Effect of interbody fusion compared with posterolateral fusion on lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Dantas, François; Dantas, Fernando Luíz Rolemberg; Botelho, Ricardo Vieira

doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2021.12.001

Cited by 15 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results fail to show any statistically significant or clinically significant difference in the functional outcomes as measured by the ODI between fusion methods such as PLF or IBF at five-year follow-up (p=0.96). Moreover, both the groups demonstrated significant improvement compared to the preoperative status as depicted by the individual studies on the fusion methods [9][10][11] . In addition, we found no statistical differences in reoperation rate, infection, or epidural hematomas.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Methods of fusion did not have any significant role in improving the functional outcome in the management of grade 1,2 degenerative spondylolisthesis at 5-year follow-up

AN¹,

R²,

Muthu³

2022

Int. J. Orthop. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:We conducted this study to compare the functional outcome of patients who underwent posterolateral fusion for the management of grade 1,2 degenerative spondylolisthesis with patients who underwent interbody fusion for the same condition. Studies on either of the treatment methods demonstrated significant improvement but the latter is implant driven while the former is not. Although radiological outcomes were found to be better in the interbody fusion we aimed to compare and analyze the functional outcome in these two groups of patients. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study analyzing 44 patients undergoing posterolateral fusion and 46 patients undergoing interbody fusion for grade 1,2 degenerative spondylolisthesis with a minimum 5year follow-up were reviewed. Patient demographics, the functional outcome with Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and complications were analyzed. Results: Although we noted significant improvement in the ODI scores (p<0.001) compared to the preoperative status, we did not find any significant difference in the ODI scores at 5-year follow-up between the cohorts (p=0.96). We did not find any significant difference in the complication rate (p=0.54) or reoperation rates (p=0.93) between the two groups. Conclusion:The method of fusion did not have a significant role in improving the functional outcome in the management of grade1,2 degenerative spondylolisthesis. There was also no significant difference between the two methods of fusion concerning the dural tear rates, reoperation rate, or infection.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

“…Studies on either of the treatment methods demonstrated significant improvement but the latter is implant driven while the former is not [9,10] . Although radiological outcomes were found to be better in the interbody fusion [9] . we aimed to compare and analyze the functional outcome in these two groups of patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Methods of fusion did not have any significant role in improving the functional outcome in the management of grade 1,2 degenerative spondylolisthesis at 5-year follow-up

AN¹,

R²,

Muthu³

2022

Int. J. Orthop. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The use of internal fixation instruments could maintain the reduction of the spondylolisthesis vertebral body, and bone graft fusion would help the stability of the spine 29 . Dantas et al 30 found that posterolateral bone graft was not on the load-bearing axis, which was prone to the non-fusion of bone graft or formation of the pseudo joint. Through a follow-up study, Miyashita et al 31 found that pedicle screws and interbody fusion cage could rebuild spinal stability, effectively maintain the height of intervertebral space, reduce screw pressure, and reduce the incidence of fracture and loosening of pedicle screws.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beneficial influence of single-stage posterior surgery for the treatment of lumbar brucella spondylitis combined with spondylolisthesis

Zhang

Zhao

Chen

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the single-stage posterior surgical treatment for patients of lumbar brucella spondylitis combined with spondylolisthesis. In this study, we performed a retrospective analysis of 16 patients with lumbar brucellosis spondylitis combined with spondylolisthesis from January 2015 to January 2019. All patients underwent single-stage posterior lumbar debridement, reduction, interbody fusion, and instrumentation. Preoperative and postoperative of the visual analog scale (VAS), the Oswestry disability index (ODI), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) were compared. In addition, the spondylolisthesis reduction rate, reduction loss rate, interbody fusion rate, and complication rate were recorded. VAS, ODI, ESR, and CRP were conducted with repeated analysis of variance data at different follow-ups. The postoperative follow-up was 12–36 months, with an average of (25.0 ± 8.1) months. VAS, ODI, ESR, and CRP were significantly better at 2-week and 1-year follow-up than preoperative results (P = 0.000, respectively). In addition, 1 year after the operation, VAS, ODI, ESR, and CRP showed a significant improvement (P = 0.000, respectively). The average spondylolisthesis reduction in 2 weeks after operation was (91.2 ± 6.7)%, and the median reduction loss rate in 1 year after operation was 8.0 (5.0, 9.8)%. At the last follow-up, all patients achieved interbody fusion, no loosening and fracture of instrumentation were found, and no recurrence happened. Single-stage posterior operation for lumbar debridement, reduction, interbody fusion, and instrumentation is beneficial for treating lumbar brucellosis spondylitis combined with spondylolisthesis. Furthermore, the reconstruction of spinal stability may relieve pain, heal lesions, and improve patients’ living.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Currently, there are various techniques for the surgical treatment of DLS, ranging from decompression only to various types of interbody fusion. Many of these procedures have gained acceptance in the medical community and become useful treatments over time ( 2 ). To minimize the trauma to the spine and paravertebral muscles, a variety of surgical methods have been used, but the choice of a surgical method for the treatment of DLS is highly controversial ( 3 ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Meta-analysis of the clinical efficacy and safety of oblique lateral interbody fusion and transforaminal interbody fusion in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

Sun

Chen

et al. 2022

EFORT Open Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The aim of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis by meta-analysis. Methods A computer-based search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection databases, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Biology Medicine, and Wanfang Digital Periodicals was conducted from the time of inception of each database to December 2021. The review process was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines and registered in the PROSPERO database. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software provided by the Cochrane Library. Results Thirteen studies were included in the statistical analysis. One randomized controlled study and 12 cohort studies with 954 patients were included. In terms of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, Oswestry disability index score, intervertebral height, and complications, the OLIF group was better than the TLIF group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of visual analogue scale score, lumbar lordosis or fused segment lordosis (P > 0.05). Conclusion Both OLIF and TLIF are effective surgical modalities in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. They achieve similar therapeutic effects, but OLIF is superior to TLIF in restoring intervertebral height. At the same time, OLIF has the advantages of short operation time and less intraoperative blood loss.

show abstract

Effect of interbody fusion compared with posterolateral fusion on lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Cited by 15 publications

References 33 publications

Methods of fusion did not have any significant role in improving the functional outcome in the management of grade 1,2 degenerative spondylolisthesis at 5-year follow-up

Methods of fusion did not have any significant role in improving the functional outcome in the management of grade 1,2 degenerative spondylolisthesis at 5-year follow-up

Beneficial influence of single-stage posterior surgery for the treatment of lumbar brucella spondylitis combined with spondylolisthesis

Meta-analysis of the clinical efficacy and safety of oblique lateral interbody fusion and transforaminal interbody fusion in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About