Introduction. Tomita En-bloc spondylectomy (TES) of L5 is one of the most challenging spinal surgical techniques. A 42-year-old female was referred with low back pain and L5 radiculopathy with background of right shoulder excision of liposarcoma. CT-PET confirmed a solitary L5 oligometastasis. MRI showed thecal sac indentation and therefore was not suitable for stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) alone. Planning Methodology. First Stage: Carbon fibre pedicle screws were planned from L2 to S2AI-Pelvis, aligned to her patient-specific rods. Custom 3D-printed navigation guides were used to overcome challenging limitations of carbon instruments. Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) of L5 pedicles prior to osteotomy was performed to prevent sarcoma cell seeding. Microscope-assisted thecal sac-tumour separation and L5 nerve root dissection was performed. Novel surgical navigation of the ultrasonic bone cutter assisted inferior L4 and superior S1 endplate osteotomies. Second stage: We performed a vascular-assisted retroperitoneal approach to L4-S1 with protection of the great vessels. Completion of osteotomies at L4 and S1 to en-bloc L5: (L4 inferior endplate, L4/5 disc, L5 body, L5/S1 disc and S1 superior endplate). Anterior reconstruction used an expandable PEEK cage obviating the need for a third posterior stage. Reinforced with a patient-specific carbon plate L4-S1 promontory. Sacrifice of left L5 nerve root undertaken. Results. Patient rehabilitated well and was discharged after 42 days. Patient underwent SABR two months post-operatively. Despite left foot drop, she was walking independently 9 months post-operatively. Conclusion. These challenging cases require a truly multi-disciplinary team approach. We share this technique for a dual stage TES and metal-free construct with post adjuvant SABR for maximum local control

We have studied fracture-dislocation of the fifth lumbar vertebra in seven patients and reviewed 50 previously reported cases. Based on this information, we have classified the injury into five types: type 1, unilateral lumbosacral facet-dislocation with or without facet fracture; type 2, bilateral lumbosacral facet-dislocation with or without facet fracture; type 3, unilateral lumbosacral facet-dislocation and contralateral lumbosacral facet fracture; type 4, dislocation of the body of L5 with bilateral fracture of the pars interarticularis; and type 5, dislocation of the body of L5 with fracture of the body and/or pedicle, with or without injury of the lamina and/or facet. Conservative treatment of fracture-dislocation of L5 is generally not effective because the lesion is fundamentally unstable. Planning of the operation should be made on the basis of the various types of injury