Literature DB >> 20121352

Which lumbar interbody fusion technique is better in terms of level for the treatment of unstable isthmic spondylolisthesis?

Jin-Sung Kim1, Kil-Yong Lee, Sang-Ho Lee, Ho-Yeon Lee.   

Abstract

OBJECT: The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of 2 kinds of lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) for the treatment of adult low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis at L4-5 and L5-S1 levels.
METHODS: The medical records and radiographs of 86 patients who underwent anterior LIF (ALIF) (L4-5, 42 patients; L5-S1, 44 patients) and 42 patients who underwent transforaminal LIF (TLIF) (L4-5, 22 patients; L5-S1, 20 patients) between 2001 and 2004 were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical results were investigated using the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, and using radiographic measurements, including disc height (DH), degree of spondylolisthesis, segmental lordosis, whole lumbar lordosis (WL), sacral slope (SS), and pelvic tilt; the L-1 axis S-1 distance (LASD) and pelvic incidence were also obtained.
RESULTS: In both groups, VAS and ODI scores had significantly improved at both treatment levels. Statistical analysis showed no significant difference in postoperative VAS scores between groups at the L4-5 level and in postoperative VAS/ODI scores at the L5-S1 level. However, ODI scores were better in the TLIF than in the ALIF group at the L4-5 level. In terms of radiological changes, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups at the L4-5 level; however, at the L5-S1 level, radiographic results indicated that ALIF was superior to TLIF in its capacity to restore DH, WL, SS, and LASD. The radiological evidence of fusion shows no intergroup difference and no interlevel difference.
CONCLUSIONS: Considering the clinical and radiological outcomes in both groups, the authors recommend that instrumented mini-TLIF is preferable at the L4-5 level, whereas instrumented mini-ALIF might be preferable at the L5-S1 level for the treatment of unstable isthmic spondylolisthesis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20121352     DOI: 10.3171/2009.9.SPINE09272

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine        ISSN: 1547-5646


  15 in total

1.  Changes in the adjacent segment 10 years after anterior lumbar interbody fusion for low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Kyung-Chul Choi; Jin-Sung Kim; Hyeong-Ki Shim; Yong Ahn; Sang-Ho Lee
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Limited access surgery for 360 degrees in-situ fusion in a dysraphic patient with high-grade spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  M A König; B M Boszczyk
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-10-19       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Mini-open lateral retroperitoneal lumbar spine approach using psoas muscle retraction technique. Technical report and initial results on six patients.

Authors:  Kamran Aghayev; Frank D Vrionis
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-08-01       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Preoperative lordosis in L4/5 predicts segmental lordosis correction achievable by transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Clara Berlin; Ferdinand Zang; Henry Halm; Markus Quante
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 5.  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

6.  Radiographic Comparison of Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Traditional Fusion Approaches: Analysis of Sagittal Contour Change.

Authors:  Jonathan N Sembrano; Sharon C Yson; Ryan D Horazdovsky; Edward Rainier G Santos; David W Polly
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2015-05-19

7.  Clinical outcomes for lumbar fusion using silicon nitride versus other biomaterials.

Authors:  Graham C Calvert; George VanBuren Huffmon; William M Rambo; Micah W Smith; Bryan J McEntire; B Sonny Bal
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-03

Review 8.  Interbody Fusions in the Lumbar Spine: A Review.

Authors:  Ravi Verma; Sohrab Virk; Sheeraz Qureshi
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2020-01-13

9.  Clinical and radiological outcome of minimally invasive posterior lumbar interbody fusion in primary versus revision surgery.

Authors:  B Hentenaar; A B Spoor; J de Waal Malefijt; C H Diekerhof; B L den Oudsten
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2016-01-04       Impact factor: 2.359

10.  A retrospective comparison of radiographic and clinical outcomes in single-level degenerative lumbar disease undergoing anterior versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Ziev B Moses; Sharmeen Razvi; Seok Yoon Oh; Andrew Platt; Kevin C Keegan; Fadi Hamati; Christopher Witiw; Brian T David; Ricardo B V Fontes; Harel Deutsch; John E O'Toole; Richard G Fessler
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2021-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.