Literature DB >> 31032433

Outcomes of direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF) in an Australian cohort.

Daniel B Scherman1,2,3, Prashanth J Rao1,3, Kevin Phan2,3, Sean F Mungovan4, Kenneth Faulder5, Gordon Dandie1,2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF) mitigates many of the vascular complications and bony resections associated with other interbody fusion techniques. However, there are concerns regarding postoperative neural complications and that indirect decompression of the foramen has not been consistently demonstrated. This study prospectively assessed the clinical and radiological outcomes and the complication rates of the DLIF approach.
METHODS: A prospective review was conducted of the first 50 consecutive DLIF cases of a single neurosurgeon between 2010 and 2014. Clinical outcomes were assessed using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) surveys. Radiological outcomes, including spondylolisthesis, disc height, local disc angle, lumbar lordosis and foraminal height and width, were measured using Surgimap Spine software at the preoperative, 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months postoperative follow-up. Complication rates were also reported.
RESULTS: A total of 50 patients (84 levels) were treated with DLIF. The mean patient age was 68.2±9.8 years and 62.0% were female. At latest follow-up, mean VAS pain score improved from 7.7±1.5 to 1.9±0.9 (P<0.0001), mean ODI improved from 42.1±14.5 to 16.9±6.7 (P<0.0001) and mean RMDQ score improved from 12.1±5.2 to 6.2±4.7 (P<0.0001). Mean spondylolisthesis reduced from 7.5%±6.5% to 1.3%±1.1% at 6 weeks (P<0.0001), 0.95%±0.74% at 6 months (P<0.0001) and recurred to 1.9%±1.7% at 12 months postoperatively (P=0.0006). Mean anterior disc height improved from 7.3±3.2 to 11.6±2.5 mm at 6 weeks (P<0.0001), 12.2±3.3 mm at 6 months (P<0.0001) and 9.8±2.1 mm at 12 months (P=0.0032) postoperatively. Mean posterior disc height improved from 4.4±2.0 to 6.8±2.1 mm at 6 weeks (P<0.0001), 6.6±2.5 mm at 6 months (P=0.0003), and 5.9±1.4 mm at 12 months (P=0.0039) postoperatively. Mean local disc angle improved from 7.0°±3.7° to 9.2°±3.3° at 6 weeks (P=0.0072), 10.4°±3.9° at 6 months (P=0.0013) and 8.2°±2.9° at 12 months (P=0.2487) postoperatively. No significant postoperative changes in lumbar lordosis were observed. Mean foraminal height improved from 18.3±3.5 to 21.5±3.9 mm at 6 weeks (P=0.0004), 20.6±3.4 mm at 6 months (P=0.0266), and 18.7±1.9 mm at 12 months (P=0.8021) postoperatively. Mean foraminal width improved from 7.9±2.0 to 10.2±2.8 mm at 6 weeks (P=0.0001), 9.4±2.6 mm at 6 months (P=0.0219) and 8.3±1.6 mm at 12 months (P=0.5734) postoperatively. Fusion rate at 6 and 12 months was 62.2% and 89.2%, respectively. A total of 6 patients (12%) had postoperative complications. Three patients (6%) had pain-related psoas muscle weakness and 3 patients (6%) had sensory neural complications that had resolved entirely by 8 and 16 weeks postoperatively, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The study provides encouraging short and medium-term clinical and radiological results for DLIF. In this patient series, there was a low complication rate with no permanent neural injury reported.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF); clinical outcomes; lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF); minimally invasive spine surgery; radiological outcomes

Year:  2019        PMID: 31032433      PMCID: PMC6465476          DOI: 10.21037/jss.2019.01.08

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Spine Surg        ISSN: 2414-4630


  53 in total

Review 1.  Minimally invasive lumbar fusion.

Authors:  Kevin T Foley; Langston T Holly; James D Schwender
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2003-08-01       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  The multiple benefits of minimally invasive spinal surgery: results comparing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar fusion.

Authors:  Angela R Starkweather; Linda Witek-Janusek; Russ P Nockels; Jonna Peterson; Herb L Mathews
Journal:  J Neurosci Nurs       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.230

Review 3.  Posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Christian P DiPaola; Robert W Molinari
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 3.020

4.  Load-sharing between anterior and posterior elements in a lumbar motion segment implanted with an artificial disc.

Authors:  A P Dooris; V K Goel; N M Grosland; L G Gilbertson; D G Wilder
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2001-03-15       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion (XLIF): a novel surgical technique for anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Burak M Ozgur; Henry E Aryan; Luiz Pimenta; William R Taylor
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2006 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.166

6.  Perioperative complications in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus anterior-posterior reconstruction for lumbar disc degeneration and instability.

Authors:  Alan T Villavicencio; Sigita Burneikiene; Ketan R Bulsara; Jeffrey J Thramann
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2006-04

7.  Visceral and vascular complications resulting from anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  V Rajaraman; R Vingan; P Roth; R F Heary; L Conklin; G B Jacobs
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 5.115

8.  Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): technical feasibility and initial results.

Authors:  James D Schwender; Langston T Holly; David P Rouben; Kevin T Foley
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2005-02

9.  Direct lateral lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative conditions: early complication profile.

Authors:  Reginald Q Knight; Paul Schwaegler; David Hanscom; Jeffery Roh
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2009-02

Review 10.  The aging spine: the role of inflammatory mediators in intervertebral disc degeneration.

Authors:  Vinod K Podichetty
Journal:  Cell Mol Biol (Noisy-le-grand)       Date:  2007-05-30       Impact factor: 1.770

View more
  3 in total

1.  Restoring spinopelvic harmony with lateral lumbar interbody fusion: is it a realistic goal?

Authors:  Mina Asaid; Aram Cox; Monique Breslin; Declan Siedler; Chester Sutterlin; Arvind Dubey
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-12

2.  Indirect decompression via oblique lumbar interbody fusion is sufficient for treatment of lumbar foraminal stenosis.

Authors:  Sheng-Chieh Tseng; Yu-Hsien Lin; Yun-Che Wu; Cheng-Min Shih; Kun-Hui Chen; Cheng-Hung Lee; Chien-Chou Pan
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-08-18

3.  Indirect Lumbar Decompression Combined With or Without Additional Direct Posterior Decompression: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Mustfa K Manzur; Andre M Samuel; Kyle W Morse; Karim A Shafi; Bridget Jivanelli Gatto; Catherine Himo Gang; Sheeraz A Qureshi; Sravisht Iyer
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2021-05-20
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.