80 percent of adults experience, low back pain at some point in their lifetime

Living with back pain is no fun. In many cases, back surgery should be the last resort.

But, minimally invasive spine surgery might be an option if conservative treatments have not helped with persistent pain.

Back pain is one of the most common health issues among adults, young and old alike.

In fact, 80 percent of adults experience low back pain at some point in their lifetime.

“If it is sharp severe pain, especially radiating down your arms or legs, that tends to be a symptom of a more serious problem. Again, if you are having weakness, numbness, or bowel and bladder changes,  that definitely is more of a worrisome symptoms,” said Medical Center Neurosurgeon.

Neurosurgeon, who performs 300 back surgeries a year, says, while surgery may be the best option to help relieve certain types of back pain, it is important for patients to know what options are available, like minimally invasive spine surgery.

“Now we can do those steps with very small incisions, 9mm to 24mm depending on whether it is cervical or lumbar. The guidance and the visual guidance of our procedure is done more with either a 3D computer guidance or intraoperative x-ray, or sometimes with intraoperative endoscopes, arthroscopes in the spinal canal,”.

The goal is to have you come out of the surgery and back on your feet quickly.

“The minimally invasive surgery allows patients to get out of the hospital sooner, including making some procedures outpatient that might have been inpatient one or more night stay. But also getting back to their home routine, office, and driving more quickly,”.

Surgery is usually not first-line therapy for acute or chronic back pain issues.

“A good place to start is with over the counter medicines, rest, ice or heat. If those things aren’t helping adequately then seeing one’s primary care doctor for evaluation and having them decide whether an MRI, for instance, is necessary to better understand why it is persisting,”.

More adults are seeking medical treatment for back pain, options for treatment are numerous, and treatments are improving all the time.

Minimally invasive spine surgery utilizes small incisions, reduces risk of trauma to the muscles, nerves, and other tissues, less bleeding, scarring and the reduced use of narcotics and hospital time.

Why might I need minimally invasive spine surgery?

  • Herniated disc
  • Spinal stenosis (narrowing of the spinal canal)
  • Spinal deformities (like scoliosis)
  • Spinal instability
  • Spondylolysis (a defect in part of a lower vertebrae)
  • Fractured vertebra
  • Removal of a tumor in the spine
  • Infection in the spine

What are the benefits of minimally invasive spine surgery?

  • A few tiny scars instead of one large scar
  • Shorter hospital stay – a few days instead of a week
  • Reduced postoperative pain
  • Shorter recovery time – a few months instead of a year – and quicker return to daily activities, including work
  • Less blood loss during surgery
  • Reduced risk of infection

What are the risks of minimally invasive spine surgery?

  • Infection
  • Excess bleeding
  • Pain at the graft site
  • Nerve damage
  • Blood clots
  • Complications from anesthesia
  • Leaking of spinal fluid. This may cause headaches or other problems.
  • Not enough relief of your back pain

Source

New computer programme reduces spine surgery errors linked to “wrong level” labelling

Amir Manbachi tests LevelCheck

Researchers at Johns Hopkins Medicine (Baltimore, USA) report that a computer programme they designed may help surgeons identify and label spinal segments during real time operating room procedures and avoid the costly and potentially debilitating consequences of operating on the wrong segment.

The current study builds on previously described work—published in April 2015 and March 2016—on the algorithm dubbed Level Check, which was designed and developed by Jeffrey Siewerdsen, professor of biomedical engineering, computer science and radiology at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and founder of the school’s Imaging for Surgery, Therapy and Radiology Laboratory. Details of the current findings were published last autumn in the Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

The researchers say current estimates indicate that spinal surgeons operate on the wrong spinal segment only about once in every 3100 surgeries. Consequences, however, are huge, potentially leading to paralysis, more surgeries and huge increases in health care costs.

Most humans have the same number of spinal segments, which are labelled L1, L2 and so on. Currently, surgeons identify the correct target spinal segment, or “level,” by using X-rays of the patient taken in the operating room at the time of the surgery, and counting up or down the spinal segments on the X-rays to identify and verify the correct one.

These intra-operative X-rays sometimes can be difficult to read on the spot due to poor image quality, the patient’s position or weight, or atypical spinal anatomy. All of these issues potentially lead to surgeon error in identifying the correct spinal level on which to operate for such conditions as herniated discs.

Some spine surgeon also physically mark the correct spinal segment with a metal marker or surgical cement during a preliminary procedure, but with this approach, patients face additional surgical risks.

The Level Check program uses a patient’s MRI or CT scan images taken before the operation. By feeding the imaging data into the Level Check computer program, engineers use mathematical algorithms to compare anatomical landmarks, line them up, and transfer the digital labels of each spinal segment from the preoperative scan to the digital X-ray taken in the operating room.

The LevelCheck-verified spine segments are then presented to the surgeon to inform assessment of the correct spinal segment for surgery.

For the current research, the scientists set up a mock operating room. They selected 62 of 364 past spinal surgeries performed at The Johns Hopkins Hospital between 2012 and 2016 for surgeries involving long segments of the spine, specifically choosing X-ray images that were the most difficult to read and label.

A neuroradiologist previously and correctly labeled all of the X-rays to determine where the correct surgical sites were on the images.

The researchers then asked five surgeons to label the same X-rays in two ways: with Level Check assistance at the same time they labeled the segments and to confirm their labeling after marking the segments without the program’s assistance.

They also randomly presented some of the same cases to the surgeons multiple times to account for fatigue or waning attention.

Without Level Check assistance and in the difficult cases presented to them in the mock setup, the surgeons labeled the target spinal segment in these challenging cases incorrectly a median of 14 cases out of 46 trials.

However, when the surgeons used Level Check either before or after labeling the segments, the average error rate dropped to a median 1 case out of 46 trials.

Next, the researchers tested Level Check’s labeling during 20 real time operations at The Johns Hopkins Hospital after surgeons had labeled the segments without the aid of Level Check. While both the surgeons’ initial labeling and Level Check’s results were correct in all 20 operations, which were not selected for difficult cases, the goal was to determine if they could integrate Level Check into real-world operations of the surgical workflow.

The scientists found that it took an average of 17 to 72 seconds for Level Check to deliver its labeling results, close to the median 20- to 60-second range surgeons when surveyed said they were willing to wait for the results.

“A surgeon may say, ‘I don’t need this, I always get it right,’” says Siewerdsen, senior author of the study. “This algorithm actually improves surgeons’ rates of getting it right.”

Before and after each of the 62 mock operating room cases, the researchers gave questionnaires to the five surgeons, including the repeated cases, for a total of 410 questionnaires. The researchers found that Level Check improved the surgeons’ confidence in labelling 91% of the time (373 out of 410 times). Another 5.8% (24 out of 410) of the time, surgeons said it didn’t have an impact on their confidence, while 3% of the time (13 out of 410) surgeons reported feeling the program reduced their confidence.

In the 20 cases in the real-time operating room setting, the surgeons said LevelCheck improved their confidence in 16 of the 20 cases and had no impact in the remaining 4 cases.

Although the researchers say they have not determined the cost of LevelCheck at this stage of development, they say it requires a computer with a graphics card and, at this point, an engineer to operate the software. They hope to further automate the system so that surgeons can use it without an engineer present. The researchers aim to conduct more trials of the program at other institutions.

Other researchers involved in this study include Tharindu De Silva (who completed retrospective studies related to this work), Ali Uneri, Matthew Jacobson, Joseph Goerres, Michael Ketcha, and Runze Han of the Johns Hopkins University Department of Biomedical Engineering; Nafi Aygun of the Johns Hopkins University Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science; David Thompson of the Johns Hopkins University Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality; Xiaobu Ye, Camilo Molina, Rajiv Iyer, Tomas Garzon-Muvdi, Michael Raber, Mari Groves, and Jean-Paul Wolinsky of the Johns Hopkins University Department of Neurosurgery; and Sebastian Vogt and Gerhard Kleinszig of Siemens Healthineers.

This research was supported by the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIH R01-EB-017226) and Siemens Healthineers.

The scientists have filed for patents related to the technology described in this research.

Source