Cargando…
Comparison of Minimally Invasive Surgery Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and TLIF for Treatment of Lumbar Spine Stenosis
With the development of minimally invasive technology, minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion has become an effective way to treat lumbar spinal stenosis. Lumbar spinal stenosis is one of the common diseases that cause backache or lumbago and sciatica. This article compare...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8808212/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35126956 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/9389239 |
_version_ | 1784643837758537728 |
---|---|
author | Gao, Guodong Cao, Linzhong Du, Xiaozheng Xu, Bin Zhang, Ping Zhang, Xiaogang Wang, Rong Quan, Zhen |
author_facet | Gao, Guodong Cao, Linzhong Du, Xiaozheng Xu, Bin Zhang, Ping Zhang, Xiaogang Wang, Rong Quan, Zhen |
author_sort | Gao, Guodong |
collection | PubMed |
description | With the development of minimally invasive technology, minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion has become an effective way to treat lumbar spinal stenosis. Lumbar spinal stenosis is one of the common diseases that cause backache or lumbago and sciatica. This article compares and analyzes the clinical efficacy of 60 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis surgery. It can be seen that the wound by MIS-TLIF is significantly less than that of traditional open surgery, and the postoperative recovery of MIS-TLIF is faster. So, MIS-TLIF is one of the concepts of minimally invasive surgery. The age distribution ranged from 56 to 78 years, with an average of 65.7 years. 31 cases were treated with MIS-TLIF (MIS-TLIF group), and 29 were treated with traditional posterior open surgery (TLIF group). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative drainage of the operation area were recorded. After statistical testing, the intraoperative blood loss, incision size, and postoperative drainage volume of the wound in the MIS-TLIF group were significantly less than those in the TLIF group. The results of JOA score, ODI score, and VAS score during the postoperative follow-up period were comparable to those of open surgery. Therefore, minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion is effective in treating lumbar spinal stenosis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8808212 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Hindawi |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88082122022-02-03 Comparison of Minimally Invasive Surgery Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and TLIF for Treatment of Lumbar Spine Stenosis Gao, Guodong Cao, Linzhong Du, Xiaozheng Xu, Bin Zhang, Ping Zhang, Xiaogang Wang, Rong Quan, Zhen J Healthc Eng Research Article With the development of minimally invasive technology, minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion has become an effective way to treat lumbar spinal stenosis. Lumbar spinal stenosis is one of the common diseases that cause backache or lumbago and sciatica. This article compares and analyzes the clinical efficacy of 60 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis surgery. It can be seen that the wound by MIS-TLIF is significantly less than that of traditional open surgery, and the postoperative recovery of MIS-TLIF is faster. So, MIS-TLIF is one of the concepts of minimally invasive surgery. The age distribution ranged from 56 to 78 years, with an average of 65.7 years. 31 cases were treated with MIS-TLIF (MIS-TLIF group), and 29 were treated with traditional posterior open surgery (TLIF group). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative drainage of the operation area were recorded. After statistical testing, the intraoperative blood loss, incision size, and postoperative drainage volume of the wound in the MIS-TLIF group were significantly less than those in the TLIF group. The results of JOA score, ODI score, and VAS score during the postoperative follow-up period were comparable to those of open surgery. Therefore, minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion is effective in treating lumbar spinal stenosis. Hindawi 2022-01-25 /pmc/articles/PMC8808212/ /pubmed/35126956 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/9389239 Text en Copyright © 2022 Guodong Gao et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Gao, Guodong Cao, Linzhong Du, Xiaozheng Xu, Bin Zhang, Ping Zhang, Xiaogang Wang, Rong Quan, Zhen Comparison of Minimally Invasive Surgery Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and TLIF for Treatment of Lumbar Spine Stenosis |
title | Comparison of Minimally Invasive Surgery Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and TLIF for Treatment of Lumbar Spine Stenosis |
title_full | Comparison of Minimally Invasive Surgery Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and TLIF for Treatment of Lumbar Spine Stenosis |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Minimally Invasive Surgery Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and TLIF for Treatment of Lumbar Spine Stenosis |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Minimally Invasive Surgery Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and TLIF for Treatment of Lumbar Spine Stenosis |
title_short | Comparison of Minimally Invasive Surgery Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and TLIF for Treatment of Lumbar Spine Stenosis |
title_sort | comparison of minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and tlif for treatment of lumbar spine stenosis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8808212/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35126956 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2022/9389239 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gaoguodong comparisonofminimallyinvasivesurgerytransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionandtliffortreatmentoflumbarspinestenosis AT caolinzhong comparisonofminimallyinvasivesurgerytransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionandtliffortreatmentoflumbarspinestenosis AT duxiaozheng comparisonofminimallyinvasivesurgerytransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionandtliffortreatmentoflumbarspinestenosis AT xubin comparisonofminimallyinvasivesurgerytransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionandtliffortreatmentoflumbarspinestenosis AT zhangping comparisonofminimallyinvasivesurgerytransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionandtliffortreatmentoflumbarspinestenosis AT zhangxiaogang comparisonofminimallyinvasivesurgerytransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionandtliffortreatmentoflumbarspinestenosis AT wangrong comparisonofminimallyinvasivesurgerytransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionandtliffortreatmentoflumbarspinestenosis AT quanzhen comparisonofminimallyinvasivesurgerytransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionandtliffortreatmentoflumbarspinestenosis |