Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2012:2012:893608.
doi: 10.1100/2012/893608. Epub 2012 Nov 6.

Lateral transpsoas fusion: indications and outcomes

Affiliations
Review

Lateral transpsoas fusion: indications and outcomes

Vishal C Patel et al. ScientificWorldJournal. 2012.

Abstract

Spinal fusion historically has been used extensively, and, recently, the lateral transpsoas approach to the thoracic and lumbar spine has become an increasingly common method to achieve fusion. Recent literature on this approach has elucidated its advantage over more traditional anterior and posterior approaches, which include a smaller tissue dissection, potentially lower blood loss, no need for an access surgeon, and a shorter hospital stay. Indications for the procedure have now expanded to include degenerative disc disease, spinal stenosis, degenerative scoliosis, nonunion, trauma, infection, and low-grade spondylolisthesis. Lateral interbody fusion has a similar if not lower rate of complications compared to traditional anterior and posterior approaches to interbody fusion. However, lateral interbody fusion has unique complications that include transient neurologic symptoms, motor deficits, and neural injuries that range from 1 to 60% in the literature. Additional studies are required to further evaluate and monitor the short- and long-term safety, efficacy, outcomes, and complications of lateral transpsoas procedures.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(a) Preoperative X-rays demonstrating nonunion at L1-2 after posterior instrumented fusion and decompression from L1-S1. (b) Postoperative X-rays demonstrating XLIF at L1-2.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Two incision technique for a lateral transpsoas approach. (a) Surgeon's Finger traversing paraspinal muscle incision site, (b) finger identifying the retroperitoneal space, (c) surgeon's finger guiding the first dilator onto the psoas major, and (d) dilator in place traversing the psoas major directly over the intended intervertebral disc space (image reprinted with permission from Nuvasive Inc., San Diego, CA).

References

    1. Baker JK, Reardon PR, Reardon MJ, Heggeness MH. Vascular injury in anterior lumbar surgery. Spine. 1993;18(15):2227–2230. - PubMed
    1. Lindey EM, Mcbeth ZL, Henry SE, et al. Retrograde ejaculation after anterior lumbar spine surgery. Spine. 2012;37(20):1785–1789. - PubMed
    1. Than KD, Wang AC, Rahman SU, et al. Complication avoidance and management in anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurgical Focus. 2011;31(4, article E6) - PubMed
    1. Rihn JA, Patel R, Makda J, et al. Complications associated with single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Spine Journal. 2009;9(8):623–629. - PubMed
    1. Okuda S, Miyauchi A, Oda T, Haku T, Yamamoto T, Iwasaki M. Surgical complications of posterior lumbar interbody fusion with total facetectomy in 251 patients. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine. 2006;4(4):304–309. - PubMed