Literature DB >> 22268018

Mini-open versus open decompression and fusion for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with stenosis.

Eric B Harris1, Amirali Sayadipour, Patrick Massey, Neil Leon Duplantier, D Greg Anderson.   

Abstract

The outcome of less invasive surgical techniques in comparison to traditional surgical techniques has been the source of debate. In this retrospective study, 51 patients who had undergone posterior lumbar fusion along with bilateral decompression were enrolled. Twenty-one patients underwent fusion using a standard, midline open technique (open group) and 30 patients underwent fusion using a mini-open technique, with a small, central incision for the decompression and bilateral paramedian incisions for the posterolateral fusion and placement of cannulated pedicle screws (mini-open group). Surgical variables were compared between the 2 groups. Patients in both groups experienced significant improvements in leg pain at 12 months, with a reduction in visual analog scale scores from 7.6 to 2.4 in the open group, and 7.8 to 2.3 in the mini-open group. There were no statistical differences between the groups in the magnitude of improvement of either the visual analog scale or Oswestry Disability Index scores. Operative times, blood loss, and length of hospitalization failed to show statistically significant differences between the groups, although there was a trend toward less blood loss and shorter hospitalization in the mini-open group. Fusion results and complications were similar between the 2 groups. Both techniques resulted in similarly statistically significant improvements in pain and clinical function.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22268018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ)        ISSN: 1078-4519


  5 in total

Review 1.  Comparison of MIS vs. open PLIF/TLIF with regard to clinical improvement, fusion rate, and incidence of major complication: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Qu Jin-Tao; Tang Yu; Wang Mei; Tang Xu-Dong; Zhang Tian-Jian; Shi Guo-Hua; Chen Lei; Hu Yue; Wang Zi-Tian; Zhou Yue
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-03-28       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  Treatment for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: Current Concepts and New Evidence.

Authors:  Andre M Samuel; Harold G Moore; Matthew E Cunningham
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2017-12

3.  Surgical training in spine surgery: safety and patient-rated outcome.

Authors:  Guy Waisbrod; Anne F Mannion; Támas F Fekete; Frank Kleinstueck; Deszö Jeszenszky; Daniel Haschtmann
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  Comparative outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for posterior lumbar fusion: a systematic review.

Authors:  Christina L Goldstein; Kevin Macwan; Kala Sundararajan; Y Raja Rampersaud
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 5.  Intervertebral Disc Diseases PART 2: A Review of the Current Diagnostic and Treatment Strategies for Intervertebral Disc Disease.

Authors:  Pang Hung Wu; Hyeun Sung Kim; Il-Tae Jang
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-03-20       Impact factor: 5.923

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.