Cargando…

Comparing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis: A STROBE-compliant observational study

Although spondylolisthesis was traditionally treated with posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) was recently proposed as an alternative treatment for spondylolisthesis. However, no studies have focused on the comparison of thes...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Dapeng, Mao, Keya, Qiang, Xiaojun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5604652/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28906383
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000008011
_version_ 1783264896533659648
author Zhang, Dapeng
Mao, Keya
Qiang, Xiaojun
author_facet Zhang, Dapeng
Mao, Keya
Qiang, Xiaojun
author_sort Zhang, Dapeng
collection PubMed
description Although spondylolisthesis was traditionally treated with posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) was recently proposed as an alternative treatment for spondylolisthesis. However, no studies have focused on the comparison of these 2 techniques’ outcome on spondylolisthesis. The operative reports and perioperative data of patients who underwent single-level primary open PLIF (n = 29) and MIS-TLIF (n = 26) for I/II spondylolisthesis were retrospectively evaluated. Patients’ demographics, operative blood loss, hospital length of stay, creatine kinase (CK) level, radiographic fusion, complications, and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated. Radiographic fusion was assessed using the Bridwell grading criteria. Preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcomes included the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Average follow-up was 28 ± 3.6 months (range 24–32 months). Bed rest time, hospital stay, estimated blood loss, and operative time in the MIS-TLIF group were significantly lower than those in the PLIF group (P < .05). The 3-month postoperative ODI and VAS in the MIS-TLIF group were significantly better than the PLIF group (P < .05). However, at the time of the last follow-up, both groups had similar ODI scores and complication, slip reduction, and spinal fusion rates (P > .05). Compared with PLIF, MIS-TLIF for grade I/II spondylolisthesis can achieve similar reduction and fusion results with better short-term quality of life, shorter hospital stays, less estimated blood loss, and shorter operative times.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5604652
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56046522017-10-03 Comparing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis: A STROBE-compliant observational study Zhang, Dapeng Mao, Keya Qiang, Xiaojun Medicine (Baltimore) 7100 Although spondylolisthesis was traditionally treated with posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) was recently proposed as an alternative treatment for spondylolisthesis. However, no studies have focused on the comparison of these 2 techniques’ outcome on spondylolisthesis. The operative reports and perioperative data of patients who underwent single-level primary open PLIF (n = 29) and MIS-TLIF (n = 26) for I/II spondylolisthesis were retrospectively evaluated. Patients’ demographics, operative blood loss, hospital length of stay, creatine kinase (CK) level, radiographic fusion, complications, and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated. Radiographic fusion was assessed using the Bridwell grading criteria. Preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcomes included the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Average follow-up was 28 ± 3.6 months (range 24–32 months). Bed rest time, hospital stay, estimated blood loss, and operative time in the MIS-TLIF group were significantly lower than those in the PLIF group (P < .05). The 3-month postoperative ODI and VAS in the MIS-TLIF group were significantly better than the PLIF group (P < .05). However, at the time of the last follow-up, both groups had similar ODI scores and complication, slip reduction, and spinal fusion rates (P > .05). Compared with PLIF, MIS-TLIF for grade I/II spondylolisthesis can achieve similar reduction and fusion results with better short-term quality of life, shorter hospital stays, less estimated blood loss, and shorter operative times. Wolters Kluwer Health 2017-09-15 /pmc/articles/PMC5604652/ /pubmed/28906383 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000008011 Text en Copyright © 2017 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC), where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
spellingShingle 7100
Zhang, Dapeng
Mao, Keya
Qiang, Xiaojun
Comparing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis: A STROBE-compliant observational study
title Comparing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis: A STROBE-compliant observational study
title_full Comparing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis: A STROBE-compliant observational study
title_fullStr Comparing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis: A STROBE-compliant observational study
title_full_unstemmed Comparing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis: A STROBE-compliant observational study
title_short Comparing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis: A STROBE-compliant observational study
title_sort comparing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis: a strobe-compliant observational study
topic 7100
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5604652/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28906383
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000008011
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangdapeng comparingminimallyinvasivetransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionandposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusionforspondylolisthesisastrobecompliantobservationalstudy
AT maokeya comparingminimallyinvasivetransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionandposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusionforspondylolisthesisastrobecompliantobservationalstudy
AT qiangxiaojun comparingminimallyinvasivetransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionandposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusionforspondylolisthesisastrobecompliantobservationalstudy