Forum Replies Created

Viewing 6 posts - 43 through 48 (of 113 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • Renee123
    Participant
    Post count: 130

    You seem to have the most conservative method of fusion, which is the most sensible and proven.

    The disturbing part of all of this is there are many large reputable spine clinics that I have spoken to that use the expandable tri-tranium cage for MIS TLIF and OPEN TLIF. Based on my research of the cage being recommended, it does seem to pack less bone and I never thought about it, but who wants the mechanical screw device growing in their spine.

    The reasons given for the tri-tanium is that it can be made porous or with large holes on the sides for the bone to grow through. The justification for the expandable cage is to restore lordosis.

    In addition the cage is steerable and can be place nicely at the front of the spine. I don’t know if BMP can be place in front of this cage or not.

    Please let me know your thoughts. Keep in mind, there are not many surgeons that do what you do i.e. microscope, 2 inch incision, O arm, BMP (usually just used for revision), GPS screw placement. You are way ahead of the curve.

    Renee123
    Participant
    Post count: 130

    “The pain is not generated from the muscle but from stretching the collapsed annulus that is typical with all fusions for degenerative discs. If the disc height is not restored, there is less pain but less restored alignment.”

    What did you mean by this ?

    Also, what is osteolysis ?

    Your argument for boomerang over expandable cage again makes logical sense. If the whole point of the TLIF is to fuse then why on earth would I want to use a smaller cage ? Do you happen to know the size of the bommerang cage ?

    My surgeon tells me that the industry is moving away from peek cages and using tri-titanium for TLIF.

    Renee123
    Participant
    Post count: 130

    So I assume a long mid line incision through the back could generate residual pain and muscle stripping?

    I have consulted with some top surgeons. None of them use microscope or O arm for open TLIF. They do an open incision and place pedicle screws with microscope glasses. Most do not use boomerang cage, some are moving to tri-tanium cage or expandable cages.

    They all have a 4-8inch incision and is the reason for MIS TLIF.

    In addition when it comes to BMP most surgeons are not well versed on where it goes and why. I had a surgeon tell me he would do a PLIF with two cadevor bones inserted in place of cage and put BMP in the middle and not on the sides. Does that sound right to you ?

    Most surgeons do not communicate the way you do. They say one thing and then flip flop. They do not like to be questioned and when they are they always have a different way to do the surgery. Unlike yourself, where you have one set way and you do not deviate from what works for you.

    You have a real passion for helping people. I appreciate your help.

    Renee123
    Participant
    Post count: 130

    Im not disagreeing with you, just letting you know what I’m hearing.

    I believe the reason why surgeons warn about muscle stripping is because they make 4-8 inch incision in back. They say the need to get long enough to get wide enough. Whereas you have a two inch incision and use microscope.

    Perhaps there is less recovery with your incision.

    I would love to meet you someday. A lot of this is just common sense and I seem to follow your logic. I may have to fly all the way to Vail !

    Renee123
    Participant
    Post count: 130

    Thank you and I whole heartedly agree with all of your points.

    With regard to muscle stripping, I sense that surgeons like to avoid open back surgery from a pain stand point. Most will say that muscle stripping or open incision is a long, painful recovery and residual scar tissue with midline incision can cause pain indefinitely.

    Thoughts ?

    Renee123
    Participant
    Post count: 130

    many surgeons are now recommending MIS TLIF with BMP in a V shaped expandable cage for isthmic spondylolisthesis?

    The thought is that there is less muscle stripping and lordosis is better with expandable cage, in addition BMP will fuse faster, however no posterolateral fusion.

    I have read your previous comments about MIS TLIF and it is interesting to hear about the expansion mechanism causing endplate fracture.

    Most surgeons would probably never admit to expansion mechanism causing fracture.

    Do you still feel the same about MIS TLIF with BMP ?

    Thank you

Viewing 6 posts - 43 through 48 (of 113 total)