Literature DB >> 35551483

Lateral decubitus single position anterior-posterior (AP) fusion shows equivalent results to minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at one-year follow-up.

Kimberly Ashayeri1, J Alex Thomas2, Brett Braly3, Nicholas O'Malley4, Carlos Leon3, Ivan Cheng5, Brian Kwon6, Mark Medley7, Leon Eisen3, Themistocles S Protopsaltis3, Aaron J Buckland4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study compares perioperative and 1-year outcomes of lateral decubitus single position circumferential fusion (L-SPS) versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) for degenerative pathologies.
METHODS: Multicenter retrospective chart review of patients undergoing AP fusion with L-SPS or MIS TLIF. Demographics and clinical and radiographic outcomes were compared using independent samples t tests and chi-squared analyses with significance set at p < 0.05.
RESULTS: A total of 445 patients were included: 353 L-SPS, 92 MIS TLIF. The L-SPS cohort was significantly older with fewer diabetics and more levels fused. The L-SPS cohort had significantly shorter operative time, blood loss, radiation dosage, and length of stay compared to MIS TLIF. 1-year follow-up showed that the L-SPS cohort had higher rates of fusion (97.87% vs. 81.11%; p = 0.006) and lower rates of subsidence (6.38% vs. 38.46%; p < 0.001) compared with MIS TLIF. There were significantly fewer returns to the OR within 1 year for early mechanical failures with L-SPS (0.0% vs. 5.4%; p < 0.001). 1-year radiographic outcomes revealed that the L-SPS cohort had a greater LL (56.6 ± 12.5 vs. 51.1 ± 15.9; p = 0.004), smaller PI-LL mismatch (0.2 ± 13.0 vs. 5.5 ± 10.5; p = 0.004). There were no significant differences in amount of change in VAS scores between cohorts. Similar results were seen after propensity-matched analysis and sub-analysis of cases including L5-S1.
CONCLUSIONS: L-SPS improves perioperative outcomes and does not compromise clinical or radiographic results at 1-year follow-up compared with MIS TLIF. There may be decreased rates of early mechanical failure with L-SPS.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF); Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF); Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF); Single position lumbar fusion

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35551483     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-022-07226-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   2.721


  27 in total

1.  Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a safe technique with satisfactory three to five year results.

Authors:  Lars Hackenberg; Henry Halm; Viola Bullmann; Volker Vieth; Marc Schneider; Ulf Liljenqvist
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-01-26       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Radiation exposure with hybrid image-guidance-based minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Michael M Safaee; Taemin Oh; Murat Pekmezci; Aaron J Clark
Journal:  J Clin Neurosci       Date:  2017-11-11       Impact factor: 1.961

3.  Short-term and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions: is there a difference?

Authors:  Jason S Cheng; Priscilla Park; Hai Le; Lori Reisner; Dean Chou; Praveen V Mummaneni
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 4.047

4.  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

5.  Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis: comparative effectiveness and cost-utility analysis.

Authors:  Scott L Parker; Stephen K Mendenhall; David N Shau; Scott L Zuckerman; Saniya S Godil; Joseph S Cheng; Matthew J McGirt
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2013-01-12       Impact factor: 2.104

6.  Single position circumferential fusion improves operative efficiency, reduces complications and length of stay compared with traditional circumferential fusion.

Authors:  Aaron J Buckland; Kimberly Ashayeri; Carlos Leon; Jordan Manning; Leon Eisen; Mark Medley; Themistocles S Protopsaltis; J Alex Thomas
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2020-11-13       Impact factor: 4.166

7.  Surgeon and patient radiation exposure in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Rajesh K Bindal; Sharon Glaze; Meghann Ognoskie; Van Tunner; Robert Malone; Subrata Ghosh
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2008-12

Review 8.  Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Traditional Open Versus Minimally Invasive Techniques.

Authors:  Michael J Lee; James Mok; Pranay Patel
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2018-02-15       Impact factor: 3.020

9.  Open and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: comparison of intermediate results and complications.

Authors:  Hwee Weng Dennis Hey; Hwan Tak Hee
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2015-04-15

10.  Anterior Versus Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Perioperative Risk Factors and 30-Day Outcomes.

Authors:  Pavan S Upadhyayula; Erik I Curtis; John K Yue; Nikki Sidhu; Joseph D Ciacci
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-10-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.