Abstract:Objective:To compare the efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and minimally invasive interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.Methods:Data of 40 patients with I-II degree single level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis from January 2018 to December 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the operation procedure, they were divided into two groups: OLIF group and MI-TLIF group, and each group had 20 patients. There were 15 males and 5 females in the OLIF group, aged 50.3±8.8 years; and there were 13 males and 7 females in the MI-TLIF group, aged 51.7±8.7 years. According to the Meyerding's grade system, there were 16 patients of type I in the OLIF group and 15 cases in the MI-TLIF group; and there were 4 patients of type II in the OLIF group and 5 cases in the MI-TLIF group. The operation time, intra-operative hemorrhage, postoperative drainage, recessive blood loss and albumin loss were recorded. The CRP and ESR on the third day after operation, the VAS score and ODI score before and after operation were recorded. The lumbar lordosis (LL), fused segmental lordosis (FSL) and disc height (DH) before and after operation were recorded. The time of getting out of bed and walking and the hospital stay were recorded. Paired t-test was used to analyze the data.Results:Forty patients successfully underwent the operation. The operation time of OLIF group was 96±20 min, with intraoperative blood loss of 61±32 ml and postoperative drainage volume of 18±8 ml. The operation time of MI-TLIF group was 132±26 min, with intraoperative blood loss of 262±102 ml and postoperative drainage volume of 95±42 ml; and there was statistical difference between the two groups ( t=4.901, 8.404, 8.064; P< 0.001). On the third day after operation, the occult blood loss was 139±47 ml in the OLIF group and 486±192 ml in the MI-TLIF group; the albumin loss was 4.2±1.9 g/L in the OLIF group and 10.2±3.9 g/L in the MI-TLIF group; CRP was 34±11 mg/L in the OLIF group and 106±39 mg/L in the MI-TLIF group; ESR was 41±15 mm/1 h in the OLIF group and 71±24 mm/1 h in the MI-TLIF group, and there all were statistical differences between the two groups ( t=7.838, 6.184, 7.983, 4.675; P< 0.001). The VAS scores were 2.2±1.5, 1.8±1.3 and ODI scores were 14%±11%, 59%±17%, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups. The LL were 33.41°±9.25°, 32.07°±9.54°, FSL were 11.59°±5.09°, 10.61°±4.56° and DH were 10.35±2.30 mm, 10.85±1.85 mm, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups. The follow-up time was 13.5±2.3 months in the OLIF group and 14.1±2.8 months in the MI-TLIF group. Three patients in the MI-TLIF group had radiation pain in the lower extremity on the third day after operation, which relieved after NSAID drugs and mannitol treatment. In the group of OLIF, the skin temperature of the left lower extremity increased in 1 case on the first day after operation, in which sympathetic chain injury was considered, and the patient recovered after 2.5 months; in the group of OLIF, the numbness in the front of the left thigh and the weakness of flexion of the hip was found in 3 cases, in which the edema or injury of the psoas major muscle was considered. Conclusion:Compared with MI-TLIF in the treatment of I, II degree single segment degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, OLIF has the advantages of shorter operation time, less intraoperative and postoperative blood loss, lower inflammation index, earlier time to get out of bed and shorter hospital stay. However, the outcomes of the two surgeries were similar.

Transforminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion in Treatment of Lumbar Spondylolisthesis：a Mid-Term Follow-Up Study

Transforminal lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral lumbar fusion in treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis: a mid-term follow-up study

Is stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion superior to instrumented lateral lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of single-level, low-grade, lumbar spondylolisthesis?

Comparative study of oblique lateral approach and posterior fusion in the treatment of grade Ⅰ-Ⅱ lumbar spondylolisthesis

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

Posterolateral lumbar fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar scoliosis

A Comparative Study of Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Combined with Pedicle Screw Fixation for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Comparative Study of PILF and TLIF Treatment in Adult Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

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

[Surgical Treatment of Lumbar Spondylolisthesis by Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion].

Comparison of posterolateral fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis: Analysis of spino-pelvic sagittal balance and postoperative chronic low back pain

A comparative study on the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis by oblique interbody fusion and minimally invasive transforminal lumbar interbody fusion

Comparison of Effect of Posterior Pedicle Screw Fixation Combined with Posterolateral Fusion or Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Clinical Outcomes of Deferent Fusion Methods for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

TLW versus PLIF for treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis combined with spinal stenosis in the elderly

Clinical and Radiographic Comparison of Oblique Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Patients with L4/5 grade-1 Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

Posterolateral Fusion Versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Adult Low-Grade Isthmic Spondylolisthesis: Analysis of Sagittal Radiographic Parameters - A Randomized Controlled Trial

Short-term and mid-term evaluation of three types of minimally invasive lumbar fusion surgery for treatment of L4/L5 degenerative spondylolisthesis

Comparison of Minimally Invasive and Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Single Segmental Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: Minimum Two-Year Follow Up.

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

Comparative Study of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Disease