Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) in treatment of degenerative diseases of lumbosacral spine compared to modified open TLIF: a prospective randomised controlled study.

IF 2.9 4区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Neurologia i neurochirurgia polska Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-05 DOI:10.5603/pjnns.97784
Roman Kalina
{"title":"Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) in treatment of degenerative diseases of lumbosacral spine compared to modified open TLIF: a prospective randomised controlled study.","authors":"Roman Kalina","doi":"10.5603/pjnns.97784","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The aim of this study was to determine the clinical and radiological outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) compared to modified open TLIF via the Wiltse approach for treatment of degenerative diseases of the lumbosacral region. The results were evaluated over a post-operative period of 48 months.</p><p><strong>Material and method: </strong>Radiological data and medical records of patients who underwent MIS TLIF and modified open TLIF between May 2017 and May 2021 were reviewed. Parameters monitored to evaluate the surgical results were: clinical status, operation time, blood loss, radiation dose to patient, day of discharge, analgesic consumption, fusion, and complications rate. For functional assessment, the Visual Analogue Scale for back pain (VAS-BP), VAS for leg pain (VAS-LP), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Patient Satisfaction Rate (PSR), and the complication rate were used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study included 57 patients randomly divided into two groups: 30 operated on using the MIS TLIF technique, and 27 operated on using the modified open TLIF technique via the Wiltse approach. 48-month follow-up rates were similar for the two cohorts. Patients did not differ significantly at baseline in terms of ODI, VAS-BP, or VAS-LP. Perioperatively, MIS TLIF was associated with significantly less blood loss (167.3 ± 80.0 vs. 297.9 ± 81.5 ml, p = 1.1E-05), slightly longer procedures (185.7 ± 45.2 vs. 183.1 ± 66.4 minutes, p = 0.76), a lower radiation dose (MIS 16.9 ± 7.1 vs. 22.0 ± 9.7 mGy OPEN p = 0.012), and shorter hospitalisations (MIS 5.9 ± 1.8 vs. 7.7 ± 1.6 days OPEN). The most common complication was radiculitis, which accounted for 33% and 37% in the MIS and the TLIF groups, respectively. The second most common complication was malposition of the fixation material, which accounted for 18.5% in the TLIF group and 20% in the MIS group. The level of fusion achieved was 92.6% in the MIS group versus 92.3% in the TLIF group. There was lower consumption of analgesics in MIS. Patient Satisfaction Rate (PSR) was 90%.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Clinical and radiological outcomes after MIS TLIF in patients with degenerative disease of the lumbosacral region are generally favourable. MIS TLIF was associated with decreased blood loss perioperatively, a lower radiation dose and an earlier discharge, but there was no difference between MIS TLIF and modified open TLIF in 48-month outcomes in terms of disability, back pain, leg pain, quality of life, or patient satisfaction rate or complication rate. Although the differences taper off over time, MIS TLIF has undeniable advantages in the perioperative and early postoperative periods.</p>","PeriodicalId":19132,"journal":{"name":"Neurologia i neurochirurgia polska","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurologia i neurochirurgia polska","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/pjnns.97784","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this study was to determine the clinical and radiological outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) compared to modified open TLIF via the Wiltse approach for treatment of degenerative diseases of the lumbosacral region. The results were evaluated over a post-operative period of 48 months.

Material and method: Radiological data and medical records of patients who underwent MIS TLIF and modified open TLIF between May 2017 and May 2021 were reviewed. Parameters monitored to evaluate the surgical results were: clinical status, operation time, blood loss, radiation dose to patient, day of discharge, analgesic consumption, fusion, and complications rate. For functional assessment, the Visual Analogue Scale for back pain (VAS-BP), VAS for leg pain (VAS-LP), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Patient Satisfaction Rate (PSR), and the complication rate were used.

Results: This study included 57 patients randomly divided into two groups: 30 operated on using the MIS TLIF technique, and 27 operated on using the modified open TLIF technique via the Wiltse approach. 48-month follow-up rates were similar for the two cohorts. Patients did not differ significantly at baseline in terms of ODI, VAS-BP, or VAS-LP. Perioperatively, MIS TLIF was associated with significantly less blood loss (167.3 ± 80.0 vs. 297.9 ± 81.5 ml, p = 1.1E-05), slightly longer procedures (185.7 ± 45.2 vs. 183.1 ± 66.4 minutes, p = 0.76), a lower radiation dose (MIS 16.9 ± 7.1 vs. 22.0 ± 9.7 mGy OPEN p = 0.012), and shorter hospitalisations (MIS 5.9 ± 1.8 vs. 7.7 ± 1.6 days OPEN). The most common complication was radiculitis, which accounted for 33% and 37% in the MIS and the TLIF groups, respectively. The second most common complication was malposition of the fixation material, which accounted for 18.5% in the TLIF group and 20% in the MIS group. The level of fusion achieved was 92.6% in the MIS group versus 92.3% in the TLIF group. There was lower consumption of analgesics in MIS. Patient Satisfaction Rate (PSR) was 90%.

Conclusions: Clinical and radiological outcomes after MIS TLIF in patients with degenerative disease of the lumbosacral region are generally favourable. MIS TLIF was associated with decreased blood loss perioperatively, a lower radiation dose and an earlier discharge, but there was no difference between MIS TLIF and modified open TLIF in 48-month outcomes in terms of disability, back pain, leg pain, quality of life, or patient satisfaction rate or complication rate. Although the differences taper off over time, MIS TLIF has undeniable advantages in the perioperative and early postoperative periods.

微创经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术(MIS TLIF)与改良开放式腰椎椎体间融合术治疗腰骶椎退行性疾病的比较:一项前瞻性随机对照研究。
简介本研究旨在确定微创经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术(MIS TLIF)与经Wiltse入路的改良开放式TLIF治疗腰骶部退行性疾病的临床和放射学结果。对术后 48 个月的结果进行了评估:回顾2017年5月至2021年5月期间接受MIS TLIF和改良开放式TLIF手术患者的放射学数据和病历。评估手术效果的监测参数包括:临床状态、手术时间、失血量、患者辐射剂量、出院日、镇痛药消耗量、融合率和并发症发生率。在功能评估方面,采用了背痛视觉模拟量表(VAS-BP)、腿痛视觉模拟量表(VAS-LP)、Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)、患者满意率(PSR)和并发症发生率:该研究将 57 名患者随机分为两组:30 名采用 MIS TLIF 技术进行手术,27 名采用经 Wiltse 入路的改良开放式 TLIF 技术进行手术。两组患者 48 个月的随访率相似。基线时,患者在ODI、VAS-BP或VAS-LP方面无明显差异。围手术期,MIS TLIF 的失血量明显较少(167.3 ± 80.0 毫升 vs. 297.9 ± 81.5 毫升,p = 1.1E-05),手术时间稍长(185.7 ± 45.2 分钟 vs. 183.1 ± 66.4 分钟,p = 1.1E-05)。1 ± 66.4 分钟,p = 0.76),放射剂量较低(MIS 16.9 ± 7.1 vs. 22.0 ± 9.7 mGy OPEN p = 0.012),住院时间较短(MIS 5.9 ± 1.8 vs. 7.7 ± 1.6 天 OPEN)。最常见的并发症是根管炎,在MIS组和TLIF组分别占33%和37%。第二大常见并发症是固定材料错位,TLIF 组占 18.5%,MIS 组占 20%。MIS 组达到的融合度为 92.6%,而 TLIF 组为 92.3%。MIS 的镇痛剂用量较少。患者满意度(PSR)为90%:结论:腰骶部退行性疾病患者接受 MIS TLIF 治疗后,临床和放射学疗效普遍良好。MIS TLIF与围手术期失血量减少、放射剂量降低和出院时间提前有关,但就残疾、背痛、腿痛、生活质量、患者满意率或并发症发生率而言,MIS TLIF与改良开放式TLIF在48个月的疗效上没有差异。虽然随着时间的推移,两者之间的差异会逐渐缩小,但 MIS TLIF 在围手术期和术后早期具有不可否认的优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neurologia i neurochirurgia polska
Neurologia i neurochirurgia polska 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
27.60%
发文量
128
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Polish Journal of Neurology and Neurosurgery is an official journal of the Polish Society of Neurology and the Polish Society of Neurosurgeons, aimed at publishing high quality articles within the field of clinical neurology and neurosurgery, as well as related subspecialties. For more than a century, the journal has been providing its authors and readers with the opportunity to report, discuss, and share the issues important for every-day practice and research advances in the fields related to neurology and neurosurgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信