Interaction between the utricles and the vertical semicircular canals. V. Bilateral selective sectioning of anterior or posterior ampullar nerves or unilateral selective sectioning of the two vertical ampullar nerves, followed by tilting around their bitemporal or longitudinal axis.

E. Fluur,J. Siegborn

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/00016487409124601

IF: 1.698

Acta Oto-Laryngologica

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis with Selective Segmental Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Posterior Spinal Fusion

李方财,陈其昕,陈维善,徐侃,吴琼华,韩斌

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2352.2009.09.002

2009-01-01

Abstract:Objective To investigate the treatment outcome of degenerative lumbar scoliosis (DIS) with selective segmental transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and posterior spinal fusion. Methods Forty-six patients with DIS treated by selective segmental TLIF and posterior spinal fusion were studied ret-rospectively. There were 14 males and 32 females, with a mean age of 66.4 years (range, 41-78). Posterior spinal fusion was performed 7 segments in 5 cases, 5 in 4, 4 in 4, 3 in 12, 2 in 16, and 1 in 5 cases. The in-dications for TLIF of motion segment included: rigid kyphosis in the lumbar spine, significant vertebral trans-lation in any orientation, segmental instability, and significant upper endplate obliquities of L3 or L4 All pa-tients were followed with a mean duration of 3.6 years postoperatively. The imaging evaluation included Cobb angle of scoliosis, lumbar lordosis angle and segmental lordosis angle. The low-back and lower-extremity clinical symptoms were evaluated with JOA score. Results The mean preoperative Cobb angle of 31.7°±14.4° was significantly corrected to 10.2°±6.5°at the final follow-up (t=15.26, P< 0.05), and the correction rate was 67.8%. The mean preoperative lumbar lordosis angle of 27.5°±12.6° was also significantly corrected to 39.3°±9.7°(t=12.17, P< 0.05), and the correction rate was 44.4%. The mean preoperative segmental lordo-sis angle of 6.5°±5.1° in TLIF segment was increased to 11.6°±5.9°. The segmental deformity and vertebral translation were corrected significantly. The mean preoperative JOA score of 14.1±4.2 was significantly in-creased to 22.2±4.8 (t=11.45, P< 0.01). Besides, there was a significant positive correlation between the fi-nal increment of JOA score and the increment in lumbar lordosis angle (r=0.61,P=0.02). Conclusion Se-lective segmental TLIF is helpful in correcting lumbar lordosis, segmental deformity and translation, and thus obtaining better outcome of posterior spinal fusion for the treatment of DLS.
Posterior-only approach with selective segmental TLIF for degenerative lumbar scoliosis.

Fangcai Li,Qixin Chen,Weishan Chen,Kan Xu,Qionghua Wu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0b013e3181f9a7d5

2011-01-01

Journal of Spinal Disorders & Techniques

Abstract:Study Design: Forty-six patients with degenerative lumbar scoliosis, and treated with selective segmental transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), were studied retrospectively. Objectives: To investigate the surgery outcomes of the posterior-only approach with selective segmental TLIF for the treatment of degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Summary of Background Data: Degenerative lumbar scoliosis usually occurs late in the life of patients with no history of scoliosis. TLIF has been successfully used in the surgical treatment of other degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine. Methods: Forty-six patients with degenerative lumbar scoliosis and treated with selective segmental TLIF were studied retrospectively. There were 14 male and 32 female patients, with a mean age of 66.4 years. The indications for TLIF of the motion segment included segmental kyphosis in the lumbar spine, significant vertebral translation in any orientation, segmental instability, and significant upper endplate obliquities of L3 or L4. All the patients were followed for a mean duration of 42 months postoperatively. Radiographic evaluation included Cobb angle of scoliosis, lumbar lordosis angle, and segmental lordosis angle. The clinical outcomes were assessed by means of Japanese Orthopedic Association score and patient satisfaction index. Results: The mean preoperative Cobb angle of 31.7 +/- 14.4 degrees was corrected to 10.2 +/- 6.5 degrees at the final follow-up (t = 15.262, P < 0.001), and the correction rate was 67.8%. The mean preoperative lumbar lordosis angle of - 27.5 +/- 12.6 degrees was corrected to - 39.3 +/- 9.7 degrees (t = 12.165, P < 0.001), and the correction rate was 44.4%. The mean preoperative segmental lordosis angle of - 6.5 +/- 5.1 degrees in the TLIF segment was increased to - 11.6 +/- 5.9 degrees, and the correction rate was 80%. Besides, the segmental deformity and vertebral translation were also corrected. The mean preoperative Japanese Orthopedic Association score of 14.1 +/- 4.2 was increased to 22.2 +/- 4.8 (t = 11.453, P < 0.001), and 81% of patients would undergo this surgery again with the same results. Conclusions: Selective segmental TLIF is helpful in correcting lumbar lordosis, segmental deformity, and translation, and thus obtaining satisfactory outcome in the treatment of degenerative lumbar scoliosis.
Predictors of Postoperative Segmental and Overall Lumbar Lordosis in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Consecutive Case Series

Justin K Zhang,Jacob K Greenberg,Saad Javeed,Braeden Benedict,Kathleen S Botterbush,Christopher F Dibble,Jawad M Khalifeh,Samuel Brehm,Deeptee Jain,Ian Dorward,Paul Santiago,Camilo Molina,Brenton H Pennicooke,Wilson Z Ray

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682231193610

2023-07-31

Abstract:Study design: Retrospective Case-Series. Objectives: Due to heterogeneity in previous studies, the effect of MI-TLIF on postoperative segmental lordosis (SL) and lumbar lordosis (LL) remains unclear. Therefore, we aim to identify radiographic factors associated with lordosis after surgery in a homogenous series of MI-TLIF patients. Methods: A single-center retrospective review identified consecutive patients who underwent single-level MI-TLIF for grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis from 2015-2020. All surgeries underwent unilateral facetectomies and a contralateral facet release with expandable interbody cages. PROs included the ODI and NRS-BP for low-back pain. Radiographic measures included SL, disc height, percent spondylolisthesis, cage positioning, LL, PI-LL mismatch, sacral-slope, and pelvic-tilt. Surgeries were considered "lordosing" if the change in postoperative SL was ≥ +4° and "kyphosing" if ≤ -4°. Predictors of change in SL/LL were evaluated using Pearson's correlation and multivariable regression. Results: A total of 73 patients with an average follow-up of 22.5 (range 12-61) months were included. Patients experienced significant improvements in ODI (29% ± 22% improvement, P < .001) and NRS-BP (3.3 ± 3 point improvement, P < .001). There was a significant increase in mean SL (Δ3.43° ± 4.37°, P < .001) while LL (Δ0.17° ± 6.98°, P > .05) remained stable. Thirty-eight (52%) patients experienced lordosing MI-TLIFs, compared to 4 (5%) kyphosing and 31 (43%) neutral MI-TLIFs. A lower preoperative SL and more anterior cage placement were associated with the greatest improvement in SL (β = -.45° P = .001, β = 15.06° P < .001, respectively). Conclusions: In our series, the majority of patients experienced lordosing or neutral MI-TLIFs (n = 69, 95%). Preoperative radiographic alignment and anterior cage placement were significantly associated with target SL following MI-TLIF.
Comparison of Long-Term Effect Between Minimally Invasive and Open Approaches in One-Level Posterior Lumbar Inter-Body Fusion: a 10-12 Year Prospective Study

Zhu Haifeng,Zhou Zhijie,Fang Xiangqian,Zhang Jianfeng,Zhao Fengdong,Zhao Xing,Hu Zhijun,Liu Chao,Fan Shunwu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2352.2018.20.008

2018-01-01

Abstract:Objective To compare the long-term effect between minimally invasive (MIS) and open approaches in one-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion (O-PLIF) after more than 10 years follow up. Methods All 131 patients (lumbar spine le-sions) in our hospital were randomized into MIS-PLIF group and O-PLIF group from March 2006 to March 2008. In MIS-PLIF group, there are 66 patients, 34 males and 32 females, with the average of 52.3 ± 6.7 years old (range from 40 to 63). In O-PLIF group, there are 65 patients, 29 males and 36 females, with the average of 51.1 ± 6.9 years old (range from 46 to 63). Regarding March 2018 as last follow-up, differences in intervertebral disc height and segmental lordosis restoration of the operation segment , lumbar lordosis restoration, multifidus cross section area (CSA), multifidus atrophy rate, fusion rate, visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index(ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association cores (JOA) and postoperative long-term compli-cations were evaluated between the two groups. The related risk factors of postoperative long-term complications were evaluated in further analysis. Results Complete follow-up data were available on 37 patients in MIS-PLIF group and 35 patients in O-PLIF group, with the follow-up rate of 56.1％and 53.8％respectively,and with the mean follow-up time of 134.5 ±8.4 and 137.1±5.8 months respectively. At three time nodes of one year after operation, five years after operation and last follow-up after operation, there were significant differences in lumbar lordosis restoration (one year after operation and last follow-up after operation)( 5.0°± 2.3° vs. 3.9°±1.4°;4.7°±2.4° vs. 3.7°±1.5°), multifidus CSA (965.4±164.9 mm2 vs. 884.9±168.2 mm2;891.1±155.9 mm2 vs. 783.2± 163.0 mm2; 764.8 ± 148.3 mm2 vs. 643.5 ± 150.0 mm2), multifidus atrophy rate (8.5％± 2.5％ vs. 16.6％± 5.8％; 15.6％± 3.5％ vs. 26.2％±7.4％;27.6％±6.5％vs. 39.3％±9.3％), postoperative VAS for back pain (2.2±1.0 vs. 2.9±1.2;1.7±0.9 vs. 2.2±1.0;1.4±1.0 vs. 2.2±1.2), JOA score (22.3±3.8 vs. 19.9±4.2;23.1±4.3 vs. 19.3±3.9;22.4±4.2 vs. 19.6±4.0) and ODI (11.6％±4.8％vs. 22.0％± 7.7％;9.4％±3.9％vs. 12.3％±4.9％;8.6％±4.0％vs. 11.0％±4.6％) between the two groups (P<0.05). However, there were no sig-nificant differences in segmental lordosis, intervertebral height restoration, lumbar lordosis restoration (one year after operation), fusion rate or postoperative VAS for leg pain between MIS-PLIF and O-PLIF(P>0.05). Intractable back pain and adjacent segment disease were the major postoperative long-term complications for MIS-PLIF group (3 cases and 2 cases) and O-PLIF group (10 cas-es and 7 cases), and the difference was statistically significant in the intractable back pain incidence rate ( 8.5％vs. 28.6％,χ2=5.090, P=0.024), but not in the adjacent segment disease(5.4％vs. 20％,χ2=0.002, P=0.061). What's more, patients with intracta-ble back pain suffered more obviously multifidus atrophy than patients without intractable back pain at three time nodes of one year after operation (19.4±4.4％vs. 10.9±5.1％, P<0.05), five years after operation (30.2±5.4％vs. 18.7±6.7％, P<0.05) and last fol-low-up after operation (44.5±5.7％vs. 30.8±8.9％, P<0.05) . Conclusion In the long-term follow up, compared with O-PLIF, MIS-PLIF had advantages in better maintenance of lumbar lordosis, protection of the multifidus muscle, reduced lower back pain, JOA score, ODI score and intractable back pain incidence rate. Multifidus atrophy may be a related risk factor of intractable back pain.
Comparative study of three surgical procedures of lumbar interbody fusion for adult low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis

Jian Wang,Fengdong Zhao,Weixing Xu,Jian Liu,Weimin Zhu,Shunwu Fan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2352.2016.09.008

2016-01-01

Abstract:Objective To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of 3 kinds of lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF,PLIF,TLIF) for adult low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis at L4.5 and L5S1 levels.Methods Data of seventy patients with lowgrade isthmic spondylolisthesis who had undergone different lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) procedures according to the assessment of the clinical manifestation,neurological symptoms,plane of the common iliac vessels and the width of "vascular window" by three-dimensional computed tomography angiography between May 2004 and May 2014 were retrospectively reviewed.21 patients had undergone anterior LIF (ALIF)(13 males and 8 females with an average of 43.29±8.15 years old (range,29-53 years old);L4,5 in ten,L5S1 in 11;Meyerding grade Ⅰ 10 cases,grade Ⅱ 11 cases);25 patients had undergone posterior LIF (PLIF) (12 males and 13 females,with an average of 44.04±12.71 years old (range,25-64 years old);L4.5 in 12,L5S1 in 13;Meyerding grade Ⅰ 15 cases,grade Ⅱ 10 cases) and 24 patients had undergone transforaminal LIF (TLIF) (12 males and 12 females with an average of 45.00± 9.36 years old (range,34-62 years old);L4,5 in 12,L5S1 in 12;Meyerding grade Ⅰ 11 cases,grade Ⅱ 13 cases).Results All patients were followed up for 24-37 months (average,25.6±8.7 months).The visual analogue scale (VAS) in all groups were decreased from 7.05±0.87 (ALIF),6.60±1.39 (PLIF),6.75±1.11 (TLIF) pre-operation to 0.90±0.70,0.96±0.68,1.04±0.62 24 months after operation.Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores were decreased from 78.53％±6.25％,79.80％±6.55％,79.92％±8.10％ preoperation to 17.14％±3.01％,21.32％±4.40％,22.46％±3.87％.Perioperative data including operation time,blood loss,postoperative blood drainage,length of stay showed no significant difference between ALIF group and TLIF group,but showing significant difference comparing with PLIF group.The imageological results showed that ALIF procedure increased whole lumbar lordosis (WL) and disc height (DH),showing no significant difference comparing with PLIF group,but showing significant difference comparing with TLIF group.The ALIF procedure increased segmental lordosis angle (SL),showing significant difference comparing with PLIF group and TLIF group.The PLIF procedure decreased spondylolisthesis index (SI),showing significant difference comparing with A/TLIF group,but showing no significant difference between ALIF group and TLIF group.There was no significant difference showed comparing the L1 axis S1 distance (LASD) and sacral slope (SS),in three groups.The graft fusion was achieved in all patients after 6-8 months postoperatively without instrument failure or displacement.Conclusion Three surgical procedures of lumbar interbody fusion for adult low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis showed silimar clinical efficacy.The ALIF procedure is superior in its capacity to restore WL,DH,and SL,and the P/TLIF procedure are superior in correcting the vertebral slippage and spinal cord decompression.
Clinical outcomes and sagittal alignment of single-level unilateral instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with a 4 to 5-year follow-up

Yun Liang,Weibin Shi,Chun Jiang,Zixian Chen,Fubing Liu,Zhenzhou Feng,Xiaoxing Jiang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3933-y

2015-01-01

Abstract:Purpose A retrospective study was designed to evaluate clinical outcomes and sagittal alignment following single-level unilateral instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Methods From November 2008 to December 2010, a total of 139 patients, who suffered from single-level lumbar degenerative disease, were included in this study. Forty-seven males and seventy-two females with a mean age of 57.3 years were enrolled. The average follow-up period was 51.7 months with a range of 41–66 months. The follow-up rate was 85.6 %. Thirty-one patients had diagnosis of discogenic low back pain, ten had recurrent disk herniation, thirty-four had spinal stenosis, and fourty-four had spondylolisthesis. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Oswestry disability index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) and Japanese Orthopedic Association. Operating time, blood loss, length of stay, and complications were also evaluated. The sagittal alignment and fusion status were assessed by X-ray and three-dimensional computed tomography. Results The average operating time was 92.1 ± 27.5 min, the average blood loss was 135.1 ± 113.5 ml, and the average length of stay was 12.0 ± 2.9 days. The overall complication rate was 13.4 %, and the fusion rate was 82.4 %. The postoperative clinical outcomes and sagittal alignment were significantly different from the preoperative values. The final lumbar lordosis angle and segment lordosis angle were associated with back pain VAS and ODI scores, respectively. Conclusion Unilateral instrumented TLIF is a safe and effective treatment option for single-level lumbar degenerative disease, and is less invasive, yields good outcomes and has a low complication rate. In addition, the procedure has the potential to partly restore sagittal alignment.
A Comparison of Factor VIII Activity in Cryoprecipitates Prepared from ACD and CPD Plasma

J. Shanberge,M. Gruhl,R. Ikemori,K. Inoshita,M. K. Chalos,R. Aster

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1537-2995.1972.tb00043.x

1972-07-01

Transfusion

Abstract:In an attempt to develop a method to produce a cryoprecipitate with a predictable Factor VIII potency, several variables were studied and statistically analyzed. These included the hematocrit, age, blood group and Rh type of the donor; possible epinephrine release; the degree of lipemia, volume, pH and Factor VIII activity of the donor plasma; the volume of cryoprecipitates, its Factor VIII activity and the per cent yield; and the Factor VIII activity of the supernatant plasma. Cryoprecipitates were prepared by the method of Pool and Shannon from the plasmas of 40 random male donors, half the bloods being drawn in ACD and half in CPD. None of the variables had a significant influence on the per cent yield of activity, although the mean values obtained suggest that the per cent yield of Factor VIII activity in the cryoprecipitates prepared from CPD plasmas is higher than in those prepared from ACD plasma. Although the per cent yield of Factor VIII in cryoprecipitates prepared from CPD plasma is not significantly different from that of ACD plasma, the mean total units of Factor VIII activity is significantly higher in CPD cryoprecipitates. It also was confirmed that a higher per cent Factor VIII activity in the donor results in a relatively higher activity in the cryoprecipitate. The data indicate that if CPD plasma collected from donors having above a certain minimum per cent activity were used for cryoprecipitate production, one could be assured of having a minimum of 100 units of Factor VIII activity per bag.
An Extended Conceptual Framework for Transformative Service Research

M. Hall,C. Haas,S. Kimbrough,Christof Weinhardt

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.3659.9681

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

Yue-Tian Wang,Bing-Xu Li,Shi-Jun Wang,Chun-De Li,Hao-Lin Sun

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v10.i35.12880

2022-12-16

Abstract: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.
[Analysis of lumbosacral sagittal balance parameter variation in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with real-time 3D navigation techniques].

Liang-Sheng Wang,T. Huang,Xiao-Yuan He,Guo-jun Li,Cheng-rong Ma,Huan-xiong Chen,Zhi-bin Meng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.2021.04.004

2021-04-25

Abstract:OBJECTIVE To explore the dynamic changes of lumbosacral sagittal parameters after real-time three-dimensional navigation assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and traditional open TLIF for treatment of lumbar degenerative disease. METHODS The clinical data of 61 patients with lumbar degenerative disease underwent single-segment surgery from September 2017 to September 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 31 cases underwent MIS-TLIF with 3D navigation techniques (MIS-TLIF group) and another 30 cases underwent conventional open TLIF (traditional open TLIF group). The basic information, operative time and intraoperative blood loss were collected. The sagittal radiologic parameters were measured before surgery and 3 months after surgery, including lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), anterior disc height (ADH), posterior disc height(PDH).And the average disc height(DH) and pelvic incidence to lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI-LL) were calculated. RESULTS Operative time and intraoperative blood loss in MIS-TLIF group were significantly less than in traditional open TLIF group(P<0.05). In MIS-TLIF group, LL, SL, PI-LL, and DH were significantly improved at 3 months after surgery (P<0.05), while PI, PT, and SS were not statistically different from those before surgery (P>0.05). LL, PI-LL, and DH of patients in the traditional open TLIF group were significantly improved at 3 months after surgery (P<0.05), while the PI, PT, SS, and SL were not statistically different from those before surgery (P>0.05). LL change showed a significant correlation with SL change (r= 0.433, P<0.001). Change in SL closely correlated to change in ADH (r=0.621, P<0.05) and PDH(r=0.527, P<0.05). CONCLUSION Real-time navigation-assisted MIS-TLIF and traditional open TLIF can recover DH in a short term for lumbar degenerative diseases, improve LL and PI-LL, and make the arrangement of the sagittal plane of the lumbosacral region more coordinated after surgery. But only the navigation assisted MIS -TLIF can significantly improve SL. Compared with traditional open TLIF, real-time navigation assisted MIS-TLIF in the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases has the advantages of short operation time and less intraoperative bleeding.

Medicine,Engineering
Can minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion achieve a better clinical and radiological outcome than traditional open technique in isthmic spondylolisthesis?

Elsayed Mohamed Selim Ali,Amr Mohamed Eladawy,Tarek ElHewala

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-04994-4

2024-08-29

Abstract:Background: Spondylolisthesis is a prevalent condition in the lumbar spine that can cause low back pain, leg pain, neurogenic claudication, and impact health-related quality of life in symptomatic individuals. Aim: to assess the results of minimally invasive TLIF (MIS-TLIF) versus open-TLIF and the impact of correcting spino-pelvic parameters on the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) in patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. The primary objective was to compare the effectiveness of both methods in correcting spinopelvic parameters. The secondary objectives involved comparing clinical improvement, operating time, blood loss, complications, and postoperative hospital stays between the two procedures. Patients and methods: Seventy-two patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis were enrolled in this retrospective cohort-control study, with a minimum follow-up period of 18 months. Disability was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), while back and leg discomfort were rated using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for each patient. The measurements comprised the sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI), and Meyerding slip grades. We measured lumbar lordosis (LL), and segmental lordosis. Results: The seventy-two patients were 60 female and 12 males. There was no statistically significant difference in the duration of operation between the two groups. In the MIS group, there was a notable reduction in blood loss, higher radiation exposure, and a shorter hospital stay (P < 0.001). The back VAS showed more favorable outcomes in the MIS-TLIF, while the leg VAS showed better results in the Open-TLIF in the early outcome. Both procedures significantly reduced leg and back pain VAS scores and ODI, with no notable difference between the two groups at the final follow-up. Post-surgery, the pelvic incidence (PI) and lumbar lordosis (LL) matched properly in all patients, showing a rise in LL and sacral slope along with a decrease in pelvic tilt. Conclusion: Both open-TLIF and MIS-TLIF are effective methods for correcting spino-pelvic parameters and improving HRQoL in patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. The rapid improvement in back pain experienced by these patients favored the use of MIS-TLIF. However, the cost-effectiveness of this approach must be carefully evaluated.
The Therapeutic Efficacy of MIS-TLIF for Patients with Sciatic Scoliosis Caused by Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Retrospective Study

Yan Liang,Yongfei Zhao,Shuai Xu,Yaning Xu,Haiying Liu,Xiangyu Tang,Keya Mao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2961533/v1

2023-01-01

Abstract:Abstract Background and Objective: Sciatic scoliosis is a clinical syndrome resulting from a minor painful lesion in the muscles, fasciae or ligaments of the lower back, the intervertebral or sacroiliac joints, or a sciatica. This study aimed to explore the efficacy and feasibility of application of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) technique in the treatment of patients with sciatic scoliosis caused by lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Methods From January 2010 to May 2017, a retrospective study was conducted with enrollment of 43 patients with sciatic scoliosis caused by LDH who were treated with MIS-TLIF and completed at least 2-year follow-up. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index were evaluated. Radiographic measurements included distance between C7 plumb line and center sacral vertical line, Cobb angle of lumbar curve, lumbar lordosis, sacrum slope, and pelvic tilt. Results The mean VAS score for back pain decreased from 5.13 ± 1.6 preoperatively to 1.42 ± 0.8 at 2-year follow-up (P < 0.05), and the mean VAS score for leg pain reduced from 4.7 ± 1.1 preoperatively to 0.46 ± 0.78 at 2-year follow-up (P < 0.05). The Oswestry Disability Index score improved from 53.3 ± 11.5% preoperatively to 14.3 ± 5% at 2-year follow-up (P < 0.05). The mean Cobb angle decreased from 15.6 ± 4.3° preoperatively to 3.8 ± 2° at 2-year follow-up with a mean correction of 11° (P < 0.05). The mean C7 plumb line and center sacral vertical line was 3.35 ± 1.7 cm preoperatively, and 0.69 ± 0.47cm at 2-year follow-up (P < 0.05). The lumbar lordosis varied from − 23.1 ± 9.4° preoperatively to -36.8 ± 7.5° at 2-year follow-up (P < 0.05). Conclusion MIS-TLIF technique can be used to treat patients with sciatic scoliosis caused by LDH, resulting in favorable clinical outcomes, proper fusion, and satisfactory imbalance correction with less blood loss and complications.
474 Comparing the Reciprocal Changes of Single Level Transforaminal Interbody Fusions Versus Lateral Interbody Fusions: A Radiographic Analysis for Sagittal Alignment and Spinopelvic Parameters

Juan Pedro Giraldo,James Zhou,Samuel Harrison Farber,Vitor Moraes,Nima Alan,Luke O'Neill,Luis Manuel Tumialan,Juan S. Uribe

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000002809_474

IF: 5.315

2024-04-01

Neurosurgery

Abstract:INTRODUCTION: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) are two techniques that are widely used to treat single-level pathology at L4-5. To date, no studies have compared the two techniques in terms of their ability to address disc space pathology, such as loss of height and spondylolisthesis, and achieve spinopelvic alignment goals. METHODS: After IRB approval, this study retrospectively reviewed the records of 203 patients who underwent single-level L4-L5 TLIFs and single-level L4-L5 LLIFs between 2017 to 2022. Preoperative and postoperative scoliosis films were collected and analyzed using an automated calibrated radiographic tool to measure pre-postoperative SA and SPs. Two blinded readers measured the pre-postoperative variables. Independent Sample T-tests were used to analyze the radiographic outcomes between the two groups. RESULTS: This study evaluated the results of 203 single-level TLIFs and LLIFs (109 L4-L5 TLIFs, and 94 L4-L5 LLIFs). Among the surgeries analyzed, 90 were MIS TLIFs, 19 open TLIFs, 16 standalone LLIs, and 78 LLIFs with posterior instrumentation. Postoperative scoliosis films were taken at a median of 0.28 (± 0.4) months. The analysis focused on comparing the reciprocal changes between both procedures. Significant statistical differences was found for ΔGTilt (p = 0.036), ΔLPA (p = 0.12), ΔADH (p = 0.03), ΔPDH (p = 0.04), ΔFH (p = 0.001), and ΔS% (p = 0.01) in the LLIF group, among all the variables included in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: L4-5 LLIF and TLIF resulted in statistically similar amounts of lordosis restoration and reciprocal change at proximal and distal lumbar levels. LLIF was found to be superior in restoration of anterior disc height, posterior disc height, and foraminal height compared to TLIF. LLIF was also superior in percentage reduction of spondylolisthesis.

surgery,clinical neurology
Minimally invasive versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study

Rongqing Qin,Tong Wu,Hongpeng Liu,Bing Zhou,Pin Zhou,Xing Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-78984-x

IF: 4.6

2020-12-01

Scientific Reports

Abstract:Abstract This was a retrospective study. We aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety between minimally invasive and traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of low-grade lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS). 81 patients with LDS grades 1 and 2 treated in our spinal department from January 2014 to July 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. The MIS-TLIF group included 23 males and 11 females, while the TO-TLIF group included 29 males and 18 females. Follow-up points were set at 7 days, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months postoperatively and the last follow-up. Various clinical and radiological indicators were used to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety between the two procedures. 8 cases (3 in the MIS-TLIF group and 5 in the TO-TLIF group) were loss of follow-up after discharge. And the remaining 73 patients were followed up for at least 2 years. No statistically significant difference was observed in the terms of age, sex, BMI, slippage grade, and surgical segments. The MIS-TLIF group had a longer operation and fluoroscopy time compared with the TO-TLIF group. But the MIS-TLIF group was associated with less blood loss, ambulation time, hospital stay, and time of return to work. In each group, significant improvement were observed in BP-VAS, ODI and vertebral slip ratio at any time-point of follow-up when compared with the preoperative condition. When the time-point of follow-up was less than 1 year, the MIS-TLIF group had significant advantages in the BP-VAS and ODI compared with TO-TLIF group. But no significant difference was observed in the BP-VAS and ODI at either 12 month follow-up or the last follow-up. Besides, no statistical difference was detected in vertebral slip ratio at any time-point of follow-up between the two groups. Successful intervertebral bone fusion was found in all patients and no significant difference was found in the incidence of total complications. Thus, we considered that MIS-TLIF and TO-TLIF both achieve satisfactory clinical efficacy in the treatment of low-grade single-segment LDS. But MIS-TLIF appears to be a more efficacious and safe technique with reduced tissue damage, less blood loss and quicker recovery.

multidisciplinary sciences
Clinical efficacy of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the treatment of II° lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis: A retrospective cohort study

Bin Zhang,Jun-Song Ma,Pin Feng,Yuan Hu,Jun-Lin Liu,Qing-Quan Kong

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000035420

2023-10-06

Abstract:Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is not suitable for high-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis, whether MIS-TLIF can treat II° lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS) is still controversial. This retrospective cohort study compared the clinical efficacy of MIS-TLIF and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (OPEN-TLIF) in the treatment of II° lumbar IS. From January 2017 to January 2023, 101 patients with II° lumbar IS were diagnosed in our hospital and underwent surgical treatment, of which 53 received MIS-TLIF surgery and 48 received OPEN-TLIF surgery. The operation time, blood loss and surgical complications were compared between the 2 groups. The pain, function, reduction rate and fusion rate of the patients were evaluated during follow-up. The amount of intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, and postoperative hospital stay in the MIS-TLIF group were significantly lower than those in the OPEN-TLIF group were (P < .01). In the MIS-TLIF group, there were 1 case of dural sac injury and 3 cases of lower limb paralysis. The complication rate of MIS-TLIF was lower than the OPEN-TLIF group (P = .032). In the visual analog scale score of low back pain, the MIS-TLIF group was lower than the OPEN-TLIF group after operation and at the last follow-up. There were no significant differences in postoperative leg pain score, slippage rate, and fusion rate between the 2 groups. Compared with OPEN-TLIF, MIS-TLIF has the advantages of better low back pain relief, less trauma, less bleeding and faster recovery, and is worthy of clinical promotion.
Sagittal Reconstruction of Lumbosacral Contiguous Double-Level Spondylolytic Spondylolisthesis: a Comparison of Double-Level and Single-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Chang-zhi Du,Song Li,Liang Xu,Qing-shuang Zhou,Ze-zhang Zhu,Xu Sun,Yong Qiu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-019-1197-7

IF: 2.6

2019-01-01

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research

Abstract:Contiguous double-level lumbar spondylolytic spondylolisthesis is an extremely rare condition. There is a paucity of data of lumbosacral deformity and sagittal spino-pelvic malalignment among these patients. Moreover, the effect of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) on sagittal realignment still remains largely unknown. The aim of the study is to investigate the reconstruction of sagittal alignment and the improvement of clinical outcomes after posterior instrumented double-level or single-level TLIF. From January 2010 to September 2018, the records of patients with contiguous L4/5 and L5/S1 double-level spondylolytic spondylolisthesis were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who had undergone double-level or single-level TLIF and a minimum of 2 years’ follow-up were included. The slippage parameters and spino-pelvic parameters were measured preoperatively, postoperatively, and at the latest follow-up. A total of 58 patients (21 males and 37 females, mean age of 57.1 ± 6.9 years) were enrolled. Thirty-eight patients were treated with double-level TLIF and the remaining 20 with single-level TLIF (L4/5 in 14; L5/S1 in 6). After surgery, the spondylolisthesis was significantly reduced at both L4/5 and L5/S1 level (all P < 0.001). There was a significant reduction in pelvic tilt (P < 0.001) and a significant increase in sacral slope (P < 0.001). Significant increase in L4–S1 height (P < 0.001) and L4–S1 lordosis (P = 0.012) and decrease in L5 slope (P = 0.004) and L5 incidence (P = 0.001) were also observed. Compared to single-level TLIF, double-level TLIF increased L4–S1 height (P < 0.001) and L4–S1 lordosis (P < 0.001) and reduced L4-SVA (P = 0.007) and L5 incidence (P = 0.013) more obviously, and the sagittal balance was better corrected in double-level TLIF group (P = 0.006). Double-level TLIF group showed larger increase in VAS scores for low back pain. The incidence of implant-related complications was lower in the double-level group. Posterior short-segment instrumented TLIF can bring favorable radiographic and clinical outcomes in patients with lumbosacral contiguous double-level spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. Double-level TLIF is more efficient to improve L4–S1 height, regional lumbar lordosis, and global sagittal balance.
MIS-TLIF or OPEN-TLIF?

Weiran Hu,Guang Yang,Hongqiang Wang,Xiaonan Wu,Haohao Ma,Kai Zhang,Yanzheng Gao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12121977

IF: 3.5083

2022-12-01

Journal of Personalized Medicine

Abstract:Objective: To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (OPEN-TLIF) in the treatment of two-level lumbar degenerative diseases. Methods: The clinical data of 112 patients were retrospectively analyzed, and were divided into an MIS-TLIF group and OPEN-TLIF group. The operative time, intraoperative fluoroscopy, blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, bed rest time, the content of creatine kinase(CK) and complications, were recorded. VAS score and ODI index were used to evaluate clinical efficacy. Bridwell grading was used to evaluate postoperative interbody fusion. Screw position was evaluated by Rao grading. Results: Compared with the OPEN-TLIF group, the MIS-TLIF group had longer operation times, more intraoperative fluoroscopy times, but shorter postoperative bed times (p 0.05). There was no difference in VAS score and ODI index during the follow-up (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the interbody fusion rate between the two groups (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the distribution of type A screws, but the type B screw in the MIS-TLIF group was higher (p 0.05). Conclusion: The postoperative quality of life score and radiological outcomes of the two types of surgery in two-level lumbar degenerative diseases was similar, and there was no significant difference in muscle injury and complications, but the operation time and intraoperative radiation exposurewere higher than in the OPEN-TLIF group, and the pedicle screws were more likely to deviate laterally out of the vertebral body. Therefore, OPEN-TLIF is recommended for patients with lumbar degenerative diseases of two segments.

medicine, general & internal,health care sciences & services
Can oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) create more lumbosacral lordosis in lumbar spine surgery than minimally invasive transforaminal interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF)?

Jie Li,Yilei Chen,Hao Wu,Kaifeng Gan,Dikai Bei,Tengdi Fan,Jian Chen,Fengdong Zhao,Binhui Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.1063354

IF: 1.8

2023-01-06

Frontiers in Surgery

Abstract:Objective To compare the differences in the correction effect for lumbosacral lordosis and clinical outcomes between OLIF with/without posterior pedicle screw fixation (PSF) and MIS-TLIF through a retrospective cohort study. Method There were 98 consecutive patients originally enrolled for the study, but 15 patients were excluded due to intraoperative endplate injury or osteotomy performed for severe spinal deformity. Thus, 83 patients included in this study (36 males and 47 females, mean age 66.0 ± 10.8 years) underwent single to three-segment OLIF (including OLIF + PSF and OLIF Standalone) or MIS-TLIF surgery from 2016 to 2018. The operation time, bleeding and blood transfusion, fusion rate, complication, pre-and postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were evaluated. In addition, radiological parameters including lumbosacral lordosis (LL), fused segment lordosis (FSL), anterior disc height (ADH) and posterior disc height (PDH) were measured. The clinical outcomes, LL, FSL, ADH and PDH restored and were compared between the OLIF group, OLIF subgroup s and MIS-TLIF group. Results The average operation time and intraoperative bleeding were significantly less in the OLIF group than in the MIS-TLIF group (189 ± 83 vs. 229 ± 80 min, 113 ± 138 vs. 421 ± 210 ml), P < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference between the OLIF group and the MIS-TLIF group in VAS and ODI improvements, fusion rate, complication, LL and FSL correction ( P > 0.05). The ADH and PDH increases in the OLIF group were more than that in MIS-TLIF group ( P < 0.001). The correction of LL was significantly more in the OLIF+PSF group than in the MIS-TLIF group (10.6 ± 8.7 vs. 4.0 ± 6.1 deg, P = 0.005). Conclusion OLIF and MIS-TLIF are both safe and effective procedures, capable of restoring lumbosacral lordosis and disc height partly. Combined with PSF, OLIF can achieve a better correction effect of lumbosacral lordosis than MIS-TLIF.

surgery
Comparison of clinical outcomes and spino-pelvic sagittal balance in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: Minimally invasive oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF)

Renjie Li,Xiaofeng Shao,Xuefeng Li,Yijie Liu,Weimin Jiang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000023783

2021-01-22

Abstract:Spino-pelvic sagittal parameters are closely related to the lumbar degenerative diseases. The present study aims to compare clinical results and spino-pelvic sagittal balance treated with oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis at single segment.We retrospectively reviewed and compared 28 patients who underwent OLIF (OLIF group) and 35 who underwent TLIF (TLIF group). Radiological results were evaluated with disc height (DH), foraminal height (FH), fused segment lordosis (FSL), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI), and sacral slope (SS). Clinical results were evaluated with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and VAS for back and leg pain.The OLIF group showed higher improvement of DH and FH than the TLIF group at all time points after surgery (P < .05). No significant differences were found in PT, PI, and SS between the 2 groups (P > .05). Significant restoration of spino-pelvic sagittal balance was observed in the 2 groups after surgery. Significant differences in postoperative lumbar lordosis and fused segment lordosis were found between the 2 groups (P < .05). Significant difference in the improvement of symptoms was observed between the 2 groups. The OLIF group had lower VAS scores for back pain and ODI compared after surgery (P < .05).It can be concluded that there are exactly differences in improvement of radiographic parameters between 2 approaches, which confirmed that OLIF is better in restoring spinal alignment. Besides, due to the unique minimally invasive approach, OLIF did exhibit a greater advantage in early recovery after surgery.
Clinical values of oblique lumbar interbody fusion on the treatment of single-level degenerative lumbar diseases

Yu Yu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2024.1424262

2024-09-05

Abstract:Objectives: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Mis-TLIF) and oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) are increasingly replacing traditional approaches. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of OLIF and Mis-TLIF in treating single-level degenerative lumbar diseases. Methods: Patients with single-level degenerative lumbar diseases underwent either OLIF (30 patients) or Mis-TLIF (30 patients). Surgical data, including operation time, blood loss, postoperative drainage, and postoperative bed rest duration, were collected. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Oswestry disability index, the visual analog scale scores for low back pain and leg pain, and Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores for daily ability, along with monitoring of complications. Results: The OLIF group showed significantly shorter operative times, less blood loss, reduced postoperative drainage, and shorter bed rest durations than the Mis-TLIF group. At the 1-month follow-up, OLIF patients also demonstrated significantly better clinical outcome scores than Mis-TLIF patients. No significant differences were observed between OLIF and Mis-TLIF patients before surgery and after 3 months. Furthermore, lumbar lordosis and disc height were significantly greater in the OLIF group at the final follow-up. Conclusions: Both OLIF and Mis-TLIF achieved satisfactory and effective long-term clinical outcomes for single-level lumbar degenerative diseases. However, OLIF resulted in less tissue damage, reduced bleeding, better short-term clinical outcomes, and improved recovery of segmental lordosis compared to Mis-TLIF. Therefore, OLIF appears to be the preferable option over Mis-TLIF.

Interaction between the utricles and the vertical semicircular canals. V. Bilateral selective sectioning of anterior or posterior ampullar nerves or unilateral selective sectioning of the two vertical ampullar nerves, followed by tilting around their bitemporal or longitudinal axis.

Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis with Selective Segmental Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Posterior Spinal Fusion

Posterior-only approach with selective segmental TLIF for degenerative lumbar scoliosis.

Predictors of Postoperative Segmental and Overall Lumbar Lordosis in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Consecutive Case Series

Comparison of Long-Term Effect Between Minimally Invasive and Open Approaches in One-Level Posterior Lumbar Inter-Body Fusion: a 10-12 Year Prospective Study

Comparative study of three surgical procedures of lumbar interbody fusion for adult low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis

Clinical outcomes and sagittal alignment of single-level unilateral instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with a 4 to 5-year follow-up

A Comparison of Factor VIII Activity in Cryoprecipitates Prepared from ACD and CPD Plasma

An Extended Conceptual Framework for Transformative Service Research

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

[Analysis of lumbosacral sagittal balance parameter variation in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with real-time 3D navigation techniques].

Can minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion achieve a better clinical and radiological outcome than traditional open technique in isthmic spondylolisthesis?

The Therapeutic Efficacy of MIS-TLIF for Patients with Sciatic Scoliosis Caused by Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Retrospective Study

474 Comparing the Reciprocal Changes of Single Level Transforaminal Interbody Fusions Versus Lateral Interbody Fusions: A Radiographic Analysis for Sagittal Alignment and Spinopelvic Parameters

Minimally invasive versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study

Clinical efficacy of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the treatment of II° lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis: A retrospective cohort study

Sagittal Reconstruction of Lumbosacral Contiguous Double-Level Spondylolytic Spondylolisthesis: a Comparison of Double-Level and Single-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

MIS-TLIF or OPEN-TLIF?

Can oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) create more lumbosacral lordosis in lumbar spine surgery than minimally invasive transforaminal interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF)?

Comparison of clinical outcomes and spino-pelvic sagittal balance in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: Minimally invasive oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF)

Clinical values of oblique lumbar interbody fusion on the treatment of single-level degenerative lumbar diseases