A Comparative Study between Single-Level Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Adjacent Segment Disease

被引:0
作者
Chang, Chung-Tse [1 ]
Lin, Yu-Hsien [1 ]
Wu, Yun-Che [1 ]
Shih, Cheng-Min [1 ,2 ]
Chen, Kun-Hui [1 ,3 ,4 ]
Pan, Chien-Chou [1 ,5 ]
Lee, Cheng-Hung [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Taichung Vet Gen Hosp, Dept Orthoped, Taichung 40705, Taiwan
[2] Hungkuang Univ, Dept Phys Therapy, Taichung 43304, Taiwan
[3] Natl Chung Hsing Univ, Coll Med, Taichung 40227, Taiwan
[4] Hungkuang Univ, Coll Intelligent Technol, Dept Biomed Engn, Taichung 43304, Taiwan
[5] Jenteh Jr Coll Med Nursing & Management, Dept Rehabil Sci, Miaoli 35664, Taiwan
关键词
lumbar spine; adjacent segment disease (ASD); oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF); transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF); COMPLICATIONS;
D O I
10.3390/jcm13195843
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background/Objectives: Various surgical approaches have been proposed for treating adjacent segment disease (ASD) after lumbar fusion. However, studies using oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) to treat ASD are lacking. The current study assessed the postoperative outcomes of single-level OLIF for ASD, comparing the results with those for patients undergoing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Methods: Patients who underwent single-level OLIF or TLIF for lumbar ASD were retrospectively included. Clinical outcomes, that is, the results of assessments using the Euroqol 5-Dimension quality of life scale (EQ-5D), the Oswestry Disability Index, and the visual analog scale, were evaluated. Radiologic parameters, including disc height (DH), segmental lordosis (SL), segmental coronal angle (SCA), lumbar lordosis, and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch, were also assessed. Results: A total of 65 patients were enrolled: 32 in the OLIF group and 33 in the TLIF group. The median follow-up time was 24.0 months in both groups. The clinical outcomes and radiologic parameters significantly improved in both groups postoperatively. According to intergroup comparisons, the OLIF group had significantly less blood loss and superior improvement in radiologic parameters (DH, SL, and SCA) whereas the TLIF group had significantly shorter operation times. For the OLIF patients who did not undergo posterior decompression, the operation time was similar to that of the TLIF group, but the surgical blood loss and length of hospital stay were significantly reduced compared with the TLIF group. Conclusions: Compared with TLIF, OLIF provides similar clinical outcomes, leads to less surgical blood loss, and has superior radiologic parameters; however, the operation time is significantly longer. OLIF without posterior decompression may be a superior option to TLIF for certain patients.
引用
收藏
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion, Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion, and Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
    Hu, Xijian
    Yan, Lei
    Jin, Xinjie
    Liu, Haifeng
    Chai, Jing
    Zhao, Bin
    GLOBAL SPINE JOURNAL, 2024, 14 (01) : 295 - 305
  • [32] Revision of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a biomechanical study in nonosteoporotic bone Laboratory investigation
    Ploumis, Avraam
    Wu, Chunhui
    Mehbod, Amir
    Fischer, Gustav
    Faundez, Antonio
    Wu, Wentien
    Transfeldt, Ensor
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2010, 12 (01) : 82 - 87
  • [33] Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Posterior Instrumentation at L5/S1
    Jacob, Kevin C.
    Patel, Madhav R.
    Ribot, Max A.
    Parsons, Alexander W.
    Vanjani, Nisheka N.
    Pawlowski, Hanna
    Prabhu, Michael C.
    Singh, Kern
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2022, 157 : E111 - E122
  • [34] Perioperative and postoperative complications of single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in elderly adults
    Lee, Peter
    Fessler, Richard G.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2012, 19 (01) : 111 - 114
  • [35] Posterolateral lumbar fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar scoliosis
    Li, Fang-cai
    Chen, Qi-xin
    Chen, Wei-shan
    Xu, Kan
    Wu, Qiong-hua
    Chen, Gang
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2013, 20 (09) : 1241 - 1245
  • [36] Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes Between Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
    Lin, Lu
    Liu, Xiao-Qin
    Shi, Lei
    Cheng, Si
    Wang, Zhi-Qiang
    Ge, Qi-Jun
    Gao, Ding-Zhi
    Ismail, Amadou Cheffou
    Ke, Zhen-Yong
    Chu, Lei
    FRONTIERS IN SURGERY, 2022, 9
  • [37] Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion as an Adjunct to Posterior Instrumented Correction of Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis
    Crandall, Dennis G.
    Revella, Jan
    SPINE, 2009, 34 (20) : 2126 - 2133
  • [38] Biomechanical evaluation of different surgical procedures in single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in vitro
    Cao, Yuanwu
    Liu, Fubing
    Wan, Shengcheng
    Liang, Yun
    Jiang, Chun
    Feng, Zhenzhou
    Jiang, Xiaoxing
    Chen, Zixian
    CLINICAL BIOMECHANICS, 2017, 49 : 91 - 95
  • [39] Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for dual-segment lower lumbar degenerative disease
    Wang, Wei
    Wang, Zhangfu
    Hong, Zhenghua
    Chen, Haixiao
    VIDEOSURGERY AND OTHER MINIINVASIVE TECHNIQUES, 2018, 13 (04) : 525 - 532
  • [40] The Alternative Approach to the Lumbosacral Segment: The Right-Sided Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Compared with Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Szabo, Viktor
    Berta, Balazs
    Nagy, Mate
    Kulcsar, Dominik
    Perlaki, Gabor
    Schwarcz, Attila
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2025, 196