Minimal invasive spinal fusion has become popular in the last decade. Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) is a relatively new surgical technique and could avoid back muscle stripping and posterior complex destruction as in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). Between December 2016 and September 2018, patients with single level degenerative spondylosis were selected to enroll in this retrospective study. A total of 21 patients that underwent OLIF and 41 patients that received MIS-TLIF were enrolled. OLIF showed significantly less blood loss and shorter surgery time compared to MIS-TLIF (p < 0.05). The improvement in segmental lordosis and coronal balance was significantly more in OLIF group than MIS-TLIF group (p < 0.05). When comparing with MIS-TLIF, OLIF was significantly better in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analogue scale for back pain improvement at post-operative 6 months (p < 0.05). Both OLIF and MIS-TLIF are becoming mainstream procedures for lumbar degenerative-related disease, especially for spondylolisthesis. However, the indirect decompression of OLIF has shown to have less perioperative blood loss and shorter surgery time than that of MIS-TLIF. In addition, OLIF gives superior outcome in restoring segmental lordosis and coronal imbalance. While both OLIF and MIS-TLIF provide optimal clinical outcomes, upon comparison between the two techniques, the indirect decompression of OLIF seems to be a superior option in modern days.

Background Even though percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal discectomy (PETD) has been widely used for the surgical treatment of lumbar herniated disc, there are only a few studies directly comparing the clinical outcomes between microdiscectomy (MD) and PETD. Therefore, further studies are needed in order to compare the clinical outcomes between PETD and MD on a single level more thoroughly. Methods We proposed a far-lateral-outside-in technique for PETD to get an entry point without complex planning and facet violation. From September 2017 to September 2019, a total of 155 patients (69 with PETD and 86 with MD) were enrolled for this retrospective study, with the inclusion criteria: single level between L2 and S1, clinical sciatica for at least 6 weeks, and failed attempts with non-surgical treatments. Patients were excluded due to cauda equina syndrome, progressive neurologic deficits, history of lumbar spinal surgery, endplate modic changes, severe disc degeneration and less than 24 months of follow-up. Results PETD showed significantly shorter surgery time and less intraoperative blood loss compared to MD. The difference between PETD and MD in VAS back pain (but not VAS leg pain) at follow-up time was significant. The ODI improvement in the follow-up time of 6 months between the 2 groups showed a significant difference (PETD: 31.23±6.59, MD: 39.85±7.81, p < 0.001). MD had a significantly higher chance of postoperative wound infection and poor healing, while PETD was more likely to have recurrence of the herniated disc. Conclusion MD has been the gold standard procedure for LDH. However, with the advanced endoscopic technology and surgical technique, PETD has emerged as an alternative method due to higher functional outcome and less wound problems.

Background Minimal invasive spinal fusion has become popular in the last decade. Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) is a relatively new surgical technique and could avoid back muscle stripping and posterior complex destruction as in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). Methods Between December 2016 and September 2018, patients with single level degenerative spondylosis were selected to enroll in this retrospective study. Results A total of 21 patients that underwent OLIF and 41 patients that received MIS-TLIF were enrolled. OLIF showed significantly less blood loss and shorter surgery time compared to MIS-TLIF (p < 0.05). The improvement in segmental lordosis and coronal balance was significantly more in OLIF group than MIS-TLIF group (p < 0.05). When comparing with MIS-TLIF, OLIF was significantly better in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analogue scale for back pain improvement at post-operative 6 months (p < 0.05). Conclusions Both OLIF and MIS-TLIF are becoming a mainstream procedure for lumbar degenerative-related disease, especially for spondylolisthesis. However, OLIF has shown to have less perioperative blood loss and shorter surgery time than that of MIS-TLIF. In addition, OLIF gives superior clinical and radiographic outcomes. While both OLIF and MIS-TLIF provide optimal clinical outcomes, upon comparison between the two techniques, the anterolateral approach of OLIF seems to be a superior option in modern day.