Abstract
So many factors affect where minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) will go in the immediate and near future that it is hazardous, and probably foolhardy, to make predictions. Many of these factors, if not most, have little to do with surgery, medicine, or even health care. To consider this issue systematically, however, let’s first define what we mean by “minimally invasive spine surgery” and then consider the question of “Where should MISS surgery go, in a perfect world?” Then let’s examine the question, “What factors could alter the pathway of where MISS should go?” Finally, by combining the information learned from the answers to both of those questions, let’s consider the final question, “Where is MISS likely to go in the future?”
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Wang M. Improvement of sagittal balance and lumbar lordosis following less invasive adult spinal deformity surgery with expandable cages and percutaneous instrumentation. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;18:4–12.
Shaffrey CI, Smith JS. Editorial: minimally invasive spinal deformity surgery. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;18:1–2.
Potter, Stewart: Jacobellis v. Ohio 378 U.S. 184, 1964.
Fessler RG. Promising advances in minimally invasive spine surgery. In: Sandhu FA, Voyadzis JM, Fessler RG, editors. Decision making for minimally invasive spine surgery. New York: Thieme Medical Publishers; 2011. p. 2071–206.
Fessler RG, Khoo LT. Minimally invasive cervical Microendoscopic Foraminotomy (MEF): an initial clinical experience. Neurosurgery. 2002;51(5, Supplement):37–45.
O’Toole JE, Sheikh J, Eichholz KM, Fessler RG, Perez-Cruet MJ. Endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy and discectomy. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2006;17:411–22.
Khoo LT, Palmer S, Laich DT, Fessler RG. Minimally invasive percutaneous posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurgery. 2002;51(5):S166–71.
Peng CWB, Yue WM, Poh SY, Mphyty WY, Tan SB. Clinical and radiological outcomes of minimally invasive vs open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Spine. 2009;34:1385–9.
O’Toole JE, Eichholz KM, Fessler RG. Surgical site infection rates after minimally invasive spinal surgery. J Neurosurg Spine. 2009;11:471–6.
Eichholz KM, O’Toole JE, Fessler RG. Thoracic microendoscopic discectomy. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2006;17:441–6.
Huang TJ, Hsu RW, Li YY. Less systemic cytokine response in patients following microendoscopic versus open lumbar discectomy. J Orthop Res. 2005;23:406–11.
Rosen DS, O’Toole JE, Eichholz KM, et al. Minimally invasive lumbar spinal decompression in the elderly: outcomes in 50 patients aged 75 years and older. Neurosurgery. 2007;60:503–9.
Bresnahan I, Fessler RG, Natarajan RN. Evaluation of change in muscle activity as a result of posterior lumbar spine surgery using a dynamic modeling. Spine. 2010;35:E761–7.
Bresnahan L, Ogden AT, Natarajan RN, Fessler RG. A biomechanical evaluation of graded posterior element removal for treatment of lumbar stenosis: comparison of a minimally invasive approach with two standard laminectomy techniques. Spine. 2009;34:17–23.
Lauber S, Schulte TL, Liljenqvist U, Halm H, Hackenberg L. Clinical and radiologic 2–4 year results of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis grades 1 and 2. Spine. 2006;31:1693–8.
Anand N, Baron EM, Thaiyananthan G, Khalsa K, Goldstein TB. Minimally invasive multilevel percutaneous correction and fusion for adult lumbar degenerative scoliosis: a technique and feasibility study. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2008;21:459–67.
Kim CW, Lee Y, Taylor W, Oygar A, Kim WK. Use of navigation-assisted fluoroscopy to decrease radiation exposure during minimally invasive spine surgery. Spine J. 2008;8:584–90.
Florian TG, Kraus MD, Schneider E, Liener UC, Kinzl L, Arand M. Does computer-assisted spine surgery reduce intraoperative radiation doses? Spine. 2006;31:2024–7.
Baldus C, Bridwell K, Harrast J, Shaffrey C, Ondra S, Lenke L, Schwab F, Mardjetko S, Glassman S, Edwards C, Lowe T, Horton W, Polly D. The Scoliosis Research Society health-related quality of life (SRS-30) age-gender normative data. Spine. 2011;36:1154–62.
Glassman SD, Copay AG, Berven SH, Polly DW, Subach BR, Carreon LY. Defining substantial clinical benefit following lumbar spine arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:1839–47.
Moktar SA, McCombe PF, Williamson OD, White MD, Gavin J, Sears WR. Health related quality of life: a comparison of outcomes after lumbar fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis with large joint replacement surgery and population norms. Spine J. 2010;10:306–12.
Parker SL, Adogwa O, Bydon A, Cheng J, McGirt MJ. Cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis associated low back and leg pain over two years. World Neurosurg. 2012;78:178–84.
Wang MY, Commock MD, Yu Y. An analysis of the differences in the acute hospitalization charges following minimally invasive versus open posterior lumbar interbody fusion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010;12:694–9.
Allen RT, Garfin SR. The economics of minimally invasive spine surgery. Spine. 2010;35:S375–82.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag Wien
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fessler, R.G. (2014). The Future of MIS Spine Surgery. In: Wang, M., Lu, Y., Anderson, D., Mummaneni, P. (eds) Minimally Invasive Spinal Deformity Surgery. Springer, Vienna. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-1407-0_38
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-1407-0_38
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Vienna
Print ISBN: 978-3-7091-1406-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-7091-1407-0
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)