Cargando…

Indirect Decompression Using Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Revision Surgery Following Previous Posterior Decompression: Comparison of Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes Between Direct and Indirect Decompression Revision Surgery

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the radiological and clinical outcomes with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) to evaluate the effect of indirect decompression through oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) as revision surgery. METHODS: We enrolled patients who underwent single-level fusio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Park, Sang-Jin, Hwang, Jong-Moon, Cho, Dae-Chul, Lee, Subum, Kim, Chi Heon, Han, Inbo, Park, Dae-Won, Kwon, Heum-Dai, Kim, Kyoung-Tae
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Korean Spinal Neurosurgery Society 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9537844/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36203280
http://dx.doi.org/10.14245/ns.2244242.121
_version_ 1784803287513432064
author Park, Sang-Jin
Hwang, Jong-Moon
Cho, Dae-Chul
Lee, Subum
Kim, Chi Heon
Han, Inbo
Park, Dae-Won
Kwon, Heum-Dai
Kim, Kyoung-Tae
author_facet Park, Sang-Jin
Hwang, Jong-Moon
Cho, Dae-Chul
Lee, Subum
Kim, Chi Heon
Han, Inbo
Park, Dae-Won
Kwon, Heum-Dai
Kim, Kyoung-Tae
author_sort Park, Sang-Jin
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: This study compared the radiological and clinical outcomes with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) to evaluate the effect of indirect decompression through oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) as revision surgery. METHODS: We enrolled patients who underwent single-level fusion with revision surgery at the same level as the previous decompression level. We retrospectively reviewed 25 patients who underwent OLIF from 2017 to 2018 and 25 who received TLIF from 2014 to 2018. Radiologic and clinical outcomes were evaluated by cross-sectional area (CSA) of the spinal canal, thickness and area of ligamentum flavum (LF), subsidence, disc height, fusion rate, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and visual analogue scale (VAS). RESULTS: Compared with OLIF, the thickness and area of the LF after surgery were significantly less in TLIF, and the resulting CSA extension was also significantly higher. However, both groups showed improvement in ODI and VAS after surgery, and there was no difference between the groups. Complications related to the posterior approach in TLIF were 4 cases, and in OLIF, there were 2 cases that underwent additional posterior decompression surgery and 6 cases of transient paresthesia. CONCLUSION: Since complications associated with the posterior approach can be avoided, OLIF is a safer and useful minimally invasive surgery. Therefore, appropriate indications are applied, OLIF is a good alternative to TLIF when revision surgery is considered.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9537844
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Korean Spinal Neurosurgery Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95378442022-10-17 Indirect Decompression Using Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Revision Surgery Following Previous Posterior Decompression: Comparison of Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes Between Direct and Indirect Decompression Revision Surgery Park, Sang-Jin Hwang, Jong-Moon Cho, Dae-Chul Lee, Subum Kim, Chi Heon Han, Inbo Park, Dae-Won Kwon, Heum-Dai Kim, Kyoung-Tae Neurospine Original Article OBJECTIVE: This study compared the radiological and clinical outcomes with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) to evaluate the effect of indirect decompression through oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) as revision surgery. METHODS: We enrolled patients who underwent single-level fusion with revision surgery at the same level as the previous decompression level. We retrospectively reviewed 25 patients who underwent OLIF from 2017 to 2018 and 25 who received TLIF from 2014 to 2018. Radiologic and clinical outcomes were evaluated by cross-sectional area (CSA) of the spinal canal, thickness and area of ligamentum flavum (LF), subsidence, disc height, fusion rate, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and visual analogue scale (VAS). RESULTS: Compared with OLIF, the thickness and area of the LF after surgery were significantly less in TLIF, and the resulting CSA extension was also significantly higher. However, both groups showed improvement in ODI and VAS after surgery, and there was no difference between the groups. Complications related to the posterior approach in TLIF were 4 cases, and in OLIF, there were 2 cases that underwent additional posterior decompression surgery and 6 cases of transient paresthesia. CONCLUSION: Since complications associated with the posterior approach can be avoided, OLIF is a safer and useful minimally invasive surgery. Therefore, appropriate indications are applied, OLIF is a good alternative to TLIF when revision surgery is considered. Korean Spinal Neurosurgery Society 2022-09 2022-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9537844/ /pubmed/36203280 http://dx.doi.org/10.14245/ns.2244242.121 Text en Copyright © 2022 by the Korean Spinal Neurosurgery Society https://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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Park, Sang-Jin
Hwang, Jong-Moon
Cho, Dae-Chul
Lee, Subum
Kim, Chi Heon
Han, Inbo
Park, Dae-Won
Kwon, Heum-Dai
Kim, Kyoung-Tae
Indirect Decompression Using Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Revision Surgery Following Previous Posterior Decompression: Comparison of Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes Between Direct and Indirect Decompression Revision Surgery
title Indirect Decompression Using Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Revision Surgery Following Previous Posterior Decompression: Comparison of Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes Between Direct and Indirect Decompression Revision Surgery
title_full Indirect Decompression Using Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Revision Surgery Following Previous Posterior Decompression: Comparison of Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes Between Direct and Indirect Decompression Revision Surgery
title_fullStr Indirect Decompression Using Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Revision Surgery Following Previous Posterior Decompression: Comparison of Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes Between Direct and Indirect Decompression Revision Surgery
title_full_unstemmed Indirect Decompression Using Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Revision Surgery Following Previous Posterior Decompression: Comparison of Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes Between Direct and Indirect Decompression Revision Surgery
title_short Indirect Decompression Using Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Revision Surgery Following Previous Posterior Decompression: Comparison of Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes Between Direct and Indirect Decompression Revision Surgery
title_sort indirect decompression using oblique lumbar interbody fusion revision surgery following previous posterior decompression: comparison of clinical and radiologic outcomes between direct and indirect decompression revision surgery
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9537844/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36203280
http://dx.doi.org/10.14245/ns.2244242.121
work_keys_str_mv AT parksangjin indirectdecompressionusingobliquelumbarinterbodyfusionrevisionsurgeryfollowingpreviousposteriordecompressioncomparisonofclinicalandradiologicoutcomesbetweendirectandindirectdecompressionrevisionsurgery
AT hwangjongmoon indirectdecompressionusingobliquelumbarinterbodyfusionrevisionsurgeryfollowingpreviousposteriordecompressioncomparisonofclinicalandradiologicoutcomesbetweendirectandindirectdecompressionrevisionsurgery
AT chodaechul indirectdecompressionusingobliquelumbarinterbodyfusionrevisionsurgeryfollowingpreviousposteriordecompressioncomparisonofclinicalandradiologicoutcomesbetweendirectandindirectdecompressionrevisionsurgery
AT leesubum indirectdecompressionusingobliquelumbarinterbodyfusionrevisionsurgeryfollowingpreviousposteriordecompressioncomparisonofclinicalandradiologicoutcomesbetweendirectandindirectdecompressionrevisionsurgery
AT kimchiheon indirectdecompressionusingobliquelumbarinterbodyfusionrevisionsurgeryfollowingpreviousposteriordecompressioncomparisonofclinicalandradiologicoutcomesbetweendirectandindirectdecompressionrevisionsurgery
AT haninbo indirectdecompressionusingobliquelumbarinterbodyfusionrevisionsurgeryfollowingpreviousposteriordecompressioncomparisonofclinicalandradiologicoutcomesbetweendirectandindirectdecompressionrevisionsurgery
AT parkdaewon indirectdecompressionusingobliquelumbarinterbodyfusionrevisionsurgeryfollowingpreviousposteriordecompressioncomparisonofclinicalandradiologicoutcomesbetweendirectandindirectdecompressionrevisionsurgery
AT kwonheumdai indirectdecompressionusingobliquelumbarinterbodyfusionrevisionsurgeryfollowingpreviousposteriordecompressioncomparisonofclinicalandradiologicoutcomesbetweendirectandindirectdecompressionrevisionsurgery
AT kimkyoungtae indirectdecompressionusingobliquelumbarinterbodyfusionrevisionsurgeryfollowingpreviousposteriordecompressioncomparisonofclinicalandradiologicoutcomesbetweendirectandindirectdecompressionrevisionsurgery