P239. Comparative study of clinical & radiological outcomes between tubular retractor and biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using double cages
Jwo-Luen Pao
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2024.06.362
IF: 4.297
2024-08-19
The Spine Journal
Abstract:BACKGROUND CONTEXT Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) using a tubular tractor system is a well-established fusion technique for the lumbosacral spines. However, the confined working space in the tubular retractor poses a great challenge for the surgeon to achieve good disc space preparation, ideal cage positions, and enough bone grafting into the disc space. In contrast, the biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (BETLIF) was performed with continuous saline irrigation, a clear and magnified surgical field, and almost no bleeding. Therefore, the surgeon can perform adequate direct neural decompression, radical discectomy, excellent disc space preparation with preservation of the bony endplate, and insert double cages with plenty of bone graft into the disc space. PURPOSE To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes between MIS-TLIF and BETLIF. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING A retrospective comparative study between groups of patients receiving surgeries with different techniques. PATIENT SAMPLE We conducted a retrospective study to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes between MIS-TLIF (88 patients with 110 fusion segments) and BETLIF (120 patients with 120 fusion segments) with an average age of 66.9 and 64.7 years, respectively. All the surgeries were performed by a single orthopedic surgeon in a single institute from January 2018 to May 2021. OUTCOME MEASURES N/A METHODS We evaluated the clinical outcomes by retrieving the data from medical records, including hospital stays, blood transfusion, visual analog scale (VAS) for low back pain and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores. We reviewed the X-rays and 1-year computed tomography (CT) scan of the lumbar spine to evaluate the change in disc height, segmental lordotic angle, fusion results, cage subsidence, endplate osteolysis, and fusion quality. RESULTS The average follow-up was 18.8 ± 6.4 months in the MIS-TLIF group and 17.9 ± 5.8 months in the BETLIF group. There was a significantly higher requirement of blood transfusion in the MIS-TLIF group (14.7% vs 0%, p < 0.01) and significantly shorter hospital stays in the BETLIF group (7.4 ± 1.6 vs 5.7 ± 1.1 days, p < 0.05). The VAS, ODI, and JOA scores significantly improved after the surgery in both groups. There were no significant differences in postoperative VAS between groups. However, the BETLIF group had significantly better functional outcomes with lower ODI (23.5 vs 12.7, p < 0.05) and higher JOA scores (20.6 vs 26.4, p < 0.05). The postoperative X-rays showed comparable results in final disc height, disc height increase, final segmental lordosis in these two groups. The CT scan 1 year after the surgery disclosed the BETLIF group had a significantly higher fusion rate (93.3% vs 81.4%, p < 0.05) and a significantly lower cage subsidence rate (23.3% vs 44.1%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS MIS-TLIF and BETLIF are both effective surgical techniques for lumbar interbody fusion. In our study, the BETLIF achieves superior clinical and radiological outcomes with shorter hospital stays, better functional outcomes, better bone fusion, and lower cage subsidence rates. FDA Device/Drug Status This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
clinical neurology,orthopedics