Cargando…
Standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion vs. combined with percutaneous pedicle screw in spondylolisthesis
BACKGROUND: To compare standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) vs. OLIF combined with posterior bilateral percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (OLIF combined) for the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of patients who underwent standalone OLIF or...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7092594/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32293389 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03192-7 |
_version_ | 1783510133627682816 |
---|---|
author | He, Wei He, Da Sun, Yuqing Xing, Yonggang Wen, Jiankun Wang, Weiheng Xi, Yanhai Liu, Mingming Tian, Wei Ye, Xiaojian |
author_facet | He, Wei He, Da Sun, Yuqing Xing, Yonggang Wen, Jiankun Wang, Weiheng Xi, Yanhai Liu, Mingming Tian, Wei Ye, Xiaojian |
author_sort | He, Wei |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: To compare standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) vs. OLIF combined with posterior bilateral percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (OLIF combined) for the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of patients who underwent standalone OLIF or combined OLIF between 07/2014 and 08/2017 at two hospitals in China. Direct decompressions were not performed. Visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), satisfaction rate, anterior/posterior disc heights (DH), foraminal height (FH), foraminal width (FW), cage subsidence, cage retropulsion, fusion rate, and complications were analyzed. All imaging examinations were read independently by two physicians and the mean measurements were used for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 73 patients were included: 32 with standalone OLIF and 41 with combined OLIF. The total complication rate was 25.0% with standalone OLIF and 26.8% with combined OLIF. There were no differences in VAS and ODI scores by 2 years of follow-up, but the scores were better with standalone OLIF at 1 week and 3 months (P < 0.05). PDH and FW was smaller in the combined OLIF group compared with the standalone OLIF group before and after surgery (all P < 0.05). There were significant differences in FH before surgery and at 1 week and 3 months between the two groups (all P < 0.05), but the difference disappeared by 2 years (P = 0.111). Cage subsidence occurred in 7.3% (3/41) and 7.3% (3/41) of the patients at 3 and 24 months, respectively, in the combined OLIF group, compared with 6.3% (2/32) and 15.6% (5/32), respectively, in the standalone OLIF group at the same time points (P = 0.287). There was no cage retropulsion in both groups at 2 years. The fusion rate was 85.4%(35/41) in the combined OLIF group and 84.4% (27/32) in the standalone OLIF group at 3 months(P = 0.669). At 24 months, the fusion rate was 100.0% in the combined OLIF group and 93.8% (30/32) in the standalone OLIF group (P = 0.066). CONCLUSION: Standalone OLIF may achieve equivalent clinical and radiological outcomes than OLIF combined with fixation for spondylolisthesis. The rate of complications was similar between the two groups. Patients who are osteoporotic might be better undergoing combined rather than standalone OLIF. The possibilty of proof lies within a future prospective study, preferably an RCT. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7092594 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70925942020-03-27 Standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion vs. combined with percutaneous pedicle screw in spondylolisthesis He, Wei He, Da Sun, Yuqing Xing, Yonggang Wen, Jiankun Wang, Weiheng Xi, Yanhai Liu, Mingming Tian, Wei Ye, Xiaojian BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: To compare standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) vs. OLIF combined with posterior bilateral percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (OLIF combined) for the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of patients who underwent standalone OLIF or combined OLIF between 07/2014 and 08/2017 at two hospitals in China. Direct decompressions were not performed. Visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), satisfaction rate, anterior/posterior disc heights (DH), foraminal height (FH), foraminal width (FW), cage subsidence, cage retropulsion, fusion rate, and complications were analyzed. All imaging examinations were read independently by two physicians and the mean measurements were used for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 73 patients were included: 32 with standalone OLIF and 41 with combined OLIF. The total complication rate was 25.0% with standalone OLIF and 26.8% with combined OLIF. There were no differences in VAS and ODI scores by 2 years of follow-up, but the scores were better with standalone OLIF at 1 week and 3 months (P < 0.05). PDH and FW was smaller in the combined OLIF group compared with the standalone OLIF group before and after surgery (all P < 0.05). There were significant differences in FH before surgery and at 1 week and 3 months between the two groups (all P < 0.05), but the difference disappeared by 2 years (P = 0.111). Cage subsidence occurred in 7.3% (3/41) and 7.3% (3/41) of the patients at 3 and 24 months, respectively, in the combined OLIF group, compared with 6.3% (2/32) and 15.6% (5/32), respectively, in the standalone OLIF group at the same time points (P = 0.287). There was no cage retropulsion in both groups at 2 years. The fusion rate was 85.4%(35/41) in the combined OLIF group and 84.4% (27/32) in the standalone OLIF group at 3 months(P = 0.669). At 24 months, the fusion rate was 100.0% in the combined OLIF group and 93.8% (30/32) in the standalone OLIF group (P = 0.066). CONCLUSION: Standalone OLIF may achieve equivalent clinical and radiological outcomes than OLIF combined with fixation for spondylolisthesis. The rate of complications was similar between the two groups. Patients who are osteoporotic might be better undergoing combined rather than standalone OLIF. The possibilty of proof lies within a future prospective study, preferably an RCT. BioMed Central 2020-03-23 /pmc/articles/PMC7092594/ /pubmed/32293389 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03192-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article He, Wei He, Da Sun, Yuqing Xing, Yonggang Wen, Jiankun Wang, Weiheng Xi, Yanhai Liu, Mingming Tian, Wei Ye, Xiaojian Standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion vs. combined with percutaneous pedicle screw in spondylolisthesis |
title | Standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion vs. combined with percutaneous pedicle screw in spondylolisthesis |
title_full | Standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion vs. combined with percutaneous pedicle screw in spondylolisthesis |
title_fullStr | Standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion vs. combined with percutaneous pedicle screw in spondylolisthesis |
title_full_unstemmed | Standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion vs. combined with percutaneous pedicle screw in spondylolisthesis |
title_short | Standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion vs. combined with percutaneous pedicle screw in spondylolisthesis |
title_sort | standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion vs. combined with percutaneous pedicle screw in spondylolisthesis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7092594/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32293389 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03192-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hewei standaloneobliquelateralinterbodyfusionvscombinedwithpercutaneouspediclescrewinspondylolisthesis AT heda standaloneobliquelateralinterbodyfusionvscombinedwithpercutaneouspediclescrewinspondylolisthesis AT sunyuqing standaloneobliquelateralinterbodyfusionvscombinedwithpercutaneouspediclescrewinspondylolisthesis AT xingyonggang standaloneobliquelateralinterbodyfusionvscombinedwithpercutaneouspediclescrewinspondylolisthesis AT wenjiankun standaloneobliquelateralinterbodyfusionvscombinedwithpercutaneouspediclescrewinspondylolisthesis AT wangweiheng standaloneobliquelateralinterbodyfusionvscombinedwithpercutaneouspediclescrewinspondylolisthesis AT xiyanhai standaloneobliquelateralinterbodyfusionvscombinedwithpercutaneouspediclescrewinspondylolisthesis AT liumingming standaloneobliquelateralinterbodyfusionvscombinedwithpercutaneouspediclescrewinspondylolisthesis AT tianwei standaloneobliquelateralinterbodyfusionvscombinedwithpercutaneouspediclescrewinspondylolisthesis AT yexiaojian standaloneobliquelateralinterbodyfusionvscombinedwithpercutaneouspediclescrewinspondylolisthesis |