Relationship Between Alterations of Spinal/Pelvic Sagittal Parameters and Clinical Outcomes After Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

2020 ◽  
Vol 133 ◽  
pp. e156-e164
Author(s):  
Liang Xiao ◽  
Quanlai Zhao ◽  
Xiumin Sun ◽  
Chen Liu ◽  
Yu Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Sagittal Parameters ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

scholarly journals Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes following Combined Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Lateral Instrumentation for the Treatment of Degenerative Spine Deformity: A Preliminary Retrospective Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Kai Wang ◽  
Can Zhang ◽  
Cheng Cheng ◽  
Fengzeng Jian ◽  
Hao Wu
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Cobb Angle ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Spine Deformity ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Spine ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Objective. The authors recently used a combination of minimally invasive oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and lateral fixation for the treatment of degenerative spine deformity. The early results were promising. Radiographic and clinical results as well as complications were retrospectively assessed in the current study. Methods. Eleven patients with degenerative spine deformity underwent combined OLIF and lateral instrumentation without real-time electromyography (EMG) monitoring. Radiographic measurements including coronal Cobb angle, central sacral vertebral line (CSVL), lumbar lordosis (LL), sagittal vertebral axis (SVA), pelvic tilt (PT), and LL-PI (pelvic incidence) mismatch were taken preoperatively and at last follow-up postoperatively in all patients. Concurrently, the visual analog score (VAS) for back pain and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score were used to assess clinical outcomes. The fusion rate of OLIF cage, total blood loss, operation time, hospital stay, and complications were also evaluated. Results. At last follow-up, all patients who underwent combined OLIF and lateral instrumentation achieved statistically significant improvement in coronal Cobb angle (from 15.3±4.7° to 5.9±3.1°, p < 0.01), LL (from 34.3±9.0° to 48.2±8.5°, p < 0.01), PT (from 24.2±9.6° to 16.2±6.0°, p < 0.01), LL-PI mismatch (from 15.4±8.7° to 7.0±3.7°, p < 0.01), CSVL (from 2.1±2.2cm to 0.7±0.9cm, p = 0.01), and SVA (from 7.0±3.9cm to 2.9±1.8cm, p < 0.01). VAS for back pain (from 6.9±1.4 to 2.0±0.9, p < 0.05) and ODI (from 39.5±3.1 to 21.9±3.6, p < 0.01) improved significantly after surgery. Conclusions. A combination of OLIF and lateral instrumentation is an effective and safety means of achieving correction of both coronal and sagittal deformity, resulting in improvement of quality of life in patients with degenerative spine deformity. It is a promising way to treat patients with moderate degenerative spine deformity.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes of Biportal Endoscopic Interlaminar Decompression with Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF): Comparative Analysis with TLIF

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 630
Author(s):  
Ho-Jin Lee ◽  
Eugene J. Park ◽  
Jae-Sung Ahn ◽  
Sang Bum Kim ◽  
Youk-Sang Kwon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Invasive Procedure ◽  
Foraminal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Combination Technique ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Group A ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) improves the spinal canal, with favorable clinical outcomes. However, it may not be useful for treating concurrent, severe central canal stenosis (SCCS). Therefore, we added biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (BESS) after OLIF, evaluated the combined procedure for one-segment fusion with clinical outcomes, and compared it to open conventional TLIF. Patients were divided into two groups: Group A underwent BESS with OLIF, and Group B were treated via TLIF. The length of hospital stay (LOS), follow-up period, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), fusion segment, complications, and clinical outcomes were evaluated. Clinical outcomes were measured using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, and the modified Macnab criteria. All the clinical parameters improved significantly after the operation in Group A. The only significant between-group difference was that the EBL was significantly lower in Group A. At the final follow-up, no clinical parameter differed significantly between the groups. No complications developed in either group. We suggest that our combination technique is a useful, alternative, minimally invasive procedure for the treatment of one-segment lumbar SCCS associated with foraminal stenosis or segmental instability.

scholarly journals The effect of two surgical approach Lordosis correction in degenerative lumbar diseases: minimally invasive oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) versus transforminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF)

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renjie Li ◽  
Xiaofeng Shao ◽  
Weimin Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Bed Rest ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Vas Scores ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Abstract Background: The present study aimed to compare clinical outcomes and radiographic results of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed and compared 28 patients who underwent OLIF (OLIF group) and 35 who underwent TLIF (TLIF group). The operation time, intraoperative hemorrhage, bed rest duration, and length of hospital stay were compared between the 2 groups. Clinical results were evaluated with the ODI and VAS for back and leg pain. Radiological results were evaluated with disc height (DH), foraminal height (FH), fused segment lordosis (FSL) and lumbar lordosis (LL).Results: The OLIF group had less intraoperative blood loss, shorter operative time, bed rest time, and hospital stay than TLIF group (P<0.05). The OLIF group had lower VAS scores for back pain and lower VAS scores for leg pain after surgery compared with before surgery (P<0.05), The OLIF group had lower ODI after surgery compared with before surgery (P<0.05). The was no significant difference in decrease value in VAS and ODI after surgery between the two groups (P>0.05). No significant differences were found in DH, FH and LL between the 2 groups preoperatively (P>0.05). The OLIF group showed higher DH and FH than the TLIF group at all time points (P<0.05). No significant differences were found in FSH between the 2 groups at any time point.Conclusions: OLIF has similar good long-term clinical outcomes of TLIF with the additional benefits of less initial postoperative pain, early rehabilitation, shorter hospitalization, and fewer complications.

Simultaneous Robotic Single Position Surgery (SR-SPS) with Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Case Series

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luis Daniel Diaz-Aguilar ◽  
Vrajesh Shah ◽  
Alexander Himstead ◽  
Nolan J. Brown ◽  
Mickey E. Abraham ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

scholarly journals Posterior fixation can further improve the segmental alignment of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with oblique lumbar interbody fusion

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jingye Wu ◽  
Tenghui Ge ◽  
Ning Zhang ◽  
Jianing Li ◽  
Wei Tian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Reduction Ratio ◽  
Posterior Fixation ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Slip Ratio ◽  
Radiographic Parameters ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Segmental Lordosis

Abstract Background For patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis, whether additional posterior fixation can further improve segmental alignment is unknown, compared with stand-alone cage insertion in oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) procedure. The aim of this study was to compare changes of the radiographical segmental alignment following stand-alone cage insertion and additional posterior fixation in the same procedure setting of OLIF for patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis. Methods A retrospective observational study. Selected consecutive patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis underwent OLIF procedure from July 2017 to August 2019. Five radiographic parameters of disc height (DH), DH-Anterior, DH-Posterior, slip ratio and segmental lordosis (SL) were measured on preoperative CT scans and intraoperative fluoroscopic images. Comparisons of those radiographic parameters prior to cage insertion, following cage insertion and following posterior fixation were performed. Results A total of thirty-three patients including six males and twenty-seven females, with an average age of 66.9 ± 8.7 years, were reviewed. Totally thirty-six slipped levels were assessed with thirty levels at L4/5, four at L3/4 and two at L2/3. Intraoperatively, with only anterior cage support, DH was increased from 8.2 ± 1.6 mm to 11.8 ± 1.7 mm (p < 0.001), DH-Anterior was increased from 9.6 ± 2.3 mm to 13.4 ± 2.1 mm (p < 0.001), DH-Posterior was increased from 6.1 ± 1.9 mm to 9.1 ± 2.1 mm (p < 0.001), the slip ratio was reduced from 11.1 ± 4.6% to 8.3 ± 4.4% (p = 0.020) with the slip reduction ratio 25.6 ± 32.3%, and SL was slightly changed from 8.7 ± 3.7° to 8.3 ± 3.0°(p = 1.000). Following posterior fixation, the DH was unchanged (from 11.8 ± 1.7 mm to 11.8 ± 2.3 mm, p = 1.000), DH-Anterior and DH-Posterior were slightly changed from 13.4 ± 2.1 mm and 9.1 ± 2.1 mm to 13.7 ± 2.3 mm and 8.4 ± 1.8 mm respectively (P = 0.861, P = 0.254), the slip ratio was reduced from 8.3 ± 4.4% to 2.1 ± 3.6% (p < 0.001) with the slip reduction ratio 57.9 ± 43.9%, and the SL was increased from 8.3 ± 3.0° to 10.7 ± 3.6° (p = 0.008). Conclusions Compared with stand-alone cage insertion, additional posterior fixation provides better segmental alignment improvement in terms of slip reduction and segmental lordosis in OLIF procedures in the treatment of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis.

scholarly journals Introducing V-line as a New Strategy to Choose Surgical Corridor in Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion at the L5-S1 Segment

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Zhang ◽  
Xing Du ◽  
Yong Zhu ◽  
Wei Luo ◽  
Ben Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Injury Risk ◽  
Protective Factor ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Iliac Crest ◽  
Iliac Vein ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Multiple Variables ◽  
Surgical Corridor ◽  
Psoas Major

Abstract Purpose: To assess the availability of oblique lumbar interbody fusion at the level of L5-S1 (OLIF51) and to choose ideal surgical corridor in OLIF51 by introducing V-line. Methods: The axial views through the center of L5-S1 disc were reviewed. We adopt 18mm as the width of the simulated surgical corridor. The midline of the surgical corridor is at the center of L5-S1 disc. According to the traction distance of the left iliac vein (LCIV) and psoas major (PM), we defined all the subjects as V (+) (traction-difficultly LCIV), V (-) (traction-friendly LCIV), P (+) (traction-difficultly PM) and P (-) (traction-friendly PM). V-line was defined as a straight line dividing equally the simulated surgical corridor. All cases were divided into 2 groups: The V-line (+) group, more than half of the LCIV region is located in ventral part of V-line; the V-line (-) group, more than half of the LCIV region is located in dorsal part of V-line. Multiple variables regressive analysis was conducted to analyze the independent risk factors of V-line (+). Results: V-line (+) was found in 36 (38.7%) patients and V-line (-) in 57 (61.3%). Incidence of V (+) and P (+) were 35.4% (33/93) and 30.1% (28/93), respectively. 16.1% (15/93) subjects processed V (+) and P (+) at the same time. The independent risk factor of V-line (+) were gender of male (P = 0.034, OR: 12.152) and medial position of LCIV (P ＜ 0.001, OR: 265.085). High iliac crest was a significant independent protective factor (P = 0.001, OR: 0.750). Conclusions: Most patients were suitable for OLIF51. V-line could assess the injury risk of LCIV. Among male patients having the LCIV near the midline or the iliac crest relatively low, a surgical corridor external to the LCIV should be taken into consideration.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document