Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Background: The extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF) approach is being increasingly adopted to alleviate complications that are commonplace with other approaches; however, an analysis of the device malfunctions and patient injuries associated with the procedure was not available. The purpose of this study was to search the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Database (MAUDE) for medical device reports (MDRs) associated with the XLIF procedure and categorically analyze the device and patient complications.

Methods: MDRs from Jan. 2012 to Nov. 2022 from the MAUDE database regarding the XLIF procedure were filtered and analyzed by two independent reviewers. The complications associated with each MDR were then categorized into device malfunctions and patient injuries, further reclassified into intra-operative and post-operative complications, and analyzed for their relative frequencies.

Results: The most common intra-operative device malfunction was the fracture of an instrument other than the interbody/cage at 8.1% (25/308) and the least common intra-operative device malfunction was an inability to insert the interbody/cage at 3.6% (11/308). The most common post-operative device malfunction was migration of something other than the cage at 5.2% (16/208) and the least common was cage migration at 2.3% (7/208). Post-operative wound issues were the most common patient injury at 7.3% (23/314) and the least common injuries included intra-operative paralysis and intra-operative death at 0.6% (2/314).

Conclusion: Although the XLIF procedure was developed to mitigate vascular injury, the predominant complication continues to be vascular injury, followed by organ injury based on MDRs submitted to the MAUDE database. This study provides an extensive search into the device malfunctions and patient injuries specific to the XLIF procedure, which has not been studied before. Such analysis provides a valuable focus for manufacturers and surgeons to improve patient safety by refining device design and optimizing surgical techniques.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00586-025-09174-4DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

xlif procedure
16
device malfunctions
12
malfunctions patient
12
patient injuries
12
device malfunction
12
device
11
extreme lateral
8
lateral interbody
8
interbody fusion
8
fusion xlif
8

Similar Publications

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of microscope-assisted modified lateral lumbar interbody fusion (micro-XOLIF) and to compare its impact on lumbar sagittal plane imaging parameters with extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF).

Methods: We retrospectively collected the data of patients who underwent XLIF and micro-XOLIF in our hospital. We compared general data, medical records, and imaging parameters of both groups, including lumbar sagittal balance and postoperative intervertebral height.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: To evaluate imaging outcomes of XLIF surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis Methods: This is a cross-sectional descriptive study. There were 33 patients with 36 segments of surgery diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis that were surgically treated with the XLIF method. Clinical outcomes measured included VAS scores for lower back pain and leg pain, ODI, and JOA scores.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Study designRetrospective Multicenter Comparative Study.ObjectiveThe population's aging is progressively increasing the number of elderly patients on antiplatelet medications undergoing lumbar fusion procedures. Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) has demonstrated valuable clinical and radiological advantages compared to conventional posterior fusion procedures in treating degenerative spine disorders.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: This review examines the novel application of the Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion (XLIF) approach for the removal of foreign bodies in the spine, including subsided cages, failed hardware, and other implants. It aims to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and technical considerations of XLIF in this context and compare it to traditional anterior and posterior surgical approaches.

Methods: A comprehensive literature search in accordance with PRISMA was conducted using Google Scholar, PubMed/MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to report the one-year posterior fusion rate in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) undergoing posterior spinal fusion (PSF) with supplemental lumbar interbody fusion (LIF).

Methods: Patients with ASD who underwent PSF with supplemental ALIF and/or XLIF between October 2021 and December 2023 were prospectively enrolled. Fusion was assessed using fine-cut CT scans with Metal Artifact Reduction (MAR) and multi-planar reconstruction (MPR) one year after surgery, and each level was graded for interbody and posterolateral fusion (Glassman Classification).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF