4.6 Article

Minimally Invasive Microsurgical Resection of Primary, Intradural Spinal Tumors is Feasible and Safe: A Consecutive Series of 83 Patients

Journal

NEUROSURGERY
Volume 82, Issue 3, Pages 365-371

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/neuros/nyx253

Keywords

Ependymoma; Feasibility studies; Meningioma; Minimally invasive surgical procedures; Neurilemmoma; Spinal neoplasms; Spine

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: To date, the traditional approach to intraspinal tumors has been open laminectomy or laminoplasty followed by microsurgical tumor resection. Recently, however, minimally invasive approaches have been attempted by some. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility and safety of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for primary intradural spinal tumors. METHODS: Medical charts of 83 consecutive patients treated with MIS for intradural spinal tumors were reviewed. Patients were followed up during the study year, 2015, by either routine history/physical examination or by telephone consultation, with a focus on tumor status and surgery-related complications. RESULTS: Mean age at surgery was 53.7 yr and 52% were female. There were 49 schwannomas, 18 meningeomas, 10 ependymomas, 2 hemangioblastomas, 1 neurofibroma, 1 paraganglioma, 1 epidermoid cyst, and 1 hemangiopericytoma. The surgical mortality was 0%. In 87% of cases, gross total resection was achieved. The complication rate was 11%, including 2 cerebrospinal fluid leakages, 1 asymptomatic pseudomeningocele, 2 superficial surgical site infections, 1 sinus vein thrombosis, and 4 cases of neurological deterioration. There were no postoperative hematomas, and no cases of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. Ninety-three percent of patients were ambulatory and able to work at the time of follow-up. CONCLUSION: This study both demonstrates that it is feasible and safe to remove select, primary intradural spinal tumors using MIS, and augments the previous literature in favor of MIS for these tumors.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available