比较微创经椎间孔腰椎椎体融合术 (TLIF) 的趋势和结果:回顾性分析

IF 1.5 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Hania Shahzad, Maximillian Lee, Frank Epitropoulous, Nazihah Bhatti, Varun K. Singh, Venkat Kavuri, Elizabeth Yu
{"title":"比较微创经椎间孔腰椎椎体融合术 (TLIF) 的趋势和结果:回顾性分析","authors":"Hania Shahzad,&nbsp;Maximillian Lee,&nbsp;Frank Epitropoulous,&nbsp;Nazihah Bhatti,&nbsp;Varun K. Singh,&nbsp;Venkat Kavuri,&nbsp;Elizabeth Yu","doi":"10.1016/j.jor.2024.07.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To describe utilization patterns of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures and to evaluate indirect healthcare utilization indicators such as revisions, infection, and complication rates for various TLIF techniques.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A retrospective analysis using the Pearldiver database was conducted to identify patients who underwent TLIF between 2010 and 2022. The patient population was stratified into four groups: TLIF with an open approach (TLIF-Open), TLIF with stereotactic navigation (TLIF-NAV), TLIF with the assistance of an operating microscope (TLIF-MI), and TLIF utilizing navigation and operating microscope (TLIF-Combined). Revision, infection, and complication rates were analyzed and compared between each technique with open procedure as the reference procedure using multivariate analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Over the past 13 years, TLIF-Open procedures showed a consistent decrease in utilization, while TLIF-NAV, TLIF-MI, and TLIF-Combined approaches remained relatively stable without experiencing the same dramatic increase as the decline in TLIF-Open procedures. Multivariate regression analysis revealed, TLIF-NAV and TLIF-MI procedures were associated with a higher likelihood of undergoing revision surgeries within 30 days post-operatively, with TLIF-NAV also being linked to a higher risk of infection within 30 days. The TLIF-MI group had a lower likelihood of acute kidney injury (AKI), while the TLIF-NAV group had a lower likelihood of pneumonia and urinary tract infections (UTI).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There has been a noticeable shift in the utilization of TLIF procedures from open to minimally invasive approaches. While stereotactic navigation demonstrates favorable outcomes in terms of complications, surgeons must carefully consider infection risks and revision rates.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16633,"journal":{"name":"Journal of orthopaedics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0972978X24002782/pdfft?md5=b6d3e545052c60a659d6d8bc8b87e72b&pid=1-s2.0-S0972978X24002782-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing trends and outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures: A retrospective analysis\",\"authors\":\"Hania Shahzad,&nbsp;Maximillian Lee,&nbsp;Frank Epitropoulous,&nbsp;Nazihah Bhatti,&nbsp;Varun K. Singh,&nbsp;Venkat Kavuri,&nbsp;Elizabeth Yu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jor.2024.07.010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To describe utilization patterns of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures and to evaluate indirect healthcare utilization indicators such as revisions, infection, and complication rates for various TLIF techniques.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A retrospective analysis using the Pearldiver database was conducted to identify patients who underwent TLIF between 2010 and 2022. The patient population was stratified into four groups: TLIF with an open approach (TLIF-Open), TLIF with stereotactic navigation (TLIF-NAV), TLIF with the assistance of an operating microscope (TLIF-MI), and TLIF utilizing navigation and operating microscope (TLIF-Combined). Revision, infection, and complication rates were analyzed and compared between each technique with open procedure as the reference procedure using multivariate analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Over the past 13 years, TLIF-Open procedures showed a consistent decrease in utilization, while TLIF-NAV, TLIF-MI, and TLIF-Combined approaches remained relatively stable without experiencing the same dramatic increase as the decline in TLIF-Open procedures. Multivariate regression analysis revealed, TLIF-NAV and TLIF-MI procedures were associated with a higher likelihood of undergoing revision surgeries within 30 days post-operatively, with TLIF-NAV also being linked to a higher risk of infection within 30 days. The TLIF-MI group had a lower likelihood of acute kidney injury (AKI), while the TLIF-NAV group had a lower likelihood of pneumonia and urinary tract infections (UTI).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There has been a noticeable shift in the utilization of TLIF procedures from open to minimally invasive approaches. While stereotactic navigation demonstrates favorable outcomes in terms of complications, surgeons must carefully consider infection risks and revision rates.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16633,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of orthopaedics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0972978X24002782/pdfft?md5=b6d3e545052c60a659d6d8bc8b87e72b&pid=1-s2.0-S0972978X24002782-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of orthopaedics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0972978X24002782\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0972978X24002782","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的描述微创经椎间孔腰椎椎体融合术(TLIF)的使用模式,并评估各种 TLIF 技术的间接医疗利用指标,如翻修、感染和并发症发生率。方法使用 Pearldiver 数据库进行回顾性分析,以确定 2010 年至 2022 年期间接受 TLIF 的患者。患者分为四组:采用开放式方法的 TLIF(TLIF-Open)、采用立体定向导航的 TLIF(TLIF-NAV)、采用手术显微镜辅助的 TLIF(TLIF-MI)以及采用导航和手术显微镜的 TLIF(TLIF-Combined)。结果在过去的 13 年中,TLIF-开放手术的使用率持续下降,而 TLIF-NAV、TLIF-MI 和 TLIF-Combined 方法则保持相对稳定,没有出现与 TLIF-开放手术下降相同的大幅增长。多变量回归分析显示,TLIF-NAV 和 TLIF-MI 手术与术后 30 天内接受翻修手术的可能性较高有关,TLIF-NAV 还与 30 天内感染风险较高有关。TLIF-MI组发生急性肾损伤(AKI)的可能性较低,而TLIF-NAV组发生肺炎和尿路感染(UTI)的可能性较低。虽然立体定向导航在并发症方面显示出良好的效果,但外科医生必须仔细考虑感染风险和翻修率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing trends and outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures: A retrospective analysis

Purpose

To describe utilization patterns of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures and to evaluate indirect healthcare utilization indicators such as revisions, infection, and complication rates for various TLIF techniques.

Methods

A retrospective analysis using the Pearldiver database was conducted to identify patients who underwent TLIF between 2010 and 2022. The patient population was stratified into four groups: TLIF with an open approach (TLIF-Open), TLIF with stereotactic navigation (TLIF-NAV), TLIF with the assistance of an operating microscope (TLIF-MI), and TLIF utilizing navigation and operating microscope (TLIF-Combined). Revision, infection, and complication rates were analyzed and compared between each technique with open procedure as the reference procedure using multivariate analysis.

Results

Over the past 13 years, TLIF-Open procedures showed a consistent decrease in utilization, while TLIF-NAV, TLIF-MI, and TLIF-Combined approaches remained relatively stable without experiencing the same dramatic increase as the decline in TLIF-Open procedures. Multivariate regression analysis revealed, TLIF-NAV and TLIF-MI procedures were associated with a higher likelihood of undergoing revision surgeries within 30 days post-operatively, with TLIF-NAV also being linked to a higher risk of infection within 30 days. The TLIF-MI group had a lower likelihood of acute kidney injury (AKI), while the TLIF-NAV group had a lower likelihood of pneumonia and urinary tract infections (UTI).

Conclusion

There has been a noticeable shift in the utilization of TLIF procedures from open to minimally invasive approaches. While stereotactic navigation demonstrates favorable outcomes in terms of complications, surgeons must carefully consider infection risks and revision rates.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
6.70%
发文量
202
审稿时长
56 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Orthopaedics aims to be a leading journal in orthopaedics and contribute towards the improvement of quality of orthopedic health care. The journal publishes original research work and review articles related to different aspects of orthopaedics including Arthroplasty, Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, Trauma, Spine and Spinal deformities, Pediatric orthopaedics, limb reconstruction procedures, hand surgery, and orthopaedic oncology. It also publishes articles on continuing education, health-related information, case reports and letters to the editor. It is requested to note that the journal has an international readership and all submissions should be aimed at specifying something about the setting in which the work was conducted. Authors must also provide any specific reasons for the research and also provide an elaborate description of the results.
×
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