Cargando…

Stand-alone ALIF versus TLIF in patients with low back pain – A propensity-matched cohort study with two-year follow-up

INTRODUCTION: Instrumented lumbar fusion by either the anterior or transforaminal approach has different advantages and disadvantages. Few studies have compared PatientReported Outcomes Measures (PROMs) between stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion (SA-ALIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbod...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Toma, Ali A., Hallager, Dennis W., Bech, Rune D., Carreon, Leah Y., Andersen, Mikkel Ø., Udby, Peter M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10668097/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38021018
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bas.2023.102713
_version_ 1785149076239548416
author Toma, Ali A.
Hallager, Dennis W.
Bech, Rune D.
Carreon, Leah Y.
Andersen, Mikkel Ø.
Udby, Peter M.
author_facet Toma, Ali A.
Hallager, Dennis W.
Bech, Rune D.
Carreon, Leah Y.
Andersen, Mikkel Ø.
Udby, Peter M.
author_sort Toma, Ali A.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Instrumented lumbar fusion by either the anterior or transforaminal approach has different advantages and disadvantages. Few studies have compared PatientReported Outcomes Measures (PROMs) between stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion (SA-ALIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). RESEARCH QUESTION: This is a register-based dual-center study on patients with severe disc degeneration (DD) and low back pain (LBP) undergoing single-level SA-ALIF or TLIF. Comparing PROMs, including disability, quality of life, back- and leg-pain and patient satisfaction two years after SA-ALIF or TLIF, respectively. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data were collected preoperatively and at one and two-year follow-up. The primary outcome was Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The secondary outcomes were patient satisfaction, walking ability, visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back and leg pain, and quality of life (QoL) measured by the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) index score. To reduce baseline differences between groups, propensity-score matching was employed in a 1:1 fashion. RESULTS: 92 patients were matched, 46 S A-ALIF and 46 TLIF. They were comparable preoperatively, with no significant difference in demographic data or PROMs (P > 0.10). Both groups obtained statistically significant improvement in the ODI, QoL and VAS-score (P < 0.01), but no significant difference was observed (P = 0.14). No statistically significant differences in EQ-5D index scores (P = 0.25), VAS score for leg pain (P = 0.88) and back pain (P = 0.37) at two years follow-up. CONCLUSION: Significant improvements in ODI, VAS-scores for back and leg pain, and EQ-5D index score were registered after two-year follow-up with both SA-ALIF and TLIF. No significant differences in improvement.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10668097
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106680972023-11-14 Stand-alone ALIF versus TLIF in patients with low back pain – A propensity-matched cohort study with two-year follow-up Toma, Ali A. Hallager, Dennis W. Bech, Rune D. Carreon, Leah Y. Andersen, Mikkel Ø. Udby, Peter M. Brain Spine Article INTRODUCTION: Instrumented lumbar fusion by either the anterior or transforaminal approach has different advantages and disadvantages. Few studies have compared PatientReported Outcomes Measures (PROMs) between stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion (SA-ALIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). RESEARCH QUESTION: This is a register-based dual-center study on patients with severe disc degeneration (DD) and low back pain (LBP) undergoing single-level SA-ALIF or TLIF. Comparing PROMs, including disability, quality of life, back- and leg-pain and patient satisfaction two years after SA-ALIF or TLIF, respectively. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data were collected preoperatively and at one and two-year follow-up. The primary outcome was Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The secondary outcomes were patient satisfaction, walking ability, visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back and leg pain, and quality of life (QoL) measured by the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) index score. To reduce baseline differences between groups, propensity-score matching was employed in a 1:1 fashion. RESULTS: 92 patients were matched, 46 S A-ALIF and 46 TLIF. They were comparable preoperatively, with no significant difference in demographic data or PROMs (P > 0.10). Both groups obtained statistically significant improvement in the ODI, QoL and VAS-score (P < 0.01), but no significant difference was observed (P = 0.14). No statistically significant differences in EQ-5D index scores (P = 0.25), VAS score for leg pain (P = 0.88) and back pain (P = 0.37) at two years follow-up. CONCLUSION: Significant improvements in ODI, VAS-scores for back and leg pain, and EQ-5D index score were registered after two-year follow-up with both SA-ALIF and TLIF. No significant differences in improvement. Elsevier 2023-11-14 /pmc/articles/PMC10668097/ /pubmed/38021018 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bas.2023.102713 Text en © 2023 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Toma, Ali A.
Hallager, Dennis W.
Bech, Rune D.
Carreon, Leah Y.
Andersen, Mikkel Ø.
Udby, Peter M.
Stand-alone ALIF versus TLIF in patients with low back pain – A propensity-matched cohort study with two-year follow-up
title Stand-alone ALIF versus TLIF in patients with low back pain – A propensity-matched cohort study with two-year follow-up
title_full Stand-alone ALIF versus TLIF in patients with low back pain – A propensity-matched cohort study with two-year follow-up
title_fullStr Stand-alone ALIF versus TLIF in patients with low back pain – A propensity-matched cohort study with two-year follow-up
title_full_unstemmed Stand-alone ALIF versus TLIF in patients with low back pain – A propensity-matched cohort study with two-year follow-up
title_short Stand-alone ALIF versus TLIF in patients with low back pain – A propensity-matched cohort study with two-year follow-up
title_sort stand-alone alif versus tlif in patients with low back pain – a propensity-matched cohort study with two-year follow-up
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10668097/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38021018
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bas.2023.102713
work_keys_str_mv AT tomaalia standalonealifversustlifinpatientswithlowbackpainapropensitymatchedcohortstudywithtwoyearfollowup
AT hallagerdennisw standalonealifversustlifinpatientswithlowbackpainapropensitymatchedcohortstudywithtwoyearfollowup
AT bechruned standalonealifversustlifinpatientswithlowbackpainapropensitymatchedcohortstudywithtwoyearfollowup
AT carreonleahy standalonealifversustlifinpatientswithlowbackpainapropensitymatchedcohortstudywithtwoyearfollowup
AT andersenmikkelø standalonealifversustlifinpatientswithlowbackpainapropensitymatchedcohortstudywithtwoyearfollowup
AT udbypeterm standalonealifversustlifinpatientswithlowbackpainapropensitymatchedcohortstudywithtwoyearfollowup