Cargando…
Augmenting posterolateral fusion with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage improves clinical outcome, but not fusion rate, of posterior decompression
OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to compare fusion rates and clinical outcomes of posterior decompression by posterolateral fusion (PLF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study involved 157 patients wit...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7218479/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32336181 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0300060520910025 |
_version_ | 1783532805760745472 |
---|---|
author | Atici, Teoman Yerebakan, Selcan Ermutlu, Cenk Özyalçın, Ali |
author_facet | Atici, Teoman Yerebakan, Selcan Ermutlu, Cenk Özyalçın, Ali |
author_sort | Atici, Teoman |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to compare fusion rates and clinical outcomes of posterior decompression by posterolateral fusion (PLF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study involved 157 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis treated with instrumented PLF alone or instrumented PLF combined with TLIF from 2010 to 2018. The patients were divided into two groups: the PLF group (Group A), in which posterior decompression with instrumented PLF was performed, and the cage-augmented group (Group B), in which TLIF was added to the procedures described for the PLF group. Patient outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index, visual analog scale score, and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey scores) and fusion rates were compared. RESULTS: The fusion rate was similar between the two groups. Among patients with two- and three-level fusion, improvements in the clinical outcome scores were significantly greater in Group B than Group A. CONCLUSION: Combining TLIF with PLF provides better clinical outcomes than PLF alone when multilevel fusion is indicated. TLIF augmentation does not improve the fusion rates in either single- or multi-level surgery. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7218479 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72184792020-05-18 Augmenting posterolateral fusion with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage improves clinical outcome, but not fusion rate, of posterior decompression Atici, Teoman Yerebakan, Selcan Ermutlu, Cenk Özyalçın, Ali J Int Med Res Retrospective Clinical Research Report OBJECTIVE: This study was performed to compare fusion rates and clinical outcomes of posterior decompression by posterolateral fusion (PLF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study involved 157 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis treated with instrumented PLF alone or instrumented PLF combined with TLIF from 2010 to 2018. The patients were divided into two groups: the PLF group (Group A), in which posterior decompression with instrumented PLF was performed, and the cage-augmented group (Group B), in which TLIF was added to the procedures described for the PLF group. Patient outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index, visual analog scale score, and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey scores) and fusion rates were compared. RESULTS: The fusion rate was similar between the two groups. Among patients with two- and three-level fusion, improvements in the clinical outcome scores were significantly greater in Group B than Group A. CONCLUSION: Combining TLIF with PLF provides better clinical outcomes than PLF alone when multilevel fusion is indicated. TLIF augmentation does not improve the fusion rates in either single- or multi-level surgery. SAGE Publications 2020-04-26 /pmc/articles/PMC7218479/ /pubmed/32336181 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0300060520910025 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ Creative Commons Non Commercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Retrospective Clinical Research Report Atici, Teoman Yerebakan, Selcan Ermutlu, Cenk Özyalçın, Ali Augmenting posterolateral fusion with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage improves clinical outcome, but not fusion rate, of posterior decompression |
title | Augmenting posterolateral fusion with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage improves clinical outcome, but not fusion rate, of posterior decompression |
title_full | Augmenting posterolateral fusion with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage improves clinical outcome, but not fusion rate, of posterior decompression |
title_fullStr | Augmenting posterolateral fusion with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage improves clinical outcome, but not fusion rate, of posterior decompression |
title_full_unstemmed | Augmenting posterolateral fusion with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage improves clinical outcome, but not fusion rate, of posterior decompression |
title_short | Augmenting posterolateral fusion with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage improves clinical outcome, but not fusion rate, of posterior decompression |
title_sort | augmenting posterolateral fusion with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage improves clinical outcome, but not fusion rate, of posterior decompression |
topic | Retrospective Clinical Research Report |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7218479/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32336181 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0300060520910025 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT aticiteoman augmentingposterolateralfusionwithtransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusioncageimprovesclinicaloutcomebutnotfusionrateofposteriordecompression AT yerebakanselcan augmentingposterolateralfusionwithtransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusioncageimprovesclinicaloutcomebutnotfusionrateofposteriordecompression AT ermutlucenk augmentingposterolateralfusionwithtransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusioncageimprovesclinicaloutcomebutnotfusionrateofposteriordecompression AT ozyalcınali augmentingposterolateralfusionwithtransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusioncageimprovesclinicaloutcomebutnotfusionrateofposteriordecompression |