Objective To discuss the key issues in the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative disc disease and thetherapeutic effect of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion on it. Methods From September 2004 to August 2006, 15 cases of degenerative disc disease were treated by transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, including 8 males and 7 females with the age of 33-46 years. All cases were single-level degenerative disc diseases, including 1 case of L3,4, 8 cases of L4,5 and 6 cases of L5, S1. The course of the disease was 2 -10 years. Preoperatively, the score of visual analogue scale (VAS) was 8.9 ± 1.8 and the score of Oswestry disabil ity index (ODI) was 51.4 ± 8.3. All patients had received normal conventional treatment for at least 3 months and had no therapeutic effect before operation. Results The operation time was 120-180 minutes (150 minutes on average) and the intra-operative blood loss was 200-500 mL (360 mL on average). There was no severe compl ication, except that the muscle tone of anterior tibia in one case decreased to the third level, which recovered to the 5- level 3 months after operation. A total of 15 cases were followed up for 12-24 months (18 months on average). All patients got interbody bony fusion 12 months after operation with the fusion rate of 100%. Postoperatively, the score of VAS was 2.8 ± 1.6 and the score of ODI was 19.1 ± 3.2, indicating there were significant difference in comparison with postoperative ones (P lt; 0.05). The improvement rates of postoperative VAS and ODI were 61.8% ± 7.3% and 64.3% ± 5.5%, respectively. For the therapeutic effect, 6 cases were regardedas excellent, 8 good, 1 fair, and the choiceness rate was 93.3%. All patients resumed their jobs and normal l ives. Conclusion Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion is effective for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disc disease, but the indications for operation must be strictly defined.
Objective
To investigate the effectiveness of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) assisted with microscope for lumbar degenerative disease.
Methods
Retrospective analysis was made on the clinical data of 82 patients with lumbar degenerative disease (minimally invasive group) undergoing minimally invasive TLIF assisted with microscope between January 2010 and June 2011, which was compared with those of 76 patients (traditional group) undergoing traditional open TLIF. There was no significant difference in age, gender, disease duration, disease type, lesion level, preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS), and preoperative Oswestry disability index (ODI) between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The perioperative related parameters, radiography index, and effectiveness were documented and compared.
Results
There was no significant difference in operation time and intraoperative radiological exposure time between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05), but intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage volume in the minimally invasive group were significantly less than those in the traditional group (P lt; 0.05). Dural tear occurred in 2 patients of the traditional group. Superficial infection of incision occurred in 1 case in each group, respectively; and primary healing of incision was obtained in the other patients. All patients were followed up 12-28 months (mean, 18 months). No failure of internal fixation occurred. Radiological analysis showed that the bone graft fusion rate was 96.1% (73/76) in the traditional group and 95.1% (78/82) in the minimally invasive group at last follow-up, showing no significant difference (χ2= 0.012 2, P= 0.912 0). The postoperative ODI and VAS score were significantly improved when compared with preoperative ones in 2 groups (P lt; 0.05); the ODI of the minimally invasive group were significantly better than those of the traditional group at 3 months (t=
—
11.941 1, P=0.000 0), and the VAS score of the minimally invasive group was significantly lower than that of the traditional group at 1 day and 3 months (P lt; 0.05); but no significant difference was found in ODI and VAS score between 2 groups at 1 year and last follow-up (P gt; 0.05).
Conclusion
Minimally invasive TLIF is an effective method to treat lumbar degenerative disease. This procedure is safe and reliable because it has less injury, less blood loss, and milder pain than the traditional open TLIF, and the short-term effectiveness is comparable in 2 procedures.
Objective To compare the therapeutic effect of conventional discectomy, posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) on the recurrent lumbar disc protrusion (RLDP). Methods From January 2000 to January 2008, 65 patients with RLDP underwent different surgical procedures, namely conventional discectomy (group A, 25 cases), PLIF (group B, 22 cases), and TLIF (group C, 18 cases). There were 44 males and 21 females aged 26-65 years old (average 41 years old). All the patients were single-level protrusion, including 33 cases at the L4, 5 level and 32 cases at the L5, S1 level. The primary procedure included laminectomy discectomy in 39 patients, unilateral hemilaminectomy discectomy in 15 patients, and bilateral laminectomy and total laminectomy discectomy in 11patients. The recurrent time to the primary operation was 13-110 months (average 64 months). The location of recurrent disc protrusion was at the ipsilateral side in 47 cases and the contralateral side in 18 cases. No significant differences among three groups were evident in terms of basel ine data (P gt; 0.05). Results The incision all healed by first intention. The incidence of perioperative compl ication in group A (24.0%) and group B (22.3%) was significantly higher than that of group C (5.6%) (P lt; 0.05), and there was no significant difference between group A and group B (P gt; 0.05). The operation time and bleed loss during operation of group B were obviously higher than that of group A and group C (P lt; 0.05), and there was no significant difference between group A and group C (P gt; 0.05). There were no significant differences among three groups in terms of the length of hospital ization (P gt; 0.05). Six-one patients were followed up for 12-36 months (average 20 months). At 1 week after operation, the satisfied rate of patients was 84.0% in group A, 81.8% in group B, and 88.9% in group C (P gt; 0.05). All the patients in group B and group C achieved fusion uneventfully. There were no significant differences among three groups in terms of visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disabil ity index (ODI) when compared the preoperative value with the final follow-up value (P gt; 0.05). There was significant difference within group A, B, and C in terms of VAS and ODI when compared the preoperative value with the final follow-up value (P lt; 0.05), but there were no significant differences among three groups in the improvement rate (P gt; 0.05). The intervertebral space grading method proposed by Roberts et al. was adopted to evaluate the intervertebral space height (ISH), the preoperative value was 2.04 ± 0.93 in group A, 2.18 ± 0.91 in group B, and 2.11 ± 0.90 in group C, andat the final follow-up, the value was 2.64 ± 0.58 in group A, 1.05 ± 0.59 in group B, and 1.06 ± 0.42 in group C. There were significant differences among three groups in the ISH when compared the properative value with the final follow-up value (P lt; 0.05). Conclusion All of the three surgical procedures are effective for RLDP, but conventional discectomy and PLIF have more compl ications than TLIF. Conventional discectomy may result in the further narrow of the intervertebral space and the occurrence of segment instabil ity, whereas TLIF is safer, more effective, and one of the ideal methods to treat RLDP.
ObjectiveTo compare the biomechanical differences between the kidney-shaped nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide 66 (n-HA/PA66) Cage and the bullet-shaped n-HA/PA66 Cage.
MethodsL2-L5 spinal specimens were selected from 10 adult male pigs. L2, L3 and L4, L5 served as a motor unit respectively, 20 motor units altogether. They were divided into 4 groups (n=5):no treatment was given as control group (group A); nucleus pulposus resection was performed (group B); bullet-shaped Cage (group C), and kidney-shaped Cage (group D) were used in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) through left intervertebral foramen and supplemented by posterior pedicle screw fixation. The intervertebral height (IH) and the position of Cages were observed on the X-ray films. The range of motion (ROM) was measured.
ResultsThere was no significant difference in the preoperative IH among 4 groups (F=0.166, P=0.917). No significant change was found in IH between at pre- and post-operation in group B (P>0.05); it increased after operation in groups C and D, but difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the postoperative IH among groups B, C, and D (P>0.05). The distance from Cage to the left margin was (3.06±0.51) mm in group C (close to the left) and (5.68±0.69) mm in group D (close to the middle), showing significant difference (t=6.787, P=0.000). The ROM in all directions were significantly lower in groups C and D than in groups A and B (P<0.05), and in group A than in group B (P<0.05). The right bending and compression ROM of group C were significantly higher than those of group D (P<0.05), but no statistically significant difference was found in the other direction ROM (P>0.05).
ConclusionThe bullet-shaped and kidney-shaped Cages have similar results in restoring IH and maintaining the stability of the spine assisted by internal fixation. Kidney-shaped Cage is more stable than bullet-shaped Cage in the axial compression and the bending load opposite implant, it can be placed in the middle and back of the vertebral body more ideally.
Objective
To compare the difference of traumatic related index in serum and its significance between minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and open TLIF.
Methods
Sixty patients were enrolled by the entry criteria between May and November 2012, and were divided into MIS-TLIF group (n=30) and open TLIF group (n=30). There was no significant difference in gender, age, type of lesions, disease segment, and disease duration between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative hospitalization time were recorded, and the pain severity of incision was evaluated by visual analog scale (VAS). The serum levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and creatine kinase (CK) were measured at preoperation and at 24 hours postoperatively. The levels of interleukin 6 (IL-6), IL-10, and tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α) in serum were measured at preoperation and at 2, 4, 8, and 24 hours after operation.
Results
The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative hospitalization time of MIS-TLIF group were significantly smaller than those of open TLIF group (P lt; 0.05), and the VAS score for incision pain in MIS-TLIF group was significantly lower than that of open TLIF group at 1, 2, and 3 days after operation (P lt; 0.05). The levels of CRP, CK, IL-6, and IL-10 in MIS-TLIF group were significantly lower than those in open TLIF group at 24 hours after operation (P lt; 0.05), but there was no significant difference between 2 groups before operation (P gt; 0.05). No significant difference was found in TNF-α level between 2 groups at pre- and post-operation (P gt; 0.05).
Conclusion
Compared with the open-TLIF, MIS-TLIF may significantly reduce tissue injury and systemic inflammatory reactions during the early postoperative period.
Objective
To compare the short-term effectiveness of minimally invasive surgery-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) versus open-TLIF in treatment of single-level lumbar degenerative disease.
Methods
Between February 2010 and February 2011, 147 patients with single-level lumbar degenerative diseases underwent open-TLIF in 104 cases (open-TLIF group) and MIS-TLIF in 43 cases (MIS-TLIF group), and the clinical data were analyzed retrospectively. There was no significant difference in gender, age, disease type, lesion level, disease duration, preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS), and preoperative Oswestry disability index (ODI) between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The operation time, intraoperative radiological exposure time, intra- and post-operative blood loss, postoperative hospitalization time, and postoperative complications were compared between 2 groups. The VAS score and ODI were observed during follow-up. The imaging examination was done to observe the bone graft fusion and the locations of internal fixator and Cage.
Results
There was no significant difference in operation time between 2 groups (t=0.402, P=0.688); MIS-TLIF group had a decreased intra- and post-operative blood loss, shortened postoperative hospitalization time, and increased intraoperative radiological exposure time, showing significant differences when compared with open-TLIF group (P lt; 0.05). Cerebrospinal fluid leakage (2 cases) and superficial infection of incision (2 cases) occurred after operation in open-TLIF group, with a complication incidence of 3.8% (4/104); dorsal root ganglion stimulation symptom (3 cases) occurred in MIS-TLIF group, with a complication incidence of 7.0% (3/43); there was no significant difference in the complication incidence between 2 groups (χ2=0.657, P=0.417). The patients were followed up 18-26 months (mean, 21 months) in MIS-TLIF group, and 18-28 months (mean, 23 months) in open-TLIF group. The VAS scores and ODI of 2 groups at each time point after operation were significantly improved when compared with those before operation (P lt; 0.05). There was no significant difference in VAS score between 2 groups at discharge and 3 months after operation (P gt; 0.05); VAS score of MIS-TLIF group was significantly lower than that of open-TLIF group at last follow-up (t=
—
2.022, P=0.047). At 3 months and last follow-up, no significant difference was found in the ODI between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The imaging examination showed good positions of Cage and internal fixator, and bone graft fusion in 2 groups.
Conclusion
The short-term effectiveness of MIS-TLIF and open-TLIF for single-level degenerative lumbar diseases was similar. MIS-TLIF has the advantages of less invasion and quick recovery, but the long-term effectiveness needs more observation.
ObjectiveTo investigate the role of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 in the posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for patients with osteoporosis and lumbar degenerative disease.
MethodsBetween November 2011 and October 2012,44 patients with osteoporosis and lumbar degenerative disease were treated with TLIF and the clinical data were retrospectively analyzed.The patients were divided into 2 groups based on the administration of 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3.After TLIF operation,1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 was used in 21 patients (trial group),and was not used in 23 patients (control group).There was no significant difference in gender,age,etiology,affected segment,and disease duration between 2 groups (P>0.05).Lumbar interbody fusion was observed by X-ray and thin-section CT scan reconstruction of lumbar spine according to Brantigan assessment system at 6 months after operation and last follow-up.Clinical outcome was evaluated by Oswestry disability index (ODI) before and after operation.
ResultsThe patients of 2 groups were followed up 12-27 months (mean,14.5 months).No fixation loosening or breaking occurred during follow-up.ODI scores in both groups were significantly improved at 6 months after operation and last follow-up (P<0.05) when conpared with preoperative value.Although at preoperation there was no significant difference in ODI score between 2 groups (P>0.05),ODI score of trial group was significantly lower than that of control group at 6 months after operation and last follow-up (P<0.05).At 6 months after operation,the interbody fusion rate was 76.19% (16/21) in trial group and 43.48% (10/23) in control group,showing significant difference (χ2=3.60,P=0.03); at last follow-up,the fusion rate was 95.24% (20/21) in trial group and 65.22% (15/23) in control group,showing significant difference (χ2=4.38,P=0.02).
Conclusion1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 can improve the lumbar interbody fusion rate and general conditions in the patients with osteoporosis and lumbar degenerative disease.
Objective To investigate the effectiveness of surgical treatment for single-level degenerative lumbar instabil ity (DLI) by comparing traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with minimally invasive TLIF. Methods Between March 2007 and May 2009，87 patients with single-level DLI were treated by traditional open TLIF (group A, n=45) and by minimally invasive TLIF (group B, n=42), respectively. There was no significant difference in gender, age, disease duration, segment level, combined diseases of lumbar spine, or the proportion of uni- and bilateral symptom between 2groups (P gt; 0.05). The indexes of surgical trauma，systemic inflammatory response, cl inical outcomes, and aravertebral muscle injury were compared between 2 groups. Results Operation was performed successfully in all patients. The patients were followed up 2.9 years on average in group A and 2.8 years on average in group B. The incision, blood loss, and postoperative drainage in group B were significantly less than those in group A (P lt; 0.05), but the operation time in group B was significantly longer than that in group A (P lt; 0.05). There were significant differences (P lt; 0.05) in C-reactive protein, leucocyte count, and creatine kinase MM between 2 groups at 24 hours postoperatively as well as in C-reactive protein at 6 days postoperatively; group B was superior to group A. At last follow-up, the Oswestry disabil ity index (ODI) and visual analogue score (VAS) were significantly improved when compared with the preoperative scores in 2 groups (P lt; 0.05). There were significant differences in ODI and back pain VAS score (P lt; 0.05), but no significant difference in leg pain VAS score (P gt; 0.05) between 2 groups. At last follow-up, no low back pain occurred in 8 and 18 cases, mild in 25 and 18 cases, moderate in 9 and 6 cases, and severe in 3 and 0 cases in groups A and B, respectively, showing that low back pain was significantly l ighter in group B than in group A (Z= —2.574, P=0.010). At last follow-up, the atrophy ratio of multifidus muscle was 37% ± 13% in group A and was 15% ± 7% in group B, showing significant difference (t=12.674, P=0.000). The multifidus muscle atrophy was rated as grade I in 18 and 44 sides, as grade II in 42 and 32 sides, and as grade III in 30 and 8 sides in groups A and B, respectively, showing significant difference (Z= — 4.947, P=0.000). Conclusion Both traditional open TLIF and minimally invasive TLIF are the effective treatments for single-level DLI. Minimally invasive TLIF has less surgical trauma, sl ighter postoperative systemic inflammatory response, less paravertebral muscle injury, and lower incidence of postoperative back pain, but it has longer operation time.
ObjectiveTo analyze the restoration of intervertebral height and lordosis of fusion segment after open-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Open-TLIF) and minimally invasive-TLIF (MIS-TLIF).MethodsBetween January 2013 and February 2016, patients who treated with TLIF due to lumbar degenerative diseases and met the selection criteria were selected as the study objects. Among them, 41 patients were treated with open-TLIF (Open-TLIF group), 34 patients were treated with MIS-TLIF (MIS-TLIF group). There was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05) in gender, age, body mass index, disease type, disease duration, pathological segment, and other general data. The intraoperative bleeding volume, hospital stay, visual analogue scale (VAS) score of waist and leg, and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were recorded before and after operation. The anterior disc height (ADH), posterior disc height (ADH), and segmental lordosis (SL) of fusion segment were measured by X-ray film before and at 6 months after operation. The differences of ADH, PDH, and SL between pre- and post-operation were calculated.ResultsThe intraoperative bleeding volume and hospital stay in Open-TLIF group were significantly higher than those in MIS-TLIF group (t=14.619, P=0.000; t=10.021, P=0.000). All incisions healed by first intention without early complications. All patients were followed up 6-24 months (mean, 12.6 months) in Open-TLIF group and 6-24 months (mean, 11.5 months) in MIS-TLIF group. The preoperative VAS scores of waist and leg and ODI of the two groups significantly improved (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in VAS scores and ODI between the two groups before operation and at 2 weeks and 6 months after operation (P>0.05). Imaging examination showed the good intervertebral fusion. There was no significant difference in ADH, PDH, and SL between the two groups before operation and at 6 months after operation (P>0.05). The differences of ADH, PDH, and SL between the two groups were not significant (P>0.05). The ADH, PDH, and SL after operation significantly increased in the two groups (P<0.05).ConclusionOpen-TLIF and MIS-TLIF show similar effectiveness and radiological change in the treatment of single lumbar degenerative diseases and the improved intervertebral height and lordosis, but MIS-TLIF can significantly reduce hospital stay and intraoperative blood loss.
Objective
To review the latest comparative research of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and traditional open approach.
Methods
The domestic and foreign literature concerning the comparative research of minimally invasive TLIF and traditional open TLIF was reviewed, then intraoperative indicators, length of hospitalization, effectiveness, complication, fusion rate, and the effect on paraspinal muscles were analyzed respectively.
Results
Minimally invasive TLIF has less blood loss and shorter length of hospitalization, but with longer operation and fluoroscopic time. Minimally invasive surgery has the same high fusion rate as open surgery, however, its effectiveness is not superior to open surgery, and complication rate is relatively higher. In the aspect of the effect on paraspinal muscles, in creatine kinase, multifidus cross-sectional area, and atrophy grading, minimally invasive surgery has no significant reduced damage on paraspinal muscles.
Conclusion
Minimally invasive TLIF is not significantly superior to open TLIF, and it does not reduce the paraspinal muscles injury. But prospective double-blind randomized control trials are still needed for further study.
