Comparing Cortical Trajectory Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusions Against Pedicle Trajectory Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusions and Posterolateral Fusions: A Retrospective Cohort Study of 90-day Outcomes

BACKGROUND: The cortical screw (CS) trajectory for pedicle screw placement is believed to require a smaller incision and less tissue dissection resulting in lower blood loss and faster healing; however, this has not yet been confirmed in clinical studies. OBJECTIVE: To compare CS transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIF), traditional pedicle screw (TPS) trajectory TLIFs, and posterolateral fusion (PLF) without interbody for differences in operative characteristics and complications. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study (CS, TPS, and PLF) looking at patients who underwent lumbar fusion with 1 or 2 levels. Extracted data included demographics, comorbidities, estimated blood loss, transfusions, operative time, length of stay, discharge disposition (home vs rehabilitation), and complications within the perioperative, 30-and 90-d periods. RESULTS: A total of 118 patients (45 CS, 35 TPS, and 38 PLF) were includedwith average age 62 and 90-d follow-up for 106 (90%) patients. CS had less average blood loss (231 ml) than either TPS (424, P =.0023) or PLF (400, P =.0070). CS had far fewer transfusions than either TPS or PLF (P <.0001). TPS had longer average operating room (OR) time (262 min) than either CS (214, P=. 0075) or PLF (211, P=. 0060). CS had the shortest length of postoperative stay (4.3 days) which was significantly shorter than PLF (6.2, P=. 0138) but not different than TPS (4.8). There were no differences in discharge disposition, complications, perioperative, 30-d, 90-d, durotomy, or wound healing issues. CONCLUSION: The CS trajectory is associated with less blood loss, fewer transfusions, reduced OR time, and shorter length of stay, with no difference in complications.