Cargando…

Does Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Have Advantages over Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis?

Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Objective To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis. Methods This study compared 24 patients undergoing TLIF and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fujimori, Takahito, Le, Hai, Schairer, William W., Berven, Sigurd H., Qamirani, Erion, Hu, Serena S.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4369196/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25844282
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1396432
_version_ 1782362736302227456
author Fujimori, Takahito
Le, Hai
Schairer, William W.
Berven, Sigurd H.
Qamirani, Erion
Hu, Serena S.
author_facet Fujimori, Takahito
Le, Hai
Schairer, William W.
Berven, Sigurd H.
Qamirani, Erion
Hu, Serena S.
author_sort Fujimori, Takahito
collection PubMed
description Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Objective To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis. Methods This study compared 24 patients undergoing TLIF and 32 patients undergoing PLF with instrumentation. The clinical outcomes were assessed by visual analog scale (VAS) for low back pain and leg pain, physical component summary (PCS) of the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Radiographic parameters included slippage of the vertebra, local disk lordosis, the anterior and posterior disk height, lumbar lordosis, and pelvic parameters. Results The improvement of VAS of leg pain was significantly greater in TLIF than in PLF unilaterally (3.4 versus 1.0; p = 0.02). The improvement of VAS of low back pain was significantly greater in TLIF than in PLF (3.8 versus 2.2; p = 0.02). However, there was no significant difference in improvement of ODI or PCS between TLIF and PLF. Reduction of slippage and the postoperative disk height was significantly greater in TLIF than in PLF. There was no significant difference in local disk lordosis, lumbar lordosis, or pelvic parameters. The fusion rate was 96% in TLIF and 84% in PLF (p = 0.3). There was no significant difference in fusion rate, estimated blood loss, adjacent segmental degeneration, or complication rate. Conclusions TLIF was superior to PLF in reduction of slippage and restoring disk height and might provide better improvement of leg pain. However, the health-related outcomes were not significantly different between the two procedures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4369196
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Georg Thieme Verlag KG
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43691962015-04-03 Does Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Have Advantages over Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis? Fujimori, Takahito Le, Hai Schairer, William W. Berven, Sigurd H. Qamirani, Erion Hu, Serena S. Global Spine J Article Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Objective To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis. Methods This study compared 24 patients undergoing TLIF and 32 patients undergoing PLF with instrumentation. The clinical outcomes were assessed by visual analog scale (VAS) for low back pain and leg pain, physical component summary (PCS) of the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Radiographic parameters included slippage of the vertebra, local disk lordosis, the anterior and posterior disk height, lumbar lordosis, and pelvic parameters. Results The improvement of VAS of leg pain was significantly greater in TLIF than in PLF unilaterally (3.4 versus 1.0; p = 0.02). The improvement of VAS of low back pain was significantly greater in TLIF than in PLF (3.8 versus 2.2; p = 0.02). However, there was no significant difference in improvement of ODI or PCS between TLIF and PLF. Reduction of slippage and the postoperative disk height was significantly greater in TLIF than in PLF. There was no significant difference in local disk lordosis, lumbar lordosis, or pelvic parameters. The fusion rate was 96% in TLIF and 84% in PLF (p = 0.3). There was no significant difference in fusion rate, estimated blood loss, adjacent segmental degeneration, or complication rate. Conclusions TLIF was superior to PLF in reduction of slippage and restoring disk height and might provide better improvement of leg pain. However, the health-related outcomes were not significantly different between the two procedures. Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2014-12-01 2015-04 /pmc/articles/PMC4369196/ /pubmed/25844282 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1396432 Text en © Thieme Medical Publishers
spellingShingle Article
Fujimori, Takahito
Le, Hai
Schairer, William W.
Berven, Sigurd H.
Qamirani, Erion
Hu, Serena S.
Does Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Have Advantages over Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis?
title Does Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Have Advantages over Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis?
title_full Does Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Have Advantages over Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis?
title_fullStr Does Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Have Advantages over Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis?
title_full_unstemmed Does Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Have Advantages over Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis?
title_short Does Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Have Advantages over Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis?
title_sort does transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion have advantages over posterolateral lumbar fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis?
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4369196/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25844282
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1396432
work_keys_str_mv AT fujimoritakahito doestransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionhaveadvantagesoverposterolaterallumbarfusionfordegenerativespondylolisthesis
AT lehai doestransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionhaveadvantagesoverposterolaterallumbarfusionfordegenerativespondylolisthesis
AT schairerwilliamw doestransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionhaveadvantagesoverposterolaterallumbarfusionfordegenerativespondylolisthesis
AT bervensigurdh doestransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionhaveadvantagesoverposterolaterallumbarfusionfordegenerativespondylolisthesis
AT qamiranierion doestransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionhaveadvantagesoverposterolaterallumbarfusionfordegenerativespondylolisthesis
AT huserenas doestransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionhaveadvantagesoverposterolaterallumbarfusionfordegenerativespondylolisthesis