Advertisement

Anterior/Anterolateral Thoracic Access and Stabilization from Posterior Approach, Transpedicular, Costotransversectomy, Lateral Extracavitary Approaches via Minimally Invasive Approaches, Minimal Access and Tubular Access

  • Rodrigo Navarro-RamirezEmail author
  • Juan Del Castillo-Calcáneo
  • Roger Härtl
  • Ali Baaj
Chapter

Abstract

Metastatic and primary tumors of the thoracic spine can be clinically identified by either neurological symptoms or pain caused by biomechanical instability. Traditionally, effective tumor resection/treatment has been addressed with anterior approaches. However, with hardware improvement and the implementation of microsurgical techniques, minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) approaches through posterior and posterolateral corridors have become more popular. These MISS techniques have demonstrated several advantages, such as improved time to return to productive activities and decreased surgical time and estimated blood loss, which may be beneficial for oncologic patients by decreasing their surgery-associated morbidity. The most common posterior MISS options to address thoracic spinal tumors include posterior, transpedicular, lateral extracavitary, and lateral approaches.

In the following chapter, we include in a well-organized fashion a brief description of the preoperative evaluation, incision planning, patient positioning, surgical details, and postoperative recommendations for successful posterior MISS thoracic tumor surgery.

Keywords

Minimally invasive spine surgery Spinal tumor Thoracic approach 

References

  1. 1.
    Härtl R, Korge A. Minimally invasive spine surgery. Stuttgart: Thieme; 2012.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Metastatic spinal cord compression: diagnosis and management of patients at risk of or with metastatic spinal cord compression. London: NICE; 2008.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Omeis IA, Dhir M, Sciubba DM, Gottfried ON, McGirt MJ, Attenello FJ, et al. Postoperative surgical site infections in patients undergoing spinal tumor surgery: incidence and risk factors. Spine. 2011;36(17):1410–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fisher CG, DiPaola CP, Ryken TC, Bilsky MH, Shaffrey CI, Berven SH, et al. A novel classification system for spinal instability in neoplastic disease: an evidence-based approach and expert consensus from the Spine Oncology Study Group. Spine. 2010;35(22):E1221–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chou D, Lu DC. Mini-open transpedicular corpectomies with expandable cage reconstruction. J Neurosurg Spine. 2011;14(1):71–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chou D, Wang VY. Trap-door rib-head osteotomies for posterior placement of expandable cages after transpedicular corpectomy: an alternative to lateral extracavitary and costotransversectomy approaches. Technical note. J Neurosurg Spine. 2009;10:40–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zairi F, et al. Minimally invasive decompression and stabilization for the management of thoracolumbar spine metastasis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;17(1):19–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rodrigo Navarro-Ramirez
    • 1
    Email author
  • Juan Del Castillo-Calcáneo
    • 2
  • Roger Härtl
    • 1
  • Ali Baaj
    • 1
  1. 1.New York Presbyterian, Weill Cornell Brain and Spine Center, Department of Neurological SurgeryNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.National Autonomous University of Mexico, Department of NeurosurgeryMexico CityMexico

Personalised recommendations