OLIF Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion

View Details
logo
Parent item

General

  • Aka:
    • ATP (Anterior to psoas approach)
  • Pros
    • Avoid the morbidity of the transpsoas approach by translating the incision anteriorly and dissecting around the psoas
      • Lumbar plexus injury
    • Minimal invasive
    • Can more easily access L1/2, L2/3 than ALIF
    • Avoid ALIF comorbidities
      • ALIF has more
        • Venous injury
        • Peritoneal mobilisation → Ileus
    • Avoid TLIF comorbidities
      • TLIF has
        • smaller cage → less endplate contact
        • Risk of nerve root injury and CSF leak
        • More difficult with multiple levels
    • Able to perform release of ALL
    • No need to reposition patient and can perform posterior fixation in same position
  • Cons
    • Limited exposure:
      • This minimally invasive technique is suitable for exposure of L2-3, 3-4, and 4-5 levels.
        • Exposure of the L4-L5 level requires ligation of the iliolumbar veins, which frequently traverse this disc space.
      • Exposure of L1-2 is difficult due to 12th rib obstruction
    • Increased risk to contralateral iliac vein because of oblique angle

Indication

  • Foraminal stenosis
  • Coronal correction for scoliosis
  • Increase likelihood for arthrodesis

Relative contraindications

  • Prior left sided intraperitoneal and retroperitoneal surgery
  • Local radiation

Position

  • Rt lateral decubitus position.
  • Bed to be broken at the level of the ilium so to make the left flank working angle better.
  • Slight bend of the hips to decrease the tension on the Psoas

Incision

  • Xray to find level
  • For L4/5
    • Incision made 5cm anterior to the anterior wall of the vertebral body
    • notion image
    • Incision made parallel to the fibers of the external abdominal oblique.
      • The more anterior incision also makes the approach to the L4-5 disc space easier compared to the XLIF.
      • Split the muscle in the direction of the muscle (using two fingers)
        • External oblique
        • Internal oblique
        • Transverse abdominius
      • Blunt dissect the retroperitoneal fat
      • notion image
        notion image
    • Identify anterior border of psoas
      • Genitofemoral nerve overlying it
    • Dock the retractor after identifying the disc space
    • Working channel between Psoas and Great vessels
  • For L5/S1
    • notion image
    • incision is planned based on L5/S1 disc space angle
      • Draw with xrays the angle of the L5/S1 disc space
      • Draw a horizontal line from the L5S1 disc space
      • Skin incision is 3-4 finger breaths in the line of the external oblique between the two drawn lines
    • Identify retroperitoneal space
    • Mobilize peritoneum and ureter medially and identify iliac vessels
    • be mindful to perfrom ipsilateral discectomy to make sure implant is central

Dissection

  • The external oblique, internal oblique, and transversus abdominus muscles are bluntly dissected.
  • the retroperitoneal space is accessed
  • the psoas muscle is identified and retracted posteriorly,
  • The ureter and sympathetic plexus are retracted anteriorly.
  • At this point the intervertebral space should be visible and 4 Steinman pins are used to secure the visual field surrounding the operative level of interest.

Fusion

  • Once the exposure is complete, disc preparation and cage insertion are the same as for an ALIF or XLIF.

Complications

  • Injury to
    • Vascular structure
    • Sympathetic chain
    • Hypogastric plexus
      • Retrograde ejaculation
    • Abdominal contents
  • Implant subsidence
  • Abe 2017:
    • Overall, 75 complications in 155 patients (48.3%);
      • 69 intraoperative (44.5%)
      • 7 early postoperative (4.7%)
    • Only 3 patients (1.9%) had permanent damage: (All related to technical errors during disc preparation/retractor fixation)
      • 1 ureteral injury
      • 2 neurological injuries (nerve root and cauda equina)
    • Complication types
      • Endplate fracture/cage subsidence (18.7%).
      • Transient psoas weakness and thigh numbness (13.5%)
      • Segmental artery injury (2.6%)
        • Not major vessel injury
      • Surgical site infection and reoperation each 1.9%.
  • OLIF vs. ExLIF Approach Comparison:
    • Transpsoas group had higher rates of transient thigh/groin sensory symptoms and transient hip flexor weakness, and increased prolonged motor deficits.
    • Prepsoas group had higher rates of sympathetic plexus injury (none in transpsoas) and higher rates of major vascular injury.
    • Rates of bowel and urological injury were similar.

Video