Learning Curve and Clinical Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Our Experience in 86 Consecutive Cases

被引:192
作者
Lee, Jae Chul [1 ]
Jang, Hae-Dong [1 ]
Shin, Byung-Joon [1 ]
机构
[1] Soonchunhyang Univ, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Seoul Hosp, Seoul 140743, South Korea
关键词
learning curve; minimally invasive surgery; transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion; ASSISTED THORACOSCOPIC SURGERY; LAPAROSCOPIC SPINAL-FUSION; ANTERIOR; INSTRUMENTATION; COMPLICATIONS; DISKECTOMY;
D O I
10.1097/BRS.0b013e318252d44b
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
100204 [神经病学];
摘要
Study Design. Consecutive case series with prospective data collection. Objective. To define and analyze the learning curve for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Summary of Background Data. Minimally invasive TLIF using a unilateral approach has recently been gaining popularity because of its potential for minimizing soft-tissue damage and reducing recovery time. However, a steep learning curve has been described for surgeons first performing this technique. Methods. Eighty-six consecutive patients with degenerative lumbar diseases who were treated by TLIF were included in the study. Surgeries were performed using a tubular retractor, and a cage was inserted using a unilateral transforaminal approach by a single surgeon. The corresponding segments were fixed with percutaneous pedicle screws. Eighty-three patients were followed up for more than 1 year, and the average follow-up period was 25 months. Single-level TLIF was performed in 60 cases, single-level TLIF plus adjacent-level decompression was performed in 13 cases, and double-level TLIF was performed in 13 cases. Corrected operative time per level, operative blood loss, postoperative blood drainage, total blood loss, and ambulation recovery time were measured. Transfusion rates and complication incidence were also identified. Clinical results were assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and a visual analogue scale (VAS). The learning curve was assessed using a logarithmic curve-fit regression analysis. In the single-level TLIF group (n = 60), 22 patients were defined as the "early" group (among the first 30 cases of the series), and the subsequent 38 cases were defined as the "late" group for comparison. Results. Corrected operative time gradually decreased as the series progressed, and an asymptote was reached after about 30 cases. ODI significantly decreased from an average of 24 at the preoperative stage to 10 at the final follow-up. Average VAS scores for lower back pain and radiating pain also significantly decreased from an average of 5.2 to 1.9 and 6.8 to 0.9, respectively. In the single-level TLIF series, operative time was significantly shorter in the late group (183 +/- 23 min) than the early group (254 +/- 44 min), and blood loss during the operation was significantly reduced in the late group (292 +/- 280 mL) compared with the early group (508 +/- 278 mL). Ambulation recovery time significantly decreased from 2.4 +/- 0.6 days in the early group to 2.0 +/- 0.5 in the late group. ODI and VAS scores for lower back pain and radiating pain did not differ between the 2 groups. Conclusion. Although it is not easy to master the minimally invasive TLIF technique, the surgeon's experience with this operation correlated with reduced operation time and blood loss during surgery. After the initial learning curve, this technique could be an effective and reliable option for the surgical treatment of lumbar degenerative disease.
引用
收藏
页码:1548 / 1557
页数:10
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]
Early experiences with video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: Our first 70 cases [J].
Al-Sayyad, MJ ;
Crawford, AH ;
Wolf, RK .
SPINE, 2004, 29 (17) :1945-1951
[2]
Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Diseases [J].
Fan Shunwu ;
Zhao Xing ;
Zhao Fengdong ;
Fang Xiangqian .
SPINE, 2010, 35 (17) :1615-1620
[3]
Minimally invasive lumbar fusion [J].
Foley, KT ;
Holly, LT ;
Schwender, JD .
SPINE, 2003, 28 (15) :S26-S35
[4]
Die posteriory lumbale, interkorporelle Fusion in unilateraler transforaminaler Technik [J].
Harms J.G. ;
Jeszenszky D. .
Operative Orthopädie und Traumatologie, 1998, 10 (2) :90-102
[5]
Anterior/posterior lumbar fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: Analysis of complications and predictive factors [J].
Hee, HT ;
Castro, FP ;
Majd, ME ;
Holt, RT ;
Myers, L .
JOURNAL OF SPINAL DISORDERS, 2001, 14 (06) :533-540
[6]
Holly Langston T, 2006, Neurosurg Focus, V20, pE6
[7]
Minimally invasive microendoscopy-assisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with instrumentation [J].
Isaacs, RE ;
Podichetty, VK ;
Santiago, P ;
Sandhu, FA ;
Spears, J ;
Kelly, K ;
Rice, L ;
Fessler, RG .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2005, 3 (02) :98-105
[8]
History and current status of percutaneous arthroscopic disc surgery [J].
Kambin, P ;
Zhou, LQ .
SPINE, 1996, 21 (24) :S57-S61
[9]
The quantitative analysis of tissue injury markers after mini-open lumbar fusion [J].
Kim, KT ;
Lee, SH ;
Suk, KS ;
Bae, SC .
SPINE, 2006, 31 (06) :712-716
[10]
The learning curve associated with thoracoscopic spinal instrumentation [J].
Lonner, BS ;
Scharf, C ;
Antonacci, D ;
Goldstein, Y ;
Panagopoulos, G .
SPINE, 2005, 30 (24) :2835-2840