Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) for Revision of Failed Posterolateral Spinal Fusion

Introduction: Posterolateral fusion is commonly used for managing many degenerative spinal problems. Reported pseudarthrosis rate varies between 5-56%. Several approaches have been used for revision, including re-grafting, ALIF, PLIF, and TLIF. Purpose: The aim of this work is to evaluate the radiog...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Mohammad El-Sharkawi, Wael Koptan, Yasser ElMiligui
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Egyptian Spine Association 2012
Materias:	Pseudarthrosis TLIF Instrumentation Posterolateral Fusion PLF Autograft Neurology. Diseases of the nervous system RC346-429
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/2f150324174c496f9f5ddaf4332c0c94
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:2f150324174c496f9f5ddaf4332c0c94
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:2f150324174c496f9f5ddaf4332c0c942021-12-02T03:31:37ZTransforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) for Revision of Failed Posterolateral Spinal FusionDOI:10.21608/ESJ.2012.37842314-89502314-8969https://doaj.org/article/2f150324174c496f9f5ddaf4332c0c942012-04-01T00:00:00Zhttp://esj.journals.ekb.eg/article_3784.htmlhttps://doaj.org/toc/2314-8950https://doaj.org/toc/2314-8969Introduction: Posterolateral fusion is commonly used for managing many degenerative spinal problems. Reported pseudarthrosis rate varies between 5-56%. Several approaches have been used for revision, including re-grafting, ALIF, PLIF, and TLIF. Purpose: The aim of this work is to evaluate the radiographic and functional results of TLIF for the management of symptomatic lumbar pseudarthrosis and to compare between revising posterolateral fusion by re-grafting and by TLIF using autogenous iliac bone graft. Study Design: This is prospective comparative study Methods: Forty-three patients with symptomatic pseudarthrosis after previous posterolateral fusion were revised using TLIF technique and were prospectively evaluated and followed for a minimum of 2 years (Range=2-5.6 years). The clinical and radiological outcomes were recorded and compared to a different group of another 21 patients treated earlier with refreshing the same fusion bed and re-grafting. Only autogenous iliac grafts were used in all cases. VAS and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used for the clinical assessment. Radiographs were obtained at 2, 6, 12 and 24 months. Results: There was no significant difference in the mean amount of blood loss between both groups. However, the mean operative time for TLIF was significantly shorter than the revision PLF. At 2 years follow-up, the TLIF group showed significantly better improvement in the mean VAS score and ODI scores (42 and 43 in TLIF group versus 8 and 21 in the PLF group) and the fusion rate was also significantly higher. Complications included incidental dural tear (2 patients) in the TLIF group that was recognized intraoperatively and successfully repaired, superficial infection (1 patient) in the posterolateral group, and donor site discomfort (2 patients in each group). Conclusion: The significantly higher success of TLIF for revising pseudarthrosis after posterolateral fusion is attributed to the fact of placing the graft in a wide fresh bed under compression. The approach is relatively easy and safe for the neural tissue because it avoids any fibrosis from previous surgery and its use is therefore encouraged. (2012ESJ014)Mohammad El-Sharkawi Wael KoptanYasser ElMiliguiEgyptian Spine AssociationarticlePseudarthrosisTLIFInstrumentationPosterolateral FusionPLFAutograftNeurology. Diseases of the nervous systemRC346-429ENEgyptian Spine Journal, Vol 2, Iss 1, Pp 1-9 (2012)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Pseudarthrosis TLIF Instrumentation Posterolateral Fusion PLF Autograft Neurology. Diseases of the nervous system RC346-429
spellingShingle	Pseudarthrosis TLIF Instrumentation Posterolateral Fusion PLF Autograft Neurology. Diseases of the nervous system RC346-429 Mohammad El-Sharkawi Wael Koptan Yasser ElMiligui Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) for Revision of Failed Posterolateral Spinal Fusion
description	Introduction: Posterolateral fusion is commonly used for managing many degenerative spinal problems. Reported pseudarthrosis rate varies between 5-56%. Several approaches have been used for revision, including re-grafting, ALIF, PLIF, and TLIF. Purpose: The aim of this work is to evaluate the radiographic and functional results of TLIF for the management of symptomatic lumbar pseudarthrosis and to compare between revising posterolateral fusion by re-grafting and by TLIF using autogenous iliac bone graft. Study Design: This is prospective comparative study Methods: Forty-three patients with symptomatic pseudarthrosis after previous posterolateral fusion were revised using TLIF technique and were prospectively evaluated and followed for a minimum of 2 years (Range=2-5.6 years). The clinical and radiological outcomes were recorded and compared to a different group of another 21 patients treated earlier with refreshing the same fusion bed and re-grafting. Only autogenous iliac grafts were used in all cases. VAS and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used for the clinical assessment. Radiographs were obtained at 2, 6, 12 and 24 months. Results: There was no significant difference in the mean amount of blood loss between both groups. However, the mean operative time for TLIF was significantly shorter than the revision PLF. At 2 years follow-up, the TLIF group showed significantly better improvement in the mean VAS score and ODI scores (42 and 43 in TLIF group versus 8 and 21 in the PLF group) and the fusion rate was also significantly higher. Complications included incidental dural tear (2 patients) in the TLIF group that was recognized intraoperatively and successfully repaired, superficial infection (1 patient) in the posterolateral group, and donor site discomfort (2 patients in each group). Conclusion: The significantly higher success of TLIF for revising pseudarthrosis after posterolateral fusion is attributed to the fact of placing the graft in a wide fresh bed under compression. The approach is relatively easy and safe for the neural tissue because it avoids any fibrosis from previous surgery and its use is therefore encouraged. (2012ESJ014)
format	article
author	Mohammad El-Sharkawi Wael Koptan Yasser ElMiligui
author_facet	Mohammad El-Sharkawi Wael Koptan Yasser ElMiligui
author_sort	Mohammad El-Sharkawi
title	Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) for Revision of Failed Posterolateral Spinal Fusion
title_short	Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) for Revision of Failed Posterolateral Spinal Fusion
title_full	Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) for Revision of Failed Posterolateral Spinal Fusion
title_fullStr	Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) for Revision of Failed Posterolateral Spinal Fusion
title_full_unstemmed	Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) for Revision of Failed Posterolateral Spinal Fusion
title_sort	transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (tlif) for revision of failed posterolateral spinal fusion
publisher	Egyptian Spine Association
publishDate	2012
url	https://doaj.org/article/2f150324174c496f9f5ddaf4332c0c94
work_keys_str_mv	AT mohammadelsharkawi transforaminallumbarinterbodyfusiontlifforrevisionoffailedposterolateralspinalfusion AT waelkoptan transforaminallumbarinterbodyfusiontlifforrevisionoffailedposterolateralspinalfusion AT yasserelmiligui transforaminallumbarinterbodyfusiontlifforrevisionoffailedposterolateralspinalfusion
_version_	1718401721315622912

Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) for Revision of Failed Posterolateral Spinal Fusion

Ejemplares similares