Literature DB >> 19125304

Clinical and radiological outcome of anterior-posterior fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for symptomatic disc degeneration: a retrospective comparative study of 133 patients.

Antonio A Faundez1, James D Schwender, Yair Safriel, Thomas J Gilbert, Amir A Mehbod, Francis Denis, Ensor E Transfeldt, Jill M Wroblewski.   

Abstract

Abundant data are available for direct anterior/posterior spine fusion (APF) and some for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), but only few studies from one institution compares the two techniques. One-hundred and thirty-three patients were retrospectively analyzed, 68 having APF and 65 having TLIF. All patients had symptomatic disc degeneration of the lumbar spine. Only those with one or two-level surgeries were included. Clinical chart and radiologic reviews were done, fusion solidity assessed, and functional outcomes determined by pre- and postoperative SF-36 and postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and a satisfaction questionnaire. The minimum follow-up was 24 months. The mean operating room time and hospital length of stay were less in the TLIF group. The blood loss was slightly less in the TLIF group (409 vs. 480 cc.). Intra-operative complications were higher in the APF group, mostly due to vein lacerations in the anterior retroperitoneal approach. Postoperative complications were higher in the TLIF group due to graft material extruding against the nerve root or wound drainage. The pseudarthrosis rate was statistically equal (APF 17.6% and TLIF 23.1%) and was higher than most published reports. Significant improvements were noted in both groups for the SF-36 questionnaires. The mean ODI scores at follow-up were 33.5 for the APF and 39.5 for the TLIF group. The patient satisfaction rate was equal for the two groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19125304      PMCID: PMC2899330          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-008-0845-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  34 in total

Review 1.  Biomechanics of stand-alone cages and cages in combination with posterior fixation: a literature review.

Authors:  T R Oxland; T Lund
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Lumbar Spine Fusion in the Treatment of Degenerative Conditions: Current Indications and Recommendations.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 3.020

3.  Spinal-fusion surgery - the case for restraint.

Authors:  Richard A Deyo; Alf Nachemson; Sohail K Mirza
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-02-12       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Retrograde ejaculation after retroperitoneal lower lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  F B Christensen; C E Bünger
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Allograft implants for posterior lumbar interbody fusion: results comparing cylindrical dowels and impacted wedges.

Authors:  Bryan Barnes; Gerald E Rodts; Regis W Haid; Brian R Subach; Mark R McLaughlin
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 4.654

6.  Ureteral injury after anterior lumbar interbody fusion. A case report.

Authors:  Z U Isiklar; R W Lindsey; M Coburn
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1996-10-15       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Transforaminal interbody fusion versus anterior-posterior interbody fusion of the lumbar spine: a financial analysis.

Authors:  T S Whitecloud ; W W Roesch; J E Ricciardi
Journal:  J Spinal Disord       Date:  2001-04

8.  Degenerative disc disease treated with combined anterior and posterior arthrodesis and posterior instrumentation.

Authors:  Kathleen R Moore; Manuel R Pinto; Lisa M Butler
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2002-08-01       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Vascular injury during anterior lumbar surgery.

Authors:  Salvador A Brau; Rick B Delamarter; Michael L Schiffman; Lytton A Williams; Robert G Watkins
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2004 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.166

10.  Functional outcomes of instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion in active-duty US servicemen: a comparison with nonoperative management.

Authors:  R W Molinari; T Gerlinger
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2001 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.166

View more
  28 in total

Review 1.  Visceral, vascular, and wound complications following over 13,000 lateral interbody fusions: a survey study and literature review.

Authors:  Juan S Uribe; Armen R Deukmedjian
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-02-27       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Stand-alone ALIF with integrated intracorporeal anchoring plates in the treatment of degenerative lumbar disc disease: a prospective study on 65 cases.

Authors:  Jérôme Allain; Joël Delecrin; Jacques Beaurain; Alexandre Poignard; Thierry Vila; Charles-Henri Flouzat-Lachaniette
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-06-22       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  A Narrative Review of Lumbar Fusion Surgery With Relevance to Chiropractic Practice.

Authors:  Clinton J Daniels; Pamela J Wakefield; Glenn A Bub; James D Toombs
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2016-10-18

Review 4.  Lumbar interbody fusion: techniques, indications and comparison of interbody fusion options including PLIF, TLIF, MI-TLIF, OLIF/ATP, LLIF and ALIF.

Authors:  Ralph J Mobbs; Kevin Phan; Greg Malham; Kevin Seex; Prashanth J Rao
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2015-12

5.  Fusion rate and influence of surgery-related factors in lumbar interbody arthrodesis for degenerative spine diseases: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  M Formica; D Vallerga; A Zanirato; L Cavagnaro; M Basso; S Divano; L Mosconi; E Quarto; G Siri; L Felli
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2020-01-01

6.  Late infections after dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine with Dynesys.

Authors:  Jon A Lutz; Philippe Otten; Gianluca Maestretti
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-05-19       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Fusion rate and clinical outcome in anterior lumbar interbody fusion with beta-tricalcium phosphate and bone marrow aspirate as a bone graft substitute. A prospective clinical study in fifty patients.

Authors:  Ricarda Lechner; David Putzer; Michael Liebensteiner; Christian Bach; Martin Thaler
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-10-21       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Effectiveness and safety of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in patients with previous laminectomy.

Authors:  Hossein Elgafy; Doug Olson; Jiayong Liu; Caitlin Lewis; Hassan Semaan
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-12-20       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Direct lateral lumbar interbody fusion: clinical and radiological outcomes.

Authors:  Young Seok Lee; Seung Won Park; Young Baeg Kim
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2014-05-31

10.  The use of beta-tricalcium phosphate and bone marrow aspirate as a bone graft substitute in posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Martin Thaler; Ricarda Lechner; Michaela Gstöttner; Conrad Kobel; Christian Bach
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-10-17       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.