Comparison of Unremoved Intervertebral Disc Location Between 2 Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion (LLIF) Techniques

被引:0
|
作者
Limthongkul, Worawat [1 ,2 ]
Chantharakomen, Rawijak [3 ]
Tanasansomboon, Teerachat [4 ]
Yingsakmongkol, Wicharn [1 ,2 ]
Oh, Jacob Yoong-Leong [5 ]
Kotheeranurak, Vit [6 ]
Singhatanadgige, Weerasak [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Chulalongkorn Univ, Fac Med, Dept Orthoped, Bangkok, Thailand
[2] Chulalongkorn Univ, Ctr Excellence Biomech & Innovat Spine Surg, Bangkok, Thailand
[3] Maharaj Nakhon Si Thammarat Hosp, Dept Orthoped, Nakhon Si Thammarat, Thailand
[4] Samutsakhon Hosp, Dept Orthoped, Samutsakhon, Thailand
[5] Tan Tock Seng Hosp, Dept Orthoped Surg, Singapore, Singapore
[6] Queen Savang Vadhana Mem Hosp, Dept Orthoped Surg, Sriracha, Chonburi, Thailand
关键词
Intervertebral disc; Lateral lumbar interbody fusion; OLIF; Unremoved; XLIF; INDIRECT DECOMPRESSION; COMPLICATION; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1016/j.wneu.22.01.011
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
OBJECTIVE: To compare location and amount of unremoved intervertebral disc between extreme lateral lumbar interbody fusion (XLIF) and oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). METHODS: Postoperative magnetic resonance images of patients who underwent XLIF and OLIF for degenerative spine diseases were reviewed. An axial cut T2-weighted image that was the middle cut of operated disc space was selected. We divided the disc area into 5 zones: central, left anterior, left posterior, right anterior, and right posterior. Disc area was measured using a picture archiving and communication system program. The angle of intervertebral cage was also measured. RESULTS: A total of 61 levels of XLIF from 51 patients and 62 levels of OLIF from 34 patients were included. The area of unremoved disc at left anterior, right anterior, and left posterior zones of OLIF were significantly greater than XLIF (55.7 +/- 41.5 vs. 29.8 +/- 33.3 mm(2), 57.9 +/- 43.6 vs. 34.1 +/- 33.1 mm(2), and 50.5 +/- 41.8 vs. 31.5 +/- 35.9 mm(2), respectively; P < 0.01). No significant differences were found at the right posterior and central zones. A 9.2 +/- 6.1 and 0.7 +/- 4.9 cage angulation from left anterior to right posterior was found in OLIF and XLIF, respectively, with statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found a greater area of unremoved disc in OLIF compared with XLIF. The common locations were in the contralateral side of the surgical approach-right anterior in OLIF, and right posterior in XLIF. The greater area of the unremoved disc in the anterior zone after OLIF due to oblique corridor to disc space may cause cage malposition. Meticulous disc removal should be performed, especially in OLIF, to prevent complications.
引用
收藏
页码:E322 / E327
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Comparison between Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MISTLIF) for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
    Chandra, Vemula V. R.
    Prasad, Bodapati C. M.
    Hanu, Tammireddy G.
    Kale, Pavan G.
    NEUROLOGY INDIA, 2022, 70 (01) : 127 - 134
  • [42] Subsidence of Polyetheretherketone Intervertebral Cages in Minimally Invasive Lateral Retroperitoneal Transpsoas Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Le, Tien V.
    Baaj, Ali A.
    Dakwar, Elias
    Burkett, Clinton J.
    Murray, Gisela
    Smith, Donald A.
    Uribe, Juan S.
    SPINE, 2012, 37 (14) : 1268 - 1273
  • [43] Comparison of intervertebral fusion rates of different bone graft materials in extreme lateral interbody fusion
    Gao, Yuan
    Li, Jiaqi
    Cui, Hao
    Zhang, Fei
    Sun, Yapeng
    Li, Zeyang
    Ding, Wenyuan
    Shen, Yong
    Zhang, Wei
    MEDICINE, 2019, 98 (44) : e17685
  • [44] Instrumentation choice and early radiographic outcome following lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF): Lateral instrumentation versus posterior pedicle screw fixation
    Nuss, Sarah
    Leary, Owen P.
    Zheng, Bryan
    Darveau, Spencer C.
    Barrios-Anderson, Adriel
    Niu, Tianyi
    Gokaslan, Ziya L.
    Sampath, Prakash
    Telfeian, Albert E.
    Oyelese, Adetokunbo A.
    Fridley, Jared S.
    NORTH AMERICAN SPINE SOCIETY JOURNAL, 2022, 12
  • [45] Comparison of unilateral posterior lumbar interbody fusion and bilateral posterior interbody fusion with simple discectomy at degenerative disc herniations
    Karabekir, Hamit S.
    Atar, Elmas K.
    Yaycioglu, Soner
    Yildizhan, Ahmet
    NEUROSCIENCES, 2008, 13 (03) : 248 - 252
  • [46] Comparison Between Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Disc Herniation with Biradicular Symptoms
    Liu, Chao
    Zhou, Yue
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2018, 120 : E72 - E79
  • [47] Anterior lumbar interbody fusion in comparison with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: implications for the restoration of foraminal height, local disc angle, lumbar lordosis, and sagittal balance
    Hsieh, Patrick C.
    Koski, Tyler R.
    O'Shaughnessy, Brian A.
    Sugrue, Patrick
    Salehi, Sean
    Ondra, Stephen
    Liu, John C.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2007, 7 (04) : 379 - 386
  • [48] Comparison of clinical and radiologic outcomes between biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion
    You, Ki-Han
    Hyun, Jin-Tak
    Park, Sang-Min
    Kang, Min-Seok
    Cho, Samuel K.
    Park, Hyun-Jin
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2024, 14 (01):
  • [49] Posterior Decompression, Lumber Interbody Fusion and Internal Fixation in the Treatment of Upper Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Herniation
    Dong Zhan
    Zhu Yong-liang
    JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE, 2014, 2 (04): : 462 - 466
  • [50] Biomechanical comparison of posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion performed at 1 and 2 levels
    Ames, CP
    Acosta, FL
    Chi, J
    Iyengar, J
    Muiru, W
    Acaroglu, E
    Puttlitz, CM
    SPINE, 2005, 30 (19) : E562 - E566