Cargando…
Analytical comparison study of the clinical and radiological outcome of spine fixation using posterolateral, posterior lumber interbody and transforaminal lumber interbody spinal fixation techniques to treat lumber spine degenerative disc disease
BACKGROUND: Degenerative disc disease is a common cause of chronic and disabling back pain that requires surgical intervention, posterolateral and posterior instrumental fixation (PLF), posterior lumber interbody fusion (PLIF) and transforaminal lumber interbody fusion (TLIF) are the techniques used...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4487990/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26136814 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13013-015-0040-0 |
_version_ | 1782379073776910336 |
---|---|
author | Al Barbarawi, Moh’d M Audat, Ziad M Allouh, Mohammed Z |
author_facet | Al Barbarawi, Moh’d M Audat, Ziad M Allouh, Mohammed Z |
author_sort | Al Barbarawi, Moh’d M |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Degenerative disc disease is a common cause of chronic and disabling back pain that requires surgical intervention, posterolateral and posterior instrumental fixation (PLF), posterior lumber interbody fusion (PLIF) and transforaminal lumber interbody fusion (TLIF) are the techniques used to deal with such a problem. OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical and radiological outcome of the variable surgical techniques used to deal with Lumber degenerative disc disease and to recommend the technique of choice. METHODS: 120 patients were treated between 2003 and 2010 at king Abdullah university hospital for lumber disc disease. The patients were divided into three groups: Group I (PLF n = 30 [59 levels]); Group II (PLIF n = 40 [70 levels]); and Group III (TLIF n = 50 [96 levels]). All patients had the same pre- and postoperative clinical and radiological evaluations (using Stanford score and local criteria and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI],). All cases had three months and then yearly for five years follow ups. RESULTS: There was no observed difference in the rates of intra-operative complications (Group I: 10 %; Group II: 8 %; Group III: 14 %; p = 0.566) and postoperative complications (Group I: 13.3 %, Group II:17.5 %, Group III: 18 % with p = 0.332). Among the groups. There was a vital decrease in the ODI scores over time (p < 0.005) but no major difference among the groups at different follow-up times. Radiographic fusion rates for Groups I, II and III were 90 %, 92.5 % and 94 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The surgical outcome of PLF, PLIF and TLIF used to treat degenerative disc disease is almost similar, there is no significant differences observed in complications and clinical outcomes. However, TILF may have better radiological outcome. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4487990 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-44879902015-07-02 Analytical comparison study of the clinical and radiological outcome of spine fixation using posterolateral, posterior lumber interbody and transforaminal lumber interbody spinal fixation techniques to treat lumber spine degenerative disc disease Al Barbarawi, Moh’d M Audat, Ziad M Allouh, Mohammed Z Scoliosis Methodology BACKGROUND: Degenerative disc disease is a common cause of chronic and disabling back pain that requires surgical intervention, posterolateral and posterior instrumental fixation (PLF), posterior lumber interbody fusion (PLIF) and transforaminal lumber interbody fusion (TLIF) are the techniques used to deal with such a problem. OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical and radiological outcome of the variable surgical techniques used to deal with Lumber degenerative disc disease and to recommend the technique of choice. METHODS: 120 patients were treated between 2003 and 2010 at king Abdullah university hospital for lumber disc disease. The patients were divided into three groups: Group I (PLF n = 30 [59 levels]); Group II (PLIF n = 40 [70 levels]); and Group III (TLIF n = 50 [96 levels]). All patients had the same pre- and postoperative clinical and radiological evaluations (using Stanford score and local criteria and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI],). All cases had three months and then yearly for five years follow ups. RESULTS: There was no observed difference in the rates of intra-operative complications (Group I: 10 %; Group II: 8 %; Group III: 14 %; p = 0.566) and postoperative complications (Group I: 13.3 %, Group II:17.5 %, Group III: 18 % with p = 0.332). Among the groups. There was a vital decrease in the ODI scores over time (p < 0.005) but no major difference among the groups at different follow-up times. Radiographic fusion rates for Groups I, II and III were 90 %, 92.5 % and 94 %, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The surgical outcome of PLF, PLIF and TLIF used to treat degenerative disc disease is almost similar, there is no significant differences observed in complications and clinical outcomes. However, TILF may have better radiological outcome. BioMed Central 2015-05-27 /pmc/articles/PMC4487990/ /pubmed/26136814 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13013-015-0040-0 Text en © Al Barbarawi et al. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Methodology Al Barbarawi, Moh’d M Audat, Ziad M Allouh, Mohammed Z Analytical comparison study of the clinical and radiological outcome of spine fixation using posterolateral, posterior lumber interbody and transforaminal lumber interbody spinal fixation techniques to treat lumber spine degenerative disc disease |
title | Analytical comparison study of the clinical and radiological outcome of spine fixation using posterolateral, posterior lumber interbody and transforaminal lumber interbody spinal fixation techniques to treat lumber spine degenerative disc disease |
title_full | Analytical comparison study of the clinical and radiological outcome of spine fixation using posterolateral, posterior lumber interbody and transforaminal lumber interbody spinal fixation techniques to treat lumber spine degenerative disc disease |
title_fullStr | Analytical comparison study of the clinical and radiological outcome of spine fixation using posterolateral, posterior lumber interbody and transforaminal lumber interbody spinal fixation techniques to treat lumber spine degenerative disc disease |
title_full_unstemmed | Analytical comparison study of the clinical and radiological outcome of spine fixation using posterolateral, posterior lumber interbody and transforaminal lumber interbody spinal fixation techniques to treat lumber spine degenerative disc disease |
title_short | Analytical comparison study of the clinical and radiological outcome of spine fixation using posterolateral, posterior lumber interbody and transforaminal lumber interbody spinal fixation techniques to treat lumber spine degenerative disc disease |
title_sort | analytical comparison study of the clinical and radiological outcome of spine fixation using posterolateral, posterior lumber interbody and transforaminal lumber interbody spinal fixation techniques to treat lumber spine degenerative disc disease |
topic | Methodology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4487990/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26136814 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13013-015-0040-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT albarbarawimohdm analyticalcomparisonstudyoftheclinicalandradiologicaloutcomeofspinefixationusingposterolateralposteriorlumberinterbodyandtransforaminallumberinterbodyspinalfixationtechniquestotreatlumberspinedegenerativediscdisease AT audatziadm analyticalcomparisonstudyoftheclinicalandradiologicaloutcomeofspinefixationusingposterolateralposteriorlumberinterbodyandtransforaminallumberinterbodyspinalfixationtechniquestotreatlumberspinedegenerativediscdisease AT allouhmohammedz analyticalcomparisonstudyoftheclinicalandradiologicaloutcomeofspinefixationusingposterolateralposteriorlumberinterbodyandtransforaminallumberinterbodyspinalfixationtechniquestotreatlumberspinedegenerativediscdisease |