Background: The aim of the present prospective study is to evaluate whether the touted advantages of minimal invasive-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) translate into superior, equal, or inferior outcomes as compared to open-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (O-TLIF). This is the first study from the Indian subcontinent prospectively comparing the outcomes of MI-TLIF and O-TLIF.

Materials And Methods: All consecutive cases of open and MI-TLIF were prospectively followed up. Single-level TLIF procedures for spondylolytic and degenerative conditions (degenerative spondylolisthesis, central disc herniations) operated between January 2011 and January 2013 were included. The pre and postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain and leg pain, length of hospital stay, operative time, radiation exposure, quantitative C-reactive protein (QCRP), and blood loss were compared between the two groups. The parameters were statistically analyzed (using IBM SPSS Statistics version 17).

Results: 129 patients underwent TLIF procedure during the study period of which, 71 patients (46 MI-TLIF and 25 O-TLIF) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Of these, a further 10 patients were excluded on account of insufficient data and/or no followup. The mean followup was 36.5 months (range 18-54 months). The duration of hospital stay (O-TLIF 5.84 days + 2.249, MI-TLIF 4.11 days + 1.8, < 0.05) was shorter in MI-TLIF cases. There was less blood loss (open 358.8 ml, MI 111.81 ml, < 0.05) in MI-TLIF cases. The operative time (O-TLIF 2.96 h + 0.57, MI-TLIF 3.40 h + 0.54, < 0.05) was longer in MI group. On an average, 57.77 fluoroscopic exposures were required in MI-TLIF which was significantly higher than in O-TLIF (8.2). There was no statistically significant difference in the improvement in ODI and VAS scores in MI-TLIF and O-TLIF groups. The change in QCRP values preoperative and postoperative was significantly lower ( < 0.000) in MI-TLIF group than in O-TLIF group, indicating lesser tissue trauma.

Conclusion: The results in MI TLIF are comparable with O-TLIF in terms of outcomes. The advantages of MI-TLIF are lesser blood loss, shorter hospital stay, lesser tissue trauma, and early mobilization. The challenges of MI-TLIF lie in the steep learning curve and significant radiation exposure. The ultimate success of TLIF lies in the execution of the procedure, and in this respect the ability to achieve similar results using a minimally invasive technique makes MI-TLIF an attractive alternative.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5017166PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.189607DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

lumbar interbody
16
interbody fusion
16
mi-tlif
14
hospital stay
12
blood loss
12
transforaminal lumbar
8
o-tlif
8
operative time
8
radiation exposure
8
mi-tlif o-tlif
8

Similar Publications

This case report describes a 70-year-old male presenting with limb weakness, urinary retention and tandem cervical and lumbar spinal stenosis with complicating white cord syndrome, a rare reperfusion injury post decompression surgery. Initially admitted following an unwitnessed fall, the patient's neurological examination indicated that progressive weakness of the limbs and sensory loss etiology is cervical and lumbar spondylosis with severe spinal canal stenosis, confirmed by imaging. Due to rapid deterioration, he underwent C5 corpectomy, cervical decompression and fusion.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Study Design: Radiographic analysis.

Objective: Evaluate the anatomical relationships of the bowel to the lateral surgical corridor and the spine in various surgical positions.

Summary Of Background Data: Retroperitoneal transpsoas lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) may be performed with patients in the prone position, allowing for lateral and posterior approaches to the spine without repositioning the patient.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Lumbar foraminal stenosis can be surgically treated by foraminal decompression or facet joint resection and fusion (transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, TLIF). While conventional foraminal decompression poses a risk of segmental instability, the endoscopic approach (extended endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy, EELF) resects only the ventral part of the facet joint with a horizontal surgical trajectory. A prospective observational study was performed to analyze the cost-effectiveness of EELF versus TLIF.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: One-hole split endoscopy (OSE) is a novel endoscopic technique that offers some advantages in spinal surgery. However, without a clear understanding of the safe zone for OSE, surgeons risk injuring nerve roots during the procedure. This study aimed to measure the safe distances among critical bone markers, the intervertebral space and nerve roots between 1-degree degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) and non-DLS at the L segment in patients via three-dimensional reconstruction and to compare the differences in relevant safety distances between the two groups.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Study Design: Prospective Observational Propensity Score.

Objectives: Randomization may lead to bias when the treatment is unblinded and there is a strong patient preference for treatment arms (such as in spinal device trials). This report describes the rationale and methods utilized to develop a propensity score (PS) model for an investigational device exemption (IDE) trial (NCT03115983) to evaluate decompression and stabilization with an investigational dynamic sagittal tether (DST) vs decompression and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) for patients with symptomatic grade I lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis.

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!