JOURNAL OF CLINICAL SURGERY ›› 2020, Vol. 28 ›› Issue (1): 73-77.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-6483.2020.01.022

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Comparative study of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion in treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis

  

  1. Department of Orthopedics,Zhongshan Hospital Qingpu Branch,Shanghai 201700,China
  • Online:2020-01-20 Published:2020-01-20

Abstract: Objective To compare the therapeutic effect of transforminal lumbar interbody fusion(TLIF)with posterior lumbar interbody fusion(PLIF)in treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis.Methods From March 2010 to March 2014,a total of 62 patients suffering from lumbar spondylolisthesis were divided into 2 groups.36 patients in group underwent TLIF.26 patients in group underwent PLIF.Posterolateral fixation with pedicle screw and decompression,interbody fusion through TLIF or PLIF technical combined with cage for distraction reduction.The application of statistics analysis of the indicators compared between the two groups,including operating time,blood loss and volume of drainage after operation.VAS,ODI evaluating standards were applied to evaluate the therapeutic effect.The intervertebral height and bone fusion were observed by X ray.Results All patients underwent surgery safely without severe complications occurred.2 cases occurred dural tear and 1 of nerve root injury in PLIF group.There was no significant difference in general materials and operation time between TLIF group[(134.17±27.40)min] and PLIF group[(130.38±30.00)min] (P>0.05).The blood during operation,volume of drainage after operation of TLIF group were significantly less than PLIF(P<0.05).The average following up time was 20 months(12~48 months)in TLIF group and 18 months(9~42 months)in PLIF group.Compared with preoperative parameters,the scores of VAS and ODI decreased significantly after surgery and at the final followup in both groups(P<0.05).But there was no significantly difference between TLIF and PLIF in VAS and ODI score(P>0.05).It occurred cage dislocation with no nerve symptom in PLIF group in 1 cases.1 case of fat liquefaction of incision injure happened in TLIF group.At the followup after 6.5 months postoperatively,the fusion is 94.4% in TLIF and 92.3% in PLIF,and no broken screw.Conclusion TLIF and PLIF technical both have a good clinical results in the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis which can achieve stable and effective decompression.With a less invasive and a less rate of nerve injury compared with PLIF,TLIF procedure can be performed easily and better protection the structure with less complications.

Key words: lumbar spondylolisthesis, pedicle screw fixation, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, posterior lumbar interbody fusion

Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] CHEN Lin, DONG Hanhua, CHEN Qi, et al. Standardized procedure for pancreaticoduodenectomy-Tongji university experience[J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL SURGERY, 2020, 28(1): 5 -7 .
[2] ZHANG Tao, SUN Bei. Clinical practice guidelines for NCCN pancreatic cancer(V2 edition) updated in 2019[J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL SURGERY, 2020, 28(1): 8 -11 .
[3] TANG Jianxiong, LI Hangyu. Interpretation of Chinese expert consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of inguinalhernia in the elderly (2019 edition)[J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL SURGERY, 2020, 28(1): 12 -15 .
[4] WANG Wenqiang, ZHANG Erlei, XIANG Shuai, et al. Pulse-first continuous blockade technique: a new strategy for the resection of giant hepatic hemangioma[J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL SURGERY, 2020, 28(1): 16 -18 .
[5] JIA Weidong, LIU Wenbin. Interpretation of multidisciplinary expert consensus on diagnosis and treatment of hepatic hemangioma (2019 edition)[J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL SURGERY, 2020, 28(1): 19 -22 .
[6] CHEN Zhiyu, BIE Ping. Expert consensus on the application of choledochostomy in hepatolithiasis (2019 edition)[J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL SURGERY, 2020, 28(1): 23 -26 .
[7] LIN Jinna, LIU Qiang. Clinical practice guidelines of NCCN breast cancer updated in 2019: new advances in local treatment of breast cancer[J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL SURGERY, 2020, 28(1): 27 -30 .
[8] WEI Wei, LI Peng. Interpretation of the first edition of NCCN guidelines for the treatment of thyroid malignancy in 2019#br#[J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL SURGERY, 2020, 28(1): 31 -34 .
[9] ZHANG Renquan, KANG Ning, NING Zhenghao. Interpretation of recommendations from Chinese clinical experts on robot-assisted esophagectomy (2019 edition)#br#[J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL SURGERY, 2020, 28(1): 35 -37 .
[10] LIANG Han. Interpretation of Chinese expert consensus on the diagnosis and comprehensive treatment of liver metastasis of gastric cancer[J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL SURGERY, 2020, 28(1): 38 -40 .