scholarly journals Biportal Endoscopic Technique for Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Review of Current Research

10.14444/8167 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (suppl 3) ◽  
pp. S84-S92
Author(s):  
Min-Seok Kang ◽  
Dong Hwa Heo ◽  
Hyoung-Bok Kim ◽  
Heung-Tae Chung
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Endoscopic Technique ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive midline lumbar interbody fusion versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-35
Author(s):  
Mladen Djurasovic ◽  
Jeffrey L. Gum ◽  
Charles H. Crawford ◽  
Kirk Owens ◽  
Morgan Brown ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Smoking Status ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Direct Costs ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related

OBJECTIVEThe midline transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIDLIF) using cortical screw fixation is a novel, minimally invasive procedure that may offer enhanced recovery over traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Little information is available regarding the comparative cost-effectiveness of the MIDLIF over conventional TLIF. The purpose of this study was to compare cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive MIDLIF with open TLIF.METHODSFrom a prospective, multisurgeon, surgical database, a consecutive series of patients undergoing 1- or 2-level MIDLIF for degenerative lumbar conditions was identified and propensity matched to patients undergoing TLIF based on age, sex, smoking status, BMI, diagnosis, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification System (ASA) class, and levels fused. Direct costs at 1 year were collected, including costs associated with the index surgical visit as well as costs associated with readmission. Improvement in health-related quality of life was measured using EQ-5D and SF-6D.RESULTSOf 214 and 181 patients undergoing MIDLIF and TLIF, respectively, 33 cases in each cohort were successfully propensity matched. Consistent with propensity matching, there was no difference in age, sex, BMI, diagnosis, ASA class, smoking status, or levels fused. Spondylolisthesis was the most common indication for surgery in both cohorts. Variable direct costs at 1 year were $2493 lower in the MIDLIF group than in the open TLIF group (mean $15,867 vs $17,612, p = 0.073). There was no difference in implant (p = 0.193) or biologics (p = 0.145) cost, but blood utilization (p = 0.015), operating room supplies (p < 0.001), hospital room and board (p < 0.001), pharmacy (p = 0.010), laboratory (p = 0.004), and physical therapy (p = 0.009) costs were all significantly lower in the MIDLIF group. Additionally, the mean length of stay was decreased for MIDLIF as well (3.21 vs 4.02 days, p = 0.05). The EQ-5D gain at 1 year was 0.156 for MIDLIF and 0.141 for open TLIF (p = 0.821). The SF-6D gain at 1 year was 0.071 for MIDLIF and 0.057 for open TLIF (p = 0.551).CONCLUSIONSCompared with patients undergoing traditional open TLIF, those undergoing MIDLIF have similar 1-year gains in health-related quality of life, with total direct costs that are $2493 lower. Although the findings were not statistically significant, minimally invasive MIDLIF showed improved cost-effectiveness at 1 year compared with open TLIF.

Obesity may be associated with adjacent-segment degeneration after single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in spinopelvic-mismatched patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-88
Author(s):  
Ping-Guo Duan ◽  
Praveen V. Mummaneni ◽  
Minghao Wang ◽  
Andrew K. Chan ◽  
Bo Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adjacent Segment Degeneration ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Single Level ◽  
Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Surgery Rates

OBJECTIVEIn this study, the authors’ aim was to investigate whether obesity affects surgery rates for adjacent-segment degeneration (ASD) after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for spondylolisthesis.METHODSPatients who underwent single-level TLIF for spondylolisthesis at the University of California, San Francisco, from 2006 to 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Inclusion criteria were a minimum 2-year follow-up, single-level TLIF, and degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Exclusion criteria were trauma, tumor, infection, multilevel fusions, non-TLIF fusions, or less than a 2-year follow-up. Patient demographic data were collected, and an analysis of spinopelvic parameters was performed. The patients were divided into two groups: mismatched, or pelvic incidence (PI) minus lumbar lordosis (LL) ≥ 10°; and balanced, or PI-LL < 10°. Within the two groups, the patients were further classified by BMI (< 30 and ≥ 30 kg/m2). Patients were then evaluated for surgery for ASD, matched by BMI and PI-LL parameters.RESULTSA total of 190 patients met inclusion criteria (72 males and 118 females, mean age 59.57 ± 12.39 years). The average follow-up was 40.21 ± 20.42 months (range 24–135 months). In total, 24 patients (12.63% of 190) underwent surgery for ASD. Within the entire cohort, 82 patients were in the mismatched group, and 108 patients were in the balanced group. Within the mismatched group, adjacent-segment surgeries occurred at the following rates: BMI < 30 kg/m2, 2.1% (1/48); and BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2, 17.6% (6/34). Significant differences were seen between patients with BMI ≥ 30 and BMI < 30 (p = 0.018). A receiver operating characteristic curve for BMI as a predictor for ASD was established, with an AUC of 0.69 (95% CI 0.49–0.90). The optimal BMI cutoff value determined by the Youden index is 29.95 (sensitivity 0.857; specificity 0.627). However, in the balanced PI-LL group (108/190 patients), there was no difference in surgery rates for ASD among the patients with different BMIs (p > 0.05).CONCLUSIONSIn patients who have a PI-LL mismatch, obesity may be associated with an increased risk of surgery for ASD after TLIF, but in obese patients without PI-LL mismatch, this association was not observed.

Incidence of graft extrusion following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 88-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Bakhsheshian ◽  
Ryan Khanna ◽  
Winward Choy ◽  
Cort D. Lawton ◽  
Alex T. Nixon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Graft Extrusion

scholarly journals Computerized tomography evaluation of a resorbable implant after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

2004 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy R. Kuklo ◽  
Michael K. Rosner ◽  
David W. Polly
Keyword(s):  
Computerized Tomography ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Ct Scanning ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Delayed Union ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Disc Space ◽  
Screw Breakage

Object Synthetic bioabsorbable implants have recently been introduced in spinal surgery; consequently, the indications, applications, and results are still evolving. The authors used absorbable interbody spacers (Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis, TN) packed with recombinant bone morphogenetic protein (Infuse; Medtronic Sofamor Danek) for single- and multiple-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures over a period of 18 months. This is a consecutive case series in which postoperative computerized tomography (CT) scanning was used to assess fusion status. Methods There were 22 patients (17 men, five women; 39 fusion levels) whose mean age was 41.6 years (range 23–70 years) and in whom the mean follow-up duration was 12.4 months (range 6–18 months). Bridging bone was noted as early as the 3-month postoperative CT scan when obtained; solid arthrodesis was routinely noted between 6 and 12 months in 38 (97.4%) of 39 fusion levels. In patients who underwent repeated CT scanning, the fusion mass appeared to increase with time, whereas the disc space height remained stable. Although the results are early (mean 12-month follow-up duration), there was only one noted asymptomatic delayed union/nonunion at L5–S1 in a two-level TLIF with associated screw breakage. There were no infections or complications related to the cages. Conclusions The bioabsorbable cages appear to be a viable alternative to metal interbody spacers, and may be ideally suited to spinal interbody applications because of their progressive load-bearing properties.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document