2022
DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.829469
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Surgical Treatments for Lumbar Spine Diseases (TLIF vs. Other Surgical Techniques): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract: ObjectiveThe purpose of this study is to compare fusion rate, clinical outcomes, complications among transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), and other techniques for lumbar spine diseases.DesignThis is a systematic review and meta-analysis.Data SourcesPubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases were searched from January 2013 through December 2019.Eligibility Criteria for Selecting StudiesRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compare lumbar interbody fusion with posterolateral fusio… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
(75 reference statements)
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For the treatment of L5 spondylolisthesis, ALIF had some advantages, such as no damage to paraspinal muscles and bone structures, less blood loss, faster recovery, a larger cage with a possible higher fusion rate because of the greater contact surface between the endplate of the vertebra and cage and more graft bone as compared with PLIF or TLIF [ 10 , 19 21 ]. Many studies have proven that ALIF can achieve similar or better clinical outcomes than PLIF or TLIF [ 20 , 22 , 23 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the treatment of L5 spondylolisthesis, ALIF had some advantages, such as no damage to paraspinal muscles and bone structures, less blood loss, faster recovery, a larger cage with a possible higher fusion rate because of the greater contact surface between the endplate of the vertebra and cage and more graft bone as compared with PLIF or TLIF [ 10 , 19 21 ]. Many studies have proven that ALIF can achieve similar or better clinical outcomes than PLIF or TLIF [ 20 , 22 , 23 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…TLIF, using a unilateral transforaminal approach, can avoid excessive traction of the dural sac, nerve roots, and lumbar and back muscles, while achieving bilateral decompression by preserving the contralateral lamina and facet joints. This technique has a minimal impact on the mechanical structure of the spine's posterior column, while retaining bone structures such as the pedicle and lamina, which increases the stability between the adjacent vertebral bodies [2]. Long-term clinical studies have shown that TLIF has satisfactory clinical efficacy.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This would require a neural decompression often reinforced with stabilization to achieve a solid fusion. [ 3 ] A growing body of evidence consistently demonstrates improved clinical outcomes with lumbar fusions for patients who fail conservative care. [ 4 ]…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%