Peter N. Drossopoulos

Peter N. Drossopoulos


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

3Years (2024-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
14 April 2024 in Journal of Clinical Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PDPeter N. Drossopoulos
Peter N. Drossopoulos
FOFavour Ononogbu-Uche
Favour Ononogbu-Uche
TTTroy Q Tabarestani
Troy Q Tabarestani
CHChuan-Ching Huang
Chuan-Ching Huang
MPMounica Paturu
Mounica Paturu
MAMuhammad M Abd-El-Barr
Muhammad M Abd-El-Barr
The transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has seen significant evolution since its early inception, reflecting advancements in surgical techniques, patient safety, and outcomes. Originally described as an improvement over the posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), the TLIF began as an open surgical procedure, that notably reduced the need for the extensive neural retractation that hindered the PLIF. In line with the broader practice of surgery, trending toward minimally invasive access, the TLIF was followed by the development of the minimally invasive TLIF (MIS-TLIF), a technique that further decreased tissue trauma and postoperative complications. Subsequent advancements, including Trans-Kambin’s Triangle TLIF (percLIF) and transfacet LIF, have continued to refine surgical access, minimize surgical footprint, and reduce the risk of injury to the patient. The latest evolution, as we will describe it, the patient-specific TLIF, is a culmination of the aforementioned adaptations and incorporates advanced imaging and segmentation technologies into perioperative planning, allowing surgeons to tailor approaches based on individual patient anatomy and pathology. These developments signify a shift towards more precise methods in spine surgery. The ongoing evolution of the TLIF technique illustrates the dynamic nature of surgery and emphasizes the need for continued adaptation and refinement.

20 April 2024 in Journal of Clinical Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PDPeter N. Drossopoulos
Peter N. Drossopoulos
ASArnav Sharma
Arnav Sharma
FOFavour Ononogbu-Uche
Favour Ononogbu-Uche
TTTroy Q Tabarestani
Troy Q Tabarestani
ABAlyssa Bartlett
Alyssa Bartlett
MAMuhammad M Abd-El-Barr
Muhammad M Abd-El-Barr
The introduction of minimally invasive surgery ushered in a new era of spine surgery by minimizing the undue iatrogenic injury, recovery time, and blood loss, among other complications, of traditional open procedures. Over time, technological advancements have further refined the care of the operative minimally invasive spine patient. Moreover, pre-, and postoperative care have also undergone significant change by way of artificial intelligence risk stratification, advanced imaging for surgical planning and patient selection, postoperative recovery pathways, and digital health solutions. Despite these advancements, challenges persist necessitating ongoing research and collaboration to further optimize patient care in minimally invasive spine surgery.

16 February 2024 in Journal of Clinical Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
PDPeter N. Drossopoulos
Peter N. Drossopoulos
ABAnas Bardeesi
Anas Bardeesi
TWTimothy Y. Wang
Timothy Y. Wang
CHChuan-Ching Huang
Chuan-Ching Huang
FOFavour Ononogbu-Uche
Favour Ononogbu-Uche
MAMuhammad M Abd-El-Barr
Muhammad M Abd-El-Barr
The Prone Transpsoas (PTP) approach to lumbar spine surgery, emerging as an evolution of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), offers significant advantages over traditional methods. PTP has demonstrated increased lumbar lordosis gains compared to LLIF, owing to the natural increase in lordosis afforded by prone positioning. Additionally, the prone position offers anatomical advantages, with shifts in the psoas muscle and lumbar plexus, reducing the likelihood of postoperative femoral plexopathy and moving critical peritoneal contents away from the approach. Furthermore, operative efficiency is a notable benefit of PTP. By eliminating the need for intraoperative position changes, PTP reduces surgical time, which in turn decreases the risk of complications and operative costs. Finally, its versatility extends to various lumbar pathologies, including degeneration, adjacent segment disease, and deformities. The growing body of evidence indicates that PTP is at least as safe as traditional approaches, with a potentially better complication profile. In this narrative review, we review the historical evolution of lateral interbody fusion, culminating in the prone transpsoas approach. We also describe several adjuncts of PTP, including robotics and radiation-reduction methods. Finally, we illustrate the versatility of PTP and its uses, ranging from ‘simple’ degenerative cases to complex deformity surgeries.

15 April 2024 in Journal of Clinical Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ABAlyssa Bartlett
Alyssa Bartlett
CDChristopher F. Dibble
Christopher F. Dibble
DSDavid B. Sykes
David B. Sykes
PDPeter N. Drossopoulos
Peter N. Drossopoulos
TWTimothy Y. Wang
Timothy Y. Wang
MAMuhammad M Abd-El-Barr
Muhammad M Abd-El-Barr
Background/Objectives: Lateral spine surgery offers effective minimally invasive deformity correction, but traditional approaches often involve separate anterior, lateral, and posterior procedures. The prone lateral technique streamlines this process by allowing single-position access for lateral and posterior surgery, potentially benefiting from the lordosing effect of prone positioning. While previous studies have compared prone lateral to direct lateral for adult degenerative diseases, this retrospective review focuses on the outcomes of adult deformity patients undergoing prone lateral interbody fusion. Methods: Ten adult patients underwent single-position prone lateral surgery for spine deformity correction, with a mean follow-up of 18 months. Results: Results showed significant improvements: sagittal vertical axis decreased by 2.4 cm, lumbar lordosis increased by 9.1°, pelvic tilt improved by 3.3°, segmental lordosis across the fusion construct increased by 12.2°, and coronal Cobb angle improved by 6.3°. These benefits remained consistent over the follow-up period. Correlational analysis showed a positive association between improvements in PROs and SVA and SL. When compared to hybrid approaches, prone lateral yielded greater improvements in SVA. Conclusions: Prone lateral surgery demonstrated favorable outcomes with reasonable perioperative risks. However, further research comparing this technique with standard minimally invasive lateral approaches, hybrid, and open approaches is warranted for a comprehensive evaluation.

3 August 2024 in World Neurosurgery
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GMGraham Mulvaney
Graham Mulvaney
MSMareshah N. Sowah
Mareshah N. Sowah
RDRebecca DeCarlo
Rebecca DeCarlo
PDPeter N. Drossopoulos
Peter N. Drossopoulos
CHChristopher M. Holland
Christopher M. Holland
MBMichael A. Bohl
Michael A. Bohl