Literature DB >> 31476471

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Single-Level Degenerative Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Larry E Miller1, Samir Bhattacharyya2, John Pracyk2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We compared the safety and effectiveness of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) to open TLIF (O-TLIF) for lumbar degenerative disease.
METHODS: We systematically searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized trials of MI-TLIF versus O-TLIF. The perioperative outcomes included the procedure time, fluoroscopy time, blood loss, complications, and hospital stay. The midterm outcomes included pseudarthrosis, the Oswestry Disability Index, and pain severity-all reported at 1-year minimum follow-up.
RESULTS: A total of 7 randomized trials including 496 patients (246 MI-TLIF; 250 O-TLIF) were included in our review. No statistically significant group differences in procedure time (mean difference [MD], -4 minutes; P = 0.70) were found. However, the fluoroscopy time was significantly longer with MI-TLIF (MD, 48 seconds; P < 0.001). MI-TLIF resulted in less perioperative blood loss (MD, -200 mL; P < 0.001) and shorter hospitalization (MD, -2.2 days; P < 0.001) compared with O-TLIF. The risk of perioperative complications was comparable between the 2 groups (risk ratio, 1.03; P = 0.94). No group differences were found in the incidence of pseudarthrosis at the 1-year minimum follow-up (risk ratio, 0.84; P = 0.67). Pain severity at midterm follow-up was comparable between the 2 groups (MD, -1; P = 0.59), and the ODI was slightly lower in the MI-TLIF group (MD, -3; P = 0.01).
CONCLUSION: Relative to O-TLIF, MI-TLIF was associated with less blood loss, a shorter hospital stay, and slightly less disability, at the expense of longer fluoroscopy times.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Low back pain; Pseudarthrosis; TLIF

Year:  2019        PMID: 31476471     DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.08.162

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


  10 in total

1.  History and Evolution of the Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Authors:  Michael C Prabhu; Kevin C Jacob; Madhav R Patel; Hanna Pawlowski; Nisheka N Vanjani; Kern Singh
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2022-09-30

Review 2.  How to start an awake spine program: Protocol and illustrative cases.

Authors:  Romaric Waguia; Elisabeth Kakmou Touko; David A W Sykes; Margot Kelly-Hedrick; Fady Y Hijji; Alok D Sharan; Norah Foster; Muhammad M Abd-El-Barr
Journal:  IBRO Neurosci Rep       Date:  2022-06-08

3.  MIS-TLIF versus O-TLIF for single-level degenerative stenosis: study protocol for randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Olga N Leonova; Evgeny A Cherepanov; Aleksandr V Krutko
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  The Endoscopic Approach to Lumbar Discectomy, Fusion, and Enhanced Recovery: A Review.

Authors:  Jason I Liounakos; Michael Y Wang
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-05-28

Review 5.  Endoscopic Techniques for Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Principles and Context.

Authors:  Bryan Zheng; Elias Shaaya; Josh Feler; Owen P Leary; Matthew J Hagan; Ankush Bajaj; Jared S Fridley; Frank Hassel; Raymond Gardocki; Ricardo Casal Grau; Kai-Uwe Lewandrowski; Albert E Telfeian
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2022-03-19       Impact factor: 3.411

6.  Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of conventional and biportal endoscopic decompressive laminectomy in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (ENDO-B trial): a protocol for a prospective, randomized, assessor-blind, multicenter trial.

Authors:  Hyun-Jin Park; Sang-Min Park; Kwang-Sup Song; Ho-Joong Kim; Si-Young Park; Taewook Kang; Min-Seok Kang; Dong-Hwa Heo; Choon-Keun Park; Dong-Geun Lee; Jin-Sub Hwang; Jae-Won Jang; Jun-Young Kim; Jin-Sung Kim; Hong-Jae Lee; Joon-Hyeok Yoon; Chang-Won Park; Ki-Han You
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2021-12-20       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  Full-Endoscopic versus Minimally Invasive Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Seong Son; Byung Rhae Yoo; Sang Gu Lee; Woo Kyung Kim; Jong Myung Jung
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2022-06-29

8.  Evaluation of Cost, Payments, Healthcare Utilization, and Perioperative and Post-Operative Outcomes of Patients Treated with Posterior Lumbar Spinal Surgery Using Open versus Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches.

Authors:  Chantal E Holy; Katherine A Corso; Dawn E Bowden; Michael J Erb; Jill R Ruppenkamp; Sandra Coombs; John B Pracyk
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2021-06-15

9.  Two-year Clinical and Radiographic Results with a Multidimensional, Expandable Interbody Implant in Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spine Surgery.

Authors:  Donald W Kucharzyk; Larry E Miller
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2020-02-21

10.  Common elective orthopaedic procedures and their clinical effectiveness: umbrella review of level 1 evidence.

Authors:  Ashley W Blom; Richard L Donovan; Andrew D Beswick; Michael R Whitehouse; Setor K Kunutsor
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2021-07-07
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.