Comparison of the early results of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion in symptomatic lumbar instability

Sakeb, N; Ahsan, Kamrul

doi:10.4103/0019-5413.111484

Cited by 53 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 42 publications

(58 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Khan et al [17] reported an incidence for lumbar durotomies in 10.6% of 3,183 patients (decompressive and fusion procedures); the subgroup with history of previous surgery at the same level showed a higher incidence of 15.9%. Studies comparing open TLIF and open PLIF (posterior lumbar interbody fusion) procedures found higher numbers of durotomies in open PLIF procedures (17.1% (13/76 patients) versus 9.3% (4/43 patients) [18]; 7.7% (4/52 patients) versus 0.0% (0/50 patients) [19]).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accidental Durotomy in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Frequency, Risk Factors, and Management

Klingler

Volz

Krüger

et al. 2015

The Scientific World Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose. To assess the frequency, risk factors, and management of accidental durotomy in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF). Methods. This single-center study retrospectively investigates 372 patients who underwent MIS TLIF and were mobilized within 24 hours after surgery. The frequency of accidental durotomies, intraoperative closure technique, body mass index, and history of previous surgery was recorded. Results. We identified 32 accidental durotomies in 514 MIS TLIF levels (6.2%). Analysis showed a statistically significant relation of accidental durotomies to overweight patients (body mass index ≥25 kg/m2; P = 0.0493). Patient age older than 65 years tended to be a positive predictor for accidental durotomies (P = 0.0657). Mobilizing patients on the first postoperative day, we observed no durotomy-associated complications. Conclusions. The frequency of accidental durotomies in MIS TLIF is low, with overweight being a risk factor for accidental durotomies. The minimally invasive approach seems to minimize durotomy-associated complications (CSF leakage, pseudomeningocele) because of the limited dead space in the soft tissue. Patients with accidental durotomy can usually be mobilized within 24 hours after MIS TLIF without increased risk. The minimally invasive TLIF technique might thus be beneficial in the prevention of postoperative immobilization-associated complications such as venous thromboembolism. This trial is registered with DRKS00006135.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accidental Durotomy in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Frequency, Risk Factors, and Management

Klingler

Volz

Krüger

et al. 2015

The Scientific World Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The incision can be midline, paramedian or Pfannenstiel (L5/S1) incision with a retroperitoneal passage and vascular mobilization and dissection. The ALIF method is appropriate for levels L3/4, L4/ L5 and L5/S1 [80,81]. An ALIF technique may be proper for degenerative diseases, and improvement of failed back syndrome [80,81].…”

Section: Alifmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The ALIF method is appropriate for levels L3/4, L4/ L5 and L5/S1 [80,81]. An ALIF technique may be proper for degenerative diseases, and improvement of failed back syndrome [80,81]. Contraindications of ALIF include substantial previous abdominal surgery with adhesions or adverse vascular anatomy, serious peripheral vascular illness, solitary kidney on exposure side, spinal infection and high-grade spondylolisthesis without posterior fusion [81,83].…”

Section: Alifmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Contraindications of ALIF include substantial previous abdominal surgery with adhesions or adverse vascular anatomy, serious peripheral vascular illness, solitary kidney on exposure side, spinal infection and high-grade spondylolisthesis without posterior fusion [81,83]. Isthmic spondylolisthesis at L5/S1 is a relative contraindication [80][81][82][83], and should be supplemented with posterior fixation. The ALIF approach is related to numerous important advantages.…”

Section: Alifmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Role of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery in Adults with Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis: A Narrative Review

Tannoury

Haddadi

Kempegowda

et al. 2017

IrJNS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Aim: Degenerative lumbar scoliosis is a spinal deformity resulting from advanced disc degeneration and facet arthropathy. Given the inconclusive available literature and lack of high-quality data supporting the role of minimally invasive surgical management of degenerative lumbar scoliosis, this review intends to highlight and compare the various viable minimally invasive surgical methods for adult degenerative deformity correction. Methods and Materials/Patients:Online databases search including Medline, PubMed and Ovid was preformed using the keywords: adult, degenerative, lumbar scoliosis, etiology, clinical issues, diagnostic imaging, spinopelvic alignment, non-operative and surgical treatment options, minimally invasive, interbody fusion, and percutaneous pedicle screw fixation. Eighty-three studies, published after 2000, on degenerative lumbar scoliosis epidemiology, classification and management were identified and reviewed.Results: Minimally invasive surgical techniques available for interbody fusion include posterior lumbar interbody fusion, transformational lumbar interbody fusion, oblique lumbar interbody fusion, anterior lumbar interbody fusion, and extreme lateral interbody fusion. Each surgical option warrants technical considerations, indication, complications awareness, and functional and radiological outcomes assessment. Sound patients' selection is key for improved outcomes, and therefore the following factors should be well examined prior to surgical intervention: the patient's medical condition and underlying morbidities, the extent of the involved disc spaces, imaging characteristics, and surgeon skills. Conclusion:The superiority of one surgical technique over the others, was not proven due to lack of strong and supportive data. However, a comprehensive review of indications, benefits, and disadvantages of the minimally invasive surgical procedures is presented. There is an interest in minimally invasive surgery of the spine owing to lower complication rates and morbidity, with limited soft tissue disturbance, decreased blood loss, improved cosmesis, shorter hospital stay, earlier return to work, and therefore decreased general health care costs.

show abstract

“…The advantages of transforaminal interventions over the classical posterior interbody fusion have been confirmed by a number of studies: low risks of damage to dura mater and the spinal roots, lower blood loss, better bone block formation [6,7]. However, some authors evidence the significant injury of paravertebral tissues and muscular-ligamentous apparatus resulting from such interventions and contributing to the formation of rough scar-adhesion changes accompanied by durable postoperative pain and reduced life quality [8][9][10][11].Search for technological solutions improving the results of decompression/stabilization interventions …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Treatment of Patients with Degenerative Diseases of the Lumbosacral Spine Using a Novel Technology of Facet Stabilization with Facet Wedge Implant

Калинин¹,

Okoneshnikova²,

Byvaltsev³

2017

Sovrem Tehnol Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Russian FederationTranspedicular fixation with interbody fusion widely used in management of degenerative diseases of the lumbosacral spine is associated with significant intraoperative aggression during surgery and postsurgical pain syndrome. To improve treatment results, a novel minimally invasive technology of facet fixation with Facet wedge implant in combination with transpedicular stabilization and interbody fusion has been introduced.The aim of the investigation was to evaluate the efficacy of facet fixation technology with Facet wedge implant in combination with transpedicular stabilization and interbody fusion in treatment of patients with degenerative diseases of the lumbosacral spine.Materials and Methods. The study involved 19 patients who underwent unilateral decompression with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, ipsilateral transpedicular stabilization and facet fixation on the contralateral side, according to clinical and instrumental indications. The minimum follow-up period of observation and complex evaluation of treatment results was 12 months.Results. when assessing pain syndrome by visual analogue scale and the degree of disability according to Oswestry disability index in the early postoperative period and in the long-term period, mostly good and excellent outcomes, statistically significantly better results were observed compared to the preoperative values. an interbody bone block was formed within 12 months in 89% (n=17) of patients, according to radiographic data.Conclusion. Decompression with a novel minimally invasive technology of combined dorsal fusion provides the possibility to significantly reduce pain, lower the degree of disability and implement efficient stabilization of the operated functional spinal segment in patients with degenerative diseases of the lumbosacral spine.Key words: stabilization of facet joints; transpedicular fixation; spinal canal decompression; lumbosacral spine; degenerative lesion of the intervertebral disc; TLIF.For contacts: Vadim a. Byvaltsev, e-mail: byval75vadim@yandex.ru Facet Stabilization in Degenerative Diseases of the Lumbosacral SpineMany degenerative diseases of the lumbosacral spine are the indication for performing interbody fusion [1,2]. Transpedicular fixation of interbody cages has been the gold standard in effective stabilization of vertebral motion segments after resection of posterior supporting elements for decompression of spinal canal structures [3, 4].The method of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), first introduced by Harms and Rolinger in 1982 [5], has gained popularity in the last two decades. The advantages of transforaminal interventions over the classical posterior interbody fusion have been confirmed by a number of studies: low risks of damage to dura mater and the spinal roots, lower blood loss, better bone block formation [6,7]. However, some authors evidence the significant injury of paravertebral tissues and muscular-ligamentous apparatus resulting from such interventions and contributing to the formatio...

show abstract

Comparison of the early results of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion in symptomatic lumbar instability

Cited by 53 publications

References 42 publications

Accidental Durotomy in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Frequency, Risk Factors, and Management

Accidental Durotomy in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Frequency, Risk Factors, and Management

Role of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery in Adults with Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis: A Narrative Review

Treatment of Patients with Degenerative Diseases of the Lumbosacral Spine Using a Novel Technology of Facet Stabilization with Facet Wedge Implant

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About