With the identification of literature shortfalls on the techniques employed in intraoperative navigated (ION) spinal surgery, we outline a number of measures which have been synthesised into a coherent operative technique. These include positioning, dissection, management of the reference frame, the grip, the angle of attack, the drill, the template, the pedicle screw, the wire, and navigated intrathecal analgesia. Optimizing techniques to improve accuracy allow an overall reduction of the repetition of the surgical steps with its associated productivity benefits including time, cost, radiation, and safety. Cite this article:
Intraoperative 3D navigation (ION) allows high accuracy to be achieved in spinal surgery, but poor workflow has prevented its widespread uptake. The technical demands on ION when used in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) are higher than for other more established indications. Lean principles have been applied to industry and to health care with good effects. While ensuring optimal accuracy of instrumentation and safety, the implementation of ION and its associated productivity was evaluated in this study for AIS surgery in order to enhance the workflow of this technique. The aim was to optimize the use of ION by the application of lean principles in AIS surgery. A total of 20 consecutive patients with AIS were treated with ION corrective spinal surgery. Both qualitative and quantitative analysis was performed with real-time modifications. Operating time, scan time, dose length product (measure of CT radiation exposure), use of fluoroscopy, the influence of the reference frame, blood loss, and neuromonitoring were assessed.Aims
Methods
Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MITLIF)
has been well validated in overweight and obese patients who are
consequently subject to a higher radiation exposure. This prospective
multicentre study aimed to investigate the efficacy of a novel lumbar
localisation system for MITLIF in overweight patients. The initial study group consisted of 175 patients. After excluding
49 patients for various reasons, 126 patients were divided into
two groups. Those in Group A were treated using the localisation
system while those in Group B were treated by conventional means.
The primary outcomes were the effective radiation dosage to the
surgeon and the exposure time.Aims
Patients and Methods