scholarly journals Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Technical Note and Surgical Comparison with Conventional MIS TLIF.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asrafi Rizki Gatam ◽  
Omar Luthfi ◽  
Harmantya Mahadhipta ◽  
Luthfi Gatam ◽  
Ajiantoro Ajiantoro
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Invasive Surgery ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Minimal Invasive ◽  
Technical Note ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Abstract Backgrounds : Minimally invasive surgery develops very extensively in past few decades, not only in the scope of decompression but until fusion surgery. Surgeon has been trying to reduce the damage to the normal anatomical structure. In this study we performed unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) as one of the fusion option which is readily available without sophisticated minimal invasive instrument. The purpose of this study is to introduce unilateral biportal endoscopic surgery and comparing the result with conventional minimal invasive lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) Methods : This is a retrospective cohort study of 145 lumbar spondylolisthesis patient underwent conventional MIS-TLIF or ULIF procedure. All patient were followed up until 12 months to evaluate the VAS of back pain and leg pain, ODI, SF-36 and fusion rate. Results : Back pain VAS were a little higher compared with the endoscopic group, but the VAS of leg pain were the same. Both group had improvement in ODI score and SF-36 which shows both of the procedure were quite effective in managing such cases. Conclusion : Full endoscopic fusion offer benefit of minimal invasive surgery with better visualization of decompression and endplate preparation. Long term follow up is still needed to evaluate the result of the procedure.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Decompression Alone for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Neurosurgery ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Kai-Hong Chan ◽  
Erica F Bisson ◽  
Mohamad Bydon ◽  
Steven D Glassman ◽  
Kevin T Foley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Reoperation Rate ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Abstract INTRODUCTION The optimal minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approach for lumbar spondylolisthesis is not clearly elucidated. This study compares patient reported outcomes (PRO) following MIS transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) and MIS decompression for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS A total of 608 patients from the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Module underwent single-level surgery for degenerative grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis of whom 143 underwent MIS [72 MI-TLIF (50.3%) and 71 MIS decompressions (49.7%)]. Surgeries were classified as MIS if there was utilization of percutaneous screw fixation and placement of a Wiltse-plane MIS intervertebral body graft (MI-TLIF) or if there was a tubular decompression (MIS decompression). In total, 24-mo follow-up parameters were collected. PROs included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), numeric rating scale (NRS) Back Pain, NRS Leg Pain, EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) Questionnaire, and North American Spine Society (NASS) Satisfaction Questionnaire. Multivariate models were constructed adjusting for baseline patient and surgical factors. RESULTS The mean age of the MIS cohort was 67.1 ± 11.3 yr (MI-TLIF 62.1 yr vs MIS decompression 72.3 yr) and consisted of 79 (55.2%) women (MI-TLIF 55.6% vs MIS decompression 54.9%). The proportions reaching 24-mo follow-up were similar (MI-TLIF 83.3% and MIS decompression 84.5%; P = .85). MI-TLIF was associated with higher blood loss (108.8 vs 33.0 mL, P < .001), longer operative times (228.2 vs 101.8 min, P < .001) and length of hospitalization (2.9 vs 0.7 d, P < .001). MI-TLIF was associated with a significantly lower reoperation rate (14.1% vs 1.4%, P = .004). Both cohorts demonstrated significant improvements in ODI, NRS back pain, NRS leg pain, and EQ-5D at 24 mo (P < .001). In multivariate analyses, MI-TLIF was associated with superior ODI change (ß = −7.59; 95% CI [−14.96 to −0.23]; P = .04), NRS back pain change (ß = −1.54; 95% CI [−2.78 to −0.30]; P = .02), and NASS satisfaction (OR = 0.32; 95% CI [0.12-0.82]; P = .02). CONCLUSION For symptomatic, single-level degenerative spondylolisthesis, MI-TLIF was associated with a 10-fold lower reoperation rate and superior outcomes for disability, back pain, and patient satisfaction compared to MIS decompression alone.

scholarly journals Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technical Note and Preliminary Clinical Experience with 2-Year Follow-Up

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Junlong Wu ◽  
Huan Liu ◽  
Shengxiang Ao ◽  
Wenjie Zheng ◽  
Changqing Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Minimal Invasive ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Large Sample Size ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Improvement Rate ◽  
Sf 36

Objective. Endoscopic surgeries have been attempted in the field of lumbar decompression and fusion surgery in the past decade. Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (PELIF) is a new-emerging technique taking advantages of an anatomical (Kambin’s triangle) to achieve simultaneous decompression and fusion under endoscopic visualization. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the feasibility and safety of PELIF technique with general anesthesia and neuromonitoring.Methods. The authors present the details of PELIF technique with general anesthesia and neuromonitoring. The first 7 consecutive patients treated with minimum of 2 year’s follow-up were included. Clinical outcomes were assessed by visual analog scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, and the Short Form-36 health survey questionnaire (SF-36) in the immediate preoperative period and during the follow-up period.Results. All patients underwent single-level PELIF surgery successfully and without conversion to open surgery. The average age was 56.0±13.0 years. All patients had Grade I degenerative/isthmic spondylolisthesis and 4 patients coexisted with disc herniation. The mean operative time was 167.5±30.9 minutes, and intraoperative blood loss was 70.0±24.5 ml. Postoperative drainage volume was 24.5±18.3 ml. The differences in the VAS scores for low back pain and leg pain between preoperative and follow-up were significant (P<0.05). The SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) improved from 38.83±4.17 to 55.67±2.58 (P<0.001). The SF-36 Mental Component Summary (MCS) improved from 43.83±3.13 to 57.50±5.36 (P=0.001). The ODI score improvement rate was 33.7±3.7 %. All cases demonstrated radiopaque graft in the intervertebral disc space consistent with solid arthrodesis.Conclusions. PELIF technique seems to be a promising surgical technique for selected appropriate patients, with the minimal invasive advantages in decreased blood, shortage of ambulation time, and hospital stay, compared with MIS-TLIF. Because of limited Kambin’s triangle space and the exiting nerve root nearby, PELIF is still a challenging technique. Future advancement and development in instrument and cage design are vital for application and popularization of this technique. Prospective, randomized, controlled studies with large sample size on PELIF technique are still needed to prove its safety, efficacy, and minimal invasive advantages.

scholarly journals The Outcomes of Minimally Invasive versus Open Posterior Approach Spinal Fusion in Treatment of Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: The Current Evidence from Prospective Comparative Studies

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Ai-Min Wu ◽  
Chun-Hui Chen ◽  
Zhi-Hao Shen ◽  
Zhen-Hua Feng ◽  
Wan-Qing Weng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Secondary Surgery ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Lumbar Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Component Scores

Purpose. To investigate the evidence of minimally invasive (MI) versus open (OP) posterior lumbar fusion in treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis from current prospective literatures.Methods. The electronic literature database of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane library was searched at April 2016. The data of operative time, estimated blood loss and length of hospital stay, visual analog scale (VAS) of both lower back pain and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), SF-36 PCS (physical component scores) and SF-36 MCS (mental component scores), complications, fusion rate, and secondary surgery were extracted and analyzed by STATA 12.0 software.Results. Five nonrandom prospective comparative studies were included in this meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed that the MI group had a significantly longer operative time than OP group, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stay. No significant difference was found in back pain, leg pain, ODI, SF-36 PCS, SF-36 MCS, complications, fusion rate, and secondary surgery between MI and OP groups.Conclusion. The prospective evidence suggested that MI posterior fusion for spondylolisthesis had less EBL and hospital stay than OP fusion; however it took more operative time. Both MI and OP fusion had similar results in pain and functional outcomes, complication, fusion rate, and secondary surgery.

Minimal Access Versus Open Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Spondylolisthesis

Neurosurgery ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
pp. 296-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Ghahreman ◽  
Richard D. Ferch ◽  
Prashanth J. Rao ◽  
Nikolai Bogduk
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Minimal Access ◽  
Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Abstract OBJECTIVE To compare the safety and effectiveness of minimal access posterior lumbar interbody fusion (MAPLIF) with open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (OPLIF) in patients with spondylolisthesis and radicular pain. METHODS A prospective study was performed of 47 patients with radicular pain resulting from lumbar spondylolisthesis with a slip of less than 50% who underwent either MAPLIF (n = 23) or OPLIF (n = 24). At 12 months after treatment, clinical outcomes were measured using the Short-Form Health Survey 36 and the visual analog score for both leg pain and back pain, and the degree of reduction of spondylolisthesis, restoration of disc height, and presence of fusion were assessed. RESULTS Both groups were similar in demographic and baseline clinical features. Both exhibited statistically and clinically significant improvements in back pain (OPLIF, 64%; MAPLIF, 78%), and leg pain (88% for both groups). This was corroborated by improvements in social and physical functioning, which were similar for both groups. The reduction of spondylolisthesis and fusion rates were also similar between the 2 groups. MAPLIF patients commenced mobilization sooner, achieved independent mobilization earlier, and had a shorter hospital stay (4 days versus 7 days). CONCLUSION MAPLIF and OPLIF both reduce leg and back pain and restore function to a similar extent. MAPLIF is as effective as OPLIF in reducing the slip in patients with spondylolisthesis of less than 50%. MAPLIF promotes faster recovery and shortens hospital stay.

scholarly journals A comparison of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and decompression alone for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (5) ◽  
pp. E13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew K. Chan ◽  
Erica F. Bisson ◽  
Mohamad Bydon ◽  
Steven D. Glassman ◽  
Kevin T. Foley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Reoperation Rate ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

OBJECTIVEThe optimal minimally invasive surgery (MIS) approach for grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis is not clearly elucidated. In this study, the authors compared the 24-month patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after MIS transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and MIS decompression for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.METHODSA total of 608 patients from 12 high-enrolling sites participating in the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) lumbar spondylolisthesis module underwent single-level surgery for degenerative grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis, of whom 143 underwent MIS (72 MIS TLIF [50.3%] and 71 MIS decompression [49.7%]). Surgeries were classified as MIS if there was utilization of percutaneous screw fixation and placement of a Wiltse plane MIS intervertebral body graft (MIS TLIF) or if there was a tubular decompression (MIS decompression). Parameters obtained at baseline through at least 24 months of follow-up were collected. PROs included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), numeric rating scale (NRS) for back pain, NRS for leg pain, EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) questionnaire, and North American Spine Society (NASS) satisfaction questionnaire. Multivariate models were constructed to adjust for patient characteristics, surgical variables, and baseline PRO values.RESULTSThe mean age of the MIS cohort was 67.1 ± 11.3 years (MIS TLIF 62.1 years vs MIS decompression 72.3 years) and consisted of 79 (55.2%) women (MIS TLIF 55.6% vs MIS decompression 54.9%). The proportion in each cohort reaching the 24-month follow-up did not differ significantly between the cohorts (MIS TLIF 83.3% and MIS decompression 84.5%, p = 0.85). MIS TLIF was associated with greater blood loss (mean 108.8 vs 33.0 ml, p < 0.001), longer operative time (mean 228.2 vs 101.8 minutes, p < 0.001), and longer length of hospitalization (mean 2.9 vs 0.7 days, p < 0.001). MIS TLIF was associated with a significantly lower reoperation rate (14.1% vs 1.4%, p = 0.004). Both cohorts demonstrated significant improvements in ODI, NRS back pain, NRS leg pain, and EQ-5D at 24 months (p < 0.001, all comparisons relative to baseline). In multivariate analyses, MIS TLIF—as opposed to MIS decompression alone—was associated with superior ODI change (β = −7.59, 95% CI −14.96 to −0.23; p = 0.04), NRS back pain change (β = −1.54, 95% CI −2.78 to −0.30; p = 0.02), and NASS satisfaction (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.12–0.82; p = 0.02).CONCLUSIONSFor symptomatic, single-level degenerative spondylolisthesis, MIS TLIF was associated with a lower reoperation rate and superior outcomes for disability, back pain, and patient satisfaction compared with posterior MIS decompression alone. This finding may aid surgical decision-making when considering MIS for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

scholarly journals Do measures of surgical effectiveness at 1 year after lumbar spine surgery accurately predict 2-year outcomes?

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 689-696 ◽  
Author(s):  
Owoicho Adogwa ◽  
Aladine A. Elsamadicy ◽  
Jing L. Han ◽  
Joseph Cheng ◽  
Isaac Karikari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Spine Surgery ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Lumbar Spine Surgery ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Longitudinal Assessment ◽  
Sf 36

OBJECTIVE With the recent passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, there has been a dramatic shift toward critical analyses of quality and longitudinal assessment of subjective and objective outcomes after lumbar spine surgery. Accordingly, the emergence and routine use of real-world institutional registries have been vital to the longitudinal assessment of quality. However, prospectively obtaining longitudinal outcomes for patients at 24 months after spine surgery remains a challenge. The aim of this study was to assess if 12-month measures of treatment effectiveness accurately predict long-term outcomes (24 months). METHODS A nationwide, multiinstitutional, prospective spine outcomes registry was used for this study. Enrollment criteria included available demographic, surgical, and clinical outcomes data. All patients had prospectively collected outcomes measures and a minimum 2-year follow-up. Patient-reported outcomes instruments (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], SF-36, and visual analog scale [VAS]-back pain/leg pain) were completed before surgery and then at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. The Health Transition Index of the SF-36 was used to determine the 1- and 2-year minimum clinically important difference (MCID), and logistic regression modeling was performed to determine if achieving MCID at 1 year adequately predicted improvement and achievement of MCID at 24 months. RESULTS The study group included 969 patients: 300 patients underwent anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), 606 patients underwent transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), and 63 patients underwent lateral interbody fusion (LLIF). There was a significant correlation between the 12- and 24-month ODI (r = 0.82; p < 0.0001), SF-36 Physical Component Summary score (r = 0.89; p < 0.0001), VAS-back pain (r = 0.90; p < 0.0001), and VAS-leg pain (r = 0.85; p < 0.0001). For the ALIF cohort, patients achieving MCID thresholds for ODI at 12 months were 13-fold (p < 0.0001) more likely to achieve MCID at 24 months. Similarly, for the TLIF and LLIF cohorts, patients achieving MCID thresholds for ODI at 12 months were 13-fold and 14-fold (p < 0.0001) more likely to achieve MCID at 24 months. Outcome measures obtained at 12 months postoperatively are highly predictive of 24-month outcomes, independent of the surgical procedure. CONCLUSIONS In a multiinstitutional prospective study, patient-centered measures of surgical effectiveness obtained at 12 months adequately predict long-term (24-month) outcomes after lumbar spine surgery. Patients achieving MCID at 1 year were more likely to report meaningful and durable improvement at 24 months, suggesting that the 12-month time point is sufficient to identify effective versus ineffective patient care.

Predictors of the Best Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Surgery for Grade 1 Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Neurosurgery ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Kai-Hong Chan ◽  
Erica F Bisson ◽  
Mohamad Bydon ◽  
Steven D Glassman ◽  
Kevin T Foley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive Surgery ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Invasive Surgery ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
College Education ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Abstract INTRODUCTION The factors driving the best outcomes following minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) are not clearly elucidated. This study investigates the factors that drive the best patient reported outcomes (PRO) following MIS for DLS. METHODS A total of 608 patients from the prospective Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Registry underwent surgery for grade 1 DLS of whom 259 underwent surgery with MIS techniques [187 fusions (72.2%)]. Surgeries were classified as MIS if any of the following were involved: MIS laminectomy, MIS pedicle screws, MIS interbody grafts, or percutaneous screws. Outcomes were assessed at 24 mo postoperatively. PROs included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), numeric rating scale (NRS) Back Pain, NRS Leg Pain, EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) Questionnaire, and North American Spine Society (NASS) Satisfaction Questionnaire. Multivariate models were constructed adjusting for patient characteristics, presentation characteristics, surgical variables, socioeconomic characteristics, and baseline PRO values. RESULTS The mean age of the MIS cohort was 64.2 ± 11.5 yr [148 (57.1%) women and 111 (42.9%) men]. In multivariate analyses, aside from baseline PRO values, only 3 factors were significantly associated with multiple 24-mo PRO change scores: employment, age, and the addition of fusion to surgery. Employment was associated with superior postoperative ODI (ß-7.8; 95% CI [−12.9- −2.6]; P = .003), NRS back pain (ß-1.2; 95% CI [−2.1- −0.4]; P = 0.004), EQ-5D (ß0.1; 95% CI [0.01-0.1]; P = .03), and NASS satisfaction (OR = 0.27; 95% CI [0.12-0.58]; P < .001). Increasing age was associated with superior NRS leg pain (ß-0.1; 95% CI [minus;0.1- minus;0.01]; P = .03) and NASS satisfaction (OR = 0.95; 95% CI [0.92-0.99]; P = .02). The addition of a fusion was associated with superior ODI (ß-6.7; 95% CI [minus;12.7- minus;0.7]; P = .03), NRS back pain (ß-1.1; 95% CI [minus;2.1- minus;0.2]; P = .02), and NASS satisfaction (OR = 0.28; 95% CI [0.12-0.62]; P = .002). CONCLUSION Preoperative active employment, at least 4 yr of college education, and surgeries including a fusion were significant predictors of superior outcomes across the domains of disease-specific disability, back pain, leg pain, quality of life, and patient satisfaction. Increasing age was predictive of superior outcomes for leg pain and satisfaction.

Utility of minimum clinically important difference in assessing pain, disability, and health state after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 598-604 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott L. Parker ◽  
Owoicho Adogwa ◽  
Alexandra R. Paul ◽  
William N. Anderson ◽  
Oran Aaronson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Operating Characteristic ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Characteristic Curve ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Minimum Clinically Important Difference ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Object Outcome studies for spine surgery rely on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to assess treatment effects. Commonly used health-related quality-of-life questionnaires include the following scales: back pain and leg pain visual analog scale (BP-VAS and LP-VAS); the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI); and the EuroQol-5D health survey (EQ-5D). A shortcoming of these questionnaires is that their numerical scores lack a direct meaning or clinical significance. Because of this, the concept of the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) has been put forth as a measure for the critical threshold needed to achieve treatment effectiveness. By this measure, treatment effects reaching the MCID threshold value imply clinical significance and justification for implementation into clinical practice. Methods In 45 consecutive patients undergoing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis-associated back and leg pain, PRO questionnaires measuring BP-VAS, LPVAS, ODI, and EQ-5D were administered preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively, and 2-year change scores were calculated. Four established anchor-based MCID calculation methods were used to calculate MCID, as follows: 1) average change; 2) minimum detectable change (MDC); 3) change difference; and 4) receiver operating characteristic curve analysis for two separate anchors (the health transition index [HTI] of the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-36], and the satisfaction index). Results All patients were available at the 2-year follow-up. The 2-year improvements in BP-VAS, LP-VAS, ODI, and EQ-5D scores were 4.3 ± 2.9, 3.8 ± 3.4, 19.5 ± 11.3, and 0.43 ± 0.44, respectively (mean ± SD). The 4 MCID calculation methods generated a range of MCID values for each of the PROs (BP-VAS, 2.1–5.3; LP-VAS, 2.1–4.7; ODI, 11–22.9; and EQ-5D, 0.15–0.54). The mean area under the curve (AUC) for the receiver operating characteristic curve from the 4 PRO-specific calculations was greater for the HTI versus satisfaction anchor (HTI [AUC 0.73] vs satisfaction [AUC 0.69]), suggesting HTI as a more accurate anchor. Conclusions The TLIF-specific MCID is highly variable based on calculation technique. The MDC approach with the SF-36 HTI anchor appears to be most appropriate for calculating MCID because it provided a threshold above the 95% CI of the unimproved cohort (greater than the measurement error), was closest to the mean change score reported by improved and satisfied patients, and was least affected by the choice of anchor. Based on the MDC method with HTI anchor, MCID scores following TLIF are 2.1 points for BP-VAS, 2.8 points for LP-VAS, 14.9 points for ODI, and 0.46 quality-adjusted life years for EQ-5D.

scholarly journals Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus oblique lateral interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disease: a meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Qing-Yi Zhang ◽  
Jie Tan ◽  
Kai Huang ◽  
Hui-Qi Xie
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Lumbar Lordosis ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Disc Height ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Intraoperative Blood Loss

Abstract Background Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) are widely used in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. In the present study, a meta-analysis was conducted to compare the clinical and radiographic efficacy of these two procedures. Methods A systematic literature review was performed, and the quality of retrieved studies was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Clinical outcomes, including operation time, intraoperative blood loss, improvement in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), improvement in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) effectiveness rate and complications, in addition to radiographic outcomes, including restoration of disc height, disc angle, overall lumbar lordosis, fusion rate and subsidence, were extracted and input into a fixed or random effect model to compare the efficacy of MIS-TLIF and OLIF. Results Seven qualified studies were included. Clinically, OLIF resulted in less intraoperative blood loss and shorter operation time than MIS-TLIF. Improvement of VAS for leg pain was more obvious in the OLIF group (P < 0.0001), whereas improvement of VAS for back pain (P = 0.08) and ODI (P = 0.98) as well as JOABPEQ effectiveness rate (P = 0.18) were similar in the two groups. Radiographically, OLIF was more effective in restoring disc height (P = 0.01) and equivalent in improving the disc angle (P = 0.18) and lumbar lordosis (P = 0.48) compared with MIS-TLIF. The fusion rate (P = 0.11) was similar in both groups, while the subsidence was more severe in the MIS-TLIF group (P < 0.00001). Conclusions The above evidence suggests that OLIF is associated with a shorter operation time (with supplementary fixation in the prone position) and less intraoperative blood loss than MIS-TLIF and can lead to better leg pain alleviation, disc height restoration and subsidence resistance. No differences regarding back pain relief, functional recovery, complications, disc angle restoration, lumbar lordosis restoration and fusion rate were found. However, due to the limited number of studies, our results should be confirmed with high-level studies to fully compare the therapeutic efficacy of MIS-TLIF and OLIF. Trial registration PROSPERO ID: CRD42020201903.

Predictors of the Best Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Surgery for Grade 1 Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Neurosurgery ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew K Chan ◽  
Erica F Bisson ◽  
Mohamad Bydon ◽  
Steven D Glassman ◽  
Kevin T Foley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive Surgery ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Invasive Surgery ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Numeric Rating Scale ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Abstract BACKGROUND The factors driving the best outcomes following minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis are not clearly elucidated. OBJECTIVE To investigate the factors that drive the best 24-mo patient-reported outcomes (PRO) following MIS surgery for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS A total of 259 patients from the Quality Outcomes Database lumbar spondylolisthesis module underwent single-level surgery for degenerative grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis with MIS techniques (188 fusions, 72.6%). Twenty-four-month follow-up PROs were collected and included the Oswestry disability index (ODI) change (ie, 24-mo minus baseline value), numeric rating scale (NRS) back pain change, NRS leg pain change, EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) questionnaire change, and North American Spine Society (NASS) satisfaction questionnaire. Multivariable models were constructed to identify predictors of PRO change. RESULTS The mean age was 64.2 ± 11.5 yr and consisted of 148 (57.1%) women and 111 (42.9%) men. In multivariable analyses, employment was associated with superior postoperative ODI change (β-7.8; 95% CI [−12.9 to −2.6]; P = .003), NRS back pain change (β −1.2; 95% CI [−2.1 to −0.4]; P = .004), EQ-5D change (β 0.1; 95% CI [0.01-0.1]; P = .03), and NASS satisfaction (OR = 3.7; 95% CI [1.7-8.3]; P &lt; .001). Increasing age was associated with superior NRS leg pain change (β −0.1; 95% CI [−0.1 to −0.01]; P = .03) and NASS satisfaction (OR = 1.05; 95% CI [1.01-1.09]; P = .02). Fusion surgeries were associated with superior ODI change (β −6.7; 95% CI [−12.7 to −0.7]; P = .03), NRS back pain change (β −1.1; 95% CI [−2.1 to −0.2]; P = .02), and NASS satisfaction (OR = 3.6; 95% CI [1.6-8.3]; P = .002). CONCLUSION Preoperative employment and surgeries, including a fusion, were predictors of superior outcomes across the domains of disease-specific disability, back pain, leg pain, quality of life, and patient satisfaction. Increasing age was predictive of superior outcomes for leg pain improvement and satisfaction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document