Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_6011_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
X
- •The Comprehensive Treatment of the Aging Spine
- •Contributors
- •Preface
- •INTRODUCTION
- •GASTRULATION
- •SOMITE PERIOD
- •ASSOCIATED ANOMALIES
- •CONGENITAL SPINAL ANOMALIES
- •Defects of Formation
- •Defects of Segmentation
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •THE VERTEBRAE
- •Cervical Vertebrae
- •Thoracic Vertebrae
- •Lumbosacral Spine
- •INTERVERTEBRAL DISC
- •LIGAMENTS
- •Intraspinal Ligaments
- •THE NERVE ROOTS
- •THE INTERVERTEBRAL FORAMEN
- •INNERVATION OF THE SPINE
- •NUTRITIONAL SUPPORT FOR THE VERTEBRA AND DISC
- •MUSCULAR ANATOMY
- •PATHOLOGIC CHANGES IN AGING
- •Spinal Stenosis
- •Spondylolisthesis
- •Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis (DISH)
- •Degenerative Scoliosis and Kyphosis
- •UPPER CERVICAL SPINE
- •NEURAL DEVELOPMENT
- •SACRUM AND CONUS MEDULLARIS DEVELOPMENT
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •INTERVERTEBRAL Disk
- •VERTEBRAL BODIES
- •FACET JOINTS
- •MUSCLES AND LIGAMENTS
- •SUMMARY
- •References
- •NATURAL HISTORY OF THE DEGENERATIVE CASCADE
- •ANATOMY AND GENERAL MECHANISMS OF PAIN
- •PATHOGENESIS OF LUMBAR DEGENERATION
- •BIOCHEMICAL CHANGES
- •BIOMECHANICAL CHANGES
- •THE THREE STAGES OF INSTABILITY
- •CLINICAL INSTABILITY AND DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •PAST MEDICAL HISTORY
- •Congenital/Familial/Genetic
- •Occupational/Environmental/Psychological
- •Comorbidities
- •HISTORY
- •Origin of Pain
- •Neurological History
- •Past Surgical History
- •PHYSICAL EXAMINATION
- •Global Balance
- •Gait
- •Neurological
- •C5 Neurological Findings
- •C6 Neurological Findings
- •C7 Neurological Findings
- •C8 Neurological Findings
- •T1 Neurological Findings
- •Thoracic and Abdominal Neurological Findings
- •T12 to L3 Neurological Findings
- •L2 to L4 Neurological Findings
- •L4 Neurological Findings
- •L5 Neurological Findings
- •S1 Neurological Findings
- •S2-4 Neurological Findings
- •Vascular
- •Summary
- •INTRODUCTION
- •NUTRITION
- •OBESITY
- •EXERCISE
- •SUMMARY
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
- •UNDERSTANDING THE PATIENT’S PERSPECTIVE
- •WESTERN PERSPECTIVES ON THE PSYCHOLOGY OF AGING
- •WESTERN PERSPECTIVES ON MANAGING THE AGING PROCESS
- •EASTERN PERSPECTIVES ON MEDICINE AND PSYCHOLOGY
- •AYURVEDA: TRADITIONAL INDIAN MEDICINE
- •Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Modic Changes in 40-Year-Old Men and Women
- •References
- •AYURVEDIC PERSPECTIVES ON AGING
- •AYURVEDIC PERSPECTIVES ON MANAGING THE AGING PROCESS WITH RESPECT TO BONE
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •AGING AND DEGENERATIVE CHANGES ON THE EFFECTS OF BIOMECHANICAL RANGE OF MOTION
- •ASSESSING ANATOMICAL CHANGES
- •OSTEOPOROSIS, AGING, AND BIOMECHANICAL PROPERTIES
- •BMD AND IMPLICATIONS ON INSTRUMENTED PROCEDURES
- •DUAL ENERGY X-RAY ABSORPTIOMETRY AND MECHANICAL STRENGTH
- •MODIC CLASSIFICATION OF VERTEBRAL ENDPLATE CHANGE
- •INTRODUCTION
- •BASIC SCIENCE
- •Aging of the Spine
- •Finite Element Analysis of CT Scans — Biomechanical Computed Tomography
- •CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES
- •CLINICAL CASE EXAMPLES
- •Comparing Teriparatide and Alendronate for Treatment of Osteoporosis
- •Alendronate Treatment in Rheumatoid Arthritic Patients
- •Assessing Risk of Vertebral Fracture in Postmenopausal Women
- •DISCUSSION
- •Acknowledgements
- •References
- •AN INTRODUCTION TO FUNCTIONAL DIAGNOSTICS OF THE SPINE
- •THE CURRENT STATE OF THE ART: DIAGNOSTIC EFFICACY OF TODAY’S FUNCTIONAL TESTING METHOD
- •Range of Motion (RoM) Measurements
- •Measurement Variability in Range of Motion (RoM) Measurements
- •Using Normative IVA Data to Detect Normal Motion, Hypomobility, and Hypermobility
- •Conclusions: Implications for the Practitioner Regarding the Clinical Application of RoM Measurements
- •TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES THAT IMPROVE THE DIAGNOSTIC EFFICACY OF SPINAL FUNCTIONAL TESTING
- •Reducing IVA Observer-Related Variability by Improving the Reliability of Image Analysis Techniques
- •Reducing the Subject-Related IVA Variability Introduced through Uncontrolled BendingDuring Imaging
- •NEW INSIGHTS INTO THE BIOMECHANICS OF THE AGING SPINE
- •Physiologic Variation in sIVA among Normal Subjects Is Very Low
- •Rethinking the Conventional Wisdom Regarding Intervertebral Hypomobility and Age
- •SUGGESTIONS FOR THE CLINICAL USE OF FUNCTIONAL TESTING METHODS
- •Suggestions Regarding the Clinical Use of the Current Standard of Care
- •Suggestions Regarding the Clinical Use of Recently Developed Methods for Conducting Functional Testing of the Spine
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •PREMATURE AGING FACTORS
- •Biochemical
- •Biomechanical
- •Atherosclerosis
- •Lifestyle Factors
- •Smoking
- •Obesity
- •Genetic Factors
- •DISCUSSION
- •CLINICAL RELEVANCE
- •References
- •PHYSIOLOGY OF BONE REMODELING AND BONE TURNOVER
- •DIAGNOSIS OF OSTEOPOROSIS
- •EVALUATION FOR OSTEOPOROSIS
- •Screening for Osteoporosis with Bone Mineral Density Measurement
- •Laboratory Investigations for Osteoporosis
- •Evaluation for Secondary Osteoporosis
- •Assess for Risk of Falls and Fractures
- •TREATMENT IN OSTEOPOROSIS
- •Nonpharmacologic Treatment
- •Calcium and Vitamin D Supplementation
- •Pharmacologic Treatment
- •Antiresorptive Agents
- •Anabolic Agents
- •Pharmacologic Agents and Spinal Fusion
- •FUTURE DIRECTIONS
- •SUMMARY
- •References
- •CLINICAL CASE EXAMPLES
- •Clinical Case #1 (Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis)
- •Clinical Case #2 (Degenerative Cervical Spondylosis)
- •Clinical Case #3 (Atlantoaxial Instability)
- •BASIC SCIENCE
- •EPIDEMIOLOGY AND RISK FACTORS
- •PATHOPHYSIOLOGY
- •DEGENERATIVE MECHANICS
- •NATURAL HISTORY
- •CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES
- •Evaluation
- •Conservative Therapy
- •Operative Therapy
- •Neurological Decompression
- •Instrumented Spinal Fusion
- •Minimally Invasive Alternatives
- •CLINICAL CASE EXAMPLES
- •Discuss Treatment, Clinical Challenges, and Future Treatments
- •CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
- •References
- •CLINICAL CASE EXAMPLE
- •BASIC SCIENCE
- •CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES
- •Surgery
- •CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
- •Acknowledgments
- •References
- •PART ONE: UNDERSTANDING THE CONDITION
- •Pathophysiology
- •Epidemiology
- •Natural History
- •PART TWO: CLINICAL DECISION MAKING
- •Evaluation
- •Imaging Studies
- •Elderly
- •Multiple Comorbidities
- •Osteoporosis
- •Indications for Fusion
- •Lateral Listhesis
- •Axial Pain
- •Nonfusion Decision Making
- •PART THREE: MANAGEMENT
- •Nonsurgical
- •Surgical
- •Fusion Options with or without Instrumentation
- •Decompression and Noninstrumented Posterolateral Fusion
- •Fusion with Biologics
- •Decompression and Posterolateral Fusion with Instrumentation
- •Facet Fusion
- •Fusion with Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Graft
- •Laminotomy or Interlaminar Fenestration
- •Foraminotomy
- •Restorative Laminoplasty
- •Minimally Invasive Techniques
- •Motion-Sparing Technologies
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •IMAGING OF DEGENERATIVE SPINE DISEASE
- •Intervertebral Disc Degeneration
- •Vertebral Marrow Changes and Osteophyte Formation
- •Facet Arthropathy
- •Spondylolisthesis and Segmental Instability of the Spine
- •Spinal Stenosis
- •SUMMARY
- •References
- •THE “DEGENERATIVE CASCADE”
- •THE FOCUS OF REHABILITATION
- •PATHOPHYSIOLOGIC BASIS FOR REHABILITATION
- •COMORBIDITY INFLUENCE ON REHABILITATION
- •PHYSIOLOGIC FACTORS OF SPINAL STABILIZATION
- •CORE STABILIZATION EXERCISES
- •References
- •CLINICAL CASE EXAMPLES
- •BASIC SCIENCE
- •CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES
- •Physician Evaluation and Prescription
- •Indications
- •Contraindications
- •Evidence Base
- •CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
- •References
- •EPIDURAL STEROID INJECTIONS
- •FACET JOINT PROCEDURES
- •SACROILIAC JOINT PROCEDURES
- •SPECIFIC DEGENERATIVE CONDITIONS
- •Degenerative Disc Disease
- •Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
- •Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •DESCRIPTION OF THE needle
- •OPERATIVE TECHNIQUES
- •Needle Insertion Techniques
- •Finger pressing insertion.
- •Pinching needle insertion.
- •Pinching skin insertion.
- •Tight skin insertion.
- •Needle Manipulation
- •Other Modalities and Techniques Related to Acupuncture and the Meridian System
- •Application of Meridian Theory in Spine-Related Pain Conditions
- •Hua Tuo Jia Ji Points
- •RESEARCH BACKGROUND OF BASIC SCIENCES AND CLINICAL OUTCOMES
- •COMPLICATIONS
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION
- •Case One
- •Case Two
- •Case Three
- •Case Discussions
- •CONCLUSIONS
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •TAI CHI
- •Clinical Practice Guidelines
- •FROM QI GONG TO ENERGY-BASED THERAPIES
- •Clinical Practice Guidelines
- •MIND-BODY THERAPIES
- •Mindfulness Meditation
- •Guided Imagery
- •Spirituality and Religiousness
- •BASIC SCIENCE
- •Attention and Pain
- •Regulation of the Autonomic Nervous System
- •Case Discussion
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •NONOPIOID ANALGESIC AGENTS: ACETAMINOPHEN, NSAIDs, ASPIRIN
- •Acetaminophen
- •Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors (COX-2)
- •Aspirin
- •Flavocoxid (Limbrel®)
- •Opioid Analgesics
- •MUSCLE RELAXANTS AND ANTISPASTICITY MEDICATIONS
- •ANTIDEPRESSANTS
- •ANTICONVULSANTS
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •CLINICAL AND BASIC SCIENCE
- •CONCLUSION
- •ACKNOWLEDGMENT
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •REGIONAL ANATOMY OF THE CERVICAL SPINE
- •Osseous Components
- •Intervertebral Discs
- •Ligaments and Joints
- •Vascular Supply
- •PATHOPHYSIOLOGY OF CERVICAL SPONDYLOSIS
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION OF CERVICAL SPONDYLOSIS
- •DIAGNOSTIC MODALITIES
- •Neuroradiology
- •Neurophysiology
- •NATURAL HISTORY OF CERVICAL RADICULOPATHY
- •TREATMENT AND DECISION-MAKING
- •POSTERIOR CERVICAL SURGICAL TECHNIQUES
- •ANTERIOR CERVICAL SURGICAL TECHNIQUES
- •SURGICAL OUTCOMES
- •COMPLICATIONS OF SURGERY
- •EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES: ARTIFICIAL Disc REPLACEMENT
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •INDICATIONS/CONTRAINDICATIONS
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION AND EVALUATION
- •DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVICES
- •OPERATIVE TECHNIQUES
- •COMPLICATIONS AND AVOIDANCE
- •CONCLUSION/DISCUSSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •BIOMECHANICS OF THE CERVICAL SPINE
- •Cervical Motion and the Spinal Cord
- •Degenerative Processes in the Cervical Spine
- •MANAGEMENT OF THE PATIENT WITH CERVICAL KYPHOSIS
- •Patient Assessment
- •Imaging
- •Surgical Decision-Making
- •The Surgical Approach
- •Surgical Complications
- •CONCLUSIONS/DiskUSSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •MECHANISM
- •DEFINITION OF CENTRAL CORD SYNDROME
- •INCIDENCE AND AGE
- •BASIC SCIENCE
- •Pathophysiology of Acute Traumatic Central Cord Syndrome (ATCCS)
- •Theory of Somatotopic Organization of Corticospinal Tracts (Neuroanatomical Theory)
- •Theory of Increased Upper Limb and Hand Functional Representation of CST (Functional Theory)
- •Neurological and Functional Recovery of Central Cord Syndrome in the Elderly
- •Imaging Modalities Used to Assess Cervical Spine Injury (Box 27-4)
- •MRI Findings in Traumatic SCI
- •Skeletal Injury
- •Extradural Compression
- •Cord Deformation and Signal Change within the Cord
- •TREATMENT
- •Clinical Challenges
- •Future Treatments
- •SUMMARY
- •References
- •OVERVIEW
- •ANATOMY
- •Occipital Bone
- •The Atlas
- •The Axis
- •Ligaments of the Craniocervical Junction
- •The Vertebral Artery
- •INJURIES OF THE CRANIOCERVICAL JUNCTION
- •Overview
- •Occipitocervical Instability
- •Occipitoatlantal Dislocation
- •Occipital Condyle Fractures
- •C1 Fractures and Transverse Ligament Injuries
- •C2 Fractures
- •Craniocervical Manifestations of Rheumatoid Arthritis
- •CONSERVATIVE MANAGEMENT OF OCCIPITOCERVICAL INJURIES IN THE AGING SPINE
- •SURGICAL APPROACHES AND TECHNIQUES
- •Ventral vs. Dorsal Approaches
- •Occipitocervical Fusion
- •Odontoid Screw
- •C1-2 Harms
- •C1-2 Transarticular Screws
- •C2 Laminar Screws
- •COMPLICATIONS
- •CONCLUSIONS
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •BASIC SCIENCE
- •ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS
- •DIFFUSE IDIOPATHIC SKELETAL HYPEROSTOSIS
- •BIOMECHANICS AND CLASSIFICATION OF SUBAXIAL SPINE FRACTURES
- •INSTRUMENTATION OF OSTEOPOROTIC LOWER CERVICAL AND UPPER THORACIC SPINE
- •CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES
- •CLINICAL CASE EXAMPLES: TREATMENT, CLINICAL CHALLENGES, AND FUTURE TREATMENTS
- •Case 1
- •Case 2
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •BASIC SCIENCE
- •CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES
- •Risk Factors
- •Clinical Presentation
- •Laboratory and Imaging Studies
- •Treatment
- •CONCLUSIONS/DISCUSSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •EPIDEMIOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY
- •PATHOPHYSIOLOGY
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION
- •LABORATORY DATA
- •RADIOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
- •Plain Radiographs
- •Magnetic Resonance Imaging
- •Computed Tomography
- •MANAGEMENT
- •Nonoperative Management
- •Surgical Indications
- •Preoperative Assessment
- •Operative Management
- •Atlantoaxial Subluxation
- •Cranial Settling
- •Subaxial Subluxation
- •Odontoid Resection
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •INTRAMEDULLARY SPINAL TUMORS
- •General Information, Clinical Presentation, and Imaging
- •Ependymomas
- •Astrocytomas
- •Hemangioblastomas
- •OPERATIVE TECHNIQUES (See Figures 32-1 and 32-2)
- •Intramedullary Tumors
- •Postsurgical Management
- •INTRADURAL-EXTRAMEDULLARY SPINAL CORD TUMORS
- •General Information, Clinical Presentation, and Imaging
- •Nerve Sheath Tumors
- •Meningiomas
- •OPERATIVE TECHNIQUES
- •Intradural-Extramedullary Tumors
- •Spinal Schwannomas
- •Spinal Meningiomas
- •Postsurgical Management
- •EXTRADURAL SPINAL CORD TUMORS
- •General Information, Clinical Presentation, and Imaging
- •Operative and Postoperative Management
- •Spinal Metastatic Tumors
- •Primary Malignant Tumors
- •CONCLUSIONS
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •BASIC SCIENCE
- •SURGICAL INDICATIONS AND PREPARATION
- •RADIOLOGICAL EVALUATION
- •SURGICAL TECHNIQUES
- •Anterior Cervical Microforaminotomy
- •Transuncal Approach
- •Upper Vertebral Transcorporeal Approach
- •Lower Vertebral Transcorporeal Approach
- •Percutaneous Cervical Nucleoplasty
- •Percutaneous Endoscopic Discectomy
- •Microendoscopic Discectomy
- •DISCUSSION
- •Microsurgical Anterior Cervical Foraminodiscectomy
- •Percutaneous Cervical Nucleoplasty(PCN)
- •Percutaneous Endoscopic Cervical Discectomy
- •Microendoscopic Discectomy
- •CONCLUSIONS
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •BRIEF DESCRIPTION
- •INDICATIONS AND CONTRAINDICATIONS
- •DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVICE
- •BACKGROUND OF SCIENTIFIC TESTING AND CLINICAL OUTCOMES
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION AND EVALUATION
- •OPERATIVE TECHNIQUE
- •POSTOPERATIVE CARE
- •COMPLICATIONS AND AVOIDANCE
- •CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •HISTORY OF VERTEBROPLASTY
- •PATIENT SELECTION/INDICATIONS
- •Absolute Contraindications
- •Relative Contraindications
- •TECHNIQUE
- •Transpedicular Approach
- •Parapedicular (Transcostovertebral) Approach
- •Posterolateral Approach
- •Anterolateral Approach
- •Procedure
- •INJECTION MATERIALS
- •COMPLICATIONS
- •NEJM RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS
- •Fracture Acuity
- •Enrollment
- •Control Group as an “Alternative Intervention”
- •Crossover
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •VERTEBRAL BODY STENT
- •How to Restore and Maintain Vertebral Height
- •In Vitro Testing
- •Clinical Application
- •Indications
- •Surgical Technique
- •Clinical Experience
- •Results
- •DISCUSSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •CLINICAL INDICATIONS AND CONTRAINDICATIONS
- •DESCRIPTION OF THE OSSEOFIX DEVICE
- •Biomechanical Studies
- •Results – Study 1
- •Results – Study 2
- •CONCLUSION
- •CLINICAL DATA
- •OPERATIVE TECHNIQUE
- •Step 1: Positioning.
- •Step 2: Creating an access channel into the vertebral body
- •Step 4: Cement delivery.
- •PITFALLS AND COMPLICATIONS OF THE PROCEDURE
- •TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
- •DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •INDICATIONS
- •CONTRAINDICATIONS
- •PRECAUTIONS
- •DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVICE
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION AND EVALUATION
- •Material and Methods
- •RESULTS
- •OPERATIVE TECHNIQUE
- •DEPLOYMENT OF THE DISTRACTION SLEEVE
- •INJECTING PMMA BONE CEMENT
- •POSTOPERATIVE CARE
- •COMPLICATIONS AND AVOIDANCE
- •CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •SYSTEM OVERVIEW
- •INDICATIONS
- •CONTRAINDICATIONS
- •BIOMECHANICAL TESTING
- •THE SHIELD KYPHOPLASTY SYSTEM SURGICAL TECHNIQUE
- •CLINICAL OUTCOMES
- •CONCLUSIONS
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •MATERIALS AND METHODS
- •The StabiliT Vertebral Augmentation System
- •In Vitro Evaluation of Height Restoration and Intravertebral Pressure in Three Minimally Invasive Procedures Using an Osteoporotic Cadaver Bone Model
- •RESULTS
- •RF KYPHOPLASTY CLINICAL EXPERIENCE WITH THE StabiliT VERTEBRAL AUGMENTATION SYSTEM
- •DISCUSSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •INDICATIONS AND CONTRAINDICATIONS
- •DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVICE
- •BACKGROUND OF SCIENTIFIC TESTING AND CLINICAL OUTCOMES
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION AND EVALUATION
- •OPERATIVE TECHNIQUE
- •Anesthesia
- •Position
- •Procedure
- •POSTOPERATIVE CARE
- •COMPLICATIONS AND AVOIDANCE
- •CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •INDICATIONS AND CONTRAINDICATIONS
- •DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVICE
- •PRINCIPLES OF PROCEDURE
- •BACKGROUND OF SCIENTIFIC TESTING AND CLINICAL OUTCOMES
- •OPERATIVE TECHNIQUE
- •Anesthesia
- •Position
- •Surgical Procedure for the Crosstrees System
- •Transpedicular Approach
- •Extrapedicular Approach (Usually Recommended in Thoracic Spine)
- •Delivery of PMMA
- •POSTOPERATIVE CARE
- •CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSIONS
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •INDICATIONS AND CONTRAINDICATIONS
- •DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVICE
- •BACKGROUND OF SCIENTIFIC TESTING AND CLINICAL OUTCOMES
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION AND EVALUATION
- •OPERATIVE TECHNIQUE
- •POSTOPERATIVE CARE
- •COMPLICATIONS AND AVOIDANCE
- •CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •INDICATIONS AND CONTRAINDICATIONS
- •Indications
- •Contraindications
- •DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVICE
- •BACKGROUND OF SCIENTIFIC TESTING AND CLINICAL OUTCOMES
- •OPERATIVE TECHNIQUE
- •Anesthesia
- •Position
- •PROCEDURE
- •POSTOPERATIVE CARE
- •COMPLICATIONS AND CAUTIONS
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •BASIC SCIENCE
- •CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES
- •Stable Thoracic Vertebral Fractures
- •CLINICAL CASE EXAMPLES
- •Thoracic Stabilization
- •Spinal Cord or Nerve Decompression
- •Deformity Correction
- •CONCLUSIONS/DISCUSSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •Metastatic Tumors
- •Intradural Extramedullary Tumors
- •Intramedullary Spinal Cord Tumors
- •Primary Vertebral Column Tumors
- •BASIC SCIENCE
- •CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES
- •CLINICAL CASE EXAMPLES
- •DISCUSSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •PATHOPHYSIOLOGY
- •Bacterial Pathogenesis
- •Pathogenesis of Tuberculosis
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION
- •DIAGNOSTIC EVALUATION
- •Imaging
- •MANAGEMENT
- •Medical Therapy
- •Indications for Surgical Intervention
- •Surgical Management
- •Posterior Approach
- •Anterior Approach
- •Anterior Approach with Anterior Fixation
- •Single-Stage Anterior and Posterior Procedure
- •Two-Staged Anterior-Posterior Procedure
- •Use of Instrumentation
- •Graft Type
- •Minimally Invasive Surgery
- •Thoracoscopic Spinal Surgery
- •Percutaneous Technology
- •PROGNOSIS
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •PATHOLOGY
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION
- •DIAGNOSIS
- •TREATMENT
- •OTHER CAUSES FOR THORACIC SPINAL STENOSIS
- •Neoplasms
- •Synovial Cysts
- •PROGNOSIS
- •CONCLUSIONS
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •RADIOSURGERY
- •INDICATIONS FOR SPINAL RADIOSURGERY
- •TREATMENT DETAILS
- •TREATMENT OF SPINAL METASTASES
- •TREATMENT OF INTRADURAL EXTRAMEDULLARY LESIONS
- •TREATMENT OF INTRAMEDULLARY LESIONS
- •COMPLICATIONS
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •Basic Science
- •Clinical Practice Guidlines
- •Basic Science
- •Clinical Practice Guidelines
- •Basic Science
- •Clinical Practice Guidelines
- •CONCLUSIONS
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •PATHOANATOMIC CHANGES
- •DEFINITION OF STENOTIC DEGENERATIVE DISEASE IN DEFORMITY
- •CLINICAL COMPLEX OF SYMPTOM PRESENTATION
- •ADULT SCOLIOSIS CLASSIFICATION
- •CONSIDERATIONS FOR NONSURGICAL OR SURGICAL MANAGEMENT
- •GOALS OF TREATMENT
- •SURGICAL PROCEDURES
- •OUTCOMES ASSOCIATED WITH SPINAL DEFORMITY TREATED WITH SURGICAL DECOMPRESSION
- •OPERATIVE TREATMENT OF DEGENERATIVE LUMBAR SCOLIOSIS ASSOCIATED WITH SPINAL STENOSIS
- •PRINCIPLES FOR SELECTING FUSION LEVELS IN ADULT SPINAL DEFORMITY WITH LUMBAR CURVES
- •SPINAL STENOSIS WITH SCOLIOSIS
- •RATE OF COMPLICATIONS IN SCOLIOSIS SURGERY
- •SUMMARY
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •NATURAL HISTORY
- •Idiopathic Curves
- •Degenerative Curves
- •IMAGING EVALUATION
- •THE ROLE OF CONSERVATIVE MANAGEMENT
- •INDICATIONS FOR SURGERY
- •SURGICAL PLANNING
- •The Role of Decompression Only in Adult Scoliosis Surgery
- •The Role of Deformity Correction and Fusion
- •The Role of Deformity in the Clinical Presentation
- •SURGICAL TECHNIQUES
- •Posterior Instrumentation
- •Anterior Release or Anterior-Only Surgery
- •Extent of Fusion
- •Extension of Fusion to the Sacrum
- •The Role of Osteotomies and Spinal Column Shortening in Adult Deformity Patients
- •SUMMARY
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •PATIENT EVALUATION
- •TREATMENT
- •SURGERY
- •SURGICAL TECHNIQUES
- •OSTEOPOROSIS AND SCOLIOSIS
- •COMPLICATIONS
- •OUTCOMES
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION: INTERSPINOUS SPACERS – HOW DO THEY WORK?
- •THE “EXTENSION STOPPERS”
- •X - Stop (Medtronic) (Figure 54-1)
- •Surgical Technique
- •Results
- •Summary
- •InSpace (Synthes, Paoli, PA, USA) (Figure 54-3)
- •Surgical Technique
- •Results
- •Summary
- •Other Implant Types (Figure 54-7)
- •Surgical Technique
- •Results
- •Summary
- •DYNAMIC/RIGID INTERSPINOUS STABILIZERS
- •Surgical Technique
- •Results
- •Summary
- •Surgical Technique
- •Results
- •Summary
- •Other Implants
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES
- •Indications
- •Contraindications
- •Osteopenia and Osteoporosis
- •Infection or Malignancy
- •Facet Joints
- •Scoliosis
- •Spondylolysis and Spondylolisthesis
- •Prior Abdominal Surgery
- •Obesity
- •Metal Allergy
- •Anatomic and Vascular Considerations
- •Psychosocial Factors
- •CONCLUSIONS
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •DEVICES
- •Interspinous Spacers
- •X-Stop (Kyphon)
- •Wallis (Zimmer Spine)
- •Diam (Medtronic)
- •ExtenSure (NuVasive)
- •In-Space (Synthes)
- •Facet Devices
- •Zyre (Quantum Orthopedics)
- •Fenix (Gerraspine AG)
- •Anatomic Facet Replacement System (Facet Solutions)
- •Total Facet Arthroplasty System (Archus)
- •Total Posterior System (Impliant)
- •Pedicle-Based Dynamic Rods
- •N-Hance (Synthes)
- •Stabilimax NZ (Applied Spine)
- •Dynesys (Zimmer Spine)
- •Dynamic TTL-Rod (Scient’x)
- •CD Horizon Legacy Peek Rod System (Medtronic)
- •DSS Spine Stabilization System (Paradigm)
- •Dynabolt (VertiFlex)
- •CLINICAL APPLICATION
- •Ligament
- •Facet
- •Canal
- •Osteopenia
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •PEDICLE SCREWS IN THE OSTEOPOROTIC SPINE
- •Screw Placement
- •Undertapping Pedicle Screws
- •Transverse Connectors
- •Bone Cement
- •Expandable Screws
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •BONE MORPHOGENETIC PROTEINS
- •OTHER BONE GRAFT ALTERNATIVES
- •Allograft
- •Demineralized Bone Matrix
- •Synthetic Materials (Ceramics)
- •Bone Marrow Aspirates
- •OTHER POTENTIAL APPLICATION OF BIOLOGICS IN THE AGING SPINE
- •Vertebral Body Augmentation in Vertebral Body Compression Fractures
- •Nonfusion Applications: Addressing Disc Degeneration Directly
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •PATHOPHYSIOLOGY
- •TREATMENT OPTIONS AND GUIDELINES
- •SURGICAL RATIONALE
- •INDICATIONS FOR MISS DECOMPRESSIVE TECHNIQUES
- •Surgical Technique
- •POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT
- •CLINICAL OUTCOMES AND COMPLICATIONS
- •EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •BASIC SCIENCE OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE SPINE SURGERY
- •CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES
- •Endoscopic Transforaminal Decompression for Unilateral Radiculopathy
- •Deformity Correction via Direct Lateral Anterior Interbody Fusion
- •Minimally Invasive Posterior-Only Approaches
- •Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation
- •MIS Iliac Fixation
- •CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •INDICATIONS AND CONTRAINDICATIONS
- •CLINICAL STUDY
- •PREOPERATIVE ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING
- •Operative Technique
- •Patient Positioning
- •Incision and Retroperitoneal Access
- •Transpsoas Access
- •POSTOPERATIVE CARE
- •COMPLICATIONS AND AVOIDANCE
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •BASIC SCIENCE AND BIOMECHANICAL STUDIES
- •CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES
- •CLINICAL CASE EXAMPLES: TREATMENT AND FUTURE CHALLENGES
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •FUNCTIONAL ANATOMY OF THE INTERVERTEBRAL Disc
- •CAUSES OF DEGENERATIVE DISC DISEASE
- •THERAPEUTIC BIOLOGIC STRATEGIES
- •Intradiscal Injection of a “Naked” Biologically Active Factor
- •Gene Therapy Approaches
- •Implantation of Mesenchymal Stem Cells
- •CONCLUSIONS
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •INDICATIONS AND CONTRAINDICATIONS
- •DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVICE
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION AND EVALUATION
- •OPERATIVE TECHNIQUE(S)
- •Anesthesia
- •Position
- •Procedure
- •POSTOPERATIVE CARE
- •COMPLICATIONS AND AVOIDANCE
- •CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •INDICATIONS AND CONTRAINDICATIONS
- •Ideal Indications
- •Relative Indications
- •Patients with Poor Indications for Dorsal Ramus Rhizotomy
- •DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVICE
- •BACKGROUND OF SCIENTIFIC TESTING AND CLINICAL OUTCOMES
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION AND EVALUATION
- •OPERATIVE TECHNIQUE
- •Anesthesia
- •Position
- •Procedure
- •POSTOPERATIVE CARE
- •COMPLICATIONS AND AVOIDANCE
- •CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
- •Anatomy of the Lumbar Dorsal Ramus
- •L1 to L4 Dorsal Rami
- •L5 Dorsal Ramus
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •OVERVIEW OF THE ECONOMY AND HEALTHCARE
- •OVERVIEW OF SPINE CARE
- •BACK PAIN IN A CHANGING POPULATION
- •Osteoporosis
- •COMPENSATION
- •MEDICAL TOURISM
- •COST-EFFECTIVENESS
- •WHERE TO GO FROM HERE
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •SPINAL ETIOLOGIES
- •Degenerative Disc and Congenital Disorders
- •Spinal Stenosis
- •Osteoporosis
- •Spinal Deformity (Scoliosis, Kyphosis)
- •Spinal Tumors
- •NANOMEDICINE AND THE AGING SPINE
- •Micro- and Nanoscale Smart Polymer Technologies
- •Nanocoatings
- •Biosensors and Biochips
- •THE POTENTIAL FOR MICRO/NANOTECHNOLOGY IN THE AGING SPINE
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •INDICATIONS/CONTRAINDICATIONS
- •DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVICE
- •BACKGROUND OF SCIENTIFIC TESTING / CLINICAL OUTCOMES
- •CLINICAL PRESENTATION AND EVALUATION
- •OPERATIVE TECHNIQUE
- •POSTOPERATIVE CARE
- •COMPLICATIONS AND AVOIDANCE
- •CONCLUSION/DISCUSSION
- •References
- •INTRODUCTION
- •LASER DECOMPRESSION
- •OZONE CHEMODISCOLYSIS
- •CONCLUSION
- •References
- •HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
- •Tissue Response to Biomaterials
- •METALS
- •Metal Types
- •Titanium
- •Cobalt-Chrome
- •Stainless Steel (316L)
- •Tantalum
- •Corrosion
- •Distribution of Metal in Body Fluids
- •Mutagenesis
- •Carcinogenicity
- •Hypersensitivity
- •POLYMERS
- •Introduction
- •UHMWPE
- •PEEK
- •PLA and PGA
- •Implant Performance and Failure
- •UHMWPE
- •PEEK
- •PLA and PGA
- •HYDROGELS
- •Synthetic Hydrogels
- •Hydrolyzed Pan Hydrogels – Development and History
- •BIOLOGICS
- •Bone Graft
- •SUMMARY
- •References
- •Index



Endoscopic Surgical Pain Management
in the Aging Spine
Anthony T. Yeung, Christopher A. Yeung, and Christopher Meredith
64
k e y p o i n t s
e foraminal endoscopic surgical approach avoids the surgical morbidity of
stripping the multifidus muscle.
e foraminal approach is capable of intradiscal and epidural decompression
under clear endoscopic visualization.
e foraminal approach can be used to treat chronic common low back pain
by denervating the nerves innervating the disc as well as the dorsal spinal
column.
Variations in foraminal normal anatomy and pathoanatomy, poorly
understood by traditional surgeons, plays major role in chronic lumbar pain
syndrome.
Use of specialized miniaturized surgical tools, including the use of bipolar
radiofrequency and laser, is an important and integral part of the endoscopic
procedure.
INTRODUCTION
The aging spine typically begins with disc degeneration and annular dehiscence, followed by transfer of loads from the anterior spinal column to the
facets. This may produce discogenic pain and axial back pain, resulting in
segmental instability with resultant deformity. If the condition becomes
painful, and nonsurgical treatment is not effective, traditional surgical treatment has been limited to diskectomy and fusion. Though diskectomy has
been shown to be beneficial by the SPORT
effectiveness of fusion is questioned. Traditional spine surgery to treat
painful degenerative disc disease such as with herniated discs, spondylolisthesis, central spinal stenosis, and neuroforaminal stenosis encompasses
many different techniques. Surgical treatment, however, often results in a
“failed back surgery syndrome” (FBSS) with limited success for subsequent
salvage procedures. Newer minimally invasive techniques, in skilled and
experienced hands, when approaching the pathology along natural muscle
and tissue planes opens the door to earlier and a greater number of minimally invasive surgical options for the painful, aging spine without excessive
concern about the paradoxical effects of surgery. The concept of “endoscopic
surgical pain management” is addressed in this chapter, based on the senior
author’s (ATY) 20-year experience using his percutaneous endoscopic
transforaminal surgical technique described as the YESS (Yeung Endoscopic Spine Surgery) procedure.
The YESS procedure eliminates the pain generator causing the pain
syndrome, not just “masking” the pain with therapeutic injections. The
approach accomplishes disc decompression by “selectively” removing degenerative nucleus, sealing and closing annular tears, decompressing spinal
nerves, ablating nerves and inflammatory tissue contributing to discogenic
and axial back pain, and surgically removing a wide spectrum of disc herniations. In more advanced stages, lumbar spondylolysis and isthmic and
1
study, the long-term cost-
degenerative spondylolisthesis can also be addressed surgically. This brief
overview provides examples of conditions that the senior author has treated
endoscopically with minimal surgical morbidity, in contrast with the
much more invasive traditional option. The reader is directed to the published references for more detailed information on the evolution of this new
minimally invasive and innovative technique.
Traditional surgical correction in the aging spine usually involves open
decompression, fixation, and fusion techniques. The percentage of fusion
surgeries for these conditions as a whole has increased dramatically in the
United States over the past few decades. Between 1990 and 2001, lumbar
fusion surgery increased 220%.
17
leagues,
for degenerative spondylolisthesis surgery (decompression and fusion) is
not a cost-effective procedure, when examined over a 2-year period. The
importance of this data is that it emphasizes the need to better identify the
source of back pain and sciatica, possibly earlier treatment, and more thorough study of the complex innervations of the spine in the foramen (Fig-
ure 64-1A-C). This area, known as the “hidden zone” of MacNab, holds
the answer to the effectiveness of foraminal decompression and ablation of
foraminal nerves in the treatment of discogenic and facet pain. It may have
an impact on health care reform that seeks to reduce the cost of care, because
over 100 billion dollars a year is spent on back pain in the United States,
most of it being spent on nonsurgical treatment such as physical therapy,
interventional pain management, and over-the-counter and prescription
drugs. We also need to reduce the need for fusion as a surgical solution for
pain. This can be accomplished if we are able to not only demonstrate the
efficacy and cost-effectiveness of endoscopic surgical pain management, but
help establish a new subspecialty in endoscopic surgical pain management,
because it requires special training to acquire proficiency.
understanding common lumbar pain. Cadaver microdissection of the
nerves in the foramen reveals an extensive network of nerves arising from
the spinal cord, splitting into the dorsal and ventral rami before exiting
the foramen as the spinal nerve. A ramus communicans connects with the
sinuvertebral nerves innervating the annulus. When there is an inflammatory response to annular tears with the development of an inflammatory
membrane, the subsequent neo-neurogenesis and angiogenesis response
contributes to pain that is not detected by imaging studies currently available. Better soft tissue imaging and imaging of chemical changes in the
spine may help. We traditionally only grossly see the traversing and exiting
spinal nerves as surgeons, and routinely fail to recognize and miss the relatively common furcal nerve, or the dorsal ramus and its medial and lateral
branches that emanate from each spinal nerve. This network of nerves from
the dorsal ramus contributes greatly to chronic discogenic and axial back
pain not responsive to nonsurgical treatment. It is undetected by MRI or
CT scan, but can be visualized endoscopically and confirmed by meticulous cadaver dissection (Figure 64-1B, C). Rational treatment calls for
the appropriate and effective use of diagnostic and therapeutic diagnostic procedures such as diskography, selective nerve root blocks, foraminal
examining the data from the SPORT trial, concluded that even
Understanding chronic, surgically treatable back pain begins with
16
A recent article by Tosteson and col-
2-15
427

428
P A R T V I I I The Future of the Aging Spine
A
F IG UR E 6 4- 1 A, Fresh cadaver dissection of dorsal and foraminal anatomy showing the relationship of the disc annulus, spinal nerves, facets, and lamina
dictating surgical access. Normal left foraminal anatomy L2-S1. Blue: hubbed needles are inserted into the disc space in the foramen accessing the posterolateral
quadrant of the disk. Note the furcal nerve branch at L4-L5. The epidural space can be reached with a far lateral trajectory and/or by removing the ventral facet
with trephines, lasers, or endoscopic high-speed diamond burrs. All soft tissue has been stripped from the transverse processes, including dorsal ramus innervation
of the dorsal column. The intertransverse ligament covering the exiting nerves in the foramen has been stripped away. B, Facet innervation and the relationship of
the transverse process, the interspinous ligament, and the exiting nerve in the foramen. The right exiting nerve at L3-L4 exhibits a furcal nerve branch traversing the
foramen in the far lateral quadrant of the L3-L4 disc annulus. Furcal nerves are the myelinated branches of normal spinal nerves (usually the exiting nerve), commonly
seen endoscopically in the foramen. When stimulated or cut, these nerves can cause dysesthesia and react like the parent spinal nerve. It does not respond like the
main nerve because it is usually too small to be detected by continuous intraoperative electromyography or radicular pain reported by the patient. The endoscopic
surgeon should take care to recognize and not injure these furcal nerves if they are more than 1 mm in diameter, but they cannot always be avoided. Dysesthesia,
immediately postoperative or delayed, is readily treated by transforaminal epidural blocks combined with sympathetic blocks. Furcal nerves can be responsible for
sciatica that is seemingly out of proportion to what is suggested by relatively normal MRI appearance, and may be part of the sciatica reported preoperatively. Note
also the proximity of the intermediate and lateral branches of the dorsal ramus on the cephalic edge of the transverse process at L3. The dorsal ramus sends a medial
branch that crosses the transverse process on the way to innervate the facet joint above and below the disc level. Irritation of the lateral branch, when irritated, can
cause muscle spasm and an involuntary list. C, Dorsal ramus innovation of L3, L4, and L5 facets. The dorsal ramus emanating from the origin of the spinal nerve
sends off medial, intermediate, and lateral branches to innervate the facets and the dorsal muscle column. The interspinous ligament has been removed to expose
the dorsal ramus. It is found just ventral to the intertransverse ligament and can irritate the exiting nerve and its dorsal root ganglion. This poorly studied nerve can
be responsible for severe chronic axial back pain associated with a degenerating disc exhibiting grade IV and V far lateral annular tears. Back pain, not just sciatica,
caused by disc protrusions and annular tears can be explained by irritation of the dorsal ramus, not just the spinal nerves. Selective endoscopic diskectomy and
thermal annuloplasty can reduce axial back pain and sciatica, and Intradiscal Electrothermic Therapy (IDET) cannot reach these nerves! Endoscopic rhizotomy of the
branches of the dorsal ramus has shown to be a very effective means of decreasing chronic severe axial back pain.
epidural steroid blocks, facet and medial branch blocks, and sympathetic
nerve blocks. Research studies, such as those by Caragee18, that emphasize the risks and the difficulty of interpretation of diagnostic tests such as
diskography without balancing the indications and usefulness of the diskography, does a disfavor to endoscopic minimally invasive surgeons who
B
pathoanatomy and the interventionalist’s experience. It is not unusual to
find pathoanatomy, such as chronic granulation and inflammatory tissue in
the disc or furcal nerves in the foramen, that is not apparent on preoperative
imaging studies, but is clearly visualized endoscopically during foraminal
endoscopic surgery.
C
are able to look at pathoanatomy and are skilled at spinal endoscopy. This
skill affords endoscopic surgeons the opportunity to treat lumbar pain and
sciatica without fusion.
The politics and social-economic pressures of medicine create even more
controversy as poorly qualified “experts” provide personal opinion on “standard of care” in medical-legal and insurance coverage disputes.
The information obtained from these diagnostic and therapeutic injection procedures allows the surgeon to more selectively pinpoint the pain
source and to determine how to mitigate the source of pain.
DESCRIPTION OF THE DEVICE
The design of the endoscope and endoscopic system is an important fac-
tor for endoscopic surgeons to consider. Techniques of endoscopic decompression vary depending on the endoscope design, the available surgical
instruments, and surgical techniques practiced by the developer of the
system. Not all endoscopic systems are designed for or amenable to the
technique described here, but techniques and endoscopic systems continue
to evolve. This chapter specifically describes the YESS transforaminal
INDICATIONS AND CONTRAINDICATIONS
A widely accepted indication for foraminal endoscopic disc surgery is cur-
rently a foraminal or extraforaminal lumbar disc herniation. All sizes and
types of herniations, however, are possible in the hands of a skilled and
experienced endoscopic surgeon. Indications rely heavily on the skill and
experience of the surgeon, as well as the patient’s anatomy relative to the
“inside-out-technique,” utilizing the YESS foraminoscope ( Figure 64-2)
and the instruments designed for the system and technique. Not only is it
important to have the necessary instruments, but specially configured cannulas are designed to expose the pathoanatomy to be surgically treated but,
in the process, also protect vital anatomy such as the nerve and dura. Other
systems are also evolving, so that in time, there will be similarities evolved
and copied from the YESS transforaminal technique illustrated here.
location of the herniation and the ability to access the herniation. Indications may also depend on injection and imaging studies to identify a painful
condition of the disc. The painful condition is currently identified by preoperative diagnostic and therapeutic injections such as evocative chromodiskography, foraminal epidurography, therapeutic foraminal blocks, or
selective nerve root blocks. Small disc herniations with sciatica, herniations
with predominant back pain from the herniation, and annular tears that
cause chemical sciatica that may be considered relative contraindications for
traditional surgery because of the surgical risk-benefit ratio of the procedure, but may be an indication for foraminal endoscopic surgery. Any condition that obviously benefits from intradiscal therapy such as intradiscal
debridement of diskitis is best performed percutaneous transforaminally.
Contraindications are relative, dependent on percutaneous access to the
BACKGROUND OF SCIENTIFIC TESTING
AND CLINICAL OUTCOMES
Peer-reviewed literature for disc herniation, first reported by Mayer and
19
Brock
in 19933 then by Hermantin2 in a prospective randomized study,
has concluded that the results with transforaminal endoscopic (coined
“arthroscopic” by Kambin
similar to those with open diskectomy, but with significantly less surgical
morbidity and quicker recovery (Table 64-1). The YESS technique evolved
from the original Kambin technique as Yeung originally learned from Kambin. The procedure, done on an outpatient basis, utilizes local anesthesia with
sedation. Patients are usually discharged an hour after surgery. Results show
20
) diskectomy in the lumbar spine are generally

PARTIAL INSTRUMENT SET FOR SELECTIVE ENDOSCOPIC DISCECTOMY (NOT TO SCALE)
Stylet
(used in needle)
Needle
C H A P T E R 6 4 Endoscopic Surgical Pain Management in the Aging Spine
Cannula
Obturator
(blunt end, 2-hole; side
hole allows delivery
of anesthetic)
Trephine Rongeur
expanded visualization of surgical field
(working channel
for all tools not used
w/needle; beveled edge allows
429
Exploded view of scope tip w/tool in working channel
Tool
V
i
d
e
o
f
i
e
l
d
Tool
F IG UR E 6 4- 2 Richard Wolf YESS Multichannel Operative Endoscope. The spinal endoscope is designed with an operative channel, multichannel irrigation
for improved visualization, and a cannula system configured to enhance surgical access to pathoanatomy while protecting sensitive anatomy such as spinal nerves.
(Reprinted from Yeung CA, Hayes VM, Siddiqi FN, Yeung AT. Lumbar endoscopic posterolateral (transforaminal) approach. In Motion pre servation surgery of the
spine. Yue JJ, Bertagnoli R, McAfee PC, An HS (eds). Philadelphia, Saunders/Elsevier, 2008.)
Working
channel
Video CCD
pickup
Irrigation
channel
Cannula
Scope tip and tool within cannula
YESS
DISCOSCOPE
Yeung Endoscopic Spine Surgery system
for selective endoscopic discectomy
Light cable
Irrigation port
Suction
hose
Tool
and spinal endoscopy
Video cable
Cannula
Tool
Cannula
Tissue
Video display from discoscope
the goal established for endoscopic surgeons wishing to take up the proce-
TA BL E 64 -1 Mic rodi skec tomy versus Endo scop ic
Diskec tomy
Level II-III Evidence
Satisfactory outcome 97% 93%
“Very satisfied” 73% 67%
Disability
Narcotic use 7 days 25 days
Hospital stay 0 day 1 day
From F.U. Hermantin ,T. Peters, L. Quartararo, et al. A prospective randomized study comparing the results of open discectomy with those of video-assisted arthroscopic microdiscectomy.
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 81A ( 1999 ) 958 – 965.
*
Sixty patients randomized, 30 per group.
Group 1: Arthro scopic
Microdiskectomy
27 days 49 days
*
SURGICAL OUTCOME
Group 2: Microscopic
Diskectomy
dure. The results for all types of herniated nucleus pulposus (HNP), through
2008, as reported in the literature are summarized in Table 64-2.
The YESS endoscopic transforaminal approach, described in this chapter, also addresses a wide spectrum of painful degenerative conditions of
the lumbar spine. The results of highly selected patients for these painful
conditions have been reported at national and international spine meetings,
but the clinical results of endoscopic treatment contained and noncontained
HNP studies were last reported in 2004. Over 3,000 cases recorded on an
excel database ranging from 1- to 10-year follow-up using clinical standardized measurements such as visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability
Index (ODI), SF 12 (lifestyle disability scale), and MacNab criteria are currently being collated independently for peer-reviewed publication.
The endoscopic foraminal approach, differentiated from the posterior
approach, emphasizes the dilation along tissue planes without damage to
normal anatomy. The foraminal approach for disc herniation utilizing the
“inside-out-technique” provides easy access for central, paracentral, and
subligamentous foraminal and extraforaminal disc herniations through
natural tissue planes between the longissimus and psoas muscles (Figure
64-3). For foraminal and large paracentral herniations, it is easy to visualize
the lateral edge of the traversing nerve (Figure 64-4) once the herniation
that patients use less postoperative pain medication and return to work
within 1 to 6 weeks. It is not unusual for individual patients to return to work
in a matter of days. Long-term follow-up has demonstrated decreased recurrence (6%), less postlaminectomy syndrome, and greater patient satisfaction
overall. Morganstern, a student of Yeung
21
, has reported6 that after a learning
curve of approximately 70 patients utilizing the YESS technique for a wide
spectrum of disc herniation types, a 90% overall good/excellent result by
MacNab and modified MacNab criteria is achievable. The 90% standard was
is removed. If the fragment is large and extruded, it comes out as an intact
collagenized fragment. Prodromal symptoms of disc herniation in the aging
spine usually arise from annular tears, which cause recurrent back pain and
sciatica before the disc herniates. The opportunity to study and treat painful annular tears endoscopically that do not heal naturally provides information on validating the theory of electrothermal therapy but also sheds
light on the reasons why the usefulness of blind radiographic methods will
always be limited. Identification of granulation tissue and nucleus material

430
P A R T V I I I The Future of the Aging Spine
TA BL E 64 -2 Resul ts of Arth roscop ic Di skec tomy* versu s Mic rodi skec tomy
Author(s)
Mayer
(1993)
Kambin
(1999)
Yeung
(2000)
Lew/Mehalic
Number of
Patients
20 Contained HNP
60 Small protrusion
500 All patient groups 42
49 Far lateral HNP NR NR 85%
Type of Treatment
(Indications)
Small protrusion Single
Contained/extruded HNP
Mean Age
(range)
Mean Follow-up
(range)
Results MacNab
Good/Excellent
NR NR 80%
NR NR 97%
NR 86%
25-69
(2001)
Yeung
(2001)
Tsou/Yeung
307 HNP—all types
All patient groups
NR
18-72
23
NR
219 HNP with neurologic deficit NR NR 93%
(2002)
Ruetten
463 All HNP NR NR 81%
(2005)
Choi/Lee
(2007)
Ruetten
(2008)
Hoogland
41 Extraforaminal HNP 58.7
32-74
178 All HNP 43
20-68
34.1
NR
NR
1-24 mo
262 Recurrent HNP NR NR 86%
(2008)
*Term coined by Kambin; later used generically to denote endoscopic foraminal diskectomy. ( P. Kambin, Arthroscopic microdiskectomy. Mt Sinai J Med 58(2) (1991) 159-64).
†
MacNab criteria: Good—occasional back or leg pain not interfering with normal work or recreation; Excellent—no pain, no restriction of activity.
†
84%
92%
82%
F IG UR E 6 4- 3 Basic “Inside-Out-Technique” for Endoscopic Disc
Decompression. Uniportal technique for selective endoscopic diskectomy. After
introduction of a beveled cannula, endoscopic microrongeurs are used for visualized fragmentectomy. This is followed by use of specialized hinged rongeurs
and straight and flexible shavers to remove the soft nucleus from the annular
herniation defect. (Reprinted from Yeung CA, Hayes VM, Siddiqi FN, Yeung AT.
Lumbar endoscopic posterolateral (transforaminal) approach. In Motion preservation surgery of the spine. Yue JJ, Bertagnoli R, McAfee PC, An HS (eds).
Philadelphia, Saunders/Elsevier, 2008.)
in the annular layers (Figure 64-5A) provides a good prognosis for those
tears treated with thermal annuloplasty. The nucleus material that weakens
the annulus must be removed before the annulus is cauterized to close the
tear. Using a biportal approach and a 70-degree scope, cauterization and
confirmation of successful thermal annuloplasty under direct endoscopic
F IG UR E 6 4- 4 Traversing Nerve after Removal of a Extruded Foraminal
HNP. Indigo carmine dye stains the degenerative nucleus blue, helping the surgeon to selectively remove not only the extruded, sequestered disc herniation,
but also the loose degenerative disc material, which could become the source of
a recurrent herniation. Here, the decompressed traversing nerve is clearly visualized to confirm complete decompression of the herniation. Intraoperative or
postoperative CT scan or MRI is not needed to confirm complete decompression
of the spinal nerve when visual confirmation confirms successful removal of the
herniation. The real-time extraction of the herniation fragment, followed by direct
visualization of the decompressed nerve, confirmed by the conscious patient providing immediate feedback reporting immediate relief of leg pain, precludes the
need for traditional evidence based medicine calling for a double-blind, randomized study to validate the selective endoscopic diskectomy technique or any visualized endoscopic technique designed to address the pathoanatomy.
visualization provide confirmation that the tear is closed and sealed
(Figure 64-5B).
The technique for endoscopic foraminoplasty in more advanced disc
degeneration and foraminal narrowing is associated with central and
foraminal stenosis, not only for lateral recess stenosis but also for foraminal

C H A P T E R 6 4 Endoscopic Surgical Pain Management in the Aging Spine
Grade IV
tear
431
A
F IG UR E 6 4 -5 Endoscopic Thermal Annuloplasty of Annular Tears. A, Painful annular tear identified endoscopically after intraoperative chromo-diskography
confirms the presence of a grade IV annular tear with disc tissue embedded in the annular fibers. Tears that don’t heal have imbedded disc material preventing
the tear from healing naturally. The nucleus material must be removed from the annular layers before the results of thermal annuloplasty is predictable. This is the
reason the surgical results of IDET is not predictable. Selective endoscopic diskectomy removes degenerative disc material as well as the nucleus embedded in the
annulus. Endoscopic thermal annuloplasty follows. Tears vary in size, location, and type. One or two quadrant posterior and posterolateral tears in patients with
20% to 25% remaining annular thickness have good long-term results following endoscopic thermal annuloplasty. More extensive tears will also heal, but can tear
again. Painful annular tears are best diagnosed with Evocative Chromo-Discography and confirmed by endoscopic visualization of the tear. Diskography performed
by the surgeon evokes the pain, while the indigo carmine dye helps locate the tear. Granulation and inflammatory tissue are often found adjacent to the tear, and
visual documentation of tear closure provides evidence of endoscopic thermal annuloplasty in the treatment of painful annular tears as a source of pain in the aging
spine. B, Illustration of selective endoscopic diskectomy and thermal annuloplasty technique for a grade IV Tear. C, Grade III-IV annular tear cauterized and closed
with bipolar radiofrequency thermal annuloplasty as viewed through a 70-degree scope. The prognosis for this tear is good because the tear is completely closed,
and 20% to 24% of the annulus is still preserved after closing the tear.
decompression of the ventral facet in tall discs to gain “inside-out” access
to sequestered herniations in the epidural space. A foraminoplasty cannula
exposes the ventral aspect of the superior facet for endoscopic decompres-
B
C
or implants such as spinal cord stimulators. Preoperative evaluation incorporates correlation of the findings on imaging studies such as MRI, CT
scan, diskography, and CT/diskography.
sion (Figure 64-6A), which helps strip the capsule and define the undersurface of the facet to be removed with trephines and burrs (Figure 64-6B).
Degenerative spondylolisthesis is often associated with disc protrusions and lateral stenosis, whereas sciatica from isthmic spondylolisthesis,
due to the mechanical compression of the axilla and subarticular recess
(Figure 64-6C), is effectively treated by endoscopic foraminal decompression in selected patients. These patients usually improve temporarily with
foraminal diagnostic and therapeutic injections. Endoscopic decompression of the foramen can provide enough relief that the patient will avoid
fusion. Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) patients with lateral recess
stenosis and recurrent disc herniation also respond well. When the support is shifted posteriorly to the facet joints, synovitis and facet cysts may
form. These cysts may impinge on the spinal nerves. Pedunculated cysts are
sometimes visualized endoscopically, especially if the cyst wall is stained by
OPERATIVE TECHNIQUE(S)
Anesthesia
The procedure is carried out in an operating room. Local anesthesia using
0.5% to 1% lidocaine, supported by an anesthesiologist using fentanyl and
midazolam (Versed), is all the anesthesia needed. Some surgeons and
anesthesiologists are more comfortable with general anesthesia, and it is an
acceptable standard of care to use general anesthesia, but there is greater
chance of nerve injury from anatomic variations of the position of the exit-
ing nerve and with anomalous nerves in the foramen, such as the furcal
nerves. The patient’s ability to feel pain during the procedure provides an
additional safety factor for foraminal surgery.
indigo carmine or is visualized in the course of a diskectomy for chronic
sciatica (Figure 64-7). Degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis (Figure
64-8A-D) can also be treated endoscopically with proper interventional
injection workup. Impingement from the disc or superior facet of the inferior vertebra can be sorted out with diagnostic and therapeutic injections.
If evocative diskography evokes concordant back pain and/or sciatica, and
foraminal epiduralgrams and therapeutic injections provide information of
the pathoanatomy, then careful preoperative planning will provide information on the likely outcome of foraminal decompression.
Position
The prone position is preferred because it provides a more intuitive for the
surgeon and lends greater flexibility when using a biportal approach work-
ing inside the disc space. The biportal approach provides greater visual
control of the flexible shavers and larger surgical instruments. A six-step
protocol in standardizing optimal needle and instrument placement is
extensively published, and not within the scope of this chapter.
CLINICAL PRESENTATION AND EVALUATION
The clinical presentation and evaluation for endoscopic decompression
are the same as for the techniques used for traditional transcanal surgery.
FBSS patients, however, represent a large and diverse group of spine surgery
patients who have previously undergone spine surgery to treat back pain,
yet they continue to suffer from back pain and sciatica after one or more
spine surgeries. FBSS can be the result of an initial failure to recognize all of
the pain generators, failure of the initial surgery (inadequate disc removal),
recurrence of the original pathology (recurrent disc herniation), or progression of the underlying condition (lumbar spondylosis and facet arthrosis).
The endoscopic applications outlined in this chapter are applicable to all of
these conditions and often obviate the need for large instrumented fusions
Procedure
The procedure and technique described are those preferred by the author.
In every instance, diskography is an integral part of the technique. The
diagnostic value of the subjective provocative response is valuable for con-
firming the disc as the source of the pain. Not only is evocative Chromo-
Discography a clinical confirmatory test that links the suspected painful
disc to the patient’s subjective pain complaints, but the blue staining of the
degenerated nucleus pulposus and annular defects, using the vital dye indigo
carmine in 10% concentration, visually identifies normal and degenerative
portions of the disc and annulus in contained or uncontained herniations.
Contiguous disc fragments in the epidural space, disc tissue embedded in
the annular defects, and herniation tracts are stained by the dye for targeted

432
ENDOSCOPIC FORAMINAL-PLASTY
P A R T V I I I The Future of the Aging Spine
Lateral stenosis
Superior view
A
B
F IG UR E 6 4 -6 A, Endoscopic foraminal decompression. In more advanced aging, foraminal stenosis and osteophytosis can cause impingement of the spinal
nerves. A specially configured cannula is placed under the facet for foraminal decompression. A side-firing laser is useful to strip the capsule from the facet; then a trephine and high-speed diamond burr are used to decompress the ventral portion of the facet to enlarge the foramen and elevate the foraminal window to gain access
to the epidural space. The exiting nerve is then followed into the epidural space to decompress the axilla between the traversing and the exiting nerve. Decompression
continues until the lateral edge of the traversing nerve is visualized or until fat is seen in the foramen. B, Foraminal decompression may be performed in conjunction
with disc decompression or as a stand-alone procedure. Here, the illustration demonstrates the use of the holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet side-firing laser to strip
the capsule from the ventral facet. More extensive decompression may be further performed with trephines, endoscopic Kerrison rongeurs, high-speed endoscopic
burrs, or rasps. C, Decompressed exiting nerve for lateral recess stenosis. A high-speed diamond burr was used to complete the superior facet decompression to free
the exiting nerve by stripping the facet capsule and removing 4 mm from the ventral surface of superior facet.
Specialized cannula isolates facet,
protects nerve root
C
removal. Nonionic Isovue 300 contrast is used for radiographic visualization of the injectate. It is mixed with indigo carmine in a 10:1 ratio. In a
nondegenerated disc, the roentgenographic contrast permeates the nucleus
pulposus and forms a compact oval or bilobular nucleogram. There is no
dye penetration into the substance of the normal impermeable annular collagen layers. Therefore the absence of an annulogram represents a normal
annulus. In degenerated conditions, clefts, crevices, tears, and migrated fragments of nucleus will be filled with contrast both inside the disc and along
the herniation tract.
A syringe is attached to the needle via an extension tube and the surgeon
correlates the patient’s response to the application of the injectate. Manual
pressure, graded light, moderate, and high, is accurate enough to correlate
the patient’s response to the injection, thereby correctly used here the pain
generated by the diskography process with the volume and pressure of the
manual injection. This must also be correlated with the diskogram pattern. The literature promotes the use of a transducer to record the intradiscal pressures during the diskogram process. Surgeons who perform their
own diskography, however, rapidly learn to correlate the findings with the
endoscopic pathoanatomy and become more proficient at patient selection.
For patients with ambiguous clinical complaints, a preoperative diskography
may help clarify the nature of the spinal problem. However, intraoperative
diskography has the advantage of outlining the disc herniation as identified
on the preoperative MRI study and assists the surgeon in removal of the
disc. Ultimately the herniated disc material is extracted under endoscopic
visualization.
The endoscopic approach uses a posterolateral approach, located typically
10 to 12 cm from the midline of the spine in a 160- to 180-pound patient,
and uses an access cannula with 6- to 7-mm inner diameter and 7- to 8-mm
outer diameter. It allows for the use of foramimal endoscopes with 2.8-, 3.1-,
and 4.0-mm working channels that provide excellent, clear visualization of
and access to the foraminal structures containing the disc and annulus, the
epidural space, and ventral surface of the facet joint, including the pedicle
and vertebral body. A combination of trephines, Kerrison rongeurs, highspeed drills, articulating graspers, flexible pituitary graspers, and various laser
delivery systems can be used to ablate nerves, enlarge the neural foramen,
remove facet and foraminal osteophytes, and decompress the spinal canal

C H A P T E R 6 4 Endoscopic Surgical Pain Management in the Aging Spine
433
compressing neural structures without any destruction of the posterior spinal
structures. Foraminal decompression is capable of treating a treating a wide
variety of the pathologies discussed here. Its application potential in the elderly
is virtually limitless, as it allows for outpatient and minimally invasive treatment
of many spine disorders currently managed with either large, open surgeries or
F IG UR E 6 4 -7 Pedunculated Synovial Cysts. Pedunculated cysts may
be difficult to see on MRI because they may vary in size and are sometimes seen
incidentally during foraminal surgery. It does not have to be located adjacent
to the facet joint, because the cyst may be medial or lateral to the joint. Here
the cyst, accompanied by a plexus of blood vessels, is found in the foramen
compressing the exiting nerve. Usually a cyst is suspected from the finding of a
bright signal adjacent to the facet capsule.
pain medications alone. The emergence of foraminal spinal endoscopy offers
a bridge for treating many spinal ailments in patients who might not fare well
with large open surgeries yet need something more than pain management.
POSTOPERATIVE CARE
A postoperative lumbar corset will make the patient feel more comfortable.
Before removal of the access cannula, routine use of depomedrol 80 mg
delivered with 0.5% bupivacaine (Marcaine) (1-2 ml) will provide immediate
postoperative analgesia; there have been no instances of infection from the
use of steroids. The patient should be instructed to avoid bending, lifting,
and twisting for 4 to 6 weeks to allow the annulus to heal and to reduce the
incidence of recurrent disc herniation from the foraminal access portal and
from an annular defect produced by the disc herniation. Physical therapy
is not required but can be considered on an individual basis. Patients are
instructed to use their pain as a guide to activity after the 6-week period.
COMPLICATIONS AND AVOIDANCE
The risk of serious complications or injury is low—approximately 1% or
less in the authors’ experience. As with any surgery, there are the usual risks
of infection, nerve injury, dural tears, bleeding, and scar tissue formation.
Transient dysesthesia, the most common postoperative complaint, occurs in
approximately 5% to 15% of cases and is almost always transient. Its cause
remains incompletely understood, but a detailed study of foraminal anatomy
reveals an extensive network of nerves that can be surgically irritated, even
with the most careful use of surgical instruments. Dysesthesia may also be
related to nerve recovery, operating adjacent to the dorsal root ganglion of
the exiting nerve, or a small hematoma adjacent to the ganglion of the exiting
nerve, because it can occur days or even weeks after surgery. There are also
anomalous nerve fibers in the annular tissue, which may be furcal nerves or
A
C
FI G U RE 6 4 -8 Both isthmic and degenerative forms of spondylolisthesis are treatable endoscopically if the pain gen-
erator can be demonstrated to come from the disc or foramen. A, Lateral MRI demonstrates a degenerative spondylo listhesis
with a disc protrusion contributing to central stenosis. The disc can be decompressed endoscopically, but the risk of instability
with further slippage is increased. B, There is foraminal stenosis causing sciatica. This patient had right sciatica, not left; good
relief was obtained with a foraminal epidural block on the right. C, Endoscopic foraminoplasty identified impingement of the
exiting nerve by the tip of the superior facet of the inferior vertebra. D, A furcal nerve was found in the foramen, possibly also
contributing to the patient’s sciatica. His sciatica resolved following foraminal endoscopic decompression.
B
D

434
P A R T V I I I The Future of the Aging Spine
ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
e visualization of conjoined nerves, furcal nerve branches, and anomalous
anatomy such as sympathetic nerves may shed light on why current imaging
studies cannot fully explain the reason(s) that some patients with identical
imaging studies have debilitating pain and others do not. e advantages of
endoscopic visualization of dorsal and foraminal pathoanatomy provide greater
opportunity for surgical treatment. When the degenerative process creates conditions that are demonstrated to produce pain, ablation of nerves responsible
for pain is a viable surgical procedure that causes very little surgical morbidity
as compared to the traditional techniques such as fusion. ese variations in
normal anatomy and anomalous nerves in the foramen also present a new set
of surgical risks to the endoscopic surgeon. Irritation or surgical injury to these
sensitive nerves, often unavoidable, is considered a risk that is fortunately very
small compared with the benefit of pain relief.
nerves growing into an inflammatory membrane in the area of the foramen
that is not the traversing or exiting nerve. It could show up in the surgical
specimen without permanent effect on the patient, but may cause temporary
dysesthesia. Using blunt techniques to dilate the annular fibers has limited
surgical morbidity and the excisional biopsy of tissues (anomalous nerves)
caused by neo-neurogenesis and angiogenesis from the surgical specimen, but
dysesthesia cannot be avoided completely, because it has occurred even when
there were no adverse intraoperative events and in cases in which the continuous electromyography (EMG) and somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP)
did not show any nerve irritation. The symptoms are sometimes so minimal
that most endoscopic surgeons do not report it as a “complication.” The more
severe dysesthetic symptoms are similar to a variant of complex regional pain
syndrome, but usually less severe, and without the skin changes. Postoperative dysesthesia is treated with transforaminal epidurals, sympathetic blocks,
and the off-label use of pregabalin 150 mg/day or gabapentin titrated to as
much as 1800 to 3200 mg/day. Gabapentin is approved by the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) for postherpetic neuralgia, but is effective in the
treatment of neuropathic pain. The close proximity of sympathetic nerves
and their role in disc innervation is still poorly understood, but treatment of
dysesthesia by blocking the sympathetic trunk has produced dramatic results,
especially when provided early in the course of postoperative dysesthesia.
Avoidance of complications is enhanced by the ability to visualize normal and pathoanatomy clearly, as well as through the use of local anesthesia
and conscious sedation rather than general or spinal anesthesia. Adopting
the “inside-out-technique” will give the surgeon more leeway in planning the
surgical approach, since direct targeting to the herniation based on imaging
studies may provide some “surprises” when visualization is not as clear as
anticipated because of bleeding, and the herniation turns out to be more
than a simple herniation not appreciated by the imaging study. Staying
inside the disc space or returning to the disc space when visualization is
obscured to reorient the surgeon is an important factor to consider. In experienced hands, some surgeons have safely utilized general anesthesia when
circumstances make it safer for the patient. With use of a local anesthetic,
the patient usually remains comfortable during the entire procedure, with
the exception of periods such as during Evocative Chromo-Discography
annular fenestration, or when instruments are manipulated past the exiting nerve. Local anesthesia of 0.50% lidocaine permits generous use of this
diluted anesthetic for pain control but allows the patient to feel pain when
the nerve root is manipulated. Nerves can also be adherent to the annulus or
nucleus. Pain experienced by the patient is very helpful to the surgeon when
probing or operating in the foramen, as it permits documentation or release
of these adhesions before removing the herniation.
CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
In summary, endoscopic posterolateral lumbar diskectomy and foraminal decompression provides a visualized method for minimal access to
the disc and epidural space that avoids surgical morbidity to the dorsal
muscle column. This endoscopic approach also allows for the visualization of foraminal and intradiscal pathology that is not appreciated by the
traditional approach. Inflammation pays a major role in pain production.
The correlation of these conditions and findings with pain generation may
open the door to a better understanding of the degenerative process causing lumbar disc herniations, and our concept of surgical intervention that
encourages patient selection for earlier intervention may evolve as well. Following foraminal diskectomy and decompression, the traversing nerve, exiting nerve, axilla, and epidural space are all able to be probed and visualized.
It is not always necessary to directly visualize all structures if there is good
indirect evidence that the painful structure is being appropriately addressed;
an example is decompression of a central disc herniation by visualizing the
annulus and annular tears with an intradiscal view of the annulus. Patients
can also provide confirmation that their leg pain is gone when undergoing
surgery under conscious sedation. A closer study of posterior column and
facet innervation will also open the door for endoscopic nerve ablation techniques that can be used for axial back pain.
In this area of health care reform, identifying the pain generator early,
and treating it with a minimally invasive technique with surgical pain management, may lead to cost savings by decreasing our dependence on drug
usage for chronic pain, and large expensive destructive surgery spine surgery
such as fusion. Any technology to help surgeons attain proficiency through
surgical training simulators or improved imaging capability, preoperatively
or intraoperatively, should be part of the equation in health care reform.
References
1. J.N. Weinstein, T.D. Tosteson, J.D. Lurie, A.N. Tosteson, B. Hanscom, J.S. Skinner, et al.,
Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disc herniation: the Spine Patient Outcomes
Research Trial (SPORT): a randomized trial, JAMA 296 (2006) 2441–2450.
2. F.U. Hermantin, T. Peters, L. Quartararo, P. Kambin, A prospective, randomized study com-
paring the results of open discectomy with those of video-assisted arthroscopic microdiscec-
tomy, Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 81A (1999) 958–965.
3. A.T. Yeung, Minimally invasive disc surgery with the Yeung Endoscopic Spine System
(YESS), Surg. Technol. Int. VIII (2000) 267–277.
4. A.T. Yeung, P.M. Tsou, Posterolateral endoscopic excision for lumbar disc herniation: sur-
gical technique, outcome, and complications in 307 consecutive cases, Spine 27 (2002)
722–731.
5. P.M. Tsou, A.T. Yeung, Transforaminal endoscopic decompression for radiculopathy second-
ary to intra-canal non-contained lumbar disc herniations: outcome and technique, Spine
J. 2 (2002) 41–48.
6. A.T. Yeung, C.A. Yeung, Advances in endoscopic disc and spine surgery: foraminal
approach, Surg. Technol. Int. XI (2003) 253–261.
7. P.M. Tsou, C.A. Yeung, A.T. Yeung, “Selective endoscopic discectomy™ and thermal annulo-
plasty for chronic lumbar discogenic pain: a minimal access visualized intradiscal procedure”,
Spine J. 2 (2004) 563–574.
8. A.T. Yeung, M.H. Savitz, L.T. Khoo, et al., Complications of minimally invasive spinal pro-
cedures and surgery Part IV: percutaneous and intradiscal techniques, in: A.R. Vacarro, J.J.
Regan, A.H. Crawford (Eds.), Complications of pediatric and adult spinal surgery, Marcel
Dekker, New York, 2004, pp. 547–571.
9. A.T. Yeung, C.A. Yeung, Percutaneous foraminal surgery: the YESS technique, in: D. Kim,
R. Fessler, J. Regan (Eds.), Endoscopic spine surgery and instrumentation, Thieme, New
York, 2005.
10. A.T. Yeung, C.A. Yeung, In vivo endoscopic visualization of patho-anatomy in painful degen-
erative conditions of the lumbar spine, Surg. Technol. Int. XV (2006) 243–256.
11. A.T. Yeung, C. A. Yeung, Microtherapy in low back pain, in: H.M. Mayer (Ed.), Minimally
invasive spine surgery, second ed., Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 2006, pp. 267–277.
12. C. Kauffman, C.A. Yeung, A.T. Yeung, Percutaneous lumbar surgery, in: Rothman Simeone,
H.N. Herkowitz, S.R. Garfin, F.J. Eismont, G.R . Bell, M.D. Balderston (Eds.), The spine,
5th edition, Elsevier/ Mosby Saunders, Philadelphia, 2006.
13. A.T. Yeung, Incorporating adjunctive minimally invasive surgical technologies in endoscopic
foraminal surgery: one surgeon’s experience with endoscopic treatment of painful degenera-
tive conditions of the lumbar spine, SAS J. 2007.
14. A.T. Yeung, C.A. Yeung, Minimally invasive techniques in the management of lumbar disc
herniation, Orthop. Clin. North Am. 38 (3) (2007) 363–372.
15. A. Yeung, C.A. Yeung, Arthroscopic lumbar discectomy, in: advanced reconstruction: spine,
American Academy of Orthopedic surgeon publication, Chicago, Illinois Publication Project
2009 (in Press)
16. B.I. Martin, S.K. Mirza, B.A. Comstock, et al., Reoperation rates following lumbar spine
surgery and the influence of spinal fusion procedures, Spine 32 (3) (2007) 382–387.
17. A.N.A. Tosteson, J.D. Lurie, T.D. Tosteson, et al., Surgical treatment of spinal stenosis with and
without degenerative spondylolisthesis, Annals of Internal Medicine 149 (12) (2008) 845–854.
18. E.J. Caragee, Is Lumbar discography a determinate of discogenic low back: Provocative dis-
cography reconsidered: current Pain and Headache Reports 4 (2007) 301–308
19. H.M. Mayer, M. Brock, Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD), Neurosurg
Rev 16 (2) (1993) 115–120.
20. P. Kambin, Nass, Arthroscopic Microdiscectomy, Spine Journal 3 (Suppl. 3) (2003)
60S–64S. (Review).
21. P.M. Tsou, A.T. Yeung, Transforaminal endoscopic decompression for radiculopathy sec-
ondary to intracanal noncontained lumbar disc herniations: outcome and technique, Spine
Journal 2 (1) (2002) 41–48.
22. P. Kambin, Arthroscopic microdiskectomy, Mt Sinai J Med 58 (2) (1991) 159–164
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
