Clinical Evaluation of Paraspinal Mini-Tubular Lumbar Decompression and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Grade I with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Cohort Study

被引:3
|
作者
Liang, Zeyan [1 ]
Xu, Xiongjie [1 ]
Rao, Jian [1 ]
Chen, Yan [1 ]
Wang, Rui [1 ]
Chen, Chunmei [1 ]
机构
[1] Fujian Med Univ, Dept Neurosurg, Union Hosp, Fuzhou, Peoples R China
来源
FRONTIERS IN SURGERY | 2022年 / 9卷
关键词
degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis; paraspinal mini-tubular lumbar decompression; minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion; lumbar spinal stenosis; minimally invasive spine surgery; LOW-BACK-PAIN; PLUS FUSION; DEGENERATIVE SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; CONSERVATIVE MANAGEMENT; NONOPERATIVE TREATMENT; SURGICAL-TREATMENT; DISC HERNIATION; OUTCOMES; TRIAL; SPONDYLOLYSIS;
D O I
10.3389/fsurg.2022.906289
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective To investigate the clinical outcome data and difference in efficacy between paraspinal mini-tubular lumbar decompression (PMTD) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis grade I with lumbar spinal stenosis (DLS-I-LSS). Methods Patients with DLS-I-LSS, who underwent PMTD or MIS TLIF from September 2017 to March 2020, were included retrospectively. The follow-up period was 24 months after surgery. Outcome measurements included the Oswestry disability index (ODI) score, visual analog scale (VAS) low back pain score, VAS leg pain score, surgical data, and adverse events. Results A total of 104 patients with DLS-I-LSS were included in this study. The average improvement in ODI at 12 months (2.0%, 95% CI, -5.7% to 1.8%; p = 0.30) and 24 months (1.7%, 95% CI, -2.7% to 6.1%; p = 0.45) after surgery between the two groups were not statistically significant. The improvement in VAS low back pain score after 24 months and improvement in VAS leg pain score were not significantly different between the two groups. Compared with the PMTD group, the MIS TLIF group had more estimated blood loss and longer hospital stays. The cumulative reoperation rates were 5.66% and 1.96% in the MIS TLIF and PMTD groups, respectively (p = 0.68). The results of multivariate analysis showed that BMI, diabetes, and baseline ODI score were the main factors influencing the improvement in ODI in patients with DLS-I-LSS after minimally invasive surgery, accounting for 50.5% of the total variance. Conclusions The clinical effectiveness of PMTD was non-inferior to that of MIS TLIF for DLS-I-LSS; however, there was a reduced duration of hospital stay, operation time, blood loss, and hospitalization costs in the PMTD group. BMI, presence or absence of diabetes and baseline ODI score were influencing factors for the improvement of ODI (Trial Registration: ChiCTR2000040025).
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Comparison of Grade I Versus Grade II Isthmic Spondylolisthesis
    Massel, Dustin H.
    Mayo, Benjamin C.
    Long, William W.
    Modi, Krishna D.
    Lopez, Gregory D.
    Shifflett, Grant D.
    Basques, Bryce A.
    Louie, Philip K.
    Bohl, Daniel D.
    Hijji, Fady Y.
    Narain, Ankur S.
    Singh, Kern
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPINE SURGERY, 2020, 14 (02): : 108 - 114
  • [32] Paraspinal-approach transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar foraminal stenosis
    Fujibayashi, Shunsuke
    Neo, Masashi
    Takemoto, Mitsuru
    Ota, Masato
    Nakamura, Takashi
    [J]. JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2010, 13 (04) : 500 - 508
  • [33] Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Diseases
    Fan Shunwu
    Zhao Xing
    Zhao Fengdong
    Fang Xiangqian
    [J]. SPINE, 2010, 35 (17) : 1615 - 1620
  • [34] Clinical and radiographic outcomes of bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with stenosis
    Cheng, Xiaofei
    Zhang, Kai
    Sun, Xiaojiang
    Zhao, Changqing
    Li, Hua
    Ni, Bin
    Zhao, Jie
    [J]. SPINE JOURNAL, 2017, 17 (08): : 1127 - 1133
  • [35] MINIMALLY INVASIVE TRANSFORAMINAL LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION IN DEGENERATIVE LUMBAR SPINE DISEASE
    Gupta, Pankaj
    Sharma, Arvind
    Singh, Jitendra
    Deen, Shameer
    Tanwar, Akansha
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EVOLUTION OF MEDICAL AND DENTAL SCIENCES-JEMDS, 2015, 4 (105): : 17055 - 17057
  • [36] 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
    [J]. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 18
  • [37] 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
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH, 2023, 18 (01)
  • [38] Clinical efficacy of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the treatment of II° lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis: A retrospective cohort study
    Zhang, Bin
    Ma, Jun-Song
    Feng, Pin
    Hu, Yuan
    Liu, Jun-Lin
    Kong, Qing-Quan
    [J]. MEDICINE, 2023, 102 (40) : E35420
  • [39] Mini-invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion through Wiltse Approach to Treating Lumbar Spondylolytic Spondylolisthesis
    Zhou, Chao
    Tian, Yong-hao
    Zheng, Yan-ping
    Liu, Xin-yu
    Wang, Hu-hu
    [J]. ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY, 2016, 8 (01) : 44 - 50
  • [40] Minimally invasive surgery for degenerative spondylolisthesis: transforaminal or oblique lumbar interbody fusion
    Sheng, Sun-Ren
    Geng, Yi-Bo
    Zhou, Kai-Liang
    Wu, Ai-Min
    Wang, Xiang-Yang
    Ni, Wen-Fei
    [J]. JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH, 2020, 9 (01) : 45 - 51