Download PDF
J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2020; 81(06): 513-520
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1688561
Original Article

Mini-Tubular Access Surgery: A Single Surgeon's 12 Years in the Corridors of the Neuroaxis

Nirmeen Zagzoog
1   Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
,
Waleed Alsunbul∗
1   Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
,
Ali Elgheriani∗
2   Graduate School of Experimental Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
,
Radwan Takroni∗
1   Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
,
Kesava Reddy∗
1   Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Tubular approach surgery now includes complex spinal and cranial procedures. Aided by modified instrumentation and frameless stereotaxy, minimal access surgery is being offered for a growing array of neurosurgical conditions.

Methods This article explores the flexibility and adaptability of the tubular retractor system for multiple indications by highlighting the 12-year experience of the primary surgeon using a tubular retractor system reported for the entire neuroaxis including intracranial, foramen magnum, and the craniocaudal extent of the spine for intra- and extradural pathologies. For this article we have not analyzed our experience with degenerative spinal disease. Patient characteristics, pathology, resection results, length of hospital stay, and complications are discussed.

Results From August 2005 through March 2017, 538 patients underwent neurosurgical procedures with mini-tubular access. Of these, the 127 patients who underwent mini-tubular access operations for nontraditional indications are discussed here. There were 65 women and 61 men with an average age of 53.5 years. The cases by anatomical location are as follows: 27 cranial cases, 11 foramen magnum decompressions, and 89 for spinal indications. The cranial pathologies included primary and metastatic tumors. The spinal pathologies included intra- and extradural spinal tumors, spina bifida occulta, syringomyelia, and other cystic lesions in the spine. In the vast majority of the patients where gross total resection was the goal, it was achieved. The mean length of stay was 2.94 days.

Conclusions This report demonstrates that mini-tubular access surgery can be adapted to pathologies in the entire neuroaxis with outcomes that are comparable with open techniques. Limited tissue dissection, smaller incisions, and limited bone resection make the mini-tubular access approach a desirable option when feasible. Greater experience with all of these techniques is needed before the definitive status of these procedures in the neurosurgical armamentarium can be demonstrated.

Keywords

tubular retractor - serial dilation - deep brain lesion - spinal surgery - minimal access


Publication History

Received: 06 October 2018

Accepted: 06 February 2019

Article published online:
10 September 2020

© 2020. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Stuttgart · New York

 

  • References

  • 1 Fessler RG. Minimally invasive spine surgery. Neurosurgery 2002; 51 (5, Suppl): Siii-Siv
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Foley KT, Smith MM. Microendoscopic discectomy. Tech Neurosurg 1997; 3: 301-307
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Kepler CK, Yu AL, Gruskay JA. et al. Comparison of open and minimally invasive techniques for posterior lumbar instrumentation and fusion after open anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J 2013; 13 (05) 489-497
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Nzokou A, Weil AG, Shedid D. Minimally invasive removal of thoracic and lumbar spinal tumors using a nonexpandable tubular retractor. J Neurosurg Spine 2013; 19 (06) 708-715
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Raygor KP, Than KD, Chou D, Mummaneni PV. Comparison of minimally invasive transspinous and open approaches for thoracolumbar intradural-extramedullary spinal tumors. Neurosurg Focus 2015; 39 (02) E12
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Akai T, Shiraga S, Sasagawa Y, Okamoto K, Tachibana O, Lizuka H. Intra-parenchymal tumor biopsy using neuroendoscopy with navigation. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2008; 51 (02) 83-86
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Tubbs RS, McGirt MJ, Oakes WJ. Surgical experience in 130 pediatric patients with Chiari I malformations. J Neurosurg 2003; 99 (02) 291-296
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Almenawer SA, Crevier L, Murty N, Kassam A, Reddy K. Minimal access to deep intracranial lesions using a serial dilatation technique: case-series and review of brain tubular retractor systems. Neurosurg Rev 2013; 36 (02) 321-329 ; discussion 329–330.
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Cohen-Gadol AA. Minitubular transcortical microsurgical approach for gross total resection of third ventricular colloid cysts: technique and assessment. World Neurosurg 2013; 79 (01) 207.e7-207.e10
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Eliyas JK, Glynn R, Kulwin CG. et al. Minimally invasive transsulcal resection of intraventricular and periventricular lesions through a tubular retractor system: multicentric experience and results. World Neurosurg 2016; 90: 556-564
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Greenfield JP, Cobb WS, Tsouris AJ, Schwartz TH. Stereotactic minimally invasive tubular retractor system for deep brain lesions. Neurosurgery 2008; 63 (04) (Suppl. 02) 334-339 ; discussion 339–340
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Ratre S, Yadav YR, Parihar VS, Kher Y. Microendoscopic removal of deep-seated brain tumors using tubular retraction system. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2016; 77 (04) 312-320
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Bander ED, Jones SH, Kovanlikaya I, Schwartz TH. Utility of tubular retractors to minimize surgical brain injury in the removal of deep intraparenchymal lesions: a quantitative analysis of FLAIR hyperintensity and apparent diffusion coefficient maps. J Neurosurg 2016; 124 (04) 1053-1060
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Kennedy R, Aref M, Badhiwala J, Vinh B, Almenawar S, Reddy K. Foramen magnum decompression of Chiari malformation using minimally invasive tubular retractors. In: Kim DH, Choi G, Sang-Ho L, Fessler RG. , eds. Endoscopic Spine Surgery. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Thieme; 2018: 299-308
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 15 Desai A, Bekelis K, Erkmen K. Minimally invasive tubular retractor system for adequate exposure during surgical obliteration of spinal dural arteriovenous fistulas with the aid of indocyanine green intraoperative angiography. J Neurosurg Spine 2012; 17 (02) 160-163
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Inanami H, Saiki F, Oshima Y. Microendoscope-assisted posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a technical note. J Spine Surg 2018; 4 (02) 408-413
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Gandhi RH, German JW. Minimally invasive approach for the treatment of intradural spinal pathology. Neurosurg Focus 2013; 35 (02) E5
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Haji FA, Cenic A, Crevier L, Murty N, Reddy K. Minimally invasive approach for the resection of spinal neoplasm. Spine 2011; 36 (15) E1018-E1026
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Hong CS, Prevedello DM, Elder JB. Comparison of endoscope- versus microscope-assisted resection of deep-seated intracranial lesions using a minimally invasive port retractor system. J Neurosurg 2016; 124 (03) 799-810
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Sandhu FA, Santiago P, Fessler RG, Palmer S. Minimally invasive surgical treatment of lumbar synovial cysts. Neurosurgery 2004; 54 (01) 107-111 ; discussion 111–112
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Sukkarieh HG, Hitchon PW, Awe O, Noeller J. Minimally invasive resection of lumbar intraspinal synovial cysts via a contralateral approach: review of 13 cases. J Neurosurg Spine 2015; 23 (04) 444-450
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Tredway TL, Santiago P, Hrubes MR, Song JK, Christie SD, Fessler RG. Minimally invasive resection of intradural-extramedullary spinal neoplasms. Neurosurgery 2006; 58 (1, Suppl): ONS52-ONS58; discussion ONS52–ONS58
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Deng K, Li YN, Li GL. et al. Neural endoscopic assisted micro-invasive management of Chiari I malformation. Chin Med J (Engl) 2010; 123 (14) 1878-1883
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Akai T, Shiraga S, Sasagawa Y, Okamoto K, Tachibana O, Lizuka H. Intra-parenchymal tumor biopsy using neuroendoscopy with navigation. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2008; 51 (02) 83-86
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Fahim DK, Relyea K, Nayar VV. et al. Transtubular microendoscopic approach for resection of a choroidal arteriovenous malformation. J Neurosurg Pediatr 2009; 3 (02) 101-104
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Jo KW, Shin HJ, Nam DH. et al. Efficacy of endoport-guided endoscopic resection for deep-seated brain lesions. Neurosurg Rev 2011; 34 (04) 457-463
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Kassam AB, Engh JA, Mintz AH, Prevedello DM. Completely endoscopic resection of intraparenchymal brain tumors. J Neurosurg 2009; 110 (01) 116-123
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 McLaughlin N, Prevedello DM, Engh J, Kelly DF, Kassam AB. Endoneurosurgical resection of intraventricular and intraparenchymal lesions using the port technique. World Neurosurg 2013; 79 (2, Suppl): 18.e1-18.e8
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Kennedy BC, Kelly KM, Phan MQ. et al. Outcomes after suboccipital decompression without dural opening in children with Chiari malformation type I. J Neurosurg Pediatr 2015; 16 (02) 150-158
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Rehman L, Akbar H, Bokhari I, Babar AK, , M Hashim AS, Arain SH. Posterior fossa decompression with duraplasty in Chiari-1 malformations. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 2015; 25 (04) 254-258
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Khan AM, Synnot K, Cammisa FP, Girardi FP. Lumbar synovial cysts of the spine: an evaluation of surgical outcome. J Spinal Disord Tech 2005; 18 (02) 127-131
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Lyons MK, Atkinson JL, Wharen RE, Deen HG, Zimmerman RS, Lemens SM. Surgical evaluation and management of lumbar synovial cysts: the Mayo Clinic experience. J Neurosurg 2000; 93 (1, Suppl): 53-57
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Tredway TL, Musleh W, Christie SD, Khavkin Y, Fessler RG, Curry DJ. A novel minimally invasive technique for spinal cord untethering. Neurosurgery 2007; 60 (02) (Suppl. 01) ONS70-ONS74 ; discussion ONS74
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Herrera SR, Shin JH, Chan M, Kouloumberis P, Goellner E, Slavin KV. Use of transparent plastic tubular retractor in surgery for deep brain lesions: a case series. Surg Technol Int 2010; 19: 47-50
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar