Assessing the Difference in Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes Between Expandable Cage and Nonexpandable Cage Among Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

被引:45
作者
Alvi, Mohammed Ali [1 ,2 ]
Kurian, Shyam J. [3 ]
Wahood, Waseem [1 ,2 ]
Goyal, Anshit [1 ,2 ]
Elder, Benjamin D. [2 ]
Bydon, Mohamad [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Mayo Clin, Neuroinformat Lab, Rochester, MN 55905 USA
[2] Mayo Clin, Dept Neurol Surg, Rochester, MN 55905 USA
[3] Mayo Clin, Alix Sch Med, Rochester, MN USA
关键词
Expandable cage; Lumbar fusion; Minimally invasive surgery; Nonexpandable cage; Spine surgery; Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion; CERVICAL DISC REPLACEMENT; ADJACENT SEGMENT DISEASE; LUMBAR LORDOSIS; POSTERIOR; RESTORATION; ARTHROPLASTY; ALIGNMENT;
D O I
10.1016/j.wneu.2019.03.284
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive transforaminal interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) has been shown to have excellent outcomes for surgical management of degenerative disc disease. However, the challenge is in addressing coronal imbalance and restoring lumbar lordosis and sagittal alignment. Use of expandable cages in MIS-TLIF has been hypothesized to circumvent this disadvantage. An indirect meta-analysis of the evidence is presented comparing outcomes from expandable cages with those from nonexpandable cages, in patients undergoing MIS-TLIF. METHODS: PRISMA guidelines were used to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes of expandable cages and nonexpandable cages in patients undergoing MIS-TLIF. RESULTS: Twelve studies (706 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. The mean increase in disc height was found to be significantly greater for the nonexpandable cages group than for the expandable cages group (1.33 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.28-1.38 vs. 1.14 mm,; 95% CI, 1.06-1.23; P < 0.001). No significant difference was found regarding change in lumbar lordosis at last follow-up between the 2 groups (P = 0.34). The mean change in segmental lordosis was found to be significantly higher for the expandable cage group (5.04 , 95% CI, 3.89-6.20 vs. 2.08', 95% Cl, 1.93-2.22; P < 0.001). We did not detect any significant difference in fusion rate (P = 0.33), subsidence rate (P = 0.41) or in reoperations (P = 0.56) at last follow-up between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that there may not be a significant difference in clinical and radiologic parameters between expandable cages and nonexpandable cages among patients undergoing MIS-TLIF, and it is unclear if the higher cost of the expandable cages is justified.
引用
收藏
页码:596 / +
页数:12
相关论文
共 46 条
  • [1] Expandable Polyaryl-Ether-Ether-Ketone Spacers for Interbody Distraction in the Lumbar Spine
    Alimi, Marjan
    Shin, Benjamin
    Macielak, Michael
    Hofstetter, Christoph P.
    Njoku, Innocent, Jr.
    Tsiouris, Apostolos J.
    Elowitz, Eric
    Haert, Roger
    [J]. GLOBAL SPINE JOURNAL, 2015, 5 (03) : 169 - 178
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2016, NEWCASTLE OTTAWA SCA
  • [3] Audat Z, 2012, SINGAP MED J, V53, P183
  • [4] Current strategies for the restoration of adequate lordosis during lumbar fusion
    Barrey, Cedric
    Darnis, Alice
    [J]. WORLD JOURNAL OF ORTHOPEDICS, 2015, 6 (01): : 117 - 126
  • [5] Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Banana-Shaped and Straight Cages: Radiological and Clinical Results from a Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial
    Hartl, Roger
    Tumialan, Luis Manuel
    [J]. NEUROSURGERY, 2018, 82 (03) : 297 - 298
  • [6] Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion at L5-S1 through a Unilateral Approach: Technical Feasibility and Outcomes
    Choi, Won-Suh
    Kim, Jin-Sung
    Ryu, Kyeong-Sik
    Hur, Jung-Woo
    Seong, Ji-Hoon
    [J]. BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL, 2016, 2016
  • [7] Multiexpandable cage for minimally invasive posterior lumbar interbody fusion
    Coe, Jeffrey D.
    Zucherman, James F.
    Kucharzyk, Donald W.
    Poelstra, Kornelis A.
    Miller, Larry E.
    Kunwar, Sandeep
    [J]. MEDICAL DEVICES-EVIDENCE AND RESEARCH, 2016, 9 (09) : 341 - 347
  • [8] Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    de Kunder, Suzanne L.
    van Kuijk, Sander M. J.
    Rijkers, Kim
    Caelers, Inge J. M. H.
    van Hemert, Wouter L. W.
    de Bie, Rob A.
    van Santbrink, Henk
    [J]. SPINE JOURNAL, 2017, 17 (11) : 1712 - 1721
  • [9] METAANALYSIS IN CLINICAL-TRIALS
    DERSIMONIAN, R
    LAIRD, N
    [J]. CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1986, 7 (03): : 177 - 188
  • [10] Does Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Have Advantages over Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis?
    Fujimori, Takahito
    Le, Hai
    Schairer, William W.
    Berven, Sigurd H.
    Qamirani, Erion
    Hu, Serena S.
    [J]. GLOBAL SPINE JOURNAL, 2015, 5 (02) : 102 - 109