Endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) offers substantial advantages in the management of degenerative spinal diseases, including accelerated postoperative recovery. However, its technical complexity and steep learning curve pose risks for nerve root injury. Optimizing nerve root protection in full-endoscopic facet-sparing TLIF (FE fs-TLIF) and full-endoscopic facet-resecting TLIF (FE fr-TLIF) is essential for enhancing surgical safety. This study aimed to improve the nerve root protection in FE fs-TLIF and FE fr-TLIF by optimizing cage glider selection and insertion techniques based on the specific cage shape—banana-shaped or bullet-shaped. The goal was to ensure safe cage positioning and mitigate nerve root injury during discectomy, endplate preparation, and cage insertion. These strategies were validated through cadaveric simulations and clinical implementation. In FE fr-TLIF utilizing bullet-shaped (straight) cages, one-tip and two-tip cage gliders effectively protected the traversing nerve root by facilitating medial cage entry, thereby minimizing irritation of the exiting nerve root. Conversely, in FE fr-TLIF with banana-shaped cages, the lateral tilt of the cage holder during implantation required the use of a two-tip cage glider to protect the traversing and exiting nerve roots, thereby mitigating the potential risk of nerve irritation. In FE fs-TLIF, a one-tip cage glider is preferred for safeguarding the exiting nerve root, while the traversing root is inherently protected by the medial wall of the facet joint. The use of a two-tip cage glider in FE fs-TLIF can cause injury to the nerve root during glider insertion. In addition to the selection of cage gliders, improper cage insertion steps can also contribute to postoperative neurapraxia. The appropriate selection of cage gliders with corresponding insertion techniques is critical for nerve root protection in endoscopic TLIF. Tailoring these choices to the specific approach (FE fs-TLIF or FE fr-TLIF) and cage type (banana or bullet) enhances surgical safety and clinical outcomes.

Background/Aims: Distal mean nocturnal baseline impedance (MNBI) measuring via pH-impedance may be valuable in diagnosing patients with suspected laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). However, its wide adoption is hindered by cost and invasiveness. This study investigates whether baseline impedance measured during high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM-BI) can predict pathological MNBI. Methods: A cross-sectional study in Taiwan included 74 subjects suspected of LPR, who underwent HRIM (MMS) and pH-impedance testing (Diversatek), after stopping proton pump inhibitors for more than 7 days. Subjects with grade C or D esophagitis or Barrett’s esophagus were excluded. The cohort was divided into 2 groups: those with concomitant typical reflux symptoms (CTRS, n = 28) and those with isolated LPR symptoms (ILPRS, n = 46). HRIM-BI measurements focused on both distal and proximal esophagi. Pathological MNBI was identified as values below 2065 Ω, measured 3 cm above the lower esophageal sphincter. Results: In all subjects, distal HRIM-BI values correlated weakly with distal MNBI(r = 0.34-0.39, P < 0.005). However, in patients with ILPRS, distal HRIM-BI corelated moderately with distal MNBI(r = 0.43-0.48, P < 0.005). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.78 (P = 0.001) with a sensitivity of 0.83 and a specificity of 0.68. No correlation exists between distal HRIM-BI and distal MNBI in patients with CTRS, and between proximal HRIM-BI and proximal MNBI in both groups. Conclusions Distal HRIM-BI from HRIM may potentially predict pathological MNBI in patients with ILPRS, but not in those with CTRS. Future outcome studies linked to the metric are warranted.

Background/Aims: Distal mean nocturnal baseline impedance (MNBI) measuring via pH-impedance may be valuable in diagnosing patients with suspected laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). However, its wide adoption is hindered by cost and invasiveness. This study investigates whether baseline impedance measured during high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM-BI) can predict pathological MNBI. Methods: A cross-sectional study in Taiwan included 74 subjects suspected of LPR, who underwent HRIM (MMS) and pH-impedance testing (Diversatek), after stopping proton pump inhibitors for more than 7 days. Subjects with grade C or D esophagitis or Barrett’s esophagus were excluded. The cohort was divided into 2 groups: those with concomitant typical reflux symptoms (CTRS, n = 28) and those with isolated LPR symptoms (ILPRS, n = 46). HRIM-BI measurements focused on both distal and proximal esophagi. Pathological MNBI was identified as values below 2065 Ω, measured 3 cm above the lower esophageal sphincter. Results: In all subjects, distal HRIM-BI values correlated weakly with distal MNBI(r = 0.34-0.39, P < 0.005). However, in patients with ILPRS, distal HRIM-BI corelated moderately with distal MNBI(r = 0.43-0.48, P < 0.005). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.78 (P = 0.001) with a sensitivity of 0.83 and a specificity of 0.68. No correlation exists between distal HRIM-BI and distal MNBI in patients with CTRS, and between proximal HRIM-BI and proximal MNBI in both groups. Conclusions Distal HRIM-BI from HRIM may potentially predict pathological MNBI in patients with ILPRS, but not in those with CTRS. Future outcome studies linked to the metric are warranted.

Background/Aims: Distal mean nocturnal baseline impedance (MNBI) measuring via pH-impedance may be valuable in diagnosing patients with suspected laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR). However, its wide adoption is hindered by cost and invasiveness. This study investigates whether baseline impedance measured during high-resolution impedance manometry (HRIM-BI) can predict pathological MNBI. Methods: A cross-sectional study in Taiwan included 74 subjects suspected of LPR, who underwent HRIM (MMS) and pH-impedance testing (Diversatek), after stopping proton pump inhibitors for more than 7 days. Subjects with grade C or D esophagitis or Barrett’s esophagus were excluded. The cohort was divided into 2 groups: those with concomitant typical reflux symptoms (CTRS, n = 28) and those with isolated LPR symptoms (ILPRS, n = 46). HRIM-BI measurements focused on both distal and proximal esophagi. Pathological MNBI was identified as values below 2065 Ω, measured 3 cm above the lower esophageal sphincter. Results: In all subjects, distal HRIM-BI values correlated weakly with distal MNBI(r = 0.34-0.39, P < 0.005). However, in patients with ILPRS, distal HRIM-BI corelated moderately with distal MNBI(r = 0.43-0.48, P < 0.005). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.78 (P = 0.001) with a sensitivity of 0.83 and a specificity of 0.68. No correlation exists between distal HRIM-BI and distal MNBI in patients with CTRS, and between proximal HRIM-BI and proximal MNBI in both groups. Conclusions Distal HRIM-BI from HRIM may potentially predict pathological MNBI in patients with ILPRS, but not in those with CTRS. Future outcome studies linked to the metric are warranted.

This video presents a case of L4–5 unstable spondylolisthesis treated with full-endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF), emphasizing the GUARD (Glider Used as a Rotary Device) technique for nerve root protection. This innovative approach involves controlled rotation of the cage glider before cage insertion to minimize the risk of nerve root injury, a significant complication in Endo-TLIF procedures. The GUARD technique, validated in previous cadaveric studies, provides enhanced safety during cage insertion by protecting the nerve root. A 48-year-old woman with a 3-year history of progressive low back pain and bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy (right-sided predominance) was diagnosed with L4–5 unstable spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis. After failure of conservative management, she underwent uniportal full-endoscopic facet-resecting transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using the GUARD technique. Postoperatively, the patient experienced significant symptomatic improvement and resolution of radiculopathy, without any intraoperative nerve root injury or postoperative neurological deficits. This case demonstrates the effectiveness of the GUARD technique in reducing neurological complications and improving patient outcomes.

Objective: Uniportal full-endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (FE-TLIF) carries a unique risk of nerve traction and abrasion injury during cage insertion. This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the GUARD technique and delayed ligamentum flavectomy in reducing postoperative radicular pain and neurapraxia in patients undergoing uniportal FE-TLIF. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 45 patients with an average age of 53.9±12.4 years who underwent either FE facet-sparing TLIF (FE fs-TLIF) or FE facet-resecting TLIF (FE fr-TLIF). Patients were divided into 2 groups: the sentinel group (21 patients) using traditional sentinel pin techniques, and the GUARD group (24 patients) using the GUARD technique with delayed ligamentum flavectomy. Patient-reported outcomes included the visual analogue scale (VAS) for leg and back pain, and Oswestry Disability Index. Complication rates, including incidental durotomy, postoperative neurapraxia, and hematoma, were also documented. Results: Postoperative radicular pain in the legs was significantly reduced at 6 weeks in the GUARD group compared to the sentinel group (VAS: 2.201 vs. 3.267, p=0.021). The incidence of postoperative neurapraxia was markedly lower in the GUARD group (0% vs. 19%, p=0.047). Both groups showed similar improvements in disc height, segmental lordosis, and lumbar lordosis at the 1-year follow-up, with no significant differences in endplate injury or fusion rates. Conclusion The GUARD technique and delayed ligamentum flavectomy significantly enhance patient safety by reducing postoperative radicular pain and neurapraxia without incurring additional costs. These techniques are easy to learn and integrate into existing surgical workflows, offering a valuable improvement for surgeons performing FE-TLIF procedures.

This video presents a case of L4–5 unstable spondylolisthesis treated with full-endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF), emphasizing the GUARD (Glider Used as a Rotary Device) technique for nerve root protection. This innovative approach involves controlled rotation of the cage glider before cage insertion to minimize the risk of nerve root injury, a significant complication in Endo-TLIF procedures. The GUARD technique, validated in previous cadaveric studies, provides enhanced safety during cage insertion by protecting the nerve root. A 48-year-old woman with a 3-year history of progressive low back pain and bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy (right-sided predominance) was diagnosed with L4–5 unstable spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis. After failure of conservative management, she underwent uniportal full-endoscopic facet-resecting transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using the GUARD technique. Postoperatively, the patient experienced significant symptomatic improvement and resolution of radiculopathy, without any intraoperative nerve root injury or postoperative neurological deficits. This case demonstrates the effectiveness of the GUARD technique in reducing neurological complications and improving patient outcomes.

Objective: Uniportal full-endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (FE-TLIF) carries a unique risk of nerve traction and abrasion injury during cage insertion. This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the GUARD technique and delayed ligamentum flavectomy in reducing postoperative radicular pain and neurapraxia in patients undergoing uniportal FE-TLIF. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 45 patients with an average age of 53.9±12.4 years who underwent either FE facet-sparing TLIF (FE fs-TLIF) or FE facet-resecting TLIF (FE fr-TLIF). Patients were divided into 2 groups: the sentinel group (21 patients) using traditional sentinel pin techniques, and the GUARD group (24 patients) using the GUARD technique with delayed ligamentum flavectomy. Patient-reported outcomes included the visual analogue scale (VAS) for leg and back pain, and Oswestry Disability Index. Complication rates, including incidental durotomy, postoperative neurapraxia, and hematoma, were also documented. Results: Postoperative radicular pain in the legs was significantly reduced at 6 weeks in the GUARD group compared to the sentinel group (VAS: 2.201 vs. 3.267, p=0.021). The incidence of postoperative neurapraxia was markedly lower in the GUARD group (0% vs. 19%, p=0.047). Both groups showed similar improvements in disc height, segmental lordosis, and lumbar lordosis at the 1-year follow-up, with no significant differences in endplate injury or fusion rates. Conclusion The GUARD technique and delayed ligamentum flavectomy significantly enhance patient safety by reducing postoperative radicular pain and neurapraxia without incurring additional costs. These techniques are easy to learn and integrate into existing surgical workflows, offering a valuable improvement for surgeons performing FE-TLIF procedures.

This video presents a case of L4–5 unstable spondylolisthesis treated with full-endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF), emphasizing the GUARD (Glider Used as a Rotary Device) technique for nerve root protection. This innovative approach involves controlled rotation of the cage glider before cage insertion to minimize the risk of nerve root injury, a significant complication in Endo-TLIF procedures. The GUARD technique, validated in previous cadaveric studies, provides enhanced safety during cage insertion by protecting the nerve root. A 48-year-old woman with a 3-year history of progressive low back pain and bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy (right-sided predominance) was diagnosed with L4–5 unstable spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis. After failure of conservative management, she underwent uniportal full-endoscopic facet-resecting transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using the GUARD technique. Postoperatively, the patient experienced significant symptomatic improvement and resolution of radiculopathy, without any intraoperative nerve root injury or postoperative neurological deficits. This case demonstrates the effectiveness of the GUARD technique in reducing neurological complications and improving patient outcomes.

Objective: Uniportal full-endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (FE-TLIF) carries a unique risk of nerve traction and abrasion injury during cage insertion. This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the GUARD technique and delayed ligamentum flavectomy in reducing postoperative radicular pain and neurapraxia in patients undergoing uniportal FE-TLIF. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 45 patients with an average age of 53.9±12.4 years who underwent either FE facet-sparing TLIF (FE fs-TLIF) or FE facet-resecting TLIF (FE fr-TLIF). Patients were divided into 2 groups: the sentinel group (21 patients) using traditional sentinel pin techniques, and the GUARD group (24 patients) using the GUARD technique with delayed ligamentum flavectomy. Patient-reported outcomes included the visual analogue scale (VAS) for leg and back pain, and Oswestry Disability Index. Complication rates, including incidental durotomy, postoperative neurapraxia, and hematoma, were also documented. Results: Postoperative radicular pain in the legs was significantly reduced at 6 weeks in the GUARD group compared to the sentinel group (VAS: 2.201 vs. 3.267, p=0.021). The incidence of postoperative neurapraxia was markedly lower in the GUARD group (0% vs. 19%, p=0.047). Both groups showed similar improvements in disc height, segmental lordosis, and lumbar lordosis at the 1-year follow-up, with no significant differences in endplate injury or fusion rates. Conclusion The GUARD technique and delayed ligamentum flavectomy significantly enhance patient safety by reducing postoperative radicular pain and neurapraxia without incurring additional costs. These techniques are easy to learn and integrate into existing surgical workflows, offering a valuable improvement for surgeons performing FE-TLIF procedures.