Display options
Share it on

SAS J. 2010 Jun 01;4(2):47-53. doi: 10.1016/j.esas.2010.03.002. eCollection 2010.

Clinical and radiographic outcomes after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

SAS journal

Arnold B Etame, Anthony C Wang, Khoi D Than, Paul Park

Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, MI.

PMID: 25802649 PMCID: PMC4365612 DOI: 10.1016/j.esas.2010.03.002

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate outcomes after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF).

BACKGROUND: MI-TLIF is a relatively novel technique for treating symptomatic spondylolisthesis and degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine. It has become a popular option for lumbar arthrodesis largely because of its potential to minimize iatrogenic trauma to the soft tissue, paraspinous muscles as well as to neural elements.

METHODS: Literature search using PubMed database.

RESULTS: Eight retrospective clinical studies and 1 prospective clinical study were identified. No randomized studies were found. The indications for surgery were low-back pain and/or radicular symptoms secondary to spondylolisthesis and/or degenerative disc disease. Analysis of radiographic outcomes demonstrated a fusion rate greater than 90% in the vast majority of patients. Patients also experienced a significant improvement in functional outcome parameters at a mean follow-up of 20 months. Comparison of functional outcomes of MI-TLIF patients to a similar matched cohort of patients who underwent conventional open TLIF did not demonstrate any statistically significant difference between both cohorts.

CONCLUSION: For carefully selected patients, MI-TLIF has a very favorable long term outcome that is comparable to conventional open TLIF, with the added benefit of decreased adjacent tissue injury.

Keywords: Minimally invasive spine; Outcomes; TLIF; Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

References

  1. Neurosurg Focus. 2006 Mar 15;20(3):E10 - PubMed
  2. Neurosurg Focus. 2006 Mar 15;20(3):E4 - PubMed
  3. Clin Neurosurg. 2002;49:499-517 - PubMed
  4. Neurosurgery. 2007 Apr;60(4 Suppl 2):203-12; discussion 212-3 - PubMed
  5. Int Orthop. 2009 Dec;33(6):1683-8 - PubMed
  6. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999 May 15;24(10):1023-8 - PubMed
  7. Neurosurg Focus. 2006 Mar 15;20(3):E6 - PubMed
  8. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Nov 15;25(22):2940-52; discussion 2952 - PubMed
  9. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 1998 Jun;10(2):90-102 - PubMed
  10. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993 Apr;18(5):568-74 - PubMed
  11. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005 Sep;3(3):218-23 - PubMed
  12. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Jun 1;34(13):1385-9 - PubMed
  13. Neurosurgery. 2001 Mar;48(3):569-74; discussion 574-5 - PubMed
  14. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2005 Feb;18 Suppl:S1-6 - PubMed
  15. Neurosurg Focus. 2001 Apr 15;10 (4):E10 - PubMed
  16. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1998 Feb 1;23(3):354-8 - PubMed
  17. Neurosurgery. 2005 Oct;57(4 Suppl):256-61; discussion 256-61 - PubMed
  18. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007 Mar 1;32(5):537-43 - PubMed
  19. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001 Mar 1;26(5):567-71 - PubMed
  20. J Neurosurg. 2002 Jul;97(1 Suppl):7-12 - PubMed
  21. Orthop Clin North Am. 2002 Apr;33(2):359-66 - PubMed
  22. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996 Apr 15;21(8):941-4 - PubMed
  23. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003 Aug 1;28(15 Suppl):S26-35 - PubMed
  24. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1994 Nov 15;19(22):2598-602 - PubMed
  25. J Neurosurg. 1953 Mar;10(2):154-68 - PubMed
  26. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 1982 May-Jun;120(3):343-7 - PubMed
  27. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002 Jan;(394):64-72 - PubMed
  28. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1989 Sep;14(9):986-91 - PubMed
  29. Neurosurgery. 2003 Jun;52(6):1512 - PubMed
  30. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993 Apr;18(5):575-81 - PubMed
  31. Neurosurg Focus. 2008;25(2):E16 - PubMed
  32. Physiotherapy. 1980 Aug;66(8):271-3 - PubMed
  33. J Neurosurg Spine. 2008 Dec;9(6):560-5 - PubMed

Publication Types