofoundation.org/spine/deformities/adolescent-idiopathic-scoliosis/approach/posterior-approach
  • 10 Gille O, Jolivet E, Dousset V. et al. Erector spinae muscle changes on magnetic resonance imaging following lumbar surgery through a posterior approach. Spine 2007; 32 (11) 1236-1241
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 He K, Head J, Mouchtouris N. et al. The Implications of Paraspinal Muscle Atrophy in Low Back Pain, Thoracolumbar Pathology, and Clinical Outcomes After Spine Surgery: A Review of the Literature. Global Spine J 2020; 10 (05) 657-666
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Kawaguchi Y, Matsui H, Tsuji H. Back muscle injury after posterior lumbar spine surgery. A histologic and enzymatic analysis. Spine 1996; 21 (08) 941-944
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Kawaguchi Y, Matsui H, Tsuji H. Back muscle injury after posterior lumbar spine surgery. Part 2: Histologic and histochemical analyses in humans. Spine 1994; 19 (22) 2598-2602
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Watkins MB. Posterolateral fusion in pseudarthrosis and posterior element defects of the lumbosacral spine. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1964; 35 (35) 80-85
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Wiltse LL. The paraspinal sacrospinalis-splitting approach to the lumbar spine. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1973; 91 (91) 48-57
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Palmer DK, Allen JL, Williams PA. et al. Multilevel magnetic resonance imaging analysis of multifidus-longissimus cleavage planes in the lumbar spine and potential clinical applications to Wiltse's paraspinal approach. Spine 2011; 36 (16) 1263-1267
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Wiltse LL, Spencer CW. New uses and refinements of the paraspinal approach to the lumbar spine. Spine 1988; 13 (06) 696-706
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Street JT, Andrew Glennie R, Dea N. et al. A comparison of the Wiltse versus midline approaches in degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine. J Neurosurg Spine 2016; 25 (03) 332-338
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Guiroy A, Sícoli A, Masanés NG, Ciancio AM, Gagliardi M, Falavigna A. How to perform the Wiltse posterolateral spinal approach: Technical note. Surg Neurol Int 2018; 9: 38
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Ozgur BM, Aryan HE, Pimenta L, Taylor WR. Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion (XLIF): a novel surgical technique for anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J 2006; 6 (04) 435-443
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Li JX, Phan K, Mobbs R. Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technical Aspects, Operative Outcomes, and Complications. World Neurosurg 2017; 98: 113-123
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Mai HT, Schneider AD, Alvarez AP. et al. Anatomic Considerations in the Lateral Transpsoas Interbody Fusion: The Impact of Age, Sex, BMI, and Scoliosis. Clin Spine Surg 2019; 32 (05) 215-221
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Watkins III RG, Watkins IV RG. Eds. Surgical Approaches to the Spine. New York, NY: Springer; 2015
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Pawar A, Hughes A, Girardi F, Sama A, Lebl D, Cammisa F. Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Asian Spine J 2015; 9 (06) 978-983
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Ito, HiroMu, JuNichi, Tsuchiya, Goichi Asami A new radical operation for Pott's disease: report of ten cases. JBJS 1934; 16 (03) 499-515
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 26 Brau SA. Mini-open approach to the spine for anterior lumbar interbody fusion: description of the procedure, results and complications. Spine J 2002; 2 (03) 216-223
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Dias Pereira Filho AR. Technique for Exposing Lumbar Discs in Anterior Approach Using Steinmann Wires: Arthroplasties or Arthrodesis. World Neurosurg 2021; 148: 189-195
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Mobbs RJ, Phan K, Malham G, Seex K, Rao PJ. Lumbar interbody fusion: techniques, indications and comparison of interbody fusion options including PLIF, TLIF, MI-TLIF, OLIF/ATP, LLIF and ALIF. J Spine Surg 2015; 1 (01) 2-18
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Wert Jr WG, Sellers W, Mariner D. et al. Identifying Risk Factors for Complications During Exposure for Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Cureus 2021; 13 (07) e16792
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Manunga J, Alcala C, Smith J. et al. Technical approach, outcomes, and exposure-related complications in patients undergoing anterior lumbar interbody fusion. J Vasc Surg 2021; 73 (03) 992-998
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Xu DS, Walker CT, Godzik J, Turner JD, Smith W, Uribe JS. Minimally invasive anterior, lateral, and oblique lumbar interbody fusion: a literature review. Ann Transl Med 2018; 6 (06) 104-104
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Safaee MM, Tenorio A, Osorio JA. et al. The impact of obesity on perioperative complications in patients undergoing anterior lumbar interbody fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 2020; 33 (03) 1-10
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Mayer HM. A new microsurgical technique for minimally invasive anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine 1997; 22 (06) 691-699 , discussion 700
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Silvestre C, Mac-Thiong JM, Hilmi R, Roussouly P. Complications and morbidities of mini-open anterior retroperitoneal lumbar interbody fusion: oblique lumbar interbody fusion in 179 patients. Asian Spine J 2012; 6 (02) 89-97
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 OLIF Procedures | Medtronic. Accessed November 17, 2022. Available from: https://www.medtronic.com/us-en/healthcare-professionals/therapies-procedures/spinal-orthopaedic/olif.html
  • 36 Molinares DM, Davis TT, Fung DA. Retroperitoneal oblique corridor to the L2-S1 intervertebral discs: an MRI study. J Neurosurg Spine 2016; 24 (02) 248-255
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Zairi F, Sunna TP, Westwick HJ. et al. Mini-open oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) approach for multi-level discectomy and fusion involving L5-S1: Preliminary experience. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2017; 103 (02) 295-299
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Li R, Li X, Zhou H, Jiang W. Development and Application of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Orthop Surg 2020; 12 (02) 355-365
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Hermantin FU, Peters T, Quartararo L, Kambin P. A prospective, randomized study comparing the results of open discectomy with those of video-assisted arthroscopic microdiscectomy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1999; 81 (07) 958-965
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Mayer HM, Brock M. Percutaneous endoscopic discectomy: surgical technique and preliminary results compared to microsurgical discectomy. J Neurosurg 1993; 78 (02) 216-225
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Ruetten S, Komp M, Merk H, Godolias G. Full-endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal lumbar discectomy versus conventional microsurgical technique: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Spine 2008; 33 (09) 931-939
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Nellensteijn J, Ostelo R, Bartels R, Peul W, van Royen B, van Tulder M. Transforaminal endoscopic surgery for symptomatic lumbar disc herniations: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Spine J 2010; 19 (02) 181-204
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Cong L, Zhu Y, Tu G. A meta-analysis of endoscopic discectomy versus open discectomy for symptomatic lumbar disk herniation. Eur Spine J 2016; 25 (01) 134-143
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Li XC, Zhong CF, Deng GB, Liang RW, Huang CM. Full-Endoscopic Procedures Versus Traditional Discectomy Surgery for Discectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Current Global Clinical Trials. Pain Physician 2016; 19 (03) 103-118
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Ruan W, Feng F, Liu Z, Xie J, Cai L, Ping A. Comparison of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy versus open lumbar microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: A meta-analysis. Int J Surg 2016; 31: 86-92
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Ruetten S, Komp M, Merk H, Godolias G. Recurrent lumbar disc herniation after conventional discectomy: a prospective, randomized study comparing full-endoscopic interlaminar and transforaminal versus microsurgical revision. J Spinal Disord Tech 2009; 22 (02) 122-129
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar