Neurologic Injury after Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Since the first description of LLIF in 2006, the indications for LLIF have expanded and the rate of LLIF procedures performed in the USA has increased. LLIF has several theoretical advantages compared to other approaches including the preservation of the anterior and posterior annular/ligamentous structures, insertion of wide cages resting on the dense apophyseal ring bilaterally, and augmentation of disc height with indirect decompression of neural elements. Favorable long-term outcomes and a reduced risk of visceral/vascular injuries, incidental dural tears, and perioperative infections have been reported. However, approach-related complications such as motor and sensory deficits remain a concern. In well-indicated patients, LLIF can be a safe procedure used for a variety of indications 1).

Hijji et al. published a systematic review analyzing the complication profile of LLIF. Their study included a total of 63 articles and 6819 patients. The most commonly reported complications were transient neurologic injury (36.07%). The clinical significance of those transient findings, however, is unclear since the rate of persistent neurologic complications was much lower (3.98%) 2)

The risk of lumbar plexus injury is particularly concerning at the L4-5 disc space. Although LLIF is associated with an increased prevalence of anterior thigh/groin pain as well as motor and sensory deficits immediately after surgery, our results support that pain and neurologic deficits decrease over time. The level treated appears to be a risk factor for lumbosacral plexus injury 3).

Interestingly, the use of rhBMP-2 was associated with higher rates of persistent motor deficits, which might be explained by a direct deleterious effect of this agent on the lumbosacral plexus 4).

In a retrospective chart review of 118 patients, Cahill et al. determined the incidence of femoral nerve injury, which is considered one of the worst neurological complications after LLIF. The authors reported an approximate 5% femoral nerve injury rate of all the LLIF procedures performed at L4-5. There were no femoral nerve injuries at any other levels 5).

During a 6-year time period of performing LLIF Aichmair et al., noted a learning curve with a decreasing proportional trend for anterior thigh pain, sensory as well as motor deficits 6)

Le et al. also observed a learning curve with a significant reduction in the incidence of postoperative thigh numbness during a 3-year period (from 26.1 to 10.7%) 7).

Levi AD from the University of Miami Hospital, adopted an exclusive mini-open muscle-splitting approach in LLIF with first-look inspection of the lumbosacral plexus nerve elements taht may improve motor and sensory outcomes in general and the incidence of postoperative groin/thighsensory dysfunction and psoas-pattern weakness in particular 8).

References

1)

Salzmann SN, Shue J, Hughes AP. Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion-Outcomes and Complications. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2017 Dec;10(4):539-546. doi: 10.1007/s12178-017-9444-1. Review. PubMed PMID: 29038952; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5685966.
2)

Hijji FY, Narain AS, Bohl DD, Ahn J, Long WW, DiBattista JV, Kudaravalli KT, Singh K. Lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review of complication rates. Spine J. 2017 Oct;17(10):1412-1419. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.04.022. Epub 2017 Apr 26. Review. PubMed PMID: 28456671.
3)

Lykissas MG, Aichmair A, Hughes AP, Sama AA, Lebl DR, Taher F, Du JY, Cammisa FP, Girardi FP. Nerve injury after lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a review of 919 treated levels with identification of risk factors. Spine J. 2014 May 1;14(5):749-58. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.066. Epub 2013 Sep 5. PubMed PMID: 24012428.
4)

Lykissas MG, Aichmair A, Hughes AP, Sama AA, Lebl DR, Taher F, Du JY, Cammisa FP, Girardi FP. Nerve injury after lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a review of 919 treated levels with identification of risk factors. Spine J. 2014 May 1;14(5):749-58. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.066. Epub 2013 Sep 5. PubMed PMID: 24012428.
5)

Cahill KS, Martinez JL, Wang MY, Vanni S, Levi AD. Motor nerve injuries following the minimally invasive lateral transpsoas approach. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012 Sep;17(3):227-31. doi: 10.3171/2012.5.SPINE1288. Epub 2012 Jun 29. PubMed PMID: 22746272.
6)

Aichmair A, Lykissas MG, Girardi FP, Sama AA, Lebl DR, Taher F, Cammisa FP, Hughes AP. An institutional six-year trend analysis of the neurological outcome after lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a 6-year trend analysis of a single institution. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013 Nov 1;38(23):E1483-90. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182a3d1b4. PubMed PMID: 23873231.
7)

Le TV, Burkett CJ, Deukmedjian AR, Uribe JS. Postoperative lumbar plexus injury after lumbar retroperitoneal transpsoas minimally invasive lateral interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013 Jan 1;38(1):E13-20. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318278417c. PubMed PMID: 23073358.
8)

Sellin JN, Brusko GD, Levi AD. Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Revisited: Complication Avoidance and Outcomes with the Mini-Open Approach. World Neurosurg. 2019 Jan;121:e647-e653. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.09.180. Epub 2018 Oct 3. PubMed PMID: 30292030.

Minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion for adult spinal deformity

A multicenter retrospective review of a minimally invasive adult spinal deformity database was queried with a minimum of 2-yr follow-up. Patients were divided into 2 groups as determined by the side of the curve from which the LLIF was performed: concave or convex.

No differences between groups were noted in demographic, and preoperative or postoperative radiographic parameters (all P > .05). There were 8 total complications in the convex group (34.8%) and 21 complications in the concave group (52.5%; P = .17). A subgroup analysis was performed in 49 patients in whom L4-5 was in the primary curve and not in the fractional curve. In this subset of patients, there were 6 complications in the convex group (31.6%) compared to 19 in the concave group (63.3%; P < .05) and both groups experienced significant improvements in coronal Cobb angle, Oswestry Disability Index, and Visual Analog Scale score with no difference between groups.

Patients undergoing LLIF for ADS had no statistically significant clinical or operative complication rates regardless of a concave or convex approach to the curve. Clinical outcomes and coronal plane deformity improved regardless of approach side. However, in cases wherein L4-5 is in the primary curve, approaching the fractional curve at L4-5 from the concavity may be associated with a higher complication rate compared to a convex approach 1).


Park et al., evaluated the clinical and radiological efficacies of supplementing minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) with open posterior spinal fusion (PSF) in adult spinal deformity (ASD).

To evaluate the advantages of minimally invasive LLIF for ASD, patients who underwent minimally invasive LLIF followed by open PSF (combined group) were compared with patients who only underwent PSF (only PSF group). The clinical and radiological outcomes for deformity correction and indirect decompression were assessed. The occurrence of proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) and proximal junctional failure (PJF) were also evaluated.

No significant differences were observed in the clinical outcomes of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale, and major complications including reoperations between the groups. No additional advantage was found for coronal deformity correction, but the restoration of lumbar lordosis in the combined group was significantly higher postoperatively (15.3° vs. 8.87°, P = 0.003) and last follow-up (6.69° vs. 1.02°, P = 0.029) compared to that of the only PSF group. In the subgroup analysis for indirect decompression for the combined group, a significant increase of canal area (104 vs. 122 mm) and foraminal height (16.2 vs. 18.5 mm) was noted. The occurrence of PJK or PJF was significantly higher in the combined group than in the only PSF group (P = 0.039).

LLIF has advantages of indirect decompression and greater improvements of sagittal correction compared to only posterior surgery. LLIF should be conducted considering the above-mentioned benefits and complications including PJK or PJF in ASD 2).

References

1)

Kanter AS, Tempel ZJ, Agarwal N, Hamilton DK, Zavatsky JM, Mundis GM, Tran S, Chou D, Park P, Uribe JS, Wang MY, Anand N, Eastlack R, Mummaneni PV, Okonkwo DO. Curve Laterality for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Adult Scoliosis Surgery: The Concave Versus Convex Controversy. Neurosurgery. 2018 Dec 1;83(6):1219-1225. doi: 10.1093/neuros/nyx612. PubMed PMID: 29361052.
2)

Park HY, Ha KY, Kim YH, Chang DG, Kim SI, Lee JW, Ahn JH, Kim JB. Minimally Invasive Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Adult Spinal Deformity: Clinical and Radiological Efficacy With Minimum Two Years Follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018 Jul 15;43(14):E813-E821. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002507. PubMed PMID: 29215493.

Update: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion complications

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion complications

A 2-page survey was distributed to attendees at the 2015 Cervical Spine Research Society (CSRS) meeting. Respondents were asked to categorize 18 anterior cervical discectomy and fusion-related adverse events as either: “common and acceptable,” “uncommon and acceptable,” “uncommon and sometimes acceptable,” or “uncommon and unacceptable.” Results were compiled to generate the relative frequency of these responses for each complication. Responses for each complication event were also compared between respondents based on practice location (US vs. non-US), primary specialty (orthopedics vs. neurosurgery) and years in practice.
Of 150 surveys distributed, 115 responses were received (76.7% response rate), with the majority of respondents found to be US-based (71.3%) orthopedic surgeons (82.6%). Wrong level surgery, esophageal injury, retained drain, and spinal cord injury were considered by most to be unacceptable and uncommon complications. Dysphagia and adjacent segment disease occurred most often, but were deemed acceptable complications. Although surgeon experience and primary specialty had little impact on responses, practice location was found to significantly influence responses for 12 of 18 complications, with non-US surgeons found to categorize events more toward the uncommon and unacceptable end of the spectrum as compared with US surgeons.
These results serve to aid communication and transparency within the field of spine surgery, and will help to inform future quality improvement and best practice initiatives 1).

Vocal cord palsy

Cervical adjacent segment disease

Hoarseness

Hoarseness, approximately in 5% 2).

Dysphagia

Soft tissue damage due to the use of automatic retractors in MACDF is not minor and leads to general discomfort in the patient in spite of good neurological results. These problems most often occur when automatic retractors are used continuously for more than 1 hour, as well as when they are used in multiple levels. Dysphagia, dysphonia and local pain decreased with the use of transient manual blades for retraction, and with intermittent release following minimally invasive principles 3).
Postoperative dysphagia is a significant concern.
Dexamethasone, although potentially protective against perioperative dysphagia and airway compromise, could inhibit fusion, a generally proinflammatory process.

Postoperative hemorrhage

Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks

Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leaks, although uncommon, may occur and can be a potentially serious complication. Little is known regarding the fusion rate after durotomy in ACDF.
In a single-institution retrospective review, 14 patients who experienced CSF leak after ACDF between 1995 and September 2014 were identified.
The median follow-up was 13.1 months. The diagnoses included spondylosis/degenerative disc disease (n = 10), disc herniation with radiculopathy (n = 3), and kyphotic deformity (n = 1). Of ACDFs, 7 were 1-level, 5 were 2-level, and 2 were 3-level procedures. The posterior longitudinal ligament was intentionally opened in all cases, and the microscope was used in 9 cases. Durotomy was discovered intraoperatively in all cases and was generally repaired with a combination of fibrin glue and synthetic dural replacement. Lumbar drainage was used in 5 patients, and 3 patients reported orthostatic headaches, which resolved within 1 month. Two patients reported hoarseness, and 8 patients reported dysphagia; all cases were transient. Follow-up imaging for fusion assessment was available for 12 patients, and a 100% fusion rate was achieved with no postoperative infections.
ACDFs with CSF leak had a 100% fusion rate in this series, with generally excellent clinical outcomes, although it is difficult to conclude definitively that there is no effect on fusion rates because of the small sample size. However, given the relative rarity of this complication, this study provides important data in the clinical literature regarding outcomes after CSF leak in ACDFs 4).

Pharyngoesophageal perforation

Spinal subdural hematoma

A spinal subdural hematoma is a rare clinical entity with considerable consequences without prompt diagnosis and treatment. Throughout the literature, there are limited accounts of spinal subdural hematoma formation following spinal surgery. This report is the first to describe the formation of a spinal subdural hematoma in the thoracic spine following surgery at the cervical level. A 53-year-old woman developed significant paraparesis several hours after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion of C5-6. Expeditious return to operating room for anterior cervical revision decompression was performed, and the epidural hematoma was evacuated without difficulty. Postoperative imaging demonstrated a subdural hematoma confined to the thoracic level, and the patient was returned to the operating room for a third surgical procedure. Decompression of T1-3, with evacuation of the subdural hematoma was performed. Postprocedure, the patient’s sensory and motor deficits were restored, and, with rehabilitation, the patient gained functional mobility. Spinal subdural hematomas should be considered as a rare but potential complication of cervical discectomy and fusion. With early diagnosis and treatment, favorable outcomes may be achieved 5).

Carotid artery compression

Legatt et al., report herein a case of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery in which findings on somatosensory evoked potential(SSEP) monitoring led to the correction of carotid artery compression in a patient with a vascularly isolated hemisphere (no significant collateral blood vessels to the carotid artery territory). The amplitude of the cortical SSEP component to left ulnar nerve stimulation progressively decreased in multiple runs, but there were no changes in the cervicomedullary SSEP component to the same stimulus. When the lateral (right-sided) retractor was removed, the cortical SSEP component returned to baseline. The retraction was then intermittently relaxed during the rest of the operation, and the patient suffered no neurological morbidity. Magnetic resonance angiography demonstrated a vascularly isolated right hemisphere. During anterior cervical spine surgery, carotid artery compression by the retractor can cause hemispheric ischemia and infarction in patients with inadequate collateral circulation. The primary purpose of SSEP monitoring during ACDF surgery is to detect compromise of the dorsal column somatosensory pathways within the cervical spinal cord, but intraoperative SSEP monitoring can also detect hemispheric ischemia. Concurrent recording of cervicomedullary SSEPs can help differentiate cortical SSEP changes due to hemispheric ischemia from those due to compromise of the dorsal column pathways. If there are adverse changes in the cortical SSEPs but no changes in the cervicomedullary SSEPs, the possibility of hemispheric ischemia due to carotid artery compression by the retractor should be considered 6).

Heterotopic Ossification

Heterotopic ossification (HO) has been reported following total hip, knee, cervical arthroplasty, and lumbar arthroplasty, as well as following posterolateral lumbar fusion using recombinant human morphogenetic protein 2 (rhBMP-2). Data regarding HO following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with rhBMP-2 are sparse. A subanalysis was done of the prospective, multicenter, investigational device exemption trial that compared rhBMP-2 on an absorbable collagen sponge (ACS) versus allograft in ACDF for patients with symptomatic single-level cervical degenerative disc disease.
To assess differences in types of HO observed in the treatment groups and effects of HO on functional and efficacy outcomes, clinical outcomes from previous disc replacement studies were compared between patients who received rhBMP-2/ACS versus allograft. Rate, location, grade, and size of ossifications were assessed preoperatively and at 24 months, and correlated with clinical outcomes. RESULTS Heterotopic ossification was primarily anterior in both groups. Preoperatively in both groups, and including osteophytes in the target regions, HO rates were high at 40.9% and 36.9% for the rhBMP-2/ACS and allograft groups, respectively (p = 0.350). At 24 months, the rate of HO in the rhBMP-2/ACS group was higher than in the allograft group (78.6% vs 59.2%, respectively; p < 0.001). At 24 months, the rate of superior-anterior adjacent-level Park Grade 3 HO was 4.2% in both groups, whereas the rate of Park Grade 2 HO was 19.0% in the rhBMP-2/ACS group compared with 9.8% in the allograft group. At 24 months, the rate of inferior-anterior adjacent-level Park Grade 2/3 HO was 11.9% in the rhBMP-2/ACS group compared with 5.9% in the allograft group. At 24 months, HO rates at the target implant level were similar (p = 0.963). At 24 months, the mean length and anteroposterior diameter of HO were significantly greater in the rhBMP-2/ACS group compared with the allograft group (p = 0.033 and 0.012, respectively). Regarding clinical correlation, at 24 months in both groups, Park Grade 3 HO at superior adjacent-level disc spaces significantly reduced range of motion, more so in the rhBMP-2/ACS group. At 24 months, HO negatively affected Neck Disability Index scores (excluding neck/arm pain scores), neurological status, and overall success in patients in the rhBMP-2/ACS group, but not in patients in the allograft group.
Implantation of rhBMP-2/ACS at 1.5 mg/ml with polyetheretherketone spacer and titanium plate is effective in inducing fusion and improving pain and function in patients undergoing ACDF for symptomatic single-level cervical degenerative disc disease. At 24 months, the rate and dimensions (length and anteroposterior diameter) of HO were higher in the rhBMP-2/ACS group. At 24 months, range of motion was reduced, with Park Grade 3 HO in both treatment groups. The impact of Park Grades 2 and 3 HO on Neck Disability Index success, neurological status, and overall success was not consistent among the treatment groups. The study data may offer a deeper understanding of HO after ACDF and may pave the way for improved device designs 7).

Subsidence

There is evidence documenting relatively frequent complications in stand-alone cage assisted ACDF, such as cage subsidence and cervical kyphosis 8).
Subsidence irrespective of the measurement technique or definition does not appear to have an impact on successful fusion and/or clinical outcomes. A validated definition and standard measurement technique for subsidence is needed to determine the actual incidence of subsidence and its impact on radiographic and clinical outcomes 9).


The results of a observational study were in accordance with those of the published randomized controlled trials (RCTs), suggesting substantial pain reduction both after anterior cervical interbody fusion (AIF) and Cervical total disc replacement, with slightly greater benefit after arthroplasty. The analysis of atypical patients suggested that, in patients outside the spectrum of clinical trials, both surgical interventions appeared to work to a similar extent to that shown for the cohort in the matched study. Also, in the longer-term perspective, both therapies resulted in similar benefits to the patients 10).

Case series

Analysis of 1000 consecutive patients undergoing Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in an outpatient setting demonstrated surgical complications occur at a low rate (<1%) and can be appropriately diagnosed and managed in 4-hour ASC PACU window. Comparison with inpatient ACDF surgery cohort demonstrated similar results, highlighting that ACDF can be safely performed in an outpatient ambulatory surgery setting without compromising surgical safety. To decrease cost of care, surgeons can safely consider performing 1- and 2-level ACDF in an ASC environment 11).


A retrospective case series of 37 patients, paying special attention to immediate complications related to the use of mechanical retraction of soft tissue (dysphagia, dysphonia, esophageal lesions and local hematoma); and a comparative analysis of the outcomes after changes in the retraction method.
All selected cases had a positive neurological symptom response in relation to neuropathic pain. Dysphagia and dysphonia were found during the first 72 h in 94.1% of the cases in which automatic mechanical retraction was used for more than one hour during the surgical procedure. A radical change was noted in the reduction of the symptoms after the use of only manual protective blades without automatic mechanical retraction: 5.1% dysphagia and 0% dysphonia in the immediate post-operative period, P = 0.001.
Soft tissue damage due to the use of automatic retractors in MACDF is not minor and leads to general discomfort in the patient in spite of good neurological results. These problems most often occur when automatic retractors are used continuously for more than 1 hour, as well as when they are used in multiple levels. Dysphagia, dysphonia and local pain decreased with the use of transient manual blades for retraction, and with intermittent release following minimally invasive principles 12).
1)

Wilson JR, Radcliff K, Schroeder G, Booth M, Lucasti C, Fehlings M, Ahmad N, Vaccaro A, Arnold P, Sciubba D, Ching A, Smith J, Shaffrey C, Singh K, Darden B, Daffner S, Cheng I, Ghogawala Z, Ludwig S, Buchowski J, Brodke D, Wang J, Lehman RA, Hilibrand A, Yoon T, Grauer J, Dailey A, Steinmetz M, Harrop JS. Frequency and Acceptability of Adverse Events After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Survey Study From the Cervical Spine Research Society. Clin Spine Surg. 2018 Apr 27. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000645. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 29708891.
2)

Morpeth JF, Williams MF. Vocal fold paralysis after anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion. Laryngoscope. 2000 Jan;110(1):43-6. PubMed PMID: 10646714.
3) , 12)

Ramos-Zúñiga R, Díaz-Guzmán LR, Velasquez S, Macías-Ornelas AM, Rodríguez-Vázquez M. A microsurgical anterior cervical approach and the immediate impact of mechanical retractors: A case control study. J Neurosci Rural Pract. 2015 Jul-Sep;6(3):315-9. doi: 10.4103/0976-3147.158748. PubMed PMID: 26167011; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4481782.
4)

Elder BD, Theodros D, Sankey EW, Bydon M, Goodwin CR, Wolinsky JP, Sciubba DM, Gokaslan ZL, Bydon A, Witham TF. Management of Cerebrospinal Fluid Leakage During Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion and Its Effect on Spinal Fusion. World Neurosurg. 2015 Nov 30. pii: S1878-8750(15)01588-0. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2015.11.033. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 26654925.
5)

Protzman NM, Kapun J, Wagener C. Thoracic spinal subdural hematoma complicating anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: case report. J Neurosurg Spine. 2015 Oct 13:1-5. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 26460756.
6)

Legatt AD, Laarakker AS, Nakhla JP, Nasser R, Altschul DJ. Somatosensory evoked potential monitoring detection of carotid compression during ACDF surgery in a patient with a vascularly isolated hemisphere. J Neurosurg Spine. 2016 Nov;25(5):566-571. PubMed PMID: 27285667.
7)

Arnold PM, Anderson KK, Selim A, Dryer RF, Kenneth Burkus J. Heterotopic ossification following single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: results from the prospective, multicenter, historically controlled trial comparing allograft to an optimized dose of rhBMP-2. J Neurosurg Spine. 2016 Sep;25(3):292-302. doi: 10.3171/2016.1.SPINE15798. Epub 2016 Apr 29. PubMed PMID: 27129045.
8)

Cloward RB: The anterior approach for removal of ruptured cervical disks. 1958. J Neurosurg Spine 6:496-511, 2007
9)

Karikari IO, Jain D, Owens TR, Gottfried O, Hodges TR, Nimjee SM, Bagley CA. Impact of Subsidence on Clinical Outcomes and Radiographic Fusion Rates in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Systematic Review. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2014 Feb;27(1):1-10. PubMed PMID: 24441059.
10)

Staub LP, Ryser C, Röder C, Mannion AF, Jarvik JG, Aebi M, Aghayev E. Total disc arthroplasty versus anterior cervical interbody fusion: use of the spine tango registry to supplement the evidence from RCTs. Spine J. 2015 Dec 7. pii: S1529-9430(15)01763-5. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.11.056. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 26674445.
11)

McGirt MJ, Mehrlich M, Parker SL, Asher AL, Adamson TE. 165 ACDF in the Outpatient Ambulatory Surgery Setting: Analysis of 1000 Consecutive Cases and Comparison to Hospital Inpatient ACDF. Neurosurgery. 2015 Aug;62 Suppl 1:220. doi: 10.1227/01.neu.0000467129.12773.a3. PubMed PMID: 26182011.

Update: Ependymoma RELA fusion positive

Ependymoma RELA fusion positive

Ependymoma RELA fusion-positive is a accepted variant of ependymoma, only recognised in the World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System 2016 1).

Epidemiology

They are the most common type of supratentorial ependymoma in children, and not found in the posterior fossa or spinal cord.
Two-thirds of supratentorial (ST) ependymomas harbor oncogenic fusions of RELA.

Outcome

The protein product is the principal effector of canonical Nuclear factor kappa signaling. RELA fusion proteins activate signaling for tumor proliferation and malignant progression, resulting in poorer prognoses in these patients compared to those in patients with other ST ependymomas.
In a study, Nakamura et al. encountered a case of C11orf-RelA fusion-positive ST anaplastic ependymoma that was diagnosed in first tumor resection surgery of multi-staged gross total resection with molecular evidence. In ependymomas, regardless of tumor location or pathological grade, subtotal resection is associated with higher rates of mortality compared with GTR 2).
In posterior fossa ependymoma group A (PF-EPN-A) tumors, telomerase activity varied and was significantly associated with dismal overall survival, whereas telomerase reactivation was present in all supratentorial RelA fusion-positive (ST-EPN-RELA) ependymomas 3).

Pathology

These tumours can be both grade II or III and demonstrate a variety of histological morphologies, although clear cells and prominent vascularity are common.
The presence of the RELA fusion gene can be assessed with FISH.

Immunophenotype

GFAP positive
EMA positive
L1CAM positive correlates closely with the presence of RELA fusion not exclusive to ependymomas.

Treatment

Actinomycin D could constitute a promising therapeutic option for Ependymoma RELA fusion positive, whose tumours frequently exhibit p53 inactivation 4).
Case reports

2017

A case of aggressive anaplastic ependymoma arising in the right frontoparietal lobe, which had genetically 1q25 gain, CDKN2A homozygous deletion, and L1CAM overexpression. The patient was a 10-year-old boy who underwent four times of tumor removal and seven times of gamma knife surgery. Metastatic loci were scalp and temporalis muscle overlying primary operation site, lung, liver, buttock, bone, and mediastinal lymph nodes. He had the malignancy for 10 years and died. This tumor is a representative case of Ependymoma RELA fusion positive, showing aggressive behavior 5).
1)

Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G, von Deimling A, Figarella-Branger D, Cavenee WK, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD, Kleihues P, Ellison DW. The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: a summary. Acta Neuropathol. 2016 Jun;131(6):803-20. doi: 10.1007/s00401-016-1545-1. Epub 2016 May 9. Review. PubMed PMID: 27157931.
2)

Nakamura T, Fukuoka K, Ikeda J, Yoshitomi M, Udaka N, Tanoshima R, Tateishi K, Yamanaka S, Ichimura K, Yamamoto T. Encouraging option of multi-staged gross total resection for a C11orf-RelA fusion-positive supratentorial anaplastic ependymoma. Brain Tumor Pathol. 2017 Oct;34(4):160-164. doi: 10.1007/s10014-017-0297-5. Epub 2017 Aug 22. PubMed PMID: 28831588.
3)

Gojo J, Lötsch D, Spiegl-Kreinecker S, Pajtler KW, Neumayer K, Korbel P, Araki A, Brandstetter A, Mohr T, Hovestadt V, Chavez L, Kirchhofer D, Ricken G, Stefanits H, Korshunov A, Pfister SM, Dieckmann K, Azizi AA, Czech T, Filipits M, Kool M, Peyrl A, Slavc I, Berger W, Haberler C. Telomerase activation in posterior fossa group A ependymomas is associated with dismal prognosis and chromosome 1q gain. Neuro Oncol. 2017 Sep 1;19(9):1183-1194. doi: 10.1093/neuonc/nox027. PubMed PMID: 28371821; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5570194.
4)

Tzaridis T, Milde T, Pajtler KW, Bender S, Jones DT, Müller S, Wittmann A, Schlotter M, Kulozik AE, Lichter P, Peter Collins V, Witt O, Kool M, Korshunov A, Pfister SM, Witt H. Low-dose Actinomycin-D treatment re-establishes the tumoursuppressive function of P53 in RELA-positive ependymoma. Oncotarget. 2016 Sep 20;7(38):61860-61873. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.11452. PubMed PMID: 27556362; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5308696.
5)

Kim SI, Lee Y, Kim SK, Kang HJ, Park SH. Aggressive Supratentorial Ependymoma, RELA Fusion-Positive with Extracranial Metastasis: A Case Report. J Pathol Transl Med. 2017 Nov;51(6):588-593. doi: 10.4132/jptm.2017.08.10. Epub 2017 Nov 15. PubMed PMID: 29161788.

Book: Modern Thoraco-Lumbar Implants for Spinal Fusion

Modern Thoraco-Lumbar Implants for Spinal Fusion

Modern Thoraco-Lumbar Implants for Spinal Fusion
List Price: $119.00
ADD TO SHOPPING CART
This book presents an updated perspective on spinal implants currently used in thoraco-lumbar spine surgery, leading to a rigid or dynamic spine fusion. The development of new surgical devices and techniques is mostly focused on a spinal fusion for lumbar instability due to trauma, tumours or degenerative or infectious diseases. Pedicle-screw fixation and fusion are currently considered to be the gold standard for most of the above-mentioned pathologies, and modern implants are designed to improve the accuracy of pedicle-screw placement and to allow the use of new surgical techniques and minimally invasive approaches. The content is relevant for surgeons, orthopaedic specialists, neurosurgeons, physiotherapists and osteopaths.


Product Details

  • Published on: 2017-08-08
  • Original language: English
  • Number of items: 1
  • Dimensions: 9.30″ h x .0″ w x 6.10″ l,
  • Binding: Hardcover
  • 190 pages

Editorial Reviews

About the Author
Prof. Roberto Delfini is a specialist in Neurosurgery at the Policlinico Umbreto I and chair of the University La Sapeinza of Rome as well as head of the School of Specialization in Neurosurgery. He is a Member of the Italian Society of Neurosurgery, where he held the position of Director, Treasurer, Secretary and President (currently past president). And he is also member of other national and international Societies of Neurosurgery and related disciplines as well as member of the World Academy of Neurosurgeons. In 2014 he was awarded the Prize Boniface VIII. He is author of over 300 scientific articles and book chapters on national laws and international neurosurgery. Prof. Delfini performed as first operator over 6,000 surgeries covering most of neurological diseases. His main fields of interest and activities are: the surgery of intracranial tumors in general and in particular tumors of the skull base; surgery of the brain and spinal vascular malformations; surgery of vertebrobasilar medullary cancer and degenerative and traumatic.

Comparing clinical outcomes of repeat discectomy versus fusion for recurrent disc herniation utilizing the N(2)QOD

The strict definition of recurrent lumbar disc herniation is the presence of herniated disc material at the same level, ipsi- or contralateral, in a patient who has experienced a pain-free interval of at least 6 months since surgery. The clinically more appropriate definition, however, is disc herniation at the previously operative site and side. The pain-free interval should not be restricted to the minimum of 6 months. It has been suggested that the mean interval for recurrent pain associated with recurrent herniated discs is 18 months, longer than that for de novo herniated discs or symptomatic epidural fibrosis.
It has been suggested that the mean interval for recurrent pain associated with recurrent herniated discs is 18 months, longer than that for de novo herniated discs or symptomatic epidural fibrosis 1).

Epidemiology

Although the recurrence of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) requiring reoperation remains a controversial question in spinal surgery, the incidence is reported to linger around 5-15% according to several previous studies 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7).

Risk factor

Reported risk factors include age, gender and smoking, while its surgical treatment is associated to a higher rate of complications and costs.
A subligamentous disc herniation and patient’s age inferior to 35 years at the time of the first surgery are risk factors for requiring surgical treatment of a first RLDH among workers’ compensation patients 8).
Young adults (< 40 years) with uncorrected scoliosis are at higher risk of recurrent lumbar disc herniation (LDH) after lumbar microdiscectomy 9).
Patients in the Fragment-Fissure group, who had disc fragments and a small anular defect, had the best overall outcomes and the lowest rates of reherniation (1%) and reoperation (1%). Patients in the Fragment-Contained group had a 10% rate of reherniation and a 5% rate of reoperation. Patients in the Fragment-Defect group, who had extruded fragments and massive posterior anular loss, had a 27% rate of reherniation and a 21% rate of reoperation. Patients in the No Fragment-Contained group did poorly: 38% had recurrent or persistent sciatica, and the standard outcomes scores were less improved compared with those in the other groups (p < 0.001).
Intraoperative findings, as described, were more clearly associated with outcomes than were demographic, socioeconomic, or clinical variables. The degree of anular competence after discectomy and the type of herniation appear to have value for the prediction of the recurrence of sciatica, reoperation, and clinical outcome following lumbar discectomy 10).

Clinical features

A recurrent lumbar disc herniation (RLDH) is the most prevalent cause for new radicular pain after surgery for disc herniation-induced sciatica.

Differential diagnosis

Normal postdiscectomy appearances can be mistaken for recurrent or retained disc. In the early (0 to 6–month) postoperative period, MR imaging reveals an interspace high signal intensity band extending from the nucleus pulposus to the site of anular disruption (especially noticeable at 0–2 months). The anulus is typically hyperintense and the nucleus hypointense. There is loss of disc space height. The endplates and marrow can exhibit changes as well, often low signal on T1 -weighted and high signal on T2 -weighted images suggesting inflammation and edema. The anterior epidural space initially reveals an increase in soft-tissue mass, evidence of tissue disruption, edema, and hemorrhage, with the appearance of mass effect 11).
Nerve root enhancement with Gd is normal, reflect- ing breakdown of the blood–nerve barrier, but should resolve by 6 months. Adhesions within the thecal sac at the operative level usually resolve within several weeks. Postoperative changes at the laminectomy site depend on the extent of surgery, ligamentum flavum removal, and whether fat graft was placed in the epidural space. Facet joint enhancement occurs as a local response to dissection and persists long ( 6 months) after surgery in more than half of the patients in whom imaging is performed12) 13) 14).

Diagnosis


http://www.elsevier.es/imatges/419/419v55n01/grande/419v55n01-90195107fig12.jpg
Persistent/recurrent disc herniation. 48-Year-old female who underwent laminectomy and L5-S1 discectomy. Follow-up MRI was performed 20 days after surgery due to persistent lumbar pain radiating to the left lower extremity. The axial T2-weighted image (A) shows persistent-recurrent left parasagittal DH connected to the left S1 nerve root at the lateral recess level (arrow). Unenhanced and contrast-enhanced axial T1-weighted image (B and C) shows peripheral enhancement of the herniated material.

Guidelines

Currently, there aren’t any guidelines to assist surgeons in determining which approach is most appropriate to treat rDH. A recent survey showed significant heterogeneity among surgeons regarding treatment options for rDH. It remains unclear which methods lead to better outcomes, as there are no comparative studies with a sufficient level of evidence.
In a study Drazin et al aimed to perform a systematic review to compare treatment options for rDH and determine if one intervention provides better outcomes than the other; more specifically, whether outcome differences exist between discectomy alone and discectomy with fusion.
They applied the PICOS (participants, intervention, comparison, outcome, study design) format to develop this systematic review through PubMed. Twenty-seven papers from 1978-2014 met our inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Nine papers reported outcomes after discectomy and seven of them showed good or excellent outcomes (70.60%-89%). Ten papers reported on minimally invasive discectomy. The percent change in visual analog scale (VAS) ranged from -50.77% to -86.57%, indicating an overall pain reduction. Four studies out of the ten reported good or excellent outcomes (81% to 90.2%). Three studies looked at posterolateral fusion. Three studies analyzed posterior lumbar interbody fusion. For one study, we found the VAS percentage change to be -46.02%. All reported good to excellent outcomes. Six studies evaluated the transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. All reported improvement in pain. Four used VAS, and we found the percent change to be -54% to -86.5%. The other two used the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, and we found the percent change to be 68.3% to 93.3%. We did not find enough evidence to support any significant difference in outcomes between discectomy alone and discectomy with fusion. The limitation of the study includes the lack of standardized outcomes reporting in the literature. However, reviewing the selected articles shows that fusion may have a greater improvement in pain compared to reoperation without fusion. Nonetheless, the study shows that further and more in-depth investigation is needed on the of treatment of rDH 15).

Treatment

While repeat discectomy is often successful in treating these patients, concern over repeat RLDH may lead surgeons to advocate instrumented fusion even in the absence of instability.
Surgical choices for disc recurrent herniations are limited by multiple factors, require longer operative time, and are associated with higher rate of complications, treatment seems to be associated with a similar chance of good outcome.

Outcome

rLDH patients do not only present higher postoperative VAS scores, compared to fLHD patients, but also that these scores are correlated with increased inflammation and may contribute to pain chronicity 16).

Case series

 2017

Guan et al., used the National Neurosurgery Quality and Outcomes Database (N2QOD) to assess outcomes of patients who underwent repeat discectomy versus instrumented fusion at a single institution from 2012 to 2015. Primary outcomes included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and quality-adjusted life year (QALY) measures. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, discharge status, and hospital charges.
The authors identified 25 repeat discectomy and 12 instrumented fusion patients with 3- and 12-month follow-up records. The groups had similar ODI and VAS scores and QALY measurements at 3 and 12 months. Patients in the instrumented fusion group had significantly longer hospitalizations (3.7 days vs 1.0 days, p < 0.001) and operative times (229.6 minutes vs 82.7 minutes, p < 0.001). They were also more likely to be female (p = 0.020) and to be discharged to inpatient rehabilitation instead of home (p = 0.036). Hospital charges for the instrumented fusion group were also significantly higher ($54,458.29 vs $11,567.05, p < 0.001). Rates of reoperation were higher in the repeat discectomy group (12% vs 0%), but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.211).
Repeat discectomy and instrumented fusion result in similar clinical outcomes at short-term follow-up. Patients undergoing repeat discectomy had significantly shorter operative times and length of stay, and they incurred dramatically lower hospital charges. They were also less likely to require acute rehabilitation postoperatively. Further research is needed to compare these two management strategies 17).

2016

A total of 163 patients who underwent Microendoscopic diskectomy (MED) for LDH and could be followed for a minimum of 1 year after surgery were enrolled in this study (follow-up [FU] rate: 79.9%).
Ikuta et al., investigated the characteristics of LDH recurrence and conducted a comparative study between the patient groups with and without recurrence to identify the risk factors for the recurrence.
The recurrence of LDH was observed in 19 patients (11.7%) during a mean of 38 months FU. Although the mean length of time from MED to recurrence was 19.2 months, 36.8% of the LDH recurrence occurred in the first 3 months following MED. Eleven patients were treated successfully by conservative treatments, and the remaining eight patients had to undergo revision surgery (MED in five patients, microdiskectomy in one, and instrumented fusion in two). In the analysis of risk factors for the recurrence, the presence of diabetes mellitus (DM) was significantly correlated with the recurrence (p = 0.0027).
The recurrence rate following MED for LDH was equivalent to those of previous reports of conventional and microscopic diskectomy. However, a third of the LDH recurrences occurred in the first 3 months after MED. We should pay attention to LDH recurrence at an early phase following MED and recognize the presence of DM as a risk factor for LDH recurrence 18).

2013

A study included 344 patients who underwent MED (213 males and 131 females; mean age, 39.3 years; age range, 11-82 years; mean follow-up, 3.6 years; follow-up range, 2.0-6.5 years). The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Japanese Orthopedic Association Score for Low Back Pain (JOA score). Recurrence factors investigated by logistic regression analysis included age; sex; level, laterality, and classified type of LDH; occupation; sports activity; and learning curve of the surgeon.
LDH recurrence was observed in 37 patients (10.8%). It was observed at the same level in the ipsilateral side as the original LDH in 30 patients, in the contralateral side in three patients, and at a level adjacent to the original level in four patients. The mean time interval between MED and the recurrence was 16.6 months (range, 0.5-52 months). Twenty patients (54.1%) developed recurrence within 1 year after MED. Twenty-two patients (59.5%) were treated by revision surgery (MED in 20 patients and microdiscectomy in two patients), and 15 patients (40.5%) were treated conservatively. The mean JOA score of all the patients was 14.7 ± 3.5 before surgery and 26.5 ± 2.2 at the final follow-up, yielding an average recovery rate of 82.3 ± 15.7%. The recovery rate was 83.1 ± 14.8% in patients without recurrence and 75.7 ± 20.4% in patients with recurrence (p = 0.006). By logistic regression analysis, we identified migration of LDH as a significant factor related to recurrence. The patients with caudal migration of LDH had recurrence more frequently (19.0%) than those with rostral migration (12.5%) or without migration (10.2%) (p = 0.04; odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-3.8).
The recurrence rate and reoperation rate for LDH after MED were comparable to those of conventional discectomy. More than half of the cases of recurrence occurred at an early postoperative phase, and patients with caudally migrated LDH experienced recurrence significantly more often than those with rostrally migrated or nonmigrated LDH 19).

1) Erbayraktar S, Acar F, Tekinsoy B, et al: Outcome analysis of reoperations after lumbar discectomies: a report of 22 patients. Kobe J Med Sci 48:33–41, 2002
2) , 11) Ross JS: MR imaging of the postoperative lumbar spine. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 7:513–524, 1999
3) Mobbs RJ, Newcombe RL, Chandran KN: Lumbar discectomy and the diabetic patient: incidence and outcome. J Clin Neu- rosci 8:10–13, 2001
4) Suk KS, Lee HM, Moon SH, et al: Recurrent lumbar disc herniation: results of operative management. Spine 26:672–676, 2001
5) , 12) Babar S, Saifuddin A: MRI of the post-discectomy lumbar spine. Clin Radiol 57:969–981, 2002
6) , 10) Carragee EJ, Han MY, Suen PW, et al: Clinical outcomes after lumbar discectomy for sciatica: the effects of fragment type and anular competence. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85:102–108, 2003
7) Moliterno JA, Knopman J, Parikh K, Cohan JN, Huang QD, Aaker GD, Grivoyannis AD, Patel AR, Härtl R, Boockvar JA. Results and risk factors for recurrence following single-level tubular lumbar microdiscectomy. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010;12:680–686.
8) Yurac R, Zamorano JJ, Lira F, Valiente D, Ballesteros V, Urzúa A. Risk factors for the need of surgical treatment of a first recurrent lumbar disc herniation. Eur Spine J. 2015 Oct 15. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 26471389.
9) Chang HK, Chang HC, Wu JC, Tu TH, Fay LY, Chang PY, Wu CL, Huang WC, Cheng H. Scoliosis may increase the risk of recurrence of lumbar disc herniation after microdiscectomy. J Neurosurg Spine. 2016 Apr;24(4):586-91. doi: 10.3171/2015.7.SPINE15133. Epub 2015 Dec 11. PubMed PMID: 26654337.
13) Boden SD, Davis DO, Dina TS, et al: Contrast-enhanced MR imaging performed after successful lumbar disk surgery: pro- spective study. Radiology 182:59–64, 1992
14) Van de Kelft EJ, van Goethem JW, de La Porte C, et al: Early postoperative gadolinium-DTPA-enhanced MR imaging after successful lumbar discectomy. Br J Neurosurg 10:41–49, 1996
15) Drazin D, Ugiliweneza B, Al-Khouja L, Yang D, Johnson P, Kim T, Boakye M. Treatment of Recurrent Disc Herniation: A Systematic Review. Cureus. 2016 May 23;8(5):e622. doi: 10.7759/cureus.622. PubMed PMID: 27382530.
16) Andrade P, Hoogland G, Teernstra OP, van Aalst J, van Maren E, Daemen MA, Visser-Vandewalle V. Elevated levels of TNF-α and TNFR1 in recurrent herniated lumbar discs correlate with chronicity of postoperative sciatic pain. Spine J. 2015 Oct 30. pii: S1529-9430(15)01623-X. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.10.038. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 26523959.
17) Guan J, Ravindra VM, Schmidt MH, Dailey AT, Hood RS, Bisson EF. Comparing clinical outcomes of repeat discectomy versus fusion for recurrent disc herniation utilizing the N(2)QOD. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017 Jan;26(1):39-44. doi: 10.3171/2016.5.SPINE1616. PubMed PMID: 27517528.
18) Ikuta K, Tarukado K, Masuda K. Characterization and Risk Factor Analysis for Recurrence Following Microendoscopic Diskectomy for Lumbar Disk Herniation. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2016 Sep 22. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 27657858.
19) Matsumoto M, Watanabe K, Hosogane N, Tsuji T, Ishii K, Nakamura M, Chiba K, Toyama Y. Recurrence of lumbar disc herniation after microendoscopic discectomy. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2013 Jul;74(4):222-7. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1320031. Epub 2012 Dec 18. PubMed PMID: 23250873.

Microsurgical resection of juxtafacet cysts without concomitant fusion-Long-term follow-up of 74 patients

Described first by Kao et al., 1). these cysts are adjacent to a spinal facet joint or arising from the ligamentum flavum.

Types

Synovial cyst
Ganglion cysts
Distinction of these types is difficult without histology and is clinically unimportant 2).


Cervical juxtafacet cyst
Lumbar juxtafacet cyst

Complications

Hemorrhage

Hemorrhage from a ganglion cyst is rare and the rate of hemorrhagic incidence is less than 10%.
Although the suspected causal factors such as anticoagulation therapy, trauma, and the presence of a vascular anomaly has been proposed, the etiology of the hemorrhage from the juxtafacet cysts is still unclear.
The similar conditions differently called a ligamentum flavum hematoma, juxtafacet cyst hematoma, hemorrhagic synovial cyst and facet apoplexy have been reported 3).

Case series

A retrospective study evaluates patients who underwent surgical resection of juxtafacet cysts without concomitant fusion from 2002 to 2013 with a minimum follow-up of one year.
Complete follow-up is available in 74 patients. Mean follow-up in all 74 patients was 69±34months (range, 14-140 months). Mean ODI was 14.9%. 68 patients (91.9%) were pleased with the results and would undergo surgery again. Three patients (4.1%) underwent secondary resection because of cyst recurrence at the same site. Four patients (5.4%) needed secondary fusion.
In patients without evident clinical and radiological criteria of instability we regard surgical resection of juxtafacet cysts without concomitant fusion as adequate primary treatment due to good outcome and low incidence of secondary symptomatic instability4).

1) Kao CC, Winkler SS, Turner JH. Synovial cyst of spinal facet. Case report. J Neurosurg. 1974 Sep;41(3):372-6. PubMed PMID: 4416019.
2) Freidberg SR, Fellows T, Thomas CB, Mancall AC. Experience with symptomatic spinal epidural cysts. Neurosurgery. 1994 Jun;34(6):989-93; discussion 993. PubMed PMID: 8084409.
3) Park JH, Im SB, Kim HK, Hwang SC, Shin DS, Shin WH, Kim BT. Histopathological findings of hemorrhagic ganglion cyst causing acute radicular pain: a case report. Korean J Spine. 2013 Dec;10(4):242-5. doi: 10.14245/kjs.2013.10.4.242. Epub 2013 Dec 31. PubMed PMID: 24891856; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4040643.
4) Scholz C, Hubbe U, Kogias E, Roelz R, Klingler JH. Microsurgical resection of juxtafacet cysts without concomitant fusion-Long-term follow-up of 74 patients. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2016 Dec 16;153:35-40. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2016.12.008. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 28012354.

Fusión de Hospitales con Neurocirugía en España

image_170_jpeg_140x140_q85El Hospital Virgen Macarena ha dejado de realizar las intervenciones complejas de Neurocirugía necesarias para tratar traumatismos craneoencefálicos graves o para eliminar tumores cerebrales. En el proceso de fusión de los dos hospitales sevillanos, el Virgen del Rocío ha asumido los casos de este tipo que lleguen hasta el Hospital Macarena. Fuentes sindicales advierten que este cambio ha dejado al Macarena sin especialistas de Neurocirugía de guardia, lo que supone que este hospital universitario tendrá que trasladar al Virgen del Rocío a los pacientes que entren por sus Urgencias aquejados por un trauma cuando necesiten una intervención compleja de Neurocirugía. “Puede ser, por ejemplo, el caso de un accidente de moto en el que los médicos detecten en un TAC un hematoma en el cerebro que requiera de una intervención quirúrgica”, explica un portavoz de los trabajadores en este centro.
“Hace dos años que las Neurociencias de ambos hospitales se constituyeron en unidades intercentros”, explican fuentes del SAS, que consideran que esta fusión permite “mejorar la asistencia sanitaria con criterios de mejora de accesibilidad, equidad y resultados en salud”. En este proceso, los traumatismos craneoencefálicos graves y la cirugía de tumores se concentran en el Hospital Virgen del Rocío; mientras que la cirugía espinal compleja la asume el Virgen Macarena. “Todo ello se ha realizado sin modificar estructura alguna de personal ni otro tipo de recursos en ninguno de los dos hospitales”, añaden fuentes de este centro hospitalario. Según explica el SAS, este proceso se ha realizado con desplazamientos voluntarios de neurocirujanos entre ambos centros hospitalarios para “colaborar en determinados procesos aportando la mejor experiencia de cada grupo”.
El Servicio Andaluz de Salud (SAS) «ha cerrado 300 camas en los hospitales de Sevilla en los últimos cinco años mientras que las personas que se encuentran en lista de espera para ser intervenidas quirúrgicamente ascienden a 14.194».

WhatsApp WhatsApp us
%d bloggers like this: