Neurosurgery

doi: 10.25005/2074-0581-2021-23-1-39-45
DEVELOPMENT AND PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF AN ORIGINAL METHOD OF MONITORING THE PATENCY OF THE SPINAL SPACES DURING THE REMOVAL OF LUMBOSACRAL LIPOMA

A.A. Sufianov1,2, I.S. Shelyagin1, M.R. Gizatullin2, A.A. Sufianov1

1Department of Neurosurgery, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russian Federation
2Federal Center for Neurosurgery, Tyumen, Russian Federation

Objective: To assess the effectiveness of reconstructive plasty of the dura mater in patients with lumbosacral lipomas (LSL) using an original method for controlling the patency of the spinal spaces.

Methods: The results of examination and treatment of 34 patients with LSL, who were operated on under the control of intraoperative ultrasonography, were analyzed. Before and after reconstructive plasty of the spinal cord and dura mater (DM), the patients underwent measurements of the anterior sagittal, posterior sagittal, common sagittal and common frontal spaces. The control group was represented by 34 patients with craniosynostosis, in whom the pathology of the spine and spinal cord was excluded, and the measurements of the above spinal spaces were taken as the anatomical norm.

Results: Statistically significant differences were revealed between the value of the posterior sagittal space before opening the DM and this indicator under conditions of anatomical norm (p<0.001). No statistically significant differences between this parameter and the anatomical norm were found after reconstruction (p=0.1). The total sagittal and total frontal spaces before opening the DM did not have a statistically significant correlation with the patient’s age (r=0.222, p=0.7 and r=0.214, p=0.82, respectively), while the same values after reconstructive surgery had a significant correlation with the patient’s age (r=0.327, p=0.007 and r=0.392, p=0.001, respectively).

Conclusions: The data obtained using the original method for monitoring the patency of the spinal spaces indicate a high efficiency of reconstructive plasty of the spinal cord and dura mater for lumbosacral lipomas, which is confirmed by statistical calculations.

Keywords: Neurosurgery, spinal cord, lumbosacral lipoma, intraoperative ultrasonography.

Download file:


References
  1. Sufianov AA, Gizatullin MR. Lyumbosakral’naya lipoma [Lumbosacral lipoma]. Moscow, RF: Izdatel’stvo RAMN; 2013. 136 p.
  2. Jones V, Wykes V, Cohen N, Thompson D, Jacques TS. The pathology of lumbosacral lipomas: macroscopic and microscopic disparity have implications for embryogenesis and mode of clinical deterioration. Histopathology. 2018;72(7):1136-44. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/his.13469
  3. Gupta P, Kumar A, Kumar A, Goel S. Congenital spinal cord anomalies: a pictorial review. Curr Probl Diagn Radiol. 2013;42(2):57-66. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1067/j.cpradiol.2012.06.002
  4. Tishchenko GE. Narushenie funktsii nizhnikh mochevydelitel’nykh putey na fone povrezhdeniy i zabolevaniy spinnogo mozga. Spektr diagnosticheskikh protsedur [Dysfunction of the lower urinary tract against the background of injuries and diseases of the spinal cord. Range of diagnostic procedures]. Urologiсheskie vedomosti. 2019;9(S):96-7.
  5. Pang D, Zovickian J, Wong ST, Hou YJ, Moes GS. Surgical treatment of complex spinal cord lipomas. Childs Nerv Syst. 2013;29(9):1485-513. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-013-2187-4
  6. Da Rosa SP, Scavarda D, Choux M. Results of the prophylactic surgery of lumbosacral lipomas 20 years of experience in the Paediatric Neurosurgery Department La Timone Enfants Hospital, Marseille, France. Childs Nerv Syst. 2016;32(11):2205-9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-016- 3198-8
  7. Vora TK, Girishan S, Moorthy RK, Rajshekhar V. Early- and long-term surgical outcomes in 109 children with lipomyelomeningocele. Childs Nerv Syst. 2021 Jan 6. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-020-05000-y. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 3340471
  8. Ficklscherer A, Zhang AZ, Baur-Melnyk A, Knösel T, Jansson V, Dürr HR. Spinal cord damage after resection of destructive spinal lipoma resembling liposarcoma: case report. Spinal Cord Ser Cases. 2016;2:16011. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/scsandc.2016.11
  9. Usami K, Lallemant P, Roujeau T, James S, Beccaria K, Levy R, et al. Spinal lipoma of the filum terminale: review of 174 consecutive patients. Childs Nerv Syst. 2016;32(7):1265-72. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381- 016-3072-8
  10. Pang D. Surgical management of complex spinal cord lipomas: How, why, and when to operate. A review. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2019;23(5):537-56. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3171/2019.2.PEDS18390
  11. Ganau M, Syrmos N, Martin AR, Jiang F, Fehlings MG. Intraoperative ultrasound in spine surgery: history, current applications, future developments. Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2018;8(3):261-7. Available from: https://doi. org/10.21037/qims.2018.04.02
  12. Han B, Wu D, Jia W, Lin S, Xu Y. Intraoperative ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound in surgical treatment of intramedullary spinal tumors. World Neurosurg. 2020;137:e570-e576. Available from: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.wneu.2020.02.059
  13. Vasudeva VS, Abd-El-Barr M, Pompeu YA, Karhade A, Groff MW, Lu Y. Use of intraoperative ultrasound during spinal surgery. Global Spine J. 2017;7(7):648- 56. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568217700100
  14. Ivanov M, Budu A, Sims-Williams H, Poeata I. Using intraoperative ultrasonography for spinal cord tumor surgery. World Neurosurg. 2017;97:104-11. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2016.09.097
  15. Ausili E, Maresca G, Massimi L, Morgante L, Romagnoli C, Rendeli C. Occult spinal dysraphisms in newborns with skin markers: Role of ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging. Childs Nerv Syst. 2018;34(2):285-91. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-017-3638-0
  16. Kang YR, Koo J. Ultrasonography of the pediatric hip and spine. Ultrasonography. 2017;36(3):239-51. Available from: https://doi.org/10.14366/usg.16051
  17. Pang D. Surgical management of complex spinal cord lipomas: A new perspective. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2020;63(3):279-313. Available from: https://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2020.0024
  18. Dhingani DD, Boruah DK, Dutta HK, Gogoi RK. Ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of pediatric spinal anomalies. J Pediatr Neurosci. 2016;11(3):206-12. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4103/1817- 1745.193374
  19. Currarino G, Coln D, Votteler T. Triad of anorectal, sacral, and presacral anomalies. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1981;137(2):395-8. Available from: https://doi. org/10.2214/ajr.137.2.395
  20. Miller JH, Reid BS, Kemberling CR. Utilization of ultrasound in the evaluation of spinal dysraphism in children. Radiology. 1982;143(3):737-40. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.143.3.7079502
  21. Naidich TP, McLone DG, Shkolnik A, Fernbach SK. Sonographic evaluation of caudal spine anomalies in children. Am J Neuroradiol. 1983;4(3):661-4.
  22. Orman G, Tijssen MPM, Seyfert D, Gassner I, Huisman TAGM. Ultrasound to evaluate neonatal spinal dysraphism: A first-line alternative to CT and MRI. J Neuroimaging. 2019;29(5):553-64. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/ jon.12649
  23. Kumar I, Sachan A, Aggarwal P, Verma A, Shukla RC. Structured MRI reporting in spinal dysraphism. Acta Radiol. 2020;61(11):1520-33. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0284185120903445
  24. Cheon JE. Intraoperative neurosonography revisited: Effective neuronavigation in pediatric neurosurgery. Ultrasonography. 2015;34(2):79-87. Available from: https://doi.org/10.14366/usg.14054
  25. Prada F, Vetrano IG, Filippini A, Del Bene M, Perin A, Casali C, et al. Intraoperative ultrasound in spinal tumor surgery. J Ultrasound. 2014;17(3):195-202. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40477-014-0102-9
  26. Alvarado E, Leach J, Caré M, Mangano F, O Hara S. Pediatric spinal ultrasound: Neonatal and intraoperative applications. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2017;38(2):126-42. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1053/j. sult.2016.07.003

Authors informations:

Sufianov Albert Akramovich
Doctor of Medical Sciences, Full Professor, Head of the Department of Neurosurgery, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University; Chief Medical Officer, Federal Center for Neurosurgery ORCID ID: 0000-0001-7580-0385 SPIN: 1722-0448 Author ID: 446102 E-mail: sufianov@gmail.com

Shelyagin Ivan Sergeevich
Resident of the Department of Neurosurgery, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University ORCID ID: 0000-0002-0877-7442 SPIN: 4188-2029 Author ID: 1043290 E-mail: sheliaginivan@outlook.com

Gizatullin Marat Rimovich
Neurosurgeon, Federal Center for Neurosurgery ORCID ID: 0000-0002-6809-4694 E-mail: kutuche@yandex.ru

Sufianov Rinat Albertovich
Assistant of the Department of Neurosurgery, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University ORCID ID: 0000-0003-4031-0540 SPIN: 1204-2994 Author ID: 792245 E-mail: rinat.sufianov@gmail.com

Information about the source of support in the form of grants, equipment, and drugs

The authors did not receive financial support from manufacturers of medicines and medical equipment

Conflict of interest: No conflict

Address for correspondence:

Shelyagin Ivan Sergeevich
Resident of the Department of Neurosurgery, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University

119991, Russian Federation, Moscow, Trubetskaya Str., 8, building 2

Tel.: +7 (919) 9545381

E-mail: sheliaginivan@outlook.com

Materials on the topic: