Efficacy and Safety of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Radiographic and surgery-related predictive factors for increased segmental lumbar lordosis following lumbar fusion surgery in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate preoperative (pre-op) radiographic characteristics and specific surgical interventions in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) who underwent lumbar fusion surgery (LFS), with a focus on analyzing predictors of postoperative restoration of segmental lumbar lordosis (SLL).

METHODS

A retrospective review at a single center identified consecutive single-level DLS patients who underwent LFS between 2016 and 2022. Radiographic measures included disc angle (DA), SLL, lumbar lordosis (LL), anterior/posterior disc height (ADH/PDH), spondylolisthesis percentage (SP), intervertebral disc degeneration, and paraspinal muscle quality. Surgery-related measures included cage position, screw insertion depth, spondylolisthesis reduction rate, and disc height restoration rate. A change in SLL ≥ 4° indicated increased segmental lumbar lordosis (ISLL), and unincreased segmental lumbar lordosis (UISLL) < 4°. Propensity score matching was employed for a 1:1 match between ISLL and UISLL patients based on age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, and osteoporosis condition.

RESULTS

A total of 192 patients with an average follow-up of 20.9 months were enrolled. Compared to UISLL patients, ISLL patients had significantly lower pre-op DA (6.78° vs. 11.84°), SLL (10.73° vs. 18.24°), LL (42.59° vs. 45.75°), and ADH (10.09 mm vs. 12.21 mm) (all, P < 0.05). ISLL patients were predisposed to more severe intervertebral disc degeneration (P = 0.047) and higher SP (21.30% vs. 19.39%, P = 0.019). The cage was positioned more anteriorly in ISLL patients (67.00% vs. 60.08%, P = 0.000), with more extensive reduction of spondylolisthesis (- 73.70% vs. - 56.16%, P = 0.000) and higher restoration of ADH (33.34% vs. 8.11%, P = 0.000). Multivariate regression showed that lower pre-op SLL (OR 0.750, P = 0.000), more anterior cage position (OR 1.269, P = 0.000), and a greater spondylolisthesis reduction rate (OR 0.965, P = 0.000) significantly impacted SLL restoration.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-op SLL, cage position, and spondylolisthesis reduction rate were identified as significant predictors of SLL restoration after LFS for DLS. Surgeons are advised to meticulously select patients based on pre-op SLL and strive to position the cage more anteriorly while minimizing spondylolisthesis to maximize SLL restoration.

Hidden Blood Loss and Its Risk Factors for Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

(1) Background: The amount of blood loss during oblique lumber interbody fusion (OLIF) surgery is often underestimated and may contribute to adverse postoperative outcomes. This study aims to evaluate hidden blood loss (HBL) in patients who underwent OLIF for degenerative lumbar spine disease and to analyze its risk factors. (2) Methods: The medical records of 179 patients who underwent OLIF surgery from 2015 to 2022 were reviewed. The HBL and total blood loss (TBL) were estimated using the Gross formula. Pearson correlation, Spearman correlation, and multivariate linear regression analyses were used to investigate risk factors for HBL. (3) Results: The mean HBL was 675.2 mL, and the mean hemoglobin loss was 1.7 g/dL during OLIF surgery. In the multivariate linear regression analysis, TBL (p < 0.001), estimated blood loss (p < 0.001), and pedicle screw fixation type (p = 0.039) were identified as independent risk factors of HBL. (4) Conclusions: The OLIF is associated with substantial perioperative HBL, for which we identified risk factors of TBL, EBL, and pedicle screw fixation type. Notably, OLIF with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation resulted in greater HBL than stand-alone OLIF or OLIF with open pedicle screw fixation.

Efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the differences in postoperative efficacy between oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Strictly based on the search strategy, we searched the published papers on OLIF and TLIF for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library. A total of 607 related papers were retrieved, and 15 articles were finally included. The quality of the papers was evaluated according to the Cochrane systematic review methodology, and the data were extracted and meta-analyzed using Review manager 5.4 software.

RESULTS

Through comparison, it was found that in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases, the OLIF group had certain advantages over the TLIF group in terms of intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, visual analog scale (VAS) for leg pain (VAS-LP), Oswestry disability index (ODI), disc height (DH), foraminal height (FH), fused segmental lordosis (FSL), and cage height, and the differences were statistically significant. The results were similar in terms of surgery time, complications, fusion rate, VAS for back pain (VAS-BP) and various sagittal imaging indicators, and there was no significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

OLIF and TLIF can relieve low back pain symptoms in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases, but OLIF has certain advantages in terms of ODI and VAS-LP. In addition, OLIF has the advantages of minor intraoperative trauma and quick postoperative recovery.

Biomechanical study of two-level oblique lumbar interbody fusion with different types of lateral instrumentation: a finite element analysis

Objective

The aim of this study was to verify the biomechanical properties of a newly designed angulated lateral plate (mini-LP) suited for two-level oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). The mini-LP is placed through the lateral ante-psoas surgical corridor, which reduces the operative time and complications associated with prolonged anesthesia and placement in the prone position.

Methods

A three-dimensional nonlinear finite element (FE) model of an intact L1-L5 lumbar spine was constructed and validated. The intact model was modified to generate a two-level OLIF surgery model augmented with three types of lateral fixation (stand-alone, SA; lateral rod screw, LRS; miniature lateral plate, mini-LP); the operative segments were L2-L3 and L3-L4. By applying a 500 N follower load and 7.5 Nm directional moment (flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation), all models were used to simulate human spine movement. Then, we extracted the range of motion (ROM), peak contact force of the bony endplate (PCFBE), peak equivalent stress of the cage (PESC), peak equivalent stress of fixation (PESF), and stress contour plots.

Results

When compared with the intact model, the SA model achieved the least reduction in ROM to surgical segments in all motions. The ROM of the mini-LP model was slightly smaller than that of the LRS model. There were no significant differences in surgical segments (L1-L2, L4-L5) between all surgical models and the intact model. The PCFBE and PESC of the LRS and the mini-LP fixation models were lower than those of the SA model. However, the differences in PCFBE or PESC between the LRS- and mini-LP-based models were not significant. The fixation stress of the LRS- and mini-LP-based models was significantly lower than the yield strength under all loading conditions. In addition, the variances in the PESF in the LRS- and mini-LP-based models were not obvious.

Conclusion

Our biomechanical FE analysis indicated that LRS or mini-LP fixation can both provide adequate biomechanical stability for two-level OLIF through a single incision. The newly designed mini-LP model seemed to be superior in installation convenience, and equally good outcomes were achieved with both LRS and mini-LP for two-level OLIF.

Different Moro Zones of Psoas Major Affect the Clinical Outcomes after Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Study of 94 Patients

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) has been driven to the maturity stage in recent years. However, postoperative symptoms such as thigh paresthesia resulting from intraoperative retraction of the psoas major (PM) have sometimes occurred. The aim of this study was to assess the different positions and morphology of PM muscles and their relationship with clinical outcomes after OLIF by introducing the Moro zones. Patients who underwent L4-5 OLIF at our institution between April 2019 and June 2021 were reviewed and all data were recorded. All patients were grouped by Moro zones into a Moro A cohort and a Moro I and II cohort based on the front edges of their left PM muscles. A total of 94 patients were recruited, including 57 in the Moro A group and 37 in the Moro I and II group. Postoperative thigh pain or numbness occurred in 12 (21.1%) and 2 (5.4%) patients in the Moro A group and the Moro I and II group, respectively. There was no difference in the psoas major transverse diameter (PMTD) between groups preoperatively, while longer PMTD was revealed postoperatively in the Moro A group. The operating window (OW) and psoas major sagittal diameter (PMSD) showed significant differences within and between groups. Thirteen patients had teardrop-shaped PM muscles, with 92.3% in the Moro A group showing significantly worse clinical scores at 1-week follow-up. The Moro zones of the PM affected the short-term outcomes after OLIF. Preoperative measurements and analysis of OW, PMSD and PM morphology should be performed as necessary to predict short-term outcomes.

Comparisons of oblique lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis: a prospective cohort study with a 2-year follow-up

Objective

This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between oblique (OLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis during a 2-year follow-up.

Methods

Patients with symptomatic degenerative spondylolisthesis who underwent OLIF (OLIF group) or TLIF (TLIF group) were prospectively enrolled in the authors' hospital and followed up for 2 years. The primary outcomes were treatment effects [changes in visual analog score (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) from baseline] at 2 years after surgery; these were compared between two groups. Patient characteristics, radiographic parameters, fusion status, and complication rates were also compared.

Results

In total, 45 patients were eligible for the OLIF group and 47 patients for the TLIF group. The rates of follow-up were 89% and 87% at 2 years, respectively. The comparisons of primary outcomes demonstrated no different changes in VAS-leg (OLIF, 3.4 vs. TLIF, 2.7), VAS-back (OLIF, 2.5 vs. TLIF, 2.1), and ODI (OLIF, 26.8 vs. TLIF, 30). The fusion rates were 86.1% in the TLIF group and 92.5% in the OLIF group at 2 years (P = 0.365). The OLIF group had less estimated blood loss (median, 200 ml) than the TLIF group (median, 300 ml) (P < 0.001). Greater restoration of disc height was obtained by OLIF (mean, 4.6 mm) than the TLIF group (mean, 1.3 mm) in the early postoperative period (P < 0.001). The subsidence rate was lower in the OLIF group than that in the TLIF group (17.5% vs. 38.9%, P = 0.037). The rates of total problematic complications were not different between the two groups (OLIF, 14.6% vs. TLIF, 26.2%, P = 0.192).

Conclusion

OLIF did not show better clinical outcomes than TLIF for degenerative spondylolisthesis, except for lesser blood loss, greater disc height restoration, and lower subsidence rate.

Beneficial influence of single-stage posterior surgery for the treatment of lumbar brucella spondylitis combined with spondylolisthesis

We aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the single-stage posterior surgical treatment for patients of lumbar brucella spondylitis combined with spondylolisthesis. In this study, we performed a retrospective analysis of 16 patients with lumbar brucellosis spondylitis combined with spondylolisthesis from January 2015 to January 2019. All patients underwent single-stage posterior lumbar debridement, reduction, interbody fusion, and instrumentation. Preoperative and postoperative of the visual analog scale (VAS), the Oswestry disability index (ODI), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP) were compared. In addition, the spondylolisthesis reduction rate, reduction loss rate, interbody fusion rate, and complication rate were recorded. VAS, ODI, ESR, and CRP were conducted with repeated analysis of variance data at different follow-ups. The postoperative follow-up was 12-36 months, with an average of (25.0 ± 8.1) months. VAS, ODI, ESR, and CRP were significantly better at 2-week and 1-year follow-up than preoperative results (P = 0.000, respectively). In addition, 1 year after the operation, VAS, ODI, ESR, and CRP showed a significant improvement (P = 0.000, respectively). The average spondylolisthesis reduction in 2 weeks after operation was (91.2 ± 6.7)%, and the median reduction loss rate in 1 year after operation was 8.0 (5.0, 9.8)%. At the last follow-up, all patients achieved interbody fusion, no loosening and fracture of instrumentation were found, and no recurrence happened. Single-stage posterior operation for lumbar debridement, reduction, interbody fusion, and instrumentation is beneficial for treating lumbar brucellosis spondylitis combined with spondylolisthesis. Furthermore, the reconstruction of spinal stability may relieve pain, heal lesions, and improve patients' living.

Meta-analysis of the clinical efficacy and safety of oblique lateral interbody fusion and transforaminal interbody fusion in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

Objective

The aim of this study was to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis by meta-analysis.

Methods

A computer-based search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection databases, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Biology Medicine, and Wanfang Digital Periodicals was conducted from the time of inception of each database to December 2021. The review process was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines and registered in the PROSPERO database. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software provided by the Cochrane Library.

Results

Thirteen studies were included in the statistical analysis. One randomized controlled study and 12 cohort studies with 954 patients were included. In terms of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, Oswestry disability index score, intervertebral height, and complications, the OLIF group was better than the TLIF group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of visual analogue scale score, lumbar lordosis or fused segment lordosis (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Both OLIF and TLIF are effective surgical modalities in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. They achieve similar therapeutic effects, but OLIF is superior to TLIF in restoring intervertebral height. At the same time, OLIF has the advantages of short operation time and less intraoperative blood loss.

Comparative analysis of the effects of OLIF and TLIF on adjacent segments after treatment of L4 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

Background

The fusion of the lumbar spine may lead to the degeneration of the adjacent segments. In this study, the effects of OLIF and TLIF on adjacent segments after treatment of L4 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) were compared and analysed.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of the medical records of consecutive patients treated with OLIF or TLIF for L4DLS. They were divided into the OLIF group and TLIF group based on different treatment methods. Cage height, segmental lordosis (SL), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), and sacral slope (SS) were compared between the two groups, and the postoperative biomechanical changes were analysed by establishing the disc angle (DA). The clinical outcomes were analysed by comparing the visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and incidence of adjacent segment disease (ASDis) between the two groups. The intervertebral disc height (IDH), intervertebral foramen height (IDH), intervertebral foramen area (IFA), sliding distance (SD), and angular displacement (AD) in L3-4 and L5-S1 were compared between the two groups. The incidence of aggravated disc degeneration (ADD), the incidence of aggravated zygapophyseal joint degeneration (AJD) and the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg) were compared between the two groups for radiological degeneration.

Results

At the last follow-up, there was one case of ASDis in the OLIF group (2.78%) and two cases in the TLIF group (5.56%). At the last follow-up, compared with the preoperative values, IDH, IFH, and IFA of the adjacent segments above and below L4-5 decreased in both groups (P < 0.05); the SD and AD increased in both groups (P < 0.05). The cage height and L4-5 IDH in the OLIF group were significantly higher than those in the TLIF group (P < 0.05). SL, LL, PT, SS, and L5- S1DA were significantly improved in the OLIF group compared with the TLIF group (P < 0.05). The incidence of L3-4ASDeg in the two groups was higher than that of L5-S1. The incidence of ASDeg and the incidence of L5-S1ADD in the OLIF group were lower than those in the TLIF group, but the incidence of L5-S1AJD was higher than that in the TLIF group.

Conclusion

L4DLS after OLIF and TLIF treatment will cause adjacent segment degeneration, and L3-4 degeneration is more obvious than L5-S1 degeneration. OLIF has more advantages in restoring lumbar sagittal balance. Compared with TLIF, OLIF can weaken the degeneration of the L5-S1 disc and increase the degeneration of the L5-S1 zygapophyseal joints.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13018-022-03084-7.