Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Far lateral approaches (XLIF) in adult scoliosis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To review the literature on the use of extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF) in adult spinal deformity, to discuss on its limits and advantages and to propose a guide to surgical strategy.

Methods

Surgical technique XLIF is a minimally invasive surgery (MIS) technique to anteriorly access the spine from midthoracic to L5. Important aspects of the technique are a muscle splitting approach through the psoas, use of advanced neuromonitoring to detect the lumbar plexus within the psoas, bilateral annulus release and large footprint interbody cages, supported by the stronger bone of ring apophyses. Large, laterally inserted cages provide strong correction of coronally asymmetrical disc spaces. Literature review MEDLINE database, the Web using Google Scholar and proceedings of the Society for Lateral Access Surgery meetings were searched for relevant articles on technique, results and complications.

Results

XLIF with posterior percutaneous pedicle screw instrumentation provides 40–75 % correction of coronal curves, with modest increase of lordosis. Only anterior XLIF can provide less correction. Self-limited thigh symptoms are frequent after transpsoas access. Permanent neural deficit and visceral complications have also been reported. Combined XLIF–MIS could have a lower complication compared to open circumferential surgery in historical series.

Conclusions

XLIF is a promising MIS option for adult deformity. Specific surgical strategies are needed to avoid imbalance and define ideal fusion levels and methods. An XLIF-based MIS strategy with a reduced number of levels of lumbar scoliosis can lead to significant advantages. Evaluation of the incidence, complications, their avoidance and real impact on patients’ outcomes is necessary to better understand the advantages of this approach. Studies comparing effectiveness and safety of traditional versus XLIF approaches are needed to assist evidence-based decision making.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Glassman SD, Berven SH, Schwab FJ, Hamill CL, Horton WC, Ondra SL, Sansur CA, Bridwell KH (2011) Risk–benefit assessment of surgery for adult scoliosis: an analysis based on patient age. Spine 1(36):817–824

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bridwell KH, Glassman S, Horton W, Shaffrey C, Schwab F, Zebala LP, Lenke LG, Hilton JF, Shainline M, Baldus C, Wootten D (2009) Does treatment (nonoperative and operative) improve the two-year quality of life in patients with adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis: a prospective multicenter evidence-based medicine study. Spine 15(34):2171–2178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Schwab F, Patel A, Ungar B, Farcy JP, Lafage V (2010) Adult spinal deformity-postoperative standing imbalance: how much can you tolerate? An overview of key parameters in assessing alignment and planning corrective surgery. Spine 35:2224–2231

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mac-Thiong JM, Transfeldt EE, Mehbod AA, Perra JH, Denis F, Garvey TA, Lonstein JE, Wu C, Dorman CW, Winter RB (2009) Can C7 plumbline and gravity line predict health related quality of life in adult scoliosis? Spine 34:E519–E527

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Glassman SD, Berven S, Bridwell K, Horton W, Dimar JR (2005) Correlation of radiographic parameters and clinical symptoms in adult scoliosis. Spine 30:682–688

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Mac-Thiong JM, Roussouly P, Berthonnaud E, Guigui P (2010) Sagittal parameters of global spinal balance: normative values from a prospective cohort of seven hundred nine Caucasian asymptomatic adults. Spine 35:E1193–E1198

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Boulay C, Tardieu C, Hecquet J, Benaim C, Mouilleseaux B, Marty C, Prat-Pradal D, Legaye J, Duval-Beaupère G, Pélissier J (2006) Sagittal alignment of spine and pelvis regulated by pelvic incidence: standard values and prediction of lordosis. Eur Spine J 15:415–422

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Schwab F, Lafage V, Patel A, Farcy JP (2009) Sagittal plane considerations and the pelvis in the adult patient. Spine 34:1828–1833

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Roussouly P, Nnadi C (2010) Sagittal plane deformity: an overview of interpretation and management. Eur Spine J 19:1824–1836

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Neal CJ, McClendon J, Halpin R, Acosta FL, Koski T, Ondra SL (2011) Predicting ideal spinopelvic balance in adult spinal deformity. J Neurosurg Spine 15:82–91

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Yang BP, Ondra SL (2006) A method for calculating the exact angle required during pedicle subtraction osteotomy for fixed sagittal deformity: comparison with the trigonometric method. Neurosurgery 59:ONS458–ONS463

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Aurouer N, Obeid I, Gille O, Pointillart V, Vital JM (2009) Computerized preoperative planning for correction of sagittal deformity of the spine. Surg Radiol Anat 31:781–792

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Le Huec JC, Leijssen P, Duarte M, Aunoble S (2011) Thoracolumbar imbalance analysis for osteotomy planification using a new method: FBI technique. Eur Spine J 20:669–680 (epub)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lamartina C, Berjano P, Petruzzi M, Sinigaglia A, Casero G, Cecchinato R, Damilano M, Bassani R (2012) Criteria to restore the sagittal balance in deformity and degenerative spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J 21:S27–S31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Schwab F, Farcy JP, Bridwell K et al (2005) A clinical impact classification of scoliosis in the adult. Spine 30:1670–1673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ozgur BM, Aryan HE, Pimenta L, Taylor WR (2006) Extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF): a novel surgical technique for anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J 6:435–443

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rodgers WB, Gerber EJ, Rodgers JA (2010) Lumbar fusion in octogenarians: the promise of minimally invasive surgery. Spine 35:S355–S360

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Berjano P, Lamartina C (2011) Minimally invasive lateral transpsoas approach with advanced neurophysiologic monitoring for lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J 20(9):1584–1586

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Benglis DM, Vanni S, Levi AD (2009) An anatomical study of the lumbosacral plexus as related to the minimally invasive transpsoas approach to the lumbar spine. J Neurosurg Spine 10:139–144

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Moro T, Kikuchi S, Konno S et al (2003) An anatomic study of the lumbar plexus with respect to retroperitoneal endoscopic surgery. Spine 28:23–28

    Google Scholar 

  21. Park DK, Lee MJ, Lin EL et al (2010) The relationship of intrapsoas nerves during a transpsoas approach to the lumbar spine: an anatomic study. J Spinal Disord Tech 23:223–228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fahim DK, Kim SD, Cho D, Lee S, Kim DH (2011) Avoiding abdominal flank bulge after anterolateral approaches to the thoracolumbar spine: cadaveric study and electrophysiological investigation. J Neurosurg Spine 15:532–540

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mundis G, Akbarnia BA, Phillips FM (2010) Adult deformity correction though minimally invasive lateral approach techniques. Spine 35:S312–S321

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Dakwar E, Cardona RF, Smith DA, Uribe JS (2010) Early outcomes and safety of the minimally invasive, lateral retroperitoneal transpsoas approach for adult degenerative scoliosis. Neurosurg Focus 28:E8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rodgers WB, Cox C, Gerber E (2009) Minimally invasive treatment (XLIF) or adjacent segment disease after prior lumbar fusions. Internet J Minim Invasive Spinal Technol 3:4

    Google Scholar 

  26. Akbarnia BA, Mundis G, Bagheri R, Kabirian N, Salari P, Pawelek J (2011) Lateral approach for interbody fusion (LIF) is a safe and effective technique to reconstruct the anterior spinal column in complex adult spinal deformity: a minimum 2-year follow-up study. In: Proceedings of the 4th annual SOLAS (Society of Lateral Access Surgery) research meeting, 31 March–2 April, 2011, San Diego, CA

  27. Tormenti MJ, Maserati MB, Bonfield CM et al (2010) Complications and radiographic correction in adult scoliosis following combined transpsoas extreme lateral interbody fusion and posterior pedicle screw instrumentation. Neurosurg Focus 28:E7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Dakwar E, Cardona RF, Smith DA, Uribe JS (2010) Early outcomes and safety of the minimally invasive, lateral retroperitoneal transpsoas approach for adult degenerative scoliosis. Neurosurg Focus 28:E8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Wang MY, Mummaneni PV (2010) Minimally invasive surgery for thoracolumbar spinal deformity: initial clinical experience with clinical and radiographic outcomes. Neurosurg Focus 28:E9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Keshavarzi S, Mundis G, Pekmezci M, Akbarnia BA, Weber M, Ames C, Deviren V (2011) The utility and limitations of XLIF in adult scoliosis. In: Proceedings of the 4th annual SOLAS (Society of Lateral Access Surgery) research meeting, 31 March–2 April, 2011, San Diego, CA

  31. Phillips F, Kahn S (2011) Immediate radiographic correction achievable in adult degenerative scoliosis treated by XLIF: influence of choice of fixation. In: Proceedings of the 4th annual SOLAS (Society of Lateral Access Surgery) research meeting, 31 March–April 2, San Diego, CA

  32. Isaacs RE, Hyde J, Goodrich A, Rodgers WB, Phillips FM (2010) A prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter evaluation of extreme lateral interbody fusion for the treatment of adult degenerative scoliosis. Spine 35:S322–S330

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Akbarnia BA, Mundis G, Moazzaz P, Kabirian N, Eastlack R, Pawelek J (2011) Can less invasive lateral interbody fusion with transpsoas all release (LIFTAR) replace three-column osteotomy for correction of adult focal sagittal plane deformity? In: Proceedings of the 4th annual SOLAS (Society of Lateral Access Surgery) research meeting, San Diego, CA

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Via Riccardo Galeazzi 4, 20161, Milan, MI, Italy

    Pedro Berjano & Claudio Lamartina

Authors
  1. Pedro Berjano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Claudio Lamartina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claudio Lamartina.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Berjano, P., Lamartina, C. Far lateral approaches (XLIF) in adult scoliosis. Eur Spine J 22 (Suppl 2), 242–253 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-012-2426-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-012-2426-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation