4.5 Article

Comparison of Outcomes of Anterior, Posterior, and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery at a Single Lumbar Level with Degenerative Spinal Disease

Journal

WORLD NEUROSURGERY
Volume 101, Issue -, Pages 216-226

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.01.114

Keywords

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion; Computed tomography (CT); Fusion rate; Posterior lumbar interbody fusion; Subsidence; Transforaminal interbody fusion

Funding

  1. Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute
  2. Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea [HC15C1228]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE: The fusion rate in spinal surgery may vary in relation to the technique, and it remains unknown which surgical technique provides the best fusion rate and surgical outcome. We aimed to compare radiologic and surgical results between 3 surgical techniques used for lumbar interbody fusion. METHODS: Participants included 77 patients diagnosed with degenerative spinal stenosis including spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to surgical technique: anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF, n = 26), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF, n = 21), and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF, n = 30). Various radiologic parameters were measured, including fusion rates. RESULTS: Significant changes after surgery were observed in the ALIF group for the percentage of vertebral body slippage, anterior disk height, posterior disk height, and segmental range of movement (ROM). The fusion rate on computed tomography (CT) scan at the final follow-up was 69.2% in the ALIF group, 72.7% in the TLIF group, and 64.3% in the PLIF group. The cage subsidence rate 2 years after surgery was 15.4% in the ALIF group, 38.1% in the TLIF group, and 10% in the PLIF group. CONCLUSIONS: ALIF was associated with better restoration of segmental lordosis. The fusion rate on CT scan and with segmental ROM did not differ between the 3 groups. TLIF was associated with a better postoperative visual analog scale. PLIF showed the lowest cage subsidence rate. Therefore, it is difficult to know which surgical technique is better among the 3 groups because each surgical method has its own advantages.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available