Introduction The most effective treatment of patients with FBSS depends on a precise and accurate diagnosis of the altered anatomy and physiology. With a careful history, examination, imaging studies, psychological evaluation and diagnostic injections, a diagnosis can be reached in over 90% of patients. More precise methods including pain blocks may be needed to answer where is the pain coming from and why is it persisting?

Introduction to transforaminal endoscopy: the "inside out" technique

Conventional fluoroscopically guided continuous radiofrequency (CRF) and pulsed Radiofrequency (PRF) lesioning of the medial branch, dorsal ramus, a standard technique to treat facet pain, is compared to an endoscopic visually guided technique. The endoscopic technique (Figure 1) is designed to ablate a larger area of the transverse process where the medial branch crosses to innervate the facet. Endoscopically guided visualization provides confirmation of nerve ablation or transection in the most common location of the branches of the dorsal ramus innervating the facet joint. Fig. 1 Surgical setup for ablation of the medial, intermediate and lateral branches of the dorsal ramus. A retrospective non randomized study of 50 initial patients assessed the efficacy of endoscopic rhizotomy. Patients with lumbar spondylosis and facet arthrosis who had at least 50% pain relief by medial branch blocks met the inclusion criteria for the visualized, surgically directed endoscopic technique. A specially designed cannula and endoscope (Richard Wolf, GmBh) (Figure 2) was developed specifically for this purpose. After completion of the initial 50 patient pilot study in 2005, utilizing a low-temperature, ultra-high frequency (1.7-4.0 MHz) bipolar energy radiofrequency source (Elliquence Int, Hewlett, NY) that demonstrated efficacy, 400 subsequent patients were added to this retrospective study by May 2013. The surgical technique refinement was guided by cadaveric variations observed from additional cadaver dissections (Figure 3) and endoscopic visualization of foraminal nerves that revealed variable locations of the dorsal ramus, including the medial branch. The anatomic variations supported a need for visualized rhizotomy. The inclusion criteria also involved increasing the percentage of back pain relief from medial branch blocks to a base of 75% estimated improvement in order to overcome the variable subjectiveness of a 50% improvement threshold that served to disappoint a small percentage of patients who overestimated the reported 50% improvement in hopes that they would qualify for the endoscopic guided procedure. Fig. 2 Richard Wolf YESS Rhizotomy Set. The cannulas, endoscope, bitip and surgical bipolar RF probes by Elliquence are configured ergonomically to provide excellent focal length imaging to keep image in focus with the endoscope scope resting on cannula. The bitip probe cuts tissue, and the RF probe thermally ablates tissue efficiently.Fig. 3 Cadaver dissection of the dorsal ramus and its branches out- lining the areas where branches of the dorsal ramus may be visualized and ablated before it reaches the facet joint. At one year follow-up in the initial study design, VAS improved 6.2-2.5, and ODI 48-28. All patients had VAS improvement equal or greater than injection. The results remained constant with additional surgical cases that continued to improve when technique and visualized rhizotomy allowed for greater surgical exploration and ablation of the targeted zone where more than just the medial branch could be ablated. Approximately 10 percent of the patients returned at one and two year follow-up with mild recurrence of their axial back pain, but none to the original level of pain. Additional rhizotomy of the upper lumbar facets provided additional relief in selected patients. The cadaver studies demonstrated considerable variability in the location of the medial and lateral branches of the dorsal ramus. Variability was most common cephalad to L3-4. The dorsal ramus and its nerve branches can also be visualized in the foramen ventral to the intertransverse ligament. Neuromas and entrapment of the dorsal ramus has been identified endoscopically, and confirmed by H and E slides (Figure 4). In the upper lumbar spine, we were not able to find the medial branch to the facets consistently at same location. The nerve to the facet joint did not always cross the transverse process. Some branches enter the facet joint before crossing the transverse process adjacent to the tip of the SAP (Figure 5). The nerve can be mistaken for a furcal nerve or foraminal ligament. Nerve Ablation at above L3-4 levels may require lesioning of the dorsal ramus or targeting the nerve innervation on the facet wall, pedicle or capsule. Fig. 4 This H and E slide of the biopsied specimen is consistent with a peripheral nerve fiber.Fig. 5 This foraminal view of a branch of the dorsal ramus is in the foramen at the level of the SAP. The nerve runs along the ventral lateral aspect of the superior facet to the tip, and can also run in the vicinity of the foraminal ligament. Endoscopic rasps, trephines, kerrisons, and burrs can be used for foraminoplasty. The nerve should be preserved, if possible, but transection of a branch of the dorsal ramus contributes to axial back pain relief. Branches of the dorsal ramus originates in the foramen before exiting to traverse the transverse process. These nerves are difficult to differentiate from furcal nerves arising from the spinal nerves. Palpating the nerve using local anesthesia can sometimes demonstrate a pain response, but not always, depending on the level of sedation and anesthetic use. Endoscopically guided facet rhizotomy provides more consistent ablation of the medial and lateral branches of the lumbar dorsal ramus compared to radiographically guided pulsed radiofrequency. The variations in the location of facet innervation can explain the variability of clinical results in fluoroscopically guided RF lesioning. This observation dictates a need for visually guided MIS procedure for best results.

Personalized care models are dominating modern medicine. These models are rooted in teaching future physicians the skill set to keep up with innovation. In orthopedic surgery and neurosurgery, education is increasingly influenced by augmented reality, simulation, navigation, robotics, and in some cases, artificial intelligence. The postpandemic learning environment has also changed, emphasizing online learning and skill- and competency-based teaching models incorporating clinical and bench-top research. Attempts to improve work–life balance and minimize physician burnout have led to work-hour restrictions in postgraduate training programs. These restrictions have made it particularly challenging for orthopedic and neurosurgery residents to acquire the knowledge and skill set to meet the requirements for certification. The fast-paced flow of information and the rapid implementation of innovation require higher efficiencies in the modern postgraduate training environment. However, what is taught typically lags several years behind. Examples include minimally invasive tissue-sparing techniques through tubular small-bladed retractor systems, robotic and navigation, endoscopic, patient-specific implants made possible by advances in imaging technology and 3D printing, and regenerative strategies. Currently, the traditional roles of mentee and mentor are being redefined. The future orthopedic surgeons and neurosurgeons involved in personalized surgical pain management will need to be versed in several disciplines ranging from bioengineering, basic research, computer, social and health sciences, clinical study, trial design, public health policy development, and economic accountability. Solutions to the fast-paced innovation cycle in orthopedic surgery and neurosurgery include adaptive learning skills to seize opportunities for innovation with execution and implementation by facilitating translational research and clinical program development across traditional boundaries between clinical and nonclinical specialties. Preparing the future generation of surgeons to have the aptitude to keep up with the rapid technological advances is challenging for postgraduate residency programs and accreditation agencies. However, implementing clinical protocol change when the entrepreneur–investigator surgeon substantiates it with high-grade clinical evidence is at the heart of personalized surgical pain management.

Early and staged endoscopic management of common pain generators in the spine

(1) Background: Postoperative nerve root injury with dysesthesia is the most frequent sequela following lumbar endoscopic transforaminal discectomy. At times, it may be accompanied by transient and rarely by permanent motor weakness. The authors hypothesized that direct compression of the exiting nerve root and its dorsal root ganglion (DRG) by manipulating the working cannula or endoscopic instruments may play a role. (2) Objective: To assess whether intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring can help prevent nerve root injury by identifying neurophysiological events during the initial placement of the endoscopic working cannula and the directly visualized video endoscopic procedure. (3) Methods: The authors performed a retrospective chart review of 65 (35 female and 30 male) patients who underwent transforaminal endoscopic decompression for failed non-operative treatment of lumbar disc herniation from 2012 to 2020. The patients’ age ranged from 22 to 86 years, with an average of 51.75 years. Patients in the experimental group (32 patients) had intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring recordings using sensory evoked (SSEP), and transcranial motor evoked potentials (TCEP), those in the control group (32 patients) did not. The SSEP and TCMEP data were analyzed and correlated to the postoperative course, including dysesthesia and clinical outcomes using modified Macnab criteria, Oswestry disability index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) for leg and back pain. (4) Results: The surgical levels were L4/L5 in 44.6%, L5/S1 in 23.1%, and L3/L4 in 9.2%. Of the 65 patients, 56.9% (37/65) had surgery on the left, 36.9% (24/65) on the right, and the remaining 6.2% (4/65) underwent bilateral decompression. Postoperative dysesthesia occurred in 2 patients in the experimental and six patients in the control group. In the experimental neuromonitoring group, there was electrodiagnostic evidence of compression of the exiting nerve root’s DRG in 24 (72.7%) of the 32 patients after initial transforaminal placement of the working cannula. A 5% or more decrease and a 50% or more decrease in amplitude of SSEPs and TCEPs recordings of the exiting nerve root were resolved by repositioning the working cannula or by pausing the root manipulation until recovery to baseline, which typically occurred within an average of 1.15 min. In 15 of the 24 patients with such latency and amplitude changes, a foraminoplasty was performed before advancing the endoscopic working cannula via the transforaminal approach into the neuroforamen to avoid an impeding nerve root injury and postoperative dysesthesia. (5) Conclusion: Neuromonitoring enabled the intraoperative diagnosis of DRG compression during the initial transforaminal placement of the endoscopic working cannula. Future studies with more statistical power will have to investigate whether employing neuromonitoring to avoid intraoperative compression of the exiting nerve root is predictive of lower postoperative dysesthesia rates in patients undergoing videoendoscopic transforaminal discectomy.