Differences in the interbody bone graft area and fusion rate between minimally invasive and traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective short-term image analysis

被引:10
|
作者
Yao, Yu-Cheng [1 ]
Lin, Hsi-Hsien [1 ]
Chou, Po-Hsin [1 ,2 ]
Wang, Shih-Tien [1 ,2 ]
Chang, Ming-Chau [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Taipei Vet Gen Hosp, Dept Orthoped & Traumatol, 201,Sect 2,Shih Pai Rd, Taipei 112, Taiwan
[2] Natl Yang Ming Univ, Sch Med, Dept Surg, Taipei, Taiwan
关键词
TLIF; MIS; Bone graft area; Endplate preparation; Fusion rate; Clinical outcome; POSTERIOR; COMPLICATIONS; CAGES; PLIF;
D O I
10.1007/s00586-019-06002-4
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose We aimed to quantify the interbody bone graft area following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) using traditional open and minimally invasive surgeries (MIS) and investigate their correlations with rates of fusion, complications, and clinical outcomes. Methods Patients undergoing TLIF of 1 or 2 levels between October 2015 and December 2016 were retrospectively included. Fusion and bone graft areas were assessed with computed tomography (CT) at 6 months postoperatively. The bone graft area ratio was defined as the bone graft area divided by the average endplate area. The distributions of bone graft area within the discs were also recorded. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) questionnaires. Results In total, 77 disc levels in 57 patients were analyzed. The fusion rate was 79.1% in the open group and 82.4% in the MIS group (p = 0.718). Clinical outcomes of both groups improved significantly. Changes in VAS and ODI scores at 12 months postoperatively were comparable between groups. Bone graft area ratio was not significantly different between the two groups (open, 38 +/- 10.8%; MIS, 38.1 +/- 9.0%, p = 0.977). Analysis of bone graft distribution revealed that the contralateral-dorsal part of the disc had the lowest bone graft area. The bone graft area ratio was significantly higher in the solid union group (39.2 +/- 10.4%) than in the non-solid union group (33.5 +/- 6.4%, p = 0.048). Conclusions The fusion rates, bone graft area ratios, clinical outcomes, and complications were similar between MIS and open TLIF. [GRAPHICS] .
引用
收藏
页码:2095 / 2102
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Time Course Observation of Outcomes between Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Lin, Guang-Xun
    Park, Chun-Kun
    Hur, Jung-Woo
    Kim, Jin-Sung
    NEUROLOGIA MEDICO-CHIRURGICA, 2019, 59 (06) : 222 - 230
  • [22] Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a prospective, controlled observational study of short-term outcome
    Sebastian Hartmann
    Anna Lang
    Sara Lener
    Anto Abramovic
    Lukas Grassner
    Claudius Thomé
    Neurosurgical Review, 2022, 45 : 3417 - 3426
  • [23] Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS) Versus Traditional Open Approach Transforaminal Interbody Lumbar Fusion
    Fried, Tristan B.
    Schroeder, Gregory D.
    Anderson, D. Greg
    Donnally, Chester J., III
    CLINICAL SPINE SURGERY, 2022, 35 (02): : 59 - 62
  • [24] Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a prospective, controlled observational study of short-term outcome
    Hartmann, Sebastian
    Lang, Anna
    Lener, Sara
    Abramovic, Anto
    Grassner, Lukas
    Thome, Claudius
    NEUROSURGICAL REVIEW, 2022, 45 (05) : 3417 - 3426
  • [25] 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
  • [26] 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)
  • [27] 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
  • [28] Incidence of graft extrusion following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
    Bakhsheshian, Joshua
    Khanna, Ryan
    Choy, Winward
    Lawton, Cort D.
    Nixon, Alex T.
    Wong, Albert P.
    Koski, Tyler R.
    Liu, John C.
    Song, John K.
    Dandaleh, Nader S.
    Smith, Zachary A.
    Fessler, Richard G.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2016, 24 : 88 - 93
  • [29] Evaluation of a novel tool for bone graft delivery in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
    Kleiner, Jeffrey B.
    Kleiner, Hannah M.
    Grimberg, E. John, Jr.
    Throlson, Stefanie J.
    MEDICAL DEVICES-EVIDENCE AND RESEARCH, 2016, 9 : 105 - 114
  • [30] Reduced Acute Care Costs With the ERAS® Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Compared With Conventional Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Wang, Michael Y.
    Chang, Hsuan Kan
    Grossman, Jay
    NEUROSURGERY, 2018, 83 (04) : 827 - 834