Study Design: Level 4 retrospective review.
Purpose: To compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes between posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) with posterior segmental spinal instrumentation (SSI) for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.
Overview Of Literature: Both PLIF and LLIF have been performed for degenerative spondylolisthesis with good results, but no study has directly compared these two techniques so far.
Methods: The electronic medical and radiographic records of 78 matched patients were analyzed. In one group, 39 patients underwent PLIF with SSI at 41 levels (L3-4/L4-5), while in the other group, 39 patients underwent the LLIF procedure at 48 levels (L3-4/L4-5). Radiological outcomes such as restoration of disc height and neuroforaminal height, segmental lumbar lordosis, total lumbar lordosis, incidence of endplate fracture, and subsidence were measured. Perioperative parameters were also recorded in each group. Clinical outcome in both groups was assessed by the short form-12, Oswestry disability index and visual analogue scale scores. The average follow-up period was 16.1 months in the LLIF group and 21 months in the PLIF group.
Results: The restoration of disc height, foraminal height, and segmental lumbar lordosis was significantly better in the LLIF group (p<0.001). The duration of the operation was similar in both groups, but the average blood loss was significantly lower in the LLIF group (p<0.001). However, clinical outcome scores were similar in both groups.
Conclusions: Safe, effective interbody fusion can be achieved at multiple levels with neuromonitoring by the lateral approach. LLIF is a viable treatment option in patients with new onset symptoms due to degenerative spondylolisthesis who have had previous lumbar spine surgery, and it results in improved sagittal alignment and indirect foraminal decompression.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4591435 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.4184/asj.2015.9.5.668 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Can unilateral-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion replace the traditional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion procedure for lumbar degenerative disc diseases?: a single center matched case-control mid-term outcome study.
Asian Spine J
December 2024
Department of Radiology, Advantage Imaging and Research Institute, Chennai, India.
Study Design: Matched case-control study.
Purpose: To evaluate the midterm outcomes of unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UPSF) versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BPSF) in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedure, ascertain efficacy of UPSF in adequately decompressing contralateral foramen+spinal canal and reducing rate of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) at 4-8-year follow-up (FU).
Overview Of Literature: Previous meta-analyses found no significant differences between UPSF and BPSF regarding fusion rates, clinical and radiological outcomes; however, few studies have reported higher rates of cage migration/subsidence and pseudoarthrosis in the UPSF.
Inflammatory bowel disease is associated with greater odds of complications following posterior lumbar fusion and further amplified for patients exposed to monoclonal antibody biologics.
N Am Spine Soc J
December 2024
Yale School of Medicine, Department of Orthopaedics & Rehabilitation, 47 College Street, New Haven, CT, 06511, United States.
Background: Posterior lumbar fusion (PLF) is a common spine surgery that may be considered in patients with underlying comorbidities, such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Prior literature examining the association of this disease and PLF outcomes was done in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS), which only assessed in-hospital data and did not reveal an elevated risk of medical or surgical complications. However, characterization of PLF outcomes beyond hospital discharge is important and remains unknown for patients with IBD.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFLetter to the Editor: 'Short-Term Comparison Between Unilateral Versus Bilateral Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in Short-Level Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion-A Prospective Randomized Study' by Akihiko Hiyama et al.
Global Spine J
January 2025
Department of orthopaedics, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
Letter to the Editor: 'Subsidence Rates Associated With Porous 3D-Printed Versus Solid Titanium Cages in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion' by Toop et al.
Global Spine J
January 2025
Department of Orthopaedics, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
3D-printed porous titanium versus polyetheretherketone cages in lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of subsidence.
Front Med (Lausanne)
December 2024
Department of Orthopedics, Tongren Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Article Synopsis
- Cage subsidence can negatively affect lumbar fusion procedures, with material selection (PEEK vs. 3D-Ti) influencing this issue; the study aims to compare their subsidence rates.
- The systematic search reviewed 265 patients from three high-quality studies, focusing on cage subsidence and classified subsidence rates using a specific method.
- Results indicated that 3D-Ti cages have a significantly lower rate of subsidence compared to PEEK cages, with less severe subsidence and better overall performance.
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!