Cargando…

Application and thinking of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative lumbar diseases

BACKGROUND: This study sought to investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. METHODS: The clinical data of 55 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases treated at our hospital...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gu, Shao, Li, Haifeng, Wang, Daxing, Dai, Xuejun, Liu, Chengwei
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AME Publishing Company 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9011304/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35433926
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-22-401
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: This study sought to investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. METHODS: The clinical data of 55 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases treated at our hospital from January 2018 to January 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. Of the 55 patients, 35 who underwent MIS-TLIF were included in the MIS-TLIF group, and 20 who underwent posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) were included in the PLIF group. The visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Oswestry disability index (ODI) score, operation time, incision length, intraoperative bleeding, postoperative drainage, postoperative landing time, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative interbody fusion rate, and complications were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The patients in both groups were followed-up for at least 1.5 years (range, 18–30 months; with an average of 27.5±2.6 months). There was no significant difference in the operation time, incision length, intraoperative bleeding, VAS score for low back and leg pain, ODI score, interbody fusion rate, hospitalization expenses, and complication rate between the two groups (P>0.05). One patient had nail failure in the MIS-TLIF group, 1 patient in each group had nerve root irritation, and 1 patient in each group had superficial incision infection and local suture dehiscence. The postoperative drainage volume, postoperative landing time, and postoperative hospital stay of the MIS-TLIF group were less than those of the PLIF group (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to PLIF, the use of MIS-TLIF in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases has a number of advantages, including more complete intraoperative hemostasis, less postoperative drainage, earlier landing, and faster discharge, and also significantly improves postoperative lumbar discomfort.