Literature DB >> 15699793

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): technical feasibility and initial results.

James D Schwender1, Langston T Holly, David P Rouben, Kevin T Foley.   

Abstract

Forty-nine patients underwent minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) from October 2001 to August 2002 (minimum 18-month follow-up). The diagnosis was degenerative disc disease with herniated nucleus pulposus (HNP) in 26, spondylolisthesis in 22, and a Chance-type seatbelt fracture in 1. The majority of cases (n = 45) were at L4-L5 or L5-S1. A paramedian, muscle-sparing approach was performed through a tubular retractor docked unilaterally on the facet joint. A total facetectomy was then conducted, exposing the disc space. Discectomy and endplate preparation were completed through the tube using customized surgical instruments. Structural support was achieved with allograft bone or interbody cages. Bone grafting was done with local autologous or allograft bone, augmented with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in some cases. Bilateral percutaneous pedicle screw-rod placement was accomplished with the Sextant system. There were no conversions to open surgery. Operative time averaged 240 minutes. Estimated blood loss averaged 140 mL. Mean length of hospital stay was 1.9 days. All patients presenting with preoperative radiculopathy (n = 45) had resolution of symptoms postoperatively. Complications included two instances of screw malposition requiring screw repositioning and two cases of new radiculopathy postoperatively (one from graft dislodgement, the other from contralateral neuroforaminal stenosis). Narcotic use was discontinued 2-4 weeks postoperatively. Improvements in average Visual Analogue Pain Scale and Oswestry Disability Index (preoperative to last follow-up) scores were 7.2-2.1 and 46-14, respectively. At last follow-up, all patients had solid fusions by radiographic criteria. Results of this study indicate that minimally invasive TLIF is feasible and offers several potential advantages over traditional open techniques.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15699793     DOI: 10.1097/01.bsd.0000132291.50455.d0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech        ISSN: 1536-0652


  129 in total

1.  Minimally invasive or open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion as revision surgery for patients previously treated by open discectomy and decompression of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  Jian Wang; Yue Zhou; Zheng Feng Zhang; Chang Qing Li; Wen Jie Zheng; Jie Liu
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-10-08       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Single transverse-orientation cage via MIS-TLIF approach for the treatment of degenerative lumbar disease: a technical note.

Authors:  Shan-Jin Wang; Ying-Chao Han; Fu-Min Pan; Bin Ma; Jun Tan
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-08-15

Review 3.  CT evaluation of lumbar interbody fusion: current concepts.

Authors:  Alan L Williams; Matthew F Gornet; J Kenneth Burkus
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 4.  Targeting polymer therapeutics to bone.

Authors:  Stewart A Low; Jindřich Kopeček
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2012-01-28       Impact factor: 15.470

5.  The multiple benefits of minimally invasive spinal surgery: results comparing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar fusion.

Authors:  Angela R Starkweather; Linda Witek-Janusek; Russ P Nockels; Jonna Peterson; Herb L Mathews
Journal:  J Neurosci Nurs       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.230

6.  Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: evaluating initial experience.

Authors:  Constantin Schizas; Nicolas Tzinieris; Elefterios Tsiridis; Victor Kosmopoulos
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-11-21       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis and degenerative spondylosis: 5-year results.

Authors:  Yung Park; Joong Won Ha; Yun Tae Lee; Na Young Sung
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-08-18       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Comparison of open versus percutaneous pedicle screw insertion in a sheep model.

Authors:  W Lehmann; A Ushmaev; A Ruecker; J Nuechtern; L Grossterlinden; P G Begemann; T Baeumer; J M Rueger; D Briem
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-04-04       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Multifidus muscle changes and clinical effects of one-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion: minimally invasive procedure versus conventional open approach.

Authors:  ShunWu Fan; ZhiJun Hu; FengDong Zhao; Xing Zhao; Yue Huang; Xiangqian Fang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-10-30       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  A prospective clinical study comparing MI-TLIF with unilateral versus bilateral transpedicular fixation in low grade lumbar spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  José-Antonio Soriano-Sánchez; Javier Quillo-Olvera; Sergio Soriano-Solis; Miroslava-Elizabeth Soriano-Lopez; Claudia-Angélica Covarrubias-Rosas; Javier Quillo-Reséndiz; Carlos-Francisco Gutiérrez-Partida; Manuel Rodríguez-García
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2017-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.