Literature DB >> 32355614

Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Comparison of Grade I Versus Grade II Isthmic Spondylolisthesis.

Dustin H Massel1, Benjamin C Mayo1, William W Long1, Krishna D Modi1, Gregory D Lopez1, Grant D Shifflett1, Bryce A Basques1, Philip K Louie1, Daniel D Bohl1, Fady Y Hijji1, Ankur S Narain1, Kern Singh1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is often used to treat low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS). No studies have compared surgical outcomes for grade I and II IS following MIS-TLIF. Therefore, the objective of the current study was to compare outcomes between patients with grade I and II IS following MIS-TLIF.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent a primary 1-level MIS-TLIF for treatment of IS between 2007 and 2015. Grade I patients underwent a unilateral tubular approach with a single interbody cage and bilateral pedicle screw instrumentation. Grade II patients underwent a bilateral tubular approach with bilateral interbody cage and pedicle screw placement. Baseline patient demographics and characteristics were compared using Student t test and χ2 analysis. Differences in peri- and postoperative outcomes were assessed using Poisson regression with robust error variance or linear regression adjusted for perioperative variables.
RESULTS: A total of 58 patients with IS underwent MIS-TLIF; 21 (36.2%) were grade I and 37 (63.8%) were grade II. The grade I cohort was younger (42.2 versus 50.6 years, P = .029); no other differences in preoperative variables were observed. No significant differences in operative time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, postoperative visual analogue scale scores, or complication and revision rates were demonstrated between cohorts. Arthrodesis rate was lower in the grade I cohort, though not statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite the grade I cohort being younger with less-severe diagnoses, the grade II cohort experienced similar outcomes. This finding may be due to the grade II cohort receiving bilateral cages, potentially providing a better fusion environment. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These results suggest that MIS-TLIF provides sufficient stabilization and fusion for treatment of grade II IS despite increased vertebral body displacement. In addition, MIS-TLIF with bilateral approach and interbody cage placement should be examined for treatment of high-grade IS cases. ©International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery 2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bilateral/unilateral interbody cage; isthmic spondylolisthesis; low-grade; minimally invasive spine surgery; transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Year:  2020        PMID: 32355614      PMCID: PMC7188099          DOI: 10.14444/7016

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


  20 in total

1.  Progression of lumbosacral isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults.

Authors:  Y Floman
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-02-01       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Minimally invasive spine technology and minimally invasive spine surgery: a historical review.

Authors:  Jeffrey H Oppenheimer; Igor DeCastro; Dennis E McDonnell
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 4.047

3.  Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Authors:  Junyoung Ahn; Ehsan Tabaraee; Kern Singh
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2015-07

4.  Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Islam M Elboghdady; Abbas Naqvi; Anton Y Jorgenson; Alejandro Marquez-Lara; Kern Singh
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2014-10

Review 5.  Minimally invasive procedures on the lumbar spine.

Authors:  Branko Skovrlj; Jeffrey Gilligan; Holt S Cutler; Sheeraz A Qureshi
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2015-01-16       Impact factor: 1.337

6.  Investigation of different cage designs and mechano-regulation algorithms in the lumbar interbody fusion process - a finite element analysis.

Authors:  Sergio Postigo; Hendrik Schmidt; Antonius Rohlmann; Michael Putzier; Antonio Simón; Georg Duda; Sara Checa
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2014-02-15       Impact factor: 2.712

7.  Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) for Spondylolisthesis in 282 Patients: In Situ Arthrodesis versus Reduction.

Authors:  Justin K Scheer; Brenda Auffinger; Ricky H Wong; Sandi K Lam; Cort D Lawton; Alexander T Nixon; Nader S Dahdaleh; Zachary A Smith; Richard G Fessler
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2015-03-06       Impact factor: 2.104

8.  Terminology and measurement of spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  L L Wiltse; R B Winter
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1983-07       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Changes in spino-pelvic alignment after surgical treatment of high-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis by a posterior approach: a report of 41 cases.

Authors:  Cesare Faldini; Alberto Di Martino; Fabrizio Perna; Kostantinos Martikos; Tiziana Greggi; Sandro Giannini
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-09-13       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Minimal access bilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for high-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  N A Quraishi; Y Raja Rampersaud
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-01-30       Impact factor: 3.134

View more
  1 in total

1.  Outcomes of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Unilateral Versus Bilateral Interbody Cages.

Authors:  Conor P Lynch; Elliot D K Cha; Augustus J Rush Iii; Caroline N Jadczak; Shruthi Mohan; Cara E Geoghegan; Kern Singh
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2021-12-31
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.