Trans-foraminal versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion: comparison of surgical morbidity

被引:112
作者
Mehta, Vivek A.
McGirt, Matthew J.
Ambrossi, Giannina L. Garces
Parker, Scott L.
Sciubba, Daniel M.
Bydon, Ali
Wolinsky, Jean-Paul
Gokaslan, Ziya L.
Witham, Timothy F.
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Sch Med, Baltimore, MD USA
[2] Johns Hopkins Spinal Column Biomech & Surg Outcom, Baltimore, MD USA
关键词
Lumbar interbody fusion; Trans-foraminal; Posterior; Outcomes; PERIOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS;
D O I
10.1179/016164110X12681290831289
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
Background: Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and trans-foraminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) are both accepted surgical approaches for spinal fusion in spondylolisthesis and degenerative disc disease. The unilateral approach of TLIF may minimize the risk of iatrogenic durotomy and nerve root injury; however, there is no definitive evidence to support either approach. We review our experience with TLIF versus PLIF to compare operative complications. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 119 consecutive cases of PLIF or TLIF performed for degenerative disc disease or spondylolithesis at a single institution over 5 years and examined the incidences of operative complications and outcomes. Results: PLIF was performed in 76 (63%) patients and TLIF in 43 (37%). Patients were 48 +/- 13 years old and presented with mechanical back pain [109 (92%)], radicular pain [95 (80%)], and radicular motor weakness [10 (8%)]. Patients undergoing PLIF and TLIF had similar baseline demographic, clinical, and radiographic characteristics. PLIF was associated with a higher incidence of post-operative iatrogenic nerve root dysfunction [6 (7.8%) versus 1 (2%)] and durotomy [13 (17%) versus 4 (9%)]; however, these differences did not reach statistical significance. All cases of nerve root injury were transient and resolved by the third month post-operatively. Estimated operative blood loss, length of hospitalization, and other peri-operative indices were similar between cohorts. By 12 months, evidence of pseudoarthrosis was present in 2 (2.6%) and 2 (4.6%) patients with PLIF or TLIF, respectively. There was a similar incidence of improvement in radicular pain (88% versus 79%) and low back pain (74% versus 80%) between TLIF and PLIF. Conclusion: In our experience with surgical management of degenerative disc disease and spondylolesthesis, PLIF versus TLIF was associated with a trend toward a higher incidence of nerve root injury and durotomy. However, iatrogenic nerve root dysfunction was transient in all cases and 12-month pseudoarthrosis rates were similar between cohorts. Similar to previous clinical studies, the incidence of neurological complications and durotomy increases when an interbody fusion is performed through a posterior approach compared to non-interbody fusion techniques. However, the fusion rates with the interbody technique are also enhanced. TLIF and PLIF should only be considered when the goals of surgery cannot be addressed with decompression and traditional posterolateral fusion.
引用
收藏
页码:38 / 42
页数:5
相关论文
共 10 条
[1]
Lumbar interbody fusion using the Brantigan I/F Cage for posterior lumbar interbody fusion and the variable pedicle screw placement system - Two-year results from a Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption Clinical Trial [J].
Brantigan, JW ;
Steffee, AD ;
Lewis, ML ;
Quinn, LM ;
Persenaire, JM .
SPINE, 2000, 25 (11) :1437-1446
[2]
Clinical and radiographic comparison of mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in 42 patients with long-term follow-up [J].
Dhall, Sanjay S. ;
Wang, Michael Y. ;
Mummaneni, Praveen V. .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2008, 9 (06) :560-565
[3]
Posterior lumbar interbody fusion [J].
DiPaola, Christian P. ;
Molinari, Robert W. .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEONS, 2008, 16 (03) :130-139
[4]
Perioperative complications of primary posterior lumbar interbody fusion for nonisthmic spondylolisthesis: analysis of risk factors [J].
Hosono, Noboru ;
Namekata, Masato ;
Makino, Takahiro ;
Miwa, Toshitada ;
Kaito, Takashi ;
Kaneko, Noriyoshi ;
Fuji, Takeshi .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2008, 9 (05) :403-407
[5]
Humphreys SC, 2001, SPINE, V26, P567
[6]
LIN PM, 1985, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P90
[7]
Surgical complications of posterior lumbar interbody fusion with total facetectomy in 251 patients [J].
Okuda, S ;
Miyauchi, A ;
Oda, T ;
Haku, T ;
Yamamoto, T ;
Iwasaki, M .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2006, 4 (04) :304-309
[8]
Posterior lumbar interbody fusion - A retrospective study of complications after facet joint excision and pedicle screw fixation in 148 cases [J].
Okuyama, K ;
Abe, E ;
Suzuki, T ;
Tamura, Y ;
Chiba, M ;
Sato, K .
ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA SCANDINAVICA, 1999, 70 (04) :329-334
[9]
Perioperative complications of threaded cylindrical lumbar interbody fusion devices - Anterior versus posterior approach [J].
Scaduto, AA ;
Gamradt, SC ;
Yu, WD ;
Huang, J ;
Delamarter, RB ;
Wang, JC .
JOURNAL OF SPINAL DISORDERS & TECHNIQUES, 2003, 16 (06) :502-507
[10]
SIMMONS JW, 1985, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P85