This video aims to describe an endoscopic surgical approach for accessing difficult to reach pathology such as disc herniations after previous surgery. The relatively small size of endoscopic instruments facilitates significant freedom of movement inside the spinal canal. The authors have experience with interlaminar approaches for contralateral pathology such as disc herniations, recurrent disc herniations, spinal stenosis, and facet cysts. The advantages of starting from the opposite side of the canal in a revision situation include the ability to establish a clear plane between the dura and the borders of the canal and visualize the disc from a different angle than the index operation. Contralateral approaches to residual or recurrent herniations can be performed with an “over the top” technique, navigating dorsal to the thecal sac to reach the far side of the canal. In the associated video we demonstrate a novel technique, a contralateral transaxillary endoscopic approach to a recurrent disc herniation at the L5–S1 level in a young male collegiate wrestler. In our experience, we have found this particular approach to be useful in patients with an early take off of the S1 nerve root which creates a large axillary window. In several instances this technique has allowed us to inspect the area of the reherniation from both the axilla and over the top of the thecal sac. This particular patient has a large recurrence 2 years after an open microscopic hemilaminotomy and discectomy. In this instance, an approach was chosen that navigates dorsal to the S1 nerve root and ventral to the thecal sac, starting on the opposite side of the spinal canal from the herniation. This approach is described as a contralateral interlaminar transaxillary discectomy.
Objective Cervical hybrid surgery optimizes the use of cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) and zero-profile (ZOP) devices in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) but lacks uniform combination and biomechanical standards, especially in revision surgery (RS). This study aimed to investigate the biomechanical characteristics of adjacent segments of the different hybrid RS constructs in ACDF RS.
Methods An intact 3-dimensional finite element model generated a normal cervical spine (C2–T1). This model was modified to the primary C5–6 ACDF model. Three RS models were created to treat C4–5 adjacent segment degeneration through implanting cages plus plates (Cage-Cage), ZOP devices (ZOP-Cage), or Bryan discs (CDA-Cage). A 1.0-Nm moment was applied to the primary C5–6 ACDF model to generate total C2–T1 range of motions (ROMs). Subsequently, a displacement load was applied to all RS models to match the total C2–T1 ROMs of the primary ACDF model.
Results The ZOP-Cage model showed lower biomechanical responses including ROM, intradiscal pressure, maximum von Mises stress in discs, and facet joint force in adjacent segments compared to the Cage-Cage model. The CDA-Cage model exhibited the lowest biomechanical responses and ROM ratio at adjacent segments among all RS models, closely approached or lower than those in the primary ACDF model in most motion directions. Additionally, the maximum von Mises stress on the C3–4 and C6–7 discs increased in the Cage-Cage and ZOP-Cage models but decreased in the CDA-Cage model when compared to the primary ACDF model.
Conclusion The CDA-Cage construct had the lowest biomechanical responses with minimal kinematic change of adjacent segments. ZOP-Cage is the next best choice, especially if CDA is not suitable. This study provides a biomechanical reference for clinical hybrid RS decision-making to reduce the risk of ASD recurrence.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Biomechanical Changes in Kyphotic Cervical Spine After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with Different Degrees of Correction Hongyu Chen, Xu Ma, Shengfa Pan, Li Zhang, Yanbin Zhao, Xin Chen, Yu Sun, Feifei Zhou Bioengineering.2025; 12(3): 213. CrossRef
Midterm outcomes of revision anterior fusion versus cervical disc arthroplasty in patients with prior single-level anterior cervical fusion Justin J. Turcotte, Jane C. Brennan, Andrea H. Johnson, Chad M. Patton The Spine Journal.2025; 25(11): 2422. CrossRef
Comparison of Hybrid Surgery and Two-Level ACDF in Treating Consecutive Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Yihan Yang, Weishi Liang, Duan Sun, Bo Han, Zhangfu Li, Yeqiu Xu, Peng Yin, Xianjun Qu, Yong Hai Global Spine Journal.2025; 15(8): 3953. CrossRef
Is zero-profile fixation safe in consecutive two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with partial uncinate resection? A finite element analysis Ning Wu, Jiarui Zhang, Zhilin Ge, Rueishiuan Jiang, Lingxi Cai, Siqi Zhang, Jiying Wei, Kai Tang BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Finite element analysis of two‐level discontinuous cervical hybrid revision surgery strategy to reduce biomechanical responses of adjacent segments Weishi Liang, Duan Sun, Bo Han, Yihan Yang, Peng Yin, Yong Hai JOR SPINE.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Objective Multilevel or revisional posterior spinal surgery is prone to infection and delayed wound healing, related with the wound closure time and suture strength. Knotless barbed suture is an innovative self-locking, multianchor suture. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the knotless barbed suture and self-adhering mesh with polymeric glue in multilevel or revisional posterior spinal surgery.
Methods This is a single-center retrospective matched cohort study. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on the wound closure method: barbed suture group with novel wound closure, and conventional suture group with conventional wound closure, 1:1 matched by the level of surgery and sex, resulting in 120 subjects each. Total operation time and wound closure time were measured intraoperatively, and perioperative clinical outcome parameters including postoperative wound complication were investigated for the first 3 months postoperatively. The distribution of continuous variables was assessed for normality by Shapiro-Wilk test, then parametric or nonparametric tests were applied accordingly (paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test).
Results Wound closure time was significantly shorter with the novel barbed suture than with conventional suture in all subgroups divided by the level of spinal surgery: 3–5, 6–9, ≥ 10 levels (p < 0.001). The 2 groups showed no significant differences in surgical complications (p = 1.000). Specially, total operation time and wound-closing time were significantly shorter in revisional subgroup.
Conclusion Absorbable knotless barbed suture and self-adhering mesh with polymeric glue can shorten spinal wound closure time with noninferiority in complications for multilevel or revisional spinal surgery.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Barbed Versus Conventional Suture for Spinal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Hugo Nunes Pustilnik, Gabriel Araújo Cerqueira, Jefferson Heber Marques Fontes, Davi Amorim Meira, Gabriel Souza Medrado-Nunes, Beatriz Lopes Bernardo da Cunha, Silvio Porto Junior, Matheus Gomes da Silva da Paz, Tancredo Alcântara, Leonardo Miranda de Av World Neurosurgery.2025; 193: 241. CrossRef
Expanded applications of knotless tissue control devices in neurosurgical cranial and spinal applications Samuel A. Tenhoeve, Clayton Rawson, Dora R. Tabachnick, Mohammed A. Azab, Omowumi Oladipo, Michael Karsy Journal of Clinical Neuroscience.2025; 134: 111108. CrossRef
Clinical Outcomes Among Patients Undergoing Open Abdominal or Orthopedic Surgery with Wound Closure Incorporating Triclosan-Coated Barbed Sutures: A Multi-Institutional, Retrospective Database Study Stephen Fortin, Kerstin Spychaj, Jörg Tomaszewski, Holly Grebeck, Rithwik Yalla, Paul Coplan, Shumin Zhang Medical Devices: Evidence and Research.2025; Volume 18: 161. CrossRef
Adhesive Strips vs. Sutures in Lumbar Spinal Fusion: A Non-inferiority Analysis of Surgical Site Infections Fernando A Núñez-Moreno, Christian Bepperling, Carlos Trenado, Steffen Eitelbuss, Karen Velázquez, Vasilis Karantzoulis, Maria C Ochoa Estrada, Edgar Santos, Farzam Vazifehdan Cureus.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Femtosecond laser micromachining of barbed sutures Walid Al Asad, Shubha Majumder, Karuna Nambi Gowri, Martin W. King, Xin Zhao Manufacturing Letters.2025; 44: 517. CrossRef
Assessing the application of barbed sutures in comparison to conventional sutures for surgical applications: a global systematic review and meta-analysis of preclinical animal studies Nanyan Xiang, Yifei Lin, Xiaoyi Su, Zifan Hu, Jinyu Zhou, Yi Wu, Liang Du, Jin Huang International Journal of Surgery.2024; 110(5): 3060. CrossRef
“Revolutionising spinal surgery: the impact of STRATAFIX™ symmetric barbed sutures on closure time and costs” Ume Aiman, Umer Bin Shahzad Neurosurgical Review.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Letter to the editor: Prospective analysis of STRATAFIX™ symmetric PDS plus suture for fascial closure in spinal surgery: a pilot study Ume Aiman Neurosurgical Review.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
“Evaluating wound closure innovations in spinal surgery: impacts on efficiency and patient outcomes” Muhammad Ahmed, Manal Nadeem, Umer Bin Shahzad, Humzah Salim Neurosurgical Review.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Barbed sutures versus conventional sutures for wound closure in spine surgeries: a systematic review and meta-analysis Khalid Sarhan, Reem Reda Elmahdi, Rashad G. Mohamed, Ibrahim Serag, Mohamed Abouzid Neurosurgical Review.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Objective This study compared the radiological and clinical outcomes with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) to evaluate the effect of indirect decompression through oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) as revision surgery.
Methods We enrolled patients who underwent single-level fusion with revision surgery at the same level as the previous decompression level. We retrospectively reviewed 25 patients who underwent OLIF from 2017 to 2018 and 25 who received TLIF from 2014 to 2018. Radiologic and clinical outcomes were evaluated by cross-sectional area (CSA) of the spinal canal, thickness and area of ligamentum flavum (LF), subsidence, disc height, fusion rate, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and visual analogue scale (VAS).
Results Compared with OLIF, the thickness and area of the LF after surgery were significantly less in TLIF, and the resulting CSA extension was also significantly higher. However, both groups showed improvement in ODI and VAS after surgery, and there was no difference between the groups. Complications related to the posterior approach in TLIF were 4 cases, and in OLIF, there were 2 cases that underwent additional posterior decompression surgery and 6 cases of transient paresthesia.
Conclusion Since complications associated with the posterior approach can be avoided, OLIF is a safer and useful minimally invasive surgery. Therefore, appropriate indications are applied, OLIF is a good alternative to TLIF when revision surgery is considered.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Global research landscape and citation dynamics of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF): A bibliometric analysis of the 100 most influential articles Badr Hafiz, Thamer Alsharif, Faisal Sukkar, Moaath Alghamdi, Ali Zaki Alhabib, Shuruq Obaid Alshammari, Saleh Baeesa Brain and Spine.2026; 6: 106043. CrossRef
Oblique lumbar interbody fusion for adjacent spinal stenosis after posterior lumbar fusion Feifei Chen, Xin Nie, Yanjun Ren, Yubin Qi Asian Journal of Surgery.2025; 48(6): 4008. CrossRef
Anterior to psoas fusion: Radiological parameters and associated clinical outcomes Andrew James Berg, Joseph Maalouly, Liam D. Rose, Prashanth J. Rao, Shay Menachem Seminars in Spine Surgery.2025; 37(1): 101167. CrossRef
Three Cases of Indirect Decompression Failure Following Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Requiring Early Direct Posterior Decompression: Analysis of Etiologies and Literature Review Satoshi Hattori, Satoru Matsutani Cureus.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Oral Eupolyphaga sinensis extract promotes lumbar interbody fusion by enhancing vascularization of cartilage endplate Ruixin Zhen, Jiaqi Li, Shaorong Li, Han Wu, Wei Zhang Frontiers in Surgery.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Can Wallis topping-off surgery reduce radiographic adjacent segment degeneration? a single-center study with at least 8 years of long-term follow-up Sixue Chen, Yang Xiong, Ziye Qiu, Ningning Feng, Guozheng Jiang, Junji Yang, Xing Yu BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Research trends and clustering analysis of postoperative infections following lumbar interbody fusion: a bibliometric study Yanxiao Liu, Hua Wang, Lei Li Neurosurgical Review.2025;[Epub] CrossRef
Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Biportal Endoscopic Revision Extraforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Following Previous Central Decompression: A Case Series Seung-Yeon Jeong, Hyun-Jin Park, Jin-Ho Park, Gab-Lae Kim Journal of Advanced Spine Surgery.2025; 15(2): 84. CrossRef
Improved intervertebral fusion in LLIF rabbit model with a novel titanium cage Jiaqi Li, Bingyi Zhao, Weijian Wang, Yafei Xu, Haoyu Wu, Wei Zhang The Spine Journal.2024; 24(6): 1109. CrossRef
Screening patients requiring secondary lumbar surgery for degenerative lumbar spine diseases: a nationwide sample cohort study Hangeul Park, Juhee Lee, Yunhee Choi, Jun-Hoe Kim, Sum Kim, Young-Rak Kim, Chang-Hyun Lee, Sung Bae Park, Kyoung-Tae Kim, John M. Rhee, Chi Heon Kim Scientific Reports.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Is Direct Decompression Necessary for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion (LLIF)? A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Direct and Indirect Decompression With LLIF in Selected Patients Worawat Limthongkul, Chayapong Thanapura, Khanathip Jitpakdee, Pakawas Praisarnti, Vit Kotheeranurak, Wicharn Yingsakmongkol, Teerachat Tanasansomboon, Weerasak Singhatanadgige Neurospine.2024; 21(1): 342. CrossRef
Trends in degenerative lumbar spinal surgery during the early COVID-19 pandemic in Republic of Korea: A national study utilizing the national health insurance database Woon Tak Yuh, Jinhee Kim, Mi-Sook Kim, Jun-Hoe Kim, Young Rak Kim, Sum Kim, Chun Kee Chung, Chang-Hyun Lee, Sung Bae Park, Kyoung-Tae Kim, John M. Rhee, Young San Ko, Chi Heon Kim, Kentaro Yamada PLOS ONE.2024; 19(6): e0305128. CrossRef
Efficacy and safety of navigation robot-assisted versus conventional oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion with internal fixation in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: A retrospective study Min Tong, Siping Zhang, Wenhao Zhang, Limin Mou, Zhenyu Dong, Rong Wang, Shida Li, Yifei Huang Medicine.2024; 103(32): e39261. CrossRef
Postoperative urinary retention after oblique lumbar interbody fusion under the systematic management protocol Joonsoo Lim, Jangyeob Lim, Asfandyar Khan, Chang-Hyun Lee, Jun-Hoe Kim, Sejin Choi, Tae-Shin Kim, Yunhee Choi, Chun Kee Chung, Sangwook T. Yoon, Kyoung-Tae Kim, Chi Heon Kim Scientific Reports.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Commentary on “Mini-Open Intercostal Retroperitoneal Approach for Upper Lumbar Spine Lateral Interbody Fusion” Alexander E. Ropper Neurospine.2023; 20(2): 564. CrossRef
Mini-Open Intercostal Retroperitoneal Approach for Upper Lumbar Spine Lateral Interbody Fusion Su Hun Lee, Dong Wuk Son, Sung Hyun Bae, Jun Seok Lee, Young Ha Kim, Soon Ki Sung, Sang Weon Lee, Geun Sung Song Neurospine.2023; 20(2): 553. CrossRef
Biomechanical Comparison of Different Surgical Approaches for the Treatment of Adjacent Segment Diseases after Primary Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Finite Element Analysis Wencan Ke, Teng Zhang, Bingjin Wang, Wenbin Hua, Kun Wang, Jason Pui Yin Cheung, Cao Yang Orthopaedic Surgery.2023; 15(10): 2701. CrossRef
Letter to the Editor : Classifying the Anatomical Location of the Ureter after Retroperitoneal Dissection Su-Hun Lee, Dong-Wuk Son, Jun-Seok Lee, Geun-Sung Song Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society.2023; 66(5): 605. CrossRef
Surgical treatment of spondylolisthesis by oblique lumbar interbody fusion and transpedicular screw fixation: Comparison between conventional double position versus navigation-assisted single lateral position Junghoon Han, Chang-Min Ha, Woon Tak Yuh, Young San Ko, Jun-Hoe Kim, Tae-Shin Kim, Chang-Hyun Lee, Sungjoon Lee, Sun-Ho Lee, Asfandyar Khan, Chun Kee Chung, Chi Heon Kim, Mohamed El-Sayed Abdel-Wanis PLOS ONE.2023; 18(9): e0291114. CrossRef
The Influence of Spondylolisthesis Reduction on the Adjacent Lumbar Segment Tae-Hwan Park, Yunhee Choi, Tae-Shin Kim, Jun-Hoe Kim, Chang-Hyun Lee, Sum Kim, Young Rak Kim, Yong San Ko, Woon Tak Yuh, John M. Rhee, Kyoung-Tae Kim, Chun Kee Chung, Chi Heon Kim The Nerve.2023; 9(2): 91. CrossRef
An Expanded Surgical Corridor of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion at L4–5: A Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study Worawat Limthongkul, Pakawas Praisarnti, Teerachat Tanasansomboon, Natavut Prasertkul, Vit Kotheeranurak, Wicharn Yingsakmongkol, Weerasak Singhatanadgige Neurospine.2023; 20(4): 1450. CrossRef
Fusion Assessment of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Demineralized Bone Matrix: A 2-Year Prospective Study Sangseok Lee, Jin Woo Jung, Sang-Woo Lee, Kyoung-Tae Kim, Heum-Dai Kwon, Subum Lee, Young San Ko, Pius Kim, Dae-Chul Cho Neurospine.2023; 20(4): 1205. CrossRef
Postoperative cervical deformity sometimes occurs in the short or long term after primary surgery for cervical disorders related to the degenerative aging spine, neoplastic etiologies, hemodialysis, infection, inflammation, trauma, etc. Cervical kyphosis after posterior decompression surgery, such as laminectomy or laminoplasty, is a common problem for spine surgeons. However, revision surgery for cervical deformity is definitely one of the most challenging areas for spine surgeons. There is no doubt that surgery for cervical deformity carries a high risk of surgery-related complications that might result in aggravation of healthrelated quality of life. Revision surgery is even more challenging. Hence, spine surgeons need to assess carefully the overall severity of the underlying condition before revision surgery, and try to refine the surgical strategy to secure safe surgery. Needless to say, spine surgeons are now facing great challenges in making spine surgery a much more reliable and convincing entity.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Predictive Factors for Postoperative Outcomes of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy in Individuals With Cerebral Palsy Su Ji Lee, Jihye Hwang, Min Gyu Kang, Minjae Cho, Yoon Ha, Sung-Rae Cho Global Spine Journal.2026; 16(1): 75. CrossRef
Clinical Outcomes Following Cervical Fusion in Patients with Dialysis-Related Spondyloarthropathy: A Systematic Review Shahabeddin Yazdanpanah, Grayson M. Talaski, Anthony N. Baumann, Jacob C. Hoffmann Spine Surgery and Related Research.2026; 10(2): 164. CrossRef
Accuracy of Cervical Pedicle Screw Placement Using a Patient-Specific Template Guide System in Revision Cervical Spine Surgery: A CT-Based Morphometric and Accuracy Analysis Kesavan Ramachandran, Akira Fukushima, Hiroyuki Hasebe, Hirohito Takeuchi, Shigeki Oshima, Masanori Fujiya, Itaru Oda Cureus.2026;[Epub] CrossRef
Midterm outcomes of revision anterior fusion versus cervical disc arthroplasty in patients with prior single-level anterior cervical fusion Justin J. Turcotte, Jane C. Brennan, Andrea H. Johnson, Chad M. Patton The Spine Journal.2025; 25(11): 2422. CrossRef
Repeated cervical laminoplasty for progressive ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament: a case report Sh.Sh. Magomedov, P.G. Mytyga Burdenko's Journal of Neurosurgery.2023; 87(1): 90. CrossRef
Development and External Validation of a Risk Calculator for Prediction of Major Complications and Readmission After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Akash A. Shah, Sai K. Devana, Changhee Lee, Thomas E. Olson, Alexander Upfill-Brown, William L. Sheppard, Elizabeth L. Lord, Arya N. Shamie, Mihaela van der Schaar, Nelson F. SooHoo, Don Y. Park Spine.2023; 48(7): 460. CrossRef
Factors Affecting Postoperative Complications and Outcomes of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy with Cerebral Palsy : A Retrospective Analysis Hyung Cheol Kim, Hyeongseok Jeon, Yeong Ha Jeong, Sangman Park, Seong Bae An, Jeong Hyun Heo, Dong Ah Shin, Seong Yi, Keung Nyun Kim, Yoon Ha, Sung-Rae Cho Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society.2021; 64(5): 808. CrossRef
Efficacy for Whitlockite for Augmenting Spinal Fusion Su Yeon Kwon, Jung Hee Shim, Yu Ha Kim, Chang Su Lim, Seong Bae An, Inbo Han International Journal of Molecular Sciences.2021; 22(23): 12875. CrossRef
First
Prev
