Minimally invasive versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study

Abstract This was a retrospective study. We aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety between minimally invasive and traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of low-grade lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS). 81 patients with LDS grades 1 and 2 treated...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Rongqing Qin, Tong Wu, Hongpeng Liu, Bing Zhou, Pin Zhou, Xing Zhang
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Nature Portfolio 2020
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/af095f0e13db443980671f1fdaf29a33
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:af095f0e13db443980671f1fdaf29a33
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:af095f0e13db443980671f1fdaf29a332021-12-02T12:42:17ZMinimally invasive versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study10.1038/s41598-020-78984-x2045-2322https://doaj.org/article/af095f0e13db443980671f1fdaf29a332020-12-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-78984-xhttps://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322Abstract This was a retrospective study. We aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety between minimally invasive and traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of low-grade lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS). 81 patients with LDS grades 1 and 2 treated in our spinal department from January 2014 to July 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. The MIS-TLIF group included 23 males and 11 females, while the TO-TLIF group included 29 males and 18 females. Follow-up points were set at 7 days, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months postoperatively and the last follow-up. Various clinical and radiological indicators were used to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety between the two procedures. 8 cases (3 in the MIS-TLIF group and 5 in the TO-TLIF group) were loss of follow-up after discharge. And the remaining 73 patients were followed up for at least 2 years. No statistically significant difference was observed in the terms of age, sex, BMI, slippage grade, and surgical segments. The MIS-TLIF group had a longer operation and fluoroscopy time compared with the TO-TLIF group. But the MIS-TLIF group was associated with less blood loss, ambulation time, hospital stay, and time of return to work. In each group, significant improvement were observed in BP-VAS, ODI and vertebral slip ratio at any time-point of follow-up when compared with the preoperative condition. When the time-point of follow-up was less than 1 year, the MIS-TLIF group had significant advantages in the BP-VAS and ODI compared with TO-TLIF group. But no significant difference was observed in the BP-VAS and ODI at either 12 month follow-up or the last follow-up. Besides, no statistical difference was detected in vertebral slip ratio at any time-point of follow-up between the two groups. Successful intervertebral bone fusion was found in all patients and no significant difference was found in the incidence of total complications. Thus, we considered that MIS-TLIF and TO-TLIF both achieve satisfactory clinical efficacy in the treatment of low-grade single-segment LDS. But MIS-TLIF appears to be a more efficacious and safe technique with reduced tissue damage, less blood loss and quicker recovery.Rongqing QinTong WuHongpeng LiuBing ZhouPin ZhouXing ZhangNature PortfolioarticleMedicineRScienceQENScientific Reports, Vol 10, Iss 1, Pp 1-10 (2020)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Rongqing Qin Tong Wu Hongpeng Liu Bing Zhou Pin Zhou Xing Zhang Minimally invasive versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study
description	Abstract This was a retrospective study. We aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety between minimally invasive and traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of low-grade lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS). 81 patients with LDS grades 1 and 2 treated in our spinal department from January 2014 to July 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. The MIS-TLIF group included 23 males and 11 females, while the TO-TLIF group included 29 males and 18 females. Follow-up points were set at 7 days, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months postoperatively and the last follow-up. Various clinical and radiological indicators were used to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety between the two procedures. 8 cases (3 in the MIS-TLIF group and 5 in the TO-TLIF group) were loss of follow-up after discharge. And the remaining 73 patients were followed up for at least 2 years. No statistically significant difference was observed in the terms of age, sex, BMI, slippage grade, and surgical segments. The MIS-TLIF group had a longer operation and fluoroscopy time compared with the TO-TLIF group. But the MIS-TLIF group was associated with less blood loss, ambulation time, hospital stay, and time of return to work. In each group, significant improvement were observed in BP-VAS, ODI and vertebral slip ratio at any time-point of follow-up when compared with the preoperative condition. When the time-point of follow-up was less than 1 year, the MIS-TLIF group had significant advantages in the BP-VAS and ODI compared with TO-TLIF group. But no significant difference was observed in the BP-VAS and ODI at either 12 month follow-up or the last follow-up. Besides, no statistical difference was detected in vertebral slip ratio at any time-point of follow-up between the two groups. Successful intervertebral bone fusion was found in all patients and no significant difference was found in the incidence of total complications. Thus, we considered that MIS-TLIF and TO-TLIF both achieve satisfactory clinical efficacy in the treatment of low-grade single-segment LDS. But MIS-TLIF appears to be a more efficacious and safe technique with reduced tissue damage, less blood loss and quicker recovery.
format	article
author	Rongqing Qin Tong Wu Hongpeng Liu Bing Zhou Pin Zhou Xing Zhang
author_facet	Rongqing Qin Tong Wu Hongpeng Liu Bing Zhou Pin Zhou Xing Zhang
author_sort	Rongqing Qin
title	Minimally invasive versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study
title_short	Minimally invasive versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study
title_full	Minimally invasive versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study
title_fullStr	Minimally invasive versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study
title_full_unstemmed	Minimally invasive versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study
title_sort	minimally invasive versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study
publisher	Nature Portfolio
publishDate	2020
url	https://doaj.org/article/af095f0e13db443980671f1fdaf29a33
work_keys_str_mv	AT rongqingqin minimallyinvasiveversustraditionalopentransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionforthetreatmentoflowgradedegenerativespondylolisthesisaretrospectivestudy AT tongwu minimallyinvasiveversustraditionalopentransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionforthetreatmentoflowgradedegenerativespondylolisthesisaretrospectivestudy AT hongpengliu minimallyinvasiveversustraditionalopentransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionforthetreatmentoflowgradedegenerativespondylolisthesisaretrospectivestudy AT bingzhou minimallyinvasiveversustraditionalopentransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionforthetreatmentoflowgradedegenerativespondylolisthesisaretrospectivestudy AT pinzhou minimallyinvasiveversustraditionalopentransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionforthetreatmentoflowgradedegenerativespondylolisthesisaretrospectivestudy AT xingzhang minimallyinvasiveversustraditionalopentransforaminallumbarinterbodyfusionforthetreatmentoflowgradedegenerativespondylolisthesisaretrospectivestudy
_version_	1718393704982511616

Minimally invasive versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study

Ejemplares similares