Distinct fusion intersegmental parameters regarding local sagittal balance provide similar clinical outcomes: a comparative study of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Clinical efficacy and complications of MIS-TLIF and TLIF in the treatment of upper lumbar disc herniation: a comparative study

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment modality for upper lumbar disc herniation remains unclear. Herein, we compared the clinical efficacy and application value of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for upper lumbar disc herniation. We aimed to provide new evidence to guide surgical decisions for treating this condition.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 81 patients with upper lumbar disc herniation admitted between January 2017 and July 2018, including 41 and 40 patients who underwent MIS-TLIF and TLIF, respectively. Demographic characteristics, preoperative functional scores, perioperative indicators, and postoperative complications were compared. We performed consecutive comparisons of visual analog scale (VAS) scores of the lumbar and leg regions, Oswestry disability index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores (JOA), and MacNab scores at the final follow-up, to assess clinical outcomes 5 years postoperatively.

RESULTS

VAS scores of the back and legs were significantly lower in the MIS-TLIF than the TLIF group at 3 months and 1 year postoperatively (P < 0.05). Intraoperative bleeding and postoperative hospitalization time were significantly lower, and the time to return to work/normal life was shorter in the MIS-TLIF than in the TLIF group (P < 0.05). The differences in JOA scores and ODI scores between the two groups at 3 months, 1 year, and 3 years postoperatively were statistically significant (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The early clinical efficacy of MIS-TLIF was superior to that of TLIF, but no differences were found in mid-term clinical efficacy. Further, MIS-TLIF has the advantages of fewer medical injuries, shorter hospitalization times, and faster postoperative functional recovery.

Comparison of Outcomes Between Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Patients With Single-Level Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF).

METHODS

This retrospective study included 110 patients with single-level lumbar degenerative disease who underwent Endo-TLIF or MIS-TLIF between January 2019 and December 2021. Patients were divided into Endo-TLIF (n = 55) and MIS-TLIF groups (n = 55). Perioperative, clinical, and radiological outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

The Endo-TLIF group had significantly lower blood loss and shorter hospital stay. However, the operation time was significantly longer and there was more x-ray exposure than in the MIS-TLIF group. There were no significant differences in complications between the groups. The Endo-TLIF group showed significantly lower creatine kinase levels than the MIS-TLIF group at 3 days postoperatively (P < 0.05), but not at 7 days postoperatively (P > 0.05). Oswestry Disability Index and visual analog scale scores were significantly reduced in both groups at different time points postoperation compared to preoperation. The visual analog scale score in the Endo-TLIF group was lower than that in the MIS-TLIF group at 3 days postoperatively. Moreover, no significant differences were found in fusion rates, lumbar lordosis, and lumbar segmental lordosis between the 2 groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Endo-TLIF might be considered as an effective and reliable treatment option for single-level lumbar degeneration. It results in less trauma and faster postoperative recovery, but a longer operative time and more x-ray exposure than MIS-TLIF. Endo-TLIF has effects on clinical and radiological outcomes that are comparable to those of MIS-TLIF.

Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Strategies for Creating Lordosis with a Posterior Approach

The purpose of this article is to review the outcomes concerning lumbar lordosis restoration after the MIS-TLIF and to present strategies to create lumbar lordosis by using this MIS posterior approach. MIS-TLIF is an effective MIS lumbar interbody fusion that can achieve lumbar lordosis restoration. Several crucial steps aid in this sagittal profile correction during the MIS-TLIF, including the appropraite prone positioning, optimizing disc space preparation, maximizing disc space height, anterior interbody cage placement, and reducing the spondylolisthesis.

Radiological and clinical outcomes of midline lumbar fusion on sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters for degenerative lumbar diseases

BACKGROUND

Improving the sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters after fusion surgery is important for improving clinical outcomes. The impact of midline lumbar fusion (MIDLF) on sagittal lumbar-pelvic alignment for the management of degenerative lumbar diseases is still unknown.

AIM

To analyze the effects of short-segment MIDLF and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) on sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 63 patients with degenerative lumbar diseases who underwent single-segment MIDLF or MIS-TLIF. The imaging data of patients were collected before surgery and at the final follow-up. The radiological sagittal parameters included the lumbar lordosis (LL), lower LL, L4 slope (L4S), L5 slope (L5S), L5 incidence (L5I), L1 axis and S1 distance (LASD), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), and PI-LL mismatch (PI-LL). Additionally, the clinical outcomes, including lower back and leg pain visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores, were also analyzed.

RESULTS

In both groups, LL and Lower LL significantly increased, while L5I and LASD significantly decreased at the final follow-up compared to that recorded prior to operation (P < 0.05). In the MIDLF group, L4S significantly decreased compared to that recorded prior to operation (P < 0.05), while the mean SS significantly increased and the PT significantly decreased compared to that recorded prior to operation (P < 0.05). In the MIS-TLIF group, SS slightly increased and the mean PT value decreased compared to that recorded prior to operation, but without a statistically significant difference (P > 0.05). However, the PI-LL in both groups was significantly reduced compared to that recorded prior to operation (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters between the two groups prior to operation and at the final follow-up (P > 0.05). In addition, the change in sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters did not differ significantly, except for ΔLASD within the two groups (P > 0.05). The mean lower back and leg pain VAS and ODI scores in both groups were significantly improved three months after surgery and at the final follow-up. Though the mean ODI score in the MIDLF group three months after surgery was slightly higher than that in the MIS-TLIF group, there was no significant difference between the two groups at the final follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Short-segment MIDLF and MIS-TLIF can equally improve sagittal lumbar parameters such as LL, Lower LL, L5I, and LASD in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. However, MIDLF had a larger impact on pelvic parameters than MIS-TLIF.

[Prospective randomized controlled trial on the effectiveness of low-dose and high-dose intravenous tranexamic acid in reducing perioperative blood loss in single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion]

OBJECTIVE

A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted to study the effectiveness and safety of intravenous different doses tranexamic acid (TXA) in single-level unilateral minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF).

METHODS

The patients treated with single-level unilateral MIS-TLIF between September 2019 and October 2020 were enrolled and randomly classified into low-dose TXA (LD) group (n=39), high-dose TXA (HD) group (n=39), and placebo-controlled (PC) group (n=38). The LD, HD, and PC groups received intravenous TXA 20 mg/kg, TXA 50 mg/kg, the same volume of normal saline at 30 minute before skin incision after general anesthesia, respectively. There was no significant difference on baseline characteristics and preoperative laboratory results among 3 groups (P>0.05), including age, gender, body mass index, surgical segments, hematocrit (HCT), hemoglobin (HGB), prothrombin time (PT), international normalized ratio (INR), D-dimer, fibrin degradation products (FDP), activated partial prothromboplastin time (APTT), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), creatinine (Cr), urea. The intraoperative blood loss (IBL), postoperative drainage volume, operation time, total blood loss (TBL), hidden blood loss (HBL), blood transfusion, hematological examination indexes on the first day after operation, and the incidence of complications within 1 month were compared among the 3 groups.

RESULTS

There were 3, 2, and 4 patients in the LD, HD, and PC groups who underwent autologous blood transfusion, respectively, and there was no allogeneic blood transfusion patients in the 3 groups. There was no significant difference in IBL, postoperative drainage volume, and operation time between groups (P>0.05). The TBL, HBL, and the decreased value of HGB in LD and HD groups were significantly lower than those in PC group (P<0.05), and TBL and HBL in HD group were significantly lower than those in LD group (P<0.05); the decreased value of HGB between LD group and HD group showed no significant difference (P>0.05). On the first day after operation, D-dimer in LD and HD groups were significantly lower than that in PC group (P<0.05); there was no significant difference between LD and HD groups (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in other hematological indexes between groups (P>0.05). All patients were followed up 1 month, and there was no TXA-related complication such as deep venous thrombosis of lower extremity, pulmonary embolism, and epilepsy in the 3 groups.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous administration of TXA in single-level unilateral MIS-TLIF is effective and safe in reducing postoperative TBL and HBL within 1 day in a dose-dependent manner. Also, TXA can reduce postoperative fibrinolysis markers and do not increase the risk of thrombotic events, including deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.