Cargando…
Retrospective Case Control Study: Clinical and Computer Tomographic Fusion and Subsidence Evaluation for Single Level Uniportal Endoscopic Posterolateral Approach Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Microscopic Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective comparative study. OBJECTIVE: Assessment of difference in clinical and computer tomographic outcomes between the 2 cohorts. METHODS: Computer tomographic evaluation by Bridwell’s grade, Kim’s stage, Kim’s subsidence grade and clinical evaluation by VAS, ODI and McNab’s cr...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9972267/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35649510 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568221994796 |
_version_ | 1784898284841598976 |
---|---|
author | Kim, Hyeun Sung Wu, Pang Hung Kim, Ji Yeon Lee, Jun Hyung Lee, Yeon Jin Kim, Dae Hwan Lee, Jun Hyung Jeon, Jun Bok Jang, Il-Tae |
author_facet | Kim, Hyeun Sung Wu, Pang Hung Kim, Ji Yeon Lee, Jun Hyung Lee, Yeon Jin Kim, Dae Hwan Lee, Jun Hyung Jeon, Jun Bok Jang, Il-Tae |
author_sort | Kim, Hyeun Sung |
collection | PubMed |
description | STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective comparative study. OBJECTIVE: Assessment of difference in clinical and computer tomographic outcomes between the 2 cohorts. METHODS: Computer tomographic evaluation by Bridwell’s grade, Kim’s stage, Kim’s subsidence grade and clinical evaluation by VAS, ODI and McNab’s criteria on both cohorts. RESULTS: 33 levels of Endo-TLIF and 22 levels of TLIF were included, with a mean follow up of 14.3 (10-24) and 22.9 (13-30) months respectively. Both Endo-TLIF and TLIF achieved significant improvement of pain and ODI at post-operative 4 week, 3 months and at final follow up with VAS 4.39 ± 0.92, 5.27 ± 1.16 and 5.73 ± 1.21in Endo-TLIF and 4.55 ± 1.16, 5.05 ± 1.11 and 5.50 ± 1.20 in TLIF respectively and ODI at post-operative 1 week, 3 months and final follow up were 43.15 ± 6.57, 49.27 ± 8.24 and 51.73 ± 9.09 in Endo-TLIF and 41.73 ± 7.98, 46.18± 8.46 and 49.09 ± 8.98 in TLIF respectively, P < 0.05. Compared to TLIF, Endo-TLIF achieved better VAS with 0.727 ± 0.235 at 3 months and 0.727 ± 0.252 at final follow up and better ODI with 3.88 ± 1.50 at 3months and 3.42 ± 1.63 at final follow up, P < 0.05. At 6 months radiological evaluation comparison of the Endo-TLIF and TLIF showed significant with more favorable fusion rate in Endo-TLIF of −0.61 ± 0.12 at 6 months and −0.49 ± 0.12 at 1 year in Bridwell’s grading and 0.70 ± 0.15 at 6 months and 0.56 ± 0.14 at 1 year in Kim’s stage.There is less subsidence of 0.606 ± 0.18 at 6 months and −0.561 ± 0.20 at 1 year of Kim’s subsidence grade, P < 0.05. CONCLUSION: Application of single level uniportal endoscopic posterolateral lumbar interbody fusion achieved better clinical outcomes and fusion rate with less subsidence than microscopic minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in mid-term evaluation for our cohorts of patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9972267 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-99722672023-03-01 Retrospective Case Control Study: Clinical and Computer Tomographic Fusion and Subsidence Evaluation for Single Level Uniportal Endoscopic Posterolateral Approach Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Microscopic Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion Kim, Hyeun Sung Wu, Pang Hung Kim, Ji Yeon Lee, Jun Hyung Lee, Yeon Jin Kim, Dae Hwan Lee, Jun Hyung Jeon, Jun Bok Jang, Il-Tae Global Spine J Original Articles STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective comparative study. OBJECTIVE: Assessment of difference in clinical and computer tomographic outcomes between the 2 cohorts. METHODS: Computer tomographic evaluation by Bridwell’s grade, Kim’s stage, Kim’s subsidence grade and clinical evaluation by VAS, ODI and McNab’s criteria on both cohorts. RESULTS: 33 levels of Endo-TLIF and 22 levels of TLIF were included, with a mean follow up of 14.3 (10-24) and 22.9 (13-30) months respectively. Both Endo-TLIF and TLIF achieved significant improvement of pain and ODI at post-operative 4 week, 3 months and at final follow up with VAS 4.39 ± 0.92, 5.27 ± 1.16 and 5.73 ± 1.21in Endo-TLIF and 4.55 ± 1.16, 5.05 ± 1.11 and 5.50 ± 1.20 in TLIF respectively and ODI at post-operative 1 week, 3 months and final follow up were 43.15 ± 6.57, 49.27 ± 8.24 and 51.73 ± 9.09 in Endo-TLIF and 41.73 ± 7.98, 46.18± 8.46 and 49.09 ± 8.98 in TLIF respectively, P < 0.05. Compared to TLIF, Endo-TLIF achieved better VAS with 0.727 ± 0.235 at 3 months and 0.727 ± 0.252 at final follow up and better ODI with 3.88 ± 1.50 at 3months and 3.42 ± 1.63 at final follow up, P < 0.05. At 6 months radiological evaluation comparison of the Endo-TLIF and TLIF showed significant with more favorable fusion rate in Endo-TLIF of −0.61 ± 0.12 at 6 months and −0.49 ± 0.12 at 1 year in Bridwell’s grading and 0.70 ± 0.15 at 6 months and 0.56 ± 0.14 at 1 year in Kim’s stage.There is less subsidence of 0.606 ± 0.18 at 6 months and −0.561 ± 0.20 at 1 year of Kim’s subsidence grade, P < 0.05. CONCLUSION: Application of single level uniportal endoscopic posterolateral lumbar interbody fusion achieved better clinical outcomes and fusion rate with less subsidence than microscopic minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in mid-term evaluation for our cohorts of patients. SAGE Publications 2022-06-01 2023-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9972267/ /pubmed/35649510 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568221994796 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, 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 | Original Articles Kim, Hyeun Sung Wu, Pang Hung Kim, Ji Yeon Lee, Jun Hyung Lee, Yeon Jin Kim, Dae Hwan Lee, Jun Hyung Jeon, Jun Bok Jang, Il-Tae Retrospective Case Control Study: Clinical and Computer Tomographic Fusion and Subsidence Evaluation for Single Level Uniportal Endoscopic Posterolateral Approach Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Microscopic Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion |
title | Retrospective Case Control Study: Clinical and Computer Tomographic
Fusion and Subsidence Evaluation for Single Level Uniportal Endoscopic
Posterolateral Approach Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus
Microscopic Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion |
title_full | Retrospective Case Control Study: Clinical and Computer Tomographic
Fusion and Subsidence Evaluation for Single Level Uniportal Endoscopic
Posterolateral Approach Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus
Microscopic Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion |
title_fullStr | Retrospective Case Control Study: Clinical and Computer Tomographic
Fusion and Subsidence Evaluation for Single Level Uniportal Endoscopic
Posterolateral Approach Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus
Microscopic Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion |
title_full_unstemmed | Retrospective Case Control Study: Clinical and Computer Tomographic
Fusion and Subsidence Evaluation for Single Level Uniportal Endoscopic
Posterolateral Approach Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus
Microscopic Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion |
title_short | Retrospective Case Control Study: Clinical and Computer Tomographic
Fusion and Subsidence Evaluation for Single Level Uniportal Endoscopic
Posterolateral Approach Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus
Microscopic Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion |
title_sort | retrospective case control study: clinical and computer tomographic
fusion and subsidence evaluation for single level uniportal endoscopic
posterolateral approach transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus
microscopic minimally invasive transforaminal interbody fusion |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9972267/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35649510 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2192568221994796 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kimhyeunsung retrospectivecasecontrolstudyclinicalandcomputertomographicfusionandsubsidenceevaluationforsingleleveluniportalendoscopicposterolateralapproachtransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionversusmicroscopicminimallyinvasivetransforaminalinterbodyfusion AT wupanghung retrospectivecasecontrolstudyclinicalandcomputertomographicfusionandsubsidenceevaluationforsingleleveluniportalendoscopicposterolateralapproachtransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionversusmicroscopicminimallyinvasivetransforaminalinterbodyfusion AT kimjiyeon retrospectivecasecontrolstudyclinicalandcomputertomographicfusionandsubsidenceevaluationforsingleleveluniportalendoscopicposterolateralapproachtransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionversusmicroscopicminimallyinvasivetransforaminalinterbodyfusion AT leejunhyung retrospectivecasecontrolstudyclinicalandcomputertomographicfusionandsubsidenceevaluationforsingleleveluniportalendoscopicposterolateralapproachtransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionversusmicroscopicminimallyinvasivetransforaminalinterbodyfusion AT leeyeonjin retrospectivecasecontrolstudyclinicalandcomputertomographicfusionandsubsidenceevaluationforsingleleveluniportalendoscopicposterolateralapproachtransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionversusmicroscopicminimallyinvasivetransforaminalinterbodyfusion AT kimdaehwan retrospectivecasecontrolstudyclinicalandcomputertomographicfusionandsubsidenceevaluationforsingleleveluniportalendoscopicposterolateralapproachtransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionversusmicroscopicminimallyinvasivetransforaminalinterbodyfusion AT leejunhyung retrospectivecasecontrolstudyclinicalandcomputertomographicfusionandsubsidenceevaluationforsingleleveluniportalendoscopicposterolateralapproachtransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionversusmicroscopicminimallyinvasivetransforaminalinterbodyfusion AT jeonjunbok retrospectivecasecontrolstudyclinicalandcomputertomographicfusionandsubsidenceevaluationforsingleleveluniportalendoscopicposterolateralapproachtransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionversusmicroscopicminimallyinvasivetransforaminalinterbodyfusion AT jangiltae retrospectivecasecontrolstudyclinicalandcomputertomographicfusionandsubsidenceevaluationforsingleleveluniportalendoscopicposterolateralapproachtransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionversusmicroscopicminimallyinvasivetransforaminalinterbodyfusion |