Lumbar interbody fusion can be performed anteriorly or posteriorly. An anterior approach generally requires an access surgeon and often is combined with a posterior fusion. A traditional posterior interbody fusion can destabilize the spinal motion segment and requires neural retraction. A new surgical technique, a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), was recently described. It requires minimal neural retraction, and the disk space is exposed posterolaterally with removal of only one facet joint. This study compares the cost of an anterior-posterior one-level lumbar fusion with the cost of the same procedure performed using the TLIF technique. Table 1 lists the specific demographics. A retrospective review of the hospital charges of 80 patients undergoing interbody lumbar stabilization was conducted. The two groups consisted of 40 patients with an anterior-posterior fusion and 40 patients who were fused circumferentially using the TLIF technique. A cost analysis with normalization of 1998 dollars between the two groups was performed. The TLIF group had an average operative time of 213 minutes, compared with 269 minutes for the anterior-posterior group. In addition, an average additional 38 minutes were required to turn the patient from the anterior or posterior position. The average blood loss for the anterior-posterior procedure was 969 mL, compared with 489 mL for the TLIF group. Twenty-three of the anterior-posterior patients received an average of 2.2 units of blood and six of the TLIF patients received an average of 1.3 units. Use of the surgical intensive care unit was much lower in the TLIF group (38 of 40 patients versus 2 of 40 patients). The average length of stay was 6.1 days for the anterior-posterior group compared with an average of 3.3 days for the TLIF group. The average cost of the anterior-posterior patients was $49,085, compared with $33,784 for the TLIF group. Cost analysis between the two groups show the TLIF patients had an average savings of approximately $15,000 per admission. This cost comparison was conducted only for the time of the operative procedure. No attempt was made to analyze rates of fusion between the two groups or ultimate clinic outcome. There were no major complications in either group, and no patient returned to surgery for a lumbar spinal problem at the authors' hospital within 1 year of the index procedure.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00002517-200104000-00002DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

interbody fusion
20
tlif group
20
tlif
10
fusion
9
patients
9
average
9
anterior-posterior
8
lumbar interbody
8
neural retraction
8
cost anterior-posterior
8

Similar Publications

Background: There are differences in the extent of excision of articular processes, spinal processes and posterior ligamentum complexes (PLC) for posterior approach lumbar interbody fusion. Given that the biomechanical significance of these structures has been verified and that deterioration of the biomechanical environment is the main trigger for complications in both fused and adjacent motion segments, changes in decompression ranges may affect the potential risk of adjacent segmental disease (ASD) biomechanically; however, this topic has yet to be identified.

Methods: Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with different decompression strategies was simulated in a well-validated lumbosacral model.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

The urgent etiological diagnosis represents the main management objective of cervical spondylodiscitis (CSD) to start as soon as possible antibiotic treatment to prevent neurological deterioration. The present study aimed to evaluate a multicenter experience implementing a minimally invasive surgical approach (MISA) to manage CSD such pathology vs the most complex and aggressive surgical strategies currently used.This retrospective multicenter study used a database of 70 patients from five European neurosurgical centers.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Pear-Shaped Disc as a Risk Factor for Postoperative Sclerotic Modic Changes After Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Orthop Surg

January 2025

Department of Orthopaedic, Orthopaedic Research Institute, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.

Objective: Pear-shaped disc could increase the risk of intraoperative end-plate injury, which may lead to postoperative sclerotic Modic Changes (MCs). However, there are no studies on the relationship between pear-shaped disc and postoperative sclerotic MCs. Therefore, this study investigates the risk factors for postoperative sclerotic MCs following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: This study aims to (1) evaluate whether the endplate bone quality (EBQ) scores can independently predict adjacent segment disease (ASD); and (2) judge the predictive value of EBQ compared to vertebral bone quality (VBQ) for ASD after single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

Methods: A single-center retrospective analysis was conducted of patients undergoing single-level TLIF for degenerative spinal disease from 2014 to 2020. Demographic, surgery, and radiographic data were collected.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Study Design: A meta-analysis approach to a systematic review.

Objective: Perform a systematic review to identify all reports directly comparing outcomes of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) using static versus expandable interbody cages. Specifically focusing on periprocedural complications, intraoperative morbidity, and fusion outcomes.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!