Literature DB >> 30276107

Comparison of Stand-Alone, Transpsoas Lateral Interbody Fusion at L3-4 and Cranial vs Transforaminal Interbody Fusion at L3-4 and L4-5 for the Treatment of Lumbar Adjacent Segment Disease.

Deeptee Jain1, Kushagra Verma1, Jeffrey Mulvihill1, Jun Mizutani1, Bobby Tay1, Shane Burch1, Vedat Deviren1.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study.
OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes and complications of stand-alone minimally invasive lateral interbody fusion (LIF) vs revision posterior surgery for the treatment of lumbar adjacent segment disease.
METHODS: Adults who underwent LIF or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for adjacent segment disease were compared. Exclusion criteria: >grade 1 spondylolisthesis, posterior approach after LIF, and L5/S1 surgery. Patient demographics, estimated blood loss, hospital length of stay, complications, reoperations, health-related quality of life measures, and radiographs were examined. Data were analyzed with the χ2, Wilcoxon signed rank, and Mann-Whitney U tests.
RESULTS: A total of 17 LIF and 16 TLIF patients were included. Demographics were similar. Follow up was similar (LIF: 22.9 ± 11.8 months vs TLIF: 22.0 ± 4.6 months; P = .86). The LIF patients had significantly less blood loss (LIF: 36 ± 16 mL vs TLIF: 700 ± 767 mL; P < .001) and shorter length of stay (LIF: 2.6 ± 2.9 days vs TLIF: 3.3 ± 0.9 days; P = .001). There were no intraoperative complications. Revision rate was 4 of 17 in LIF and 3 of 16 in TLIF (P = .73). Baseline health-related quality of life and radiographic measurements were similar. In both groups, back and leg pain scores significantly improved, and in LIF, the Owestry Disability Index, and EuroQol-5D significantly improved. The LIF had a significant increase in intervertebral height (LIF: 4.8 ± 2.9 mm, P < .001, TLIF: 1.3 ± 3.4 mm, P = .37), which was significantly greater for LIF than TLIF (P = .002). Similarly, LIF had a significant increase in segmental lordosis (LIF: 5.6° ± 4.9°, P < .001, TLIF: 3.6° ± 8.6°, P = .16), which was not significantly different between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with adjacent segment disease may receive significant benefit from stand-alone LIF or TLIF. The LIF offers advantages of less blood loss and a shorter hospital stay. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Entities:  

Keywords:  adjacent segment disease; lateral interbody fusion; minimally invasive; transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Year:  2018        PMID: 30276107      PMCID: PMC6159729          DOI: 10.14444/5056

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Spine Surg        ISSN: 2211-4599


  17 in total

1.  A radiographic assessment of the ability of the extreme lateral interbody fusion procedure to indirectly decompress the neural elements.

Authors:  Leonardo Oliveira; Luis Marchi; Etevaldo Coutinho; Luiz Pimenta
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2010-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Evaluation of indirect decompression of the lumbar spinal canal following minimally invasive lateral transpsoas interbody fusion: radiographic and outcome analysis.

Authors:  E H Elowitz; D S Yanni; M Chwajol; R M Starke; N I Perin
Journal:  Minim Invasive Neurosurg       Date:  2012-01-25

3.  Comparison of clinical outcomes following minimally invasive lateral interbody fusion stratified by preoperative diagnosis.

Authors:  Kaveh Khajavi; Alessandria Shen; Madeline Lagina; Anthony Hutchison
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-03-27       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  Update on the evidence for adjacent segment degeneration and disease.

Authors:  Melvin D Helgeson; Adam J Bevevino; Alan S Hilibrand
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2013-02-15       Impact factor: 4.166

5.  Hidden blood loss during posterior spine fusion surgery.

Authors:  Yossi Smorgick; Kevin C Baker; Casey C Bachison; Harry N Herkowitz; David M Montgomery; Jeffrey S Fischgrund
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2013-03-21       Impact factor: 4.166

6.  Pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch predisposes to adjacent segment disease after lumbar spinal fusion.

Authors:  Dominique A Rothenfluh; Daniel A Mueller; Esin Rothenfluh; Kan Min
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-07-14       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Minimally invasive lateral interbody fusion for the treatment of rostral adjacent-segment lumbar degenerative stenosis without supplemental pedicle screw fixation.

Authors:  Michael Y Wang; Ram Vasudevan; Stefan A Mindea
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2014-10-10

Review 8.  Preservation or Restoration of Segmental and Regional Spinal Lordosis Using Minimally Invasive Interbody Fusion Techniques in Degenerative Lumbar Conditions: A Literature Review.

Authors:  Juan S Uribe; Sue Lynn Myhre; Jim A Youssef
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2-induced radiculitis in elective minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions: a series review.

Authors:  Stefan A Mindea; Patrick Shih; John K Song
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2009-06-15       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Initial clinical outcomes of minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative lumbar disease: a preliminary report on the experience of a single institution with 30 cases.

Authors:  Young Cheol Na; Hyo Sang Lee; Dong Ah Shin; Yoon Ha; Keung Nyun Kim; Do Heum Yoon
Journal:  Korean J Spine       Date:  2012-09-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.