Literature DB >> 23905957

Short-term and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions: is there a difference?

Jason S Cheng1, Priscilla Park, Hai Le, Lori Reisner, Dean Chou, Praveen V Mummaneni.   

Abstract

OBJECT: Previous studies comparing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MITLIF) with open TLIF have demonstrated that MITLIF reduces blood loss and decreases postoperative pain while preserving fusion rates and reducing complications. In this study, the authors wanted to compare outcomes of MITLIF with those of open TLIF to determine whether MITLIF also improves postoperative functional mobility and decreases the usage of pain medication.
METHODS: In total, 75 consecutive patients who underwent either single-level open TLIF or MITLIF at the University of California, San Francisco, between 2006 and 2011 were included, and patients were followed up for an average of 5.05 years. Fifty patients underwent MITLIF and 25 underwent open TLIF. Primary outcomes included administration of morphine-equivalent narcotics and functional status on postoperative Day 1. Secondary outcomes included operative characteristics, complications, long-term fusion rates, and visual analog scale (VAS) scores.
RESULTS: No statistically significant differences in age, sex, body mass index (BMI), level of disease, or surgical indication were detected between the open TLIF and MITLIF groups. Similarly, preoperative medication usage did not significantly differ between these groups. Intraoperatively, compared with TLIF, MITLIF resulted in decreased lengths of operation, lower blood loss, and fewer complications (p < 0.05). Total administration of morphine-equivalent pain medication in the hospital also tended to be lower in the MITLIF than in the TLIF group. Functional assessment by physical therapy on postoperative Day 1 demonstrated higher function in the MITLIF patients for transfer-related tasks, ambulatory ability, and distance walked than in the TLIF patients (p < 0.05). This translated to shorter inpatient hospitalizations (6.05 vs 4.8 days for open TLIF vs MITLIF patients, respectively, p = 0.006) and an average cost reduction of $3885 per MITLIF patient. Long-term fusion rates were 92% in the MITLIF group and 100% in the open TLIF group (p = 0.09). Preoperative VAS pain scores were 7.1 for the MITLIF patients and 7.6 for the TLIF patients (p = 0.26). At the last follow-up, the reported VAS pain score was 2.9 in the MITLIF patients and 3.5 in the open TLIF patients, but this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.25). There was also no statistically significant difference in the degree change in this score (p = 0.44).
CONCLUSIONS: The MITLIF approach achieves improved functional mobility, decreases the usage of postoperative pain medication, and significantly reduces cost compared with open TLIF while preserving long-term fusion rates. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study comparing the postoperative usage of pain medication between treatments in the postoperative period before discharge.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23905957     DOI: 10.3171/2013.5.FOCUS1377

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurg Focus        ISSN: 1092-0684            Impact factor:   4.047


  18 in total

1.  Perioperative outcomes in minimally invasive lumbar spine surgery: A systematic review.

Authors:  Branko Skovrlj; Patrick Belton; Hekmat Zarzour; Sheeraz A Qureshi
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2015-12-18

Review 2.  Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of degenerative lumbar disease: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kevin Phan; Prashanth J Rao; Andrew C Kam; Ralph J Mobbs
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Clinical outcomes after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and lateral lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of degenerative lumbar disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Gun Keorochana; Kitipong Setrkraising; Patarawan Woratanarat; Alisara Arirachakaran; Jatupon Kongtharvonskul
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2016-12-24       Impact factor: 3.042

4.  One-level open vs. minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and advanced meta-analytic assessment of prospective studies with at least two years follow-up.

Authors:  Max Kunadt; Luisa Barleben; Karin Büttner-Janz
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 2.721

Review 5.  An Update on Postoperative Opioid Use and Alternative Pain Control Following Spine Surgery.

Authors:  Kevin Berardino; Austin H Carroll; Alicia Kaneb; Matthew D Civilette; William F Sherman; Alan D Kaye
Journal:  Orthop Rev (Pavia)       Date:  2021-06-22

6.  Is a drain tube necessary for minimally invasive lumbar spine fusion surgery?

Authors:  Pei-I Hung; Ming-Chau Chang; Po-Hsin Chou; Hsi-Hsien Lin; Shih-Tien Wang; Chien-Lin Liu
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-06-25       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  [Comparative study of microendoscope-assisted and conventional minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar diseases].

Authors:  Jianwen Dong; Yang Yang; Zihao Chen; Mingzhu Yu; Bin Liu; Qiyou Wang; Peigen Xie; Ruiqiang Chen; Limin Rong
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2019-07-15

8.  A comparison of narcotic usage and length of post-operative hospital stay in open versus minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion with percutaneous pedicle screws.

Authors:  Darshan Vora; Matthew Kinnard; David Falk; Michael Hoy; Sachin Gupta; Christine Piper; Warren Yu; Faisal Siddiqui; Joseph O'Brien
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-09

9.  Accelerated Recovery Program for Patients with Polysegmental Degenerative Lumbar Spine Disease.

Authors:  A A Kalinin; V Yu Goloborodko; V V Shepelev; Yu Ya Pestryakov; M Yu Biryuchkov; E E Satardinova; V A Byvaltsev
Journal:  Sovrem Tekhnologii Med       Date:  2021-01-01

10.  Clinical and Radiographic Comparison Between Open Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Bilateral Facetectomies.

Authors:  Hai Le; Ryan Anderson; Eileen Phan; Joseph Wick; Joshua Barber; Rolando Roberto; Eric Klineberg; Yashar Javidan
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-06-22
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.