Background This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes and safety of a novel hand-held retractor system-assisted Wiltse TLIF with that P-TLIF and assess whether this hand-held retractor system assisted Wiltse TLIF can yield less paraspinal muscle injury. Methods 56 patients (P-TLIF: 26, Wiltse TLIF: 30) were included in this one year prospective controlled study. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, mobilization time, and discharge time were recorded. The clinical outcomes were evaluated by ODI, VAS, JOA, and SF-36 scores (7 days, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery). Paraspinal muscle injury was assessed by postoperative MRI (6 months after surgery). CK and C-reaction protein were measured pre and postoperatively, and CT or X-ray (one year postoperatively) was used to assess bony union/non-union. Results The Wiltse (study) group was associated with significantly less estimated blood loss (79.67 +/- 28.59 ml vs 192.31 +/- 59.48 ml, P = 0.000*), postoperative drainage (43.33 +/- 27.89 ml vs 285.57 +/- 123.05 ml, P = 0.000*), and shorter mobilization (4.1 +/- 1.2 d vs. 3.0 +/- 0.9 d, P < 0.05) and discharge times (7.7 +/- 1.9 d vs. 6.1 +/- 1.2 d, P = 0.002*) than the P-TLIF (control) group. Serum CK activity at 24 h postoperatively in the study group was significantly lower than in the control group (384.10 +/- 141.99 U/L vs 532.76 +/- 225.76 U/L, P = 0.018*). At 7 days after surgery, VAS (2.3 +/- 0.6 vs 3.2 +/- 0.7, P = 0.000*)and ODI scores (43.9 +/- 11.9 vs 55.2 +/- 12.9, P = 0.001*) were lower, while the JOA scores (18.4 +/- 3.4 vs 16.3 +/- 4.2, P = 0.041*) was higher in the control group than in the study group. Results observed at 3 months of follow-up were consistent with those at 7 days. After six months postoperatively, paraspinal muscle degeneration in the control group was more significant than in the study group (P = 0.008*). Conclusion Our study showed that this novel hand-held retractor system assisted Wiltse approach TLIF can significantly reduce paraspinal muscle injury, postoperative drainage, and intraoperative blood loss, mobilization and discharge time, as well as yield better short-term outcomes compared to P-TLIF.
