NuVasive’s X360 Procedural Approach is Validated in Clinical Study

It’s official: Data has proven that NuVasive Inc.’s X360 approach to lateral single-position surgery is beneficial to patients.

A study published in the Spine Journal (“Single position circumferential fusion improves operative efficiency, reduces complications and length of stay compared with traditional circumferential fusion”) validates single-position spine surgery as having significant advantages over traditional, open spinal fusion.

“As an early adopter of the NuVasive X360 system, the clinical benefits and operative efficiency of single-position surgery over traditional surgery, that requires patient repositioning, continue to be proven throughout my practice,” said Dr. Aaron Buckland, spine and scoliosis surgeon at Melbourne Orthopaedic Group in Melbourne, Australia. “The results of this study further validate that this practice-changing technique leads to clear benefits for the patient, surgeon and provider.”
 
The multi-center, retrospective study included 390 patients who underwent anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and/or lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) surgery with bilateral percutaneous pedicle screw fixation between L2-S1. Two hundred and thirty-seven patients underwent single-position lateral surgery (SPLS) and 153 underwent a “flip” surgery. The study found that SPLS reduced operating time by more than three hours, and led to a reduction in blood loss and intraoperative radiation dosage for the patient. Further, patients who underwent SPLS experienced lower postoperative intestinal blockage (ileus), and their length of stay in the hospital was reduced on average by two days.  
 
The results of this study build upon other clinical evidence validating X360, NuVasive’s comprehensive approach to lateral single-position surgery that combines XLIF, XALIF, and XFixation, and is clinically proven to provide better outcomes over traditional open spinal fusion, including: 
 

• Improved clinical outcomes with >95 percent fusion1 rates and up to 90 percent reduction in blood loss;¹
• Reduced operative time by up to 60 minutes,² resulting in less time under anesthesia and 50 percent shorter length of stay in the hospital;³ and 
• Enhanced economics with up to a 20 percent increase in case volumes⁴ and as much as $5,000 saved per patient in hospital costs.^5,6

 
References
¹ Lehmen JA, Gerber EJ. MIS lateral spine surgery: a systematic literature review of complications, outcomes, and economics. Eur Spine J 2015;24(Suppl 3):S287-313.
² Drazin D, Kim TT, Johnson JP. Simultaneous lateral interbody fusion and posterior percutaneous instrumentation: early experience and technical considerations. Biomed Res Int2015:Article ID 458284.
³ Lucio JC, VanConia RB, DeLuzio KJ, et al. Economics of less invasive spinal surgery: an analysis of hospital cost differences between open and minimally invasive instrumented spinal fusion procedures during the perioperative period. Risk Manag Healthc Policy 2012;5:65-74.
⁴ Rodgers WB, Gerber EJ, Rodgers JAK. MIS v open spine surgery: the impact on a surgeon’s efficiency. Society of Lateral Access Surgery (SOLAS®) 2010 annual meeting. San Diego, CA.
⁵ Macario A. What does one minute of operating room time cost? J Clin Anesth 2010;22(4):233-6.
⁶ Shippert RD. A study of time-dependent operating room fees and how to save $100,000 by using time-saving products. Am J Cosmet Surg 2005;22(1):25-34.