Alfredo Guiroy1, Charles Carazzo2, Gastón Camino-Willhuber3, Martín Gagliardi4, Andrei Fernandes-Joaquim5, Juan Pablo Cabrera6, Cristiano Menezes7, Jahangir Asghar8. 1. Spine Unit, Orthopedic Department, Hospital Español de Mendoza, Mendoza, Argentina. Electronic address: alfreguiroy@gmail.com. 2. Charles A. Carazzo: Department of Neurosurgery, University of Passo Fundo, São Vicente de Paulo Hospital, Passo Fundo, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. 3. Gastón Camino-Willhuber: Institute of Orthopedics "Carlos E. Ottolenghi", Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina. 4. Spine Unit, Orthopedic Department, Hospital Español de Mendoza, Mendoza, Argentina. 5. Andrei Fernandes-Joaquim: Department of Neurosurgery, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil. 6. Juan Pablo Cabrera: Department of Neurosurgery, Hospital Clínico Regional de Concepción, Concepción, Chile. 7. Cristiano Menezes: Instituto Columna, Hospital Vera Cruz, Belo Horizonte, Brazil. 8. Jahangir Asghar: The Paley Orthopedic & Spine Institute at Saint Mary´s Medical Center, West Palm Beach, Florida, United States.
Abstract
PURPOSE: to compare the outcomes of single position (SP) circumferential lumbar interbody fusion in lateral decubitus versus dual position (DP) fusion. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines in PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus database to identify comparative studies reporting the outcomes of SP lumbar interbody fusion versus DP. For risk of bias assessment ROBINS-I (Risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions) tool was used. RESULTS: Four comparative studies were included from an initial search of 3780 papers. All four studies were retrospective cohort studies comparing outcomes of single-position versus dual-position LLIF. A total of 349 patients were operated using a SP versus 254 DP. All the studies involved reported: operating time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, change in segmental lordosis and complications. From a general perspective, baseline variables were similar in both groups in all the studies and all reported a significant decrease in operative time and length of stays with SP. CONCLUSION: literature comparing single-position versus lateral then prone lumbar fusion shows a tendency towards shorter operating time and hospital stays in single position lumbar fusion, while maintaining similar perioperative outcomes.
PURPOSE: to compare the outcomes of single position (SP) circumferential lumbar interbody fusion in lateral decubitus versus dual position (DP) fusion. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines in PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus database to identify comparative studies reporting the outcomes of SP lumbar interbody fusion versus DP. For risk of bias assessment ROBINS-I (Risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions) tool was used. RESULTS: Four comparative studies were included from an initial search of 3780 papers. All four studies were retrospective cohort studies comparing outcomes of single-position versus dual-position LLIF. A total of 349 patients were operated using a SP versus 254 DP. All the studies involved reported: operating time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, change in segmental lordosis and complications. From a general perspective, baseline variables were similar in both groups in all the studies and all reported a significant decrease in operative time and length of stays with SP. CONCLUSION: literature comparing single-position versus lateral then prone lumbar fusion shows a tendency towards shorter operating time and hospital stays in single position lumbar fusion, while maintaining similar perioperative outcomes.