Anterior to Psoas Fusion versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Fusion with Cortical Bone Trajectory Fixation for Single-Level Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease

被引:0
|
作者
Lin, Jui-Feng [1 ,2 ]
Tsai, Cheng-Chia [1 ,3 ]
Huang, Yu-Chuen [4 ,5 ]
Yang, Chih-Chuan [1 ,6 ]
Chen, Yu-Jen [2 ,4 ,5 ,6 ,7 ]
机构
[1] MacKay Mem Hosp, Dept Surg, Taipei, Taiwan
[2] Natl Yang Ming Chiao Tung Univ, Inst Tradit Med, Sch Med, Taipei, Taiwan
[3] MacKay Med Coll, Dept Med, New Taipei, Taiwan
[4] China Med Univ Hosp, Dept Med Res, Taichung, Taiwan
[5] China Med Univ, Coll Chinese Med, Sch Chinese Med, Taichung, Taiwan
[6] MacKay Jr Coll Med Nursing & Management, Taipei, Taiwan
[7] MacKay Mem Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol, New Taipei, Taiwan
关键词
anterior to psoas; MI-TLIF; CBT; interbody fusion; LATERAL INTERBODY FUSION; DECOMPRESSION; COMPLICATIONS; POSTERIOR; OUTCOMES; SPINE;
D O I
10.6890/IJGE.202304_17(2).0010
中图分类号
R592 [老年病学]; C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ; 100203 ;
摘要
Objective: To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes between an anterior to psoas (ATP) ap-proach combined with cortical bone trajectory (CBT) fixation (ATP group) and minimally invasive trans-foraminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) combined with CBT fixation (MI-TLIF group) for treating patients with lumbar degenerative disc disease and instability. Methods: This retrospective study included patients who underwent interbody fusion and internal fixa-tion between May 1, 2019, and September 30, 2020, using the ATP or MI-TLIF approach to treat degen-erative lumbar disc disease and instability. The visual analog scale (VAS) score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) results, blood loss, operation time, complications, and bony fusion were analyzed and compared to understand clinical outcomes. Clinical and radiologic follow-up for all patients was at least 12 months. Results: The ATP approach combined with CBT fixation resulted in less blood loss, earlier reduced VAS scores, better ODI scores, but longer operation time. At 12 months, the fusion rates in the ATP and MI-TLIF groups were 90% (18/20) and 72% (13/18), respectively. Conclusion: Our results show that the ATP approach combined with CBT fixation had the advantage of less blood loss, earlier recovery in VAS scores, and better ODI than in MI-TLIF. Indirect and direct de-compression could be successfully integrated by the ATP approach combined with CBT fixation and laminectomy.Copyright (c) 2023, Taiwan Society of Geriatric Emergency & Critical Care Medicine.
引用
收藏
页码:130 / 134
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Single-level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Surgical Treatment of Isthmic Spondylolisthesis
    Patel, Madhav R.
    Jacob, Kevin C.
    Pawlowski, Hanna
    Prabhu, Michael C.
    Vanjani, Nisheka N.
    Singh, Kern
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEONS, 2022, 30 (21) : E1382 - E1390
  • [2] Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Unilateral Fixation for Degenerative Lumbar Disease
    Wang, Hui-wang
    Hu, Yong-cheng
    Wu, Zhan-yong
    Wu, Hua-rong
    Wu, Chun-fu
    Zhang, Lian-suo
    Xu, Wei-kun
    Fan, Hui-long
    Cai, Jin-sheng
    Ma, Jian-qing
    ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY, 2017, 9 (03) : 277 - 283
  • [3] Comparison of Outcomes Between Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Patients With Single-Level Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Retrospective Study
    Xu, Hongyao
    Yu, Lei
    Xiao, Bing
    Zhao, Hong
    Gu, Xin
    Gao, Zengxin
    Wang, Weiheng
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2024, 183 : E98 - E108
  • [4] Clinical and Radiological Comparison between Three Different Minimally Invasive Surgical Fusion Techniques for Single-Level Lumbar Isthmic and Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: Minimally Invasive Surgical Posterolateral Fusion versus Minimally Invasive Surgical Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion versus Midline Lumbar Fusion
    Elmekaty, Mohamed
    Kotani, Yoshihisa
    El Mehy, Emad
    Robinson, Yohan
    El Tantawy, Ahmed
    Sekiguchi, Ivan
    Fujita, Ryo
    ASIAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2018, 12 (05) : 870 - 879
  • [5] Comparing Miniopen and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion in Single-Level Lumbar Degeneration
    Lo, Wei-Lun
    Lin, Chien-Min
    Yeh, Yi-Shian
    Su, Yu-kai
    Tseng, Yuan-Yun
    Yang, Shun-Tai
    Lin, Jai-Wei
    BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL, 2015, 2015
  • [6] Functional and radiological outcome of anterior retroperitoneal versus posterior transforaminal interbody fusion in the management of single-level lumbar degenerative disease
    Bassani, Roberto
    Morselli, Carlotta
    Querenghi, Amos M.
    Nuara, Alessandro
    Sconfienza, Luca Maria
    Peretti, Giuseppe M.
    NEUROSURGICAL FOCUS, 2020, 49 (03) : 1 - 9
  • [7] Clinical Effect of Minimally Invasive Microendoscopic-Assisted Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Single-Level Lumbar Disc Herniation
    Chen, Gang
    Li, Long Biao
    Shangguan, Zhitao
    Wang, Zhenyu
    Liu, Wenge
    Li, Jiandong
    ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY, 2022, 14 (12) : 3300 - 3312
  • [8] Single-Level Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion at L5/S1 for an Obese Population
    Patel, Madhav Rajesh
    Jacob, Kevin Chacko
    Zamanian, Cameron
    Pawlowski, Hanna
    Prabhu, Michael Clifford
    Vanjani, Nisheka Navin
    Singh, Kern
    ASIAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2023, 17 (02) : 293 - 303
  • [9] Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Posterior Instrumentation at L5/S1
    Jacob, Kevin C.
    Patel, Madhav R.
    Ribot, Max A.
    Parsons, Alexander W.
    Vanjani, Nisheka N.
    Pawlowski, Hanna
    Prabhu, Michael C.
    Singh, Kern
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2022, 157 : E111 - E122
  • [10] Comparison of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in two-level degenerative lumbar disease
    Gu, Guangfei
    Zhang, Hailong
    Fan, Guoxin
    He, Shisheng
    Cai, Xiaobing
    Shen, Xiaolong
    Guan, Xiaofei
    Zhou, Xu
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2014, 38 (04) : 817 - 824