Do Diabetic Patients Have Poorer Clinical and Radiological Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion?

被引:0
|
作者
Thever, Yogen [1 ,2 ]
Lincoln, Liow Ming Han [1 ]
Gatot, Cheryl [1 ]
Cheong, Reuben Soh hee [1 ]
机构
[1] Singapore Gen Hosp, Dept Orthoped Surg, Singapore, Singapore
[2] Singapore Gen Hosp, Dept Orthopaed Surg, 20 Coll Rd, Acad Level 4, Singapore 169865, Singapore
来源
关键词
diabetes; lumbar fusion; minimally invasive; transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion; fusion rates; outcomes; satisfaction; quality of life; SPINAL SURGERY;
D O I
10.14444/8535
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The number of patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) seeking treatment for degenerative spondylolisthesis is expected to increase. However, there is a paucity of studies examining the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and subjective measures in patients with DM following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). The present study aimed to compare PROs, satisfaction, and radiological fusion between DM and non -DM patients following MIS- TLIF. Methods: The authors identified 30 patients with DM who underwent primary, single -level MIS- TLIF for degenerative spondylolisthesis from a spine registry. Each patient was matched 1:1 with 30 controls without DM using propensity scores to adjust for age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and baseline PROs. Visual analog scale leg pain, back pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), SF -36 physical component score and mental component scores were compared at 1, 3, 6, and 24 months. Patients also completed a satisfaction questionnaire during these visits. Radiographic fusion was analyzed according to Bridwell grades. Results: There was no difference in PROs between non -DM and DM patients at 2 years. However, a higher proportion of non -DM patients attained minimal clinically important difference for ODI (90.0% vs 66.7% P = 0.028) and SF -36 physical component score (90.0% vs 53.3% P = 0.002) at 3 months and ODI (96.7% vs 80.0%) at 6 months. A similar proportion of patients in each group were satisfied and had expectations fulfilled. A higher proportion of non -DM patients attained a grade 1 or 2 fusion (93.3%), as compared with DM patients (80.0%), although this did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.129). Conclusions: DM patients have poorer initial PROs, which reach comparable levels to those in non -DM patients in the longer -term. Fusion rates of DM patients were poorer compared with non -DM patients.
引用
收藏
页码:708 / 714
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Clinical Outcomes of Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Three-Level Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
    Fan, Guoxin
    Wu, Xinbo
    Yu, Shunzhi
    Sun, Qi
    Guan, Xiaofei
    Zhang, Hailong
    Gu, Xin
    He, Shisheng
    BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL, 2016, 2016
  • [42] Comparison of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Direct Lumbar Interbody Fusion : Clinical and Radiological Results
    Lee, Young Seok
    Kim, Young Baeg
    Park, Seung Won
    Chung, Chan
    JOURNAL OF KOREAN NEUROSURGICAL SOCIETY, 2014, 56 (06) : 469 - 474
  • [43] Elderly Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion May Have Similar Clinical Outcomes, Perioperative Complications, and Fusion Rates As Their Younger Counterparts
    Goh, Graham Seow-Hng
    Tay, You Wei Adriel
    Liow, Ming Han Lincoln
    Gatot, Cheryl
    Ling, Zhixing Marcus
    Fong, Poh Ling
    Soh, Reuben Chee Cheong
    Guo, Chang Ming
    Yue, Wai-Mun
    Tan, Seang-Beng
    Chen, John Li-Tat
    CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2020, 478 (04) : 822 - 832
  • [44] Hidden and overall haemorrhage following minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
    Yang, Yang
    Zhang, Liangming
    Liu, Bin
    Pang, Mao
    Xie, Peigen
    Chen, Zihao
    Wu, Wenbin
    Feng, Feng
    Rong, Limin
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDICS AND TRAUMATOLOGY, 2017, 18 (04) : 395 - 400
  • [45] Improvements in Back and Leg Pain Following a Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Massel, Dustin H.
    Mayo, Benjamin C.
    Narain, Ankur S.
    Hijji, Fady Y.
    Louie, Philip K.
    Jenkins, Nathaniel W.
    Parrish, James M.
    Singh, Kern
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPINE SURGERY, 2020, 14 (05): : 745 - 755
  • [46] Does Gender Influence Postoperative Outcomes in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion?
    Khechen, Benjamin
    Haws, Brittany E.
    Patel, Dil, V
    Cardinal, Kaitlyn L.
    Ganda, Jordan A.
    Singh, Kern
    CLINICAL SPINE SURGERY, 2019, 32 (02): : E107 - E111
  • [47] Hidden and overall haemorrhage following minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
    Yang Yang
    Liangming Zhang
    Bin Liu
    Mao Pang
    Peigen Xie
    Zihao Chen
    Wenbin Wu
    Feng Feng
    Limin Rong
    Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 2017, 18 : 395 - 400
  • [48] 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
  • [49] Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a technical description and review of the literature
    Vazan, Martin
    Gempt, Jens
    Meyer, Bernhard
    Buchmann, Niels
    Ryang, Yu-Mi
    ACTA NEUROCHIRURGICA, 2017, 159 (06) : 1137 - 1146
  • [50] Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a technical description and review of the literature
    Martin Vazan
    Jens Gempt
    Bernhard Meyer
    Niels Buchmann
    Yu- Mi Ryang
    Acta Neurochirurgica, 2017, 159 : 1137 - 1146