Literature DB >> 26915276

Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Isthmic Spondylolisthesis: In Situ Versus Reduction.

Guoxin Fan1, Guangfei Gu1, Yanjie Zhu1, Xiaofei Guan1, Annan Hu1, Xinbo Wu1, Hailong Zhang2, Shisheng He3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of reduction versus in situ fusion with minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) for isthmic spondylolisthesis.
METHODS: Demographic, preoperative, and postoperative data were collected from the medical records. Radiographic fusion was assessed by use of the grading criteria of Bridwell. Preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcomes including visual analog scale, Oswestry Disability Index, Japanese Orthopedic Association scale and improvement rate were calculated. Patient satisfaction was assessed with the criteria of Macnab (excellent, good, fair, poor).
RESULTS: There were 24 patients (11 male) in the reduction group and 21 patients (10 male) in the in situ fusion group. The average follow-up was 34.75 ± 8.06 months in reduction group and 31.05 ± 6.52 months in the in situ fusion group (P = 0.101). There were no significant differences in hospital stay, estimated blood loss, blood transfusion, operation time, fusion grading, and complications between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). Spinal fusion rate was 91.67% (22/24) in the reduction group and 85.71% (18/21) in the in situ group (P = 0.835). There were no significant differences in Japanese Orthopedic Association scale, visual analog scale, and Oswestry Disability Index score between the 2 groups whenever preoperatively, 3-month postoperatively, or at the last follow-up (P > 0.05). According to the criteria of Macnab, the rate of excellent and good was 83.33% in reduction group and 80.95% in the in situ group (P = 0.899).
CONCLUSIONS: MIS-TLIF with reduction did not induce significantly better patient-reported outcomes, spinal fusion rate, perioperative outcomes, or fewer complications in isthmic spondylolisthesis. Intentional reduction may not be a requirement in MIS-TLIF for isthmic spondylolisthesis.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Isthmic spondylolisthesis; Minimally invasive; Reduction; Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26915276     DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.02.033

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World Neurosurg        ISSN: 1878-8750            Impact factor:   2.104


  10 in total

Review 1.  Is reduction better than arthrodesis in situ in surgical management of low-grade spondylolisthesis? A system review and meta analysis.

Authors:  Xuedong Bai; Jiahai Chen; Liyang Liu; Xiaochuan Li; Yaohong Wu; Deli Wang; Dike Ruan
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-11-10       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  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

3.  High-Grade Spondylolisthesis in Adults: Current Concepts in Evaluation and Management.

Authors:  Kyle N Kunze; Daniel T Lilly; Jannat M Khan; Philip K Louie; Joseph Ferguson; Bryce A Basques; Michael T Nolte; Christopher J Dewald
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-06-30

4.  Significant reduction of fluoroscopy repetition with lumbar localization system in minimally invasive spine surgery: A prospective study.

Authors:  Guoxin Fan; Hailong Zhang; Xin Gu; Chuanfeng Wang; Xiaofei Guan; Yunshan Fan; Shisheng He
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 1.889

Review 5.  Spinal Biologics in Minimally Invasive Lumbar Surgery.

Authors:  Kevin Y Chang; Wellington K Hsu
Journal:  Minim Invasive Surg       Date:  2018-04-05

6.  Defining the MIS-TLIF: A Systematic Review of Techniques and Technologies Used by Surgeons Worldwide.

Authors:  Sara Lener; Christoph Wipplinger; R Nick Hernandez; Ibrahim Hussain; Sertac Kirnaz; Rodrigo Navarro-Ramirez; Franziska Anna Schmidt; Eliana Kim; Roger Härtl
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-05-28

7.  Clinical outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion via a novel tubular retractor.

Authors:  Yan Wang; Yaqing Zhang; Fanli Chong; Yue Zhou; Bo Huang
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 1.671

Review 8.  Direct Pars Defect Tubular Decompression and TLIF for the Treatment of Low-Grade Adult Isthmic Spondylolisthesis: Surgical Challenges and Nuances of a Muscle-Sparing Minimally Invasive Approach.

Authors:  Fabio Roberti; Katie Arsenault
Journal:  Minim Invasive Surg       Date:  2020-10-31

9.  Risk factors of postoperative low back pain for low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Fulin Guan; Hongna Yin; Lin Zhu; Zhizhuang Zhang; Qichang Gao; Tuo Shao; Weilong Tang; Guofa Guan; Ming Chen; Zhiyong Chi; Jiaao Gu; Zhange Yu
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2019-12-18       Impact factor: 1.671

10.  Fusion in situ versus reduction for spondylolisthesis treatment: grading the evidence through a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Rui He; Guo-Lin Tang; Kun Chen; Zheng-Liang Luo; Xifu Shang
Journal:  Biosci Rep       Date:  2020-06-26       Impact factor: 3.840

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.