Comparison of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Direct Lumbar Interbody Fusion : Clinical and Radiological Results

被引:20
|
作者
Lee, Young Seok [1 ]
Kim, Young Baeg [1 ]
Park, Seung Won [1 ]
Chung, Chan [2 ]
机构
[1] Chung Ang Univ Hosp, Dept Neurosurg, Seoul 156755, South Korea
[2] Dongguk Univ, Gyeongju Hosp, Dept Neurosurg, Gyeongju, South Korea
关键词
Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion; Direct lumbar interbody fusion; Segmental balance; Coronal balance; Fusion rate; BACK MUSCLE INJURY; TRANSPSOAS APPROACH; SPINE SURGERY; COMPLICATIONS; METAANALYSIS; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.3340/jkns.2014.56.6.469
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective : The use of direct lumbar interbody fusion (DLIF) has gradually increased; however, no studies have directly compared DLIF and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). We compared DLIF and TLIF on the basis of clinical and radiological outcomes. Methods : A retrospective review was performed on the medical records and radiographs of 98 and 81 patients who underwent TLIF and DLIF between January 2011 and December 2012. Clinical outcomes were compared with a visual analog scale (VAS) and the Oswestry disability index (ODI). The preoperative and postoperative disc heights, segmental sagittal/coronal angles, and lumbar lordosis were measured on radiographs. Fusion rates, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of hospital stay, and complications were assessed. Results : DLIF was superior to TLIF regarding its ability to restore disc height, foraminal height, and coronal balanbe (p<0.001). As the extent of surgical level increased, DLIF displayed significant advantages over TLIF considering the operative time and EBL. However, fusion rates at 12 months post-operation were lower for DLIF (87.8%) than for TLIF (98.1%) (p=0.007). The changes of VAS and ODI between the TLIF and DLIF were not significantly different (p>0.05). Conclusion : Both DLIF and TLIF are less invasive and thus good surgical options for treating degenerative lumber diseases. DLIF has higher potential in increasing neural foramina and correcting coronal balance, and involves a shorter operative time and reduced EBL, in comparison with TLIF. However, DLIF displayed a lower fusion rate than TLIF, and caused complications related to the transpsoas approach.
引用
收藏
页码:469 / 474
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A systematic review of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF)
    John Rathbone
    Matthew Rackham
    David Nielsen
    So Mang Lee
    Wayne Hing
    Sukhman Riar
    Matthew Scott-Young
    European Spine Journal, 2023, 32 : 1911 - 1926
  • [42] A systematic review of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF)
    Rathbone, John
    Rackham, Matthew
    Nielsen, David
    Lee, So Mang
    Hing, Wayne
    Riar, Sukhman
    Scott-Young, Matthew
    EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2023, 32 (06) : 1911 - 1926
  • [43] Transforaminal Interbody Fusion Using the Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Technique Compared With Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Spine Diseases: Analysis of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes
    Zheng, Bo
    Zhang, Xiu-Li
    Li, Peng
    OPERATIVE NEUROSURGERY, 2023, 24 (06) : E395 - E401
  • [44] Comparison of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative diseases: a retrospective observational study
    Hao Chen
    Goudi Zheng
    Zhenyu Bian
    Changju Hou
    Maoqiang Li
    Zhen Zhang
    Liulong Zhu
    Xuepeng Wang
    Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 18
  • [45] Comparison of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative diseases: a retrospective observational study
    Chen, Hao
    Zheng, Goudi
    Bian, Zhenyu
    Hou, Changju
    Li, Maoqiang
    Zhang, Zhen
    Zhu, Liulong
    Wang, Xuepeng
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH, 2023, 18 (01)
  • [46] Comparison of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using the Boomerang-Shaped Cage with Traditional Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
    Ishihara, Yohei
    Morishita, Masutaro
    Miyaki, Jiro
    Kanzaki, Koji
    Toyone, Tomoaki
    SPINE SURGERY AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2019, 3 (01): : 71 - 78
  • [47] Comparison of Functional and Radiological Outcomes of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Posterolateral Fusion Techniques in the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
    Ziroglu, Nezih
    Duramaz, Altug
    Bayrak, Alkan
    ZEITSCHRIFT FUR ORTHOPADIE UND UNFALLCHIRURGIE, 2022, 160 (06): : 629 - 636
  • [48] Comparison of Clinical and Radiologic Results of Mini-Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion Indirect Decompression for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
    Kono, Yutaka
    Gen, Hogaku
    Sakuma, Yoshio
    Koshika, Yasuhide
    ASIAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2018, 12 (02) : 356 - 364
  • [49] Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Cage Retrieval for the Treatment of Pseudarthrosis After Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Safaee, Michael
    Tenorio, Alexander
    Haddad, Alexander F.
    Wu, Bian
    Hu, Serena
    Tay, Bobby
    Burch, Shane
    Berven, Sigurd
    Deviren, Vedat
    Dhall, Sanjay S.
    Chou, Dean
    Mummaneni, Praveen V.
    Eichler, Charles
    Ames, Christopher P.
    Clark, Aaron J.
    NEUROSURGERY, 2020, 67 : 269 - 270
  • [50] Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion, Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion, and Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
    Hu, Xijian
    Yan, Lei
    Jin, Xinjie
    Liu, Haifeng
    Chai, Jing
    Zhao, Bin
    GLOBAL SPINE JOURNAL, 2024, 14 (01) : 295 - 305