Single-Level Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion at L5/S1 for an Obese Population

Study design: Retrospective study. Purpose: To compare perioperative outcomes, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) achievement rates for an obese patient cohort between single-level minimally invasive (MIS) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) vs. anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). Overview of literature: To the best of our knowledge, no study has compared the outcomes of MIS TLIF and ALIF in an obese population. Methods: Obese patients (body mass index [BMI] >= 30.0 kg/m(2)) who underwent single-level MIS TLIF or ALIF at L5/S1 were included in the study. Demographic/perioperative variables, presenting patient pathology, and 1-year arthrodesis statistics were collected. PROM scores for Visual Analog Scale (VAS) back/leg, Oswestry Disability Index, 12-item Short Form Physical Composite Scale, and Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) were collected from preoperative and postoperative (6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years) PROMIS-PF. The obese patients were classified based on the procedure they underwent (MIS TLIF vs. ALIF). Results: The criteria were met by 210 patients in total. After coarsened exact matching for Charlson comorbidity index score, degenerative spondylolisthesis, isthmic spondylolisthesis, degenerative scoliosis, foraminal stenosis, insurance, male, and ethnicity, 94 obese patients were included in the total cohort, with 59 receiving MIS TLIF and 35 receiving ALIF. ALIF recipients had higher PROMIS-PF scores at 6 weeks (p=0.014) and 12 weeks (p=0.030), as well as a higher VAS leg at 2 years (p=0.017). Following multiple regression accounting for differences in baseline BMI, only the 6-week PROMIS-PF significantly differed (p=0.028), with no other intergroup differences in mean PROMs between fusion types. Aside from a significantly higher 6-week MCID achievement rate for PROMIS-PF among ALIF recipients (p=0.006), no differences in attainment were observed. Conclusions: There were no statistically significant differences in perioperative characteristics, fusion rates, PROMs, or MCID achievement between obese patients receiving MIS TLIF vs. ALIF. As a result, our findings indicate that MIS TLIF and ALIF at L5/S1 are equally effective in an obese patient population.