Systemic Inflammatory Markers and Clinical Outcomes of Open versus Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/tcrm.s447394
2024-05-07
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
Abstract:Liwen Feng, 1 Junbo Liang, 1 Naiguo Wang, 2 Qingyu Zhang 2 1 Department of Orthopedics, Weihaiwei People's Hospital, Weihai, Shandong Province, 264200, People's Republic of China; 2 Department of Orthopedics, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, Shandong Province, 250021, People's Republic of China Correspondence: Qingyu Zhang, Tel +86-13296402823, Email ; ; Naiguo Wang, Tel +86-13505319917, Email Purpose: The purpose of this study is to preliminarily assess the change in perioperative systemic inflammatory markers and clinical outcomes between open TLIF and BE-TLIF procedures. Patients and Methods: In total, 38 patients who underwent single-level lumbar fusion surgery (L4-5 or L5-S1) were retrospectively reviewed. 19 patients were treated by the BE-TLIF technique, while the other patients were managed using open TLIF. The perioperative serum C-reactive protein (CRP), neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR), lymphocyte/monocyte ratio (LMR), and platelet/lymphocyte ratio (PLR) of the two groups were compared to determine if there was a statistical difference. Meanwhile, clinical evaluations were conducted to assess various factors including operative duration, estimated blood loss (EBL), drainage catheter stay, length of hospitalization, visual analogue scale (VAS), and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores. Results: The perioperative analysis revealed that BE-TLIF cases experienced a longer operative duration than open TLIF cases (open TLIF: 138.63 ± 31.59 min, BE-TLIF: 204.58 ± 49.37 min, p 0.05). The VAS and ODI scores in both groups were significantly improved after surgery (p < 0.05). Conclusion: There was no significant difference found between BE-TLIF and open TLIF in terms of systemic inflammatory markers, and clinical outcomes. Overall, BE-TLIF can be considered a viable choice for lumbar canal decompression and interbody fusion for less invasion. It is worth noting that BE-TLIF does have a longer operation time, indicating that there is still potential for further improvement in this technique. Keywords: transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, unilateral biportal endoscope, systemic inflammatory markers Degenerative disease of the lumbar spine, as a common condition among the elderly population, is increasingly affecting younger individuals as well. 1 It is a major contributor to low back pain, leg pain and numbness, and can even result in walking difficulties in severe cases. 2 The two primary conditions associated with this degenerative disease are lumbar spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis. Lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) has long been regarded as the gold standard treatment for degenerative lumbar diseases by spinal decompression and stability reconstruction. Currently, the mainstream of LIF includes posterior LIF (PLIF), oblique LIF (OLIF), anterior LIF (ALIF), lateral LIF (LLIF), and transforaminal LIF (TLIF). 3,4 Among these approaches, PLIF and TLIF are widely performed. TLIF has several advantages over PLIF, as it can effectively decompress the spinal canal and release the nerve roots by removing unilateral partial facet joints and lamina. 5 However, TLIF has also been criticized for the extensive destruction of posterior musculoligamentous structures. 6 The inflammatory response is a physiological reaction of the body to tissue injury to promote repair and healing. 7 Nevertheless, an excessive inflammatory response can also lead to adverse consequences, such as pain, swelling, and further tissue damage. 8 Additionally, the inflammatory response can increase the risk of postoperative infection. Currently, the popularity of minimally invasive spine surgery for treating spine disorders is growing. 9 The unilateral biportal endoscopic technique which uses two incisions that are 3 cm apart, is a good approach (Figure 1A). 10 This technique is not only effective for treating lumbar disc herniation but is also used in lumbar decompression and fusion. 11 Figure 1 Overview of biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion. ( A ) Illustration of unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy; ( B ) the dominant hand was used for the working portal and the nondominant hand was used for the e -Abstract Truncated-
health care sciences & services