Literature DB >> 34603954

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion - A narrative review on the present status.

S Phani Kiran1, G Sudhir2.   

Abstract

Minimally invasive lumbar transforaminal interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) has become the most commonly performed lumbar fusion procedure. There are multiple variables such as bone graft properties, use of rhBMP (recombinant human bone morphogenic protein), interbody cage properties, image guidance techniques, etc., that may impact the outcomes and fusion rates. Radiation exposure to the patient as well as to the operating team is an important concern. The minimally invasive anterior approaches for lumbar fusion with ability to insert larger cages and achieve better sagittal correction have added another option in management of lumbar degenerative deformities. A literature review of recent studies and systematic reviews on different aspects impacting the outcomes of MIS TLIF has been done to define the present status of the procedure in this narrative review. Iliac crest bone graft can help achieve very good fusion rate without significantly increasing the morbidity. RhBMP is most potent enhancer of fusion and the adverse effects can be avoided by surgical technique and using lower dose. The use of navigation techniques has reduced the radiation exposure to patient and the surgeons but the benefit seems to be significant only in long segment fusions.
© 2021 Delhi Orthopedic Association. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ALIF, Anterior lumbar interbody fusion; Bone graft substitutes; DBM, Demineralised Bone Matrix; JOABPEQ, Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire; LLIF, Lateral lumbar interbody fusion; MIISA, Minimally Invasive Interbody Selection Algorithm; MIS TLIF; MIS TLIF, Minimally invasive transforaminal interbody fusion; Minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion; Navigation assisted lumbar fusion; OLIF, Oblique lumbar interbody fusion; SiCaP, Silicate-substituted Calcium Phosphate; Transforaminal interbody fusion; XLIF, Extreme lateral lumbar interbody fusion; rhBMP, recombinant human bone morphogenic protein; β-TCP, β-Tricalcium Phosphate

Year:  2021        PMID: 34603954      PMCID: PMC8463772          DOI: 10.1016/j.jcot.2021.101592

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma        ISSN: 0976-5662


  41 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 Use of Bone Morphogenetic Protein in the Intervertebral Disk Space in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: 10-year Experience in 688 Patients.

Authors:  Ian K White; Megan Tuohy; Jacob Archer; Gregory D Schroeder; Alexander R Vaccaro; Jean-Pierre Mobasser
Journal:  Clin Spine Surg       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 1.876

3.  Use of Local Morselized Bone Autograft in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Cost Analysis.

Authors:  Dia R Halalmeh; Mick J Perez-Cruet
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2020-10-28       Impact factor: 2.104

4.  Lumbar interbody fusion rates with 3D-printed lamellar titanium cages using a silicate-substituted calcium phosphate bone graft.

Authors:  Michael Mokawem; Galateia Katzouraki; Clare L Harman; Robert Lee
Journal:  J Clin Neurosci       Date:  2019-07-24       Impact factor: 1.961

5.  Restoration of lumbar lordosis after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review.

Authors:  Brandon B Carlson; Philip Saville; James Dowdell; Rie Goto; Avani Vaishnav; Catherine Himo Gang; Steven McAnany; Todd J Albert; Sheeraz Qureshi
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2018-12-06       Impact factor: 4.166

6.  Radiation Exposure in Minimally Invasive Lumbar Fusion Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Conventional Fluoroscopy and 3D Fluoroscopy-based Navigation.

Authors:  Jan-Helge Klingler; Christoph Scholz; Marie T Krüger; Yashar Naseri; Florian Volz; Marc Hohenhaus; Johannes Brönner; Herbert Hoedlmoser; Ronen Sircar; Ulrich Hubbe
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2021-01-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Clinical and radiographic comparison of mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in 42 patients with long-term follow-up.

Authors:  Sanjay S Dhall; Michael Y Wang; Praveen V Mummaneni
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2008-12

8.  Minimally invasive surgery for degenerative spondylolisthesis: transforaminal or oblique lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Sun-Ren Sheng; Yi-Bo Geng; Kai-Liang Zhou; Ai-Min Wu; Xiang-Yang Wang; Wen-Fei Ni
Journal:  J Comp Eff Res       Date:  2019-12-16       Impact factor: 1.744

9.  Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with expandable versus static interbody devices: radiographic assessment of sagittal segmental and pelvic parameters.

Authors:  Ammar H Hawasli; Jawad M Khalifeh; Ajay Chatrath; Chester K Yarbrough; Wilson Z Ray
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 4.047

10.  Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Modified Mini-Open and Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comparative Study.

Authors:  Sudhir Ganesan; Vignesh Jayabalan; Venkatesh Kumar; Karthik Kailash
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2018-06-04
View more
  1 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
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.