Clinical and Radiological Comparison between Three Different Minimally Invasive Surgical Fusion Techniques for Single-Level Lumbar Isthmic and Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: Minimally Invasive Surgical Posterolateral Fusion versus Minimally Invasive Surgical Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion versus Midline Lumbar Fusion

Autor: Mohamed Elmekaty, Yoshihisa Kotani, Emad El Mehy, Yohan Robinson, Ahmed El Tantawy, Ivan Sekiguchi, Ryo Fujita
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2018
Předmět:
Zdroj: Asian Spine Journal, Vol 12, Iss 5, Pp 870-879 (2018)
Druh dokumentu: article
ISSN: 1976-1902
1976-7846
DOI: 10.31616/asj.2018.12.5.870
Popis: Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Purpose Comparison between three different minimally invasive surgical (MIS) fusion techniques for single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis. Overview of Literature There has been an increase in the development and utilization of MIS techniques for lumbar spine fusion. No study has compared the efficacy of MIS-posterolateral fusion (MIS-PLF), MIS-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF), and midline lumbar fusion (MIDLF) with modified cortical bone trajectory screws for lumbar spondylolisthesis. Methods Fifty-nine patients with single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis and a minimum follow-up period of 1 year were included in this study. The MIS-PLF, MIS-TLIF, and MIDLF groups included 22, 15, and 22 patients, respectively. The average age of the groups was 70.6, 49.3, and 62.7 years, respectively. The evaluation parameters were operation time, intraoperative bleeding, serum C-reactive protein (CRP) value, creatine kinase (CK) value, and overall functional outcome as per the Japanese Orthopedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) score. The changes in the lumbar lordosis angle (LLA), segmental disc angle (SDA), and disc height were measured. Fusion rate, screw loosening, and loss of correction were also assessed. Results MIDLF showed a significantly shorter operation time (111 min), less bleeding amount (112.5 mL), and lower values of CRP and CK than the other two techniques. There was no significant difference in the JOABPEQ scores of the three groups. MIDLF resulted in a greater increase in the LLA and SDA postoperatively. MIDLF and MIS-TLIF resulted in a significant increase in the middle disc height compared with MIS-PLF. MIDLF showed a lower loss of correction after 6 months postoperatively (2.6%) than MIS-PLF (5.2%) and MIS-TLIF (4.2%). The fusion rate was 100% in the MIDLF and MIS-TLIF groups and 90% in the MIS-PLF group. Screw loosening occurred in 10% of the MIS-PLF cases, 7.14% of the MIS-TLIF cases, and 4.76% of the MIDLF cases. Conclusions MIDLF was the least invasive, and there was no significant difference between the three groups in terms of fusion, screw loosening, and clinical outcomes.
Databáze: Directory of Open Access Journals
Externí odkaz: