Comparing Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Lateral Screw Fixation and Transforaminal Full-Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy (OLIF-TELD) and Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF) for the Treatment of Adjacent Segment Disease

Yang, Zhuo; Chang, Jianjun; Sun, Lin; Chen, Chien‐Min; Feng, Haoyu

doi:10.1155/2020/4610128

Cited by 17 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Various techniques for interbody fusion, including TLIF and OLIF, have been developed [ 2 , 4 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 29 ]. Several clinical studies and a few meta-analyses have compared postoperative outcomes and complications between the two techniques, TLIF and OLIF [ 3 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 14 , 26 , 30 , 31 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 ]. However, previous studies did not control for the preoperative conditions requiring lumbar fusion surgery.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lateral-access cage insertion techniques via the retroperitoneal space have been invented to reduce the problems related to TLIF procedures, including lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) or oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) [ 2 , 4 , 7 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 ]. LLIF is conducted via the intermuscular approach dissecting the psoas muscle; thus, it can cause psoas muscle-related complications, including anterior thigh pain, leg weakness, nerve root injury, and others [ 2 , 4 , 11 , 13 , 14 , 25 , 29 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) versus Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) in Interbody Fusion Technique for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lee

Kim

Choo

et al. 2021

Life

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Preoperative pathology requiring fusion surgery has a great impact on postoperative outcomes. However, the previous clinical and meta-analysis studies did not control for the pathology. In this systematic review, the authors aimed to compare oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) with transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) as an interbody fusion technique in lumbar fusion surgery for patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). We systematically searched for relevant articles in the available databases. Among the 3022 articles, three studies were identified and met the inclusion criteria. In terms of radiological outcome, the amount of disc height restoration was greater in the OLIF group than in the TLIF group, but there was no significant difference between the two surgical techniques (p = 0.18). In the clinical outcomes, the pain improvement was not significantly different between the two surgical techniques. In terms of surgical outcomes, OLIF resulted in a shorter length of hospital stay and less blood loss than TLIF (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.02, respectively). The present meta-analysis indicated no significant difference in clinical, radiological outcomes, and surgical time between TLIF and OLIF for DS, but the lengths of hospital stay and blood loss were better in OLIF than TLIF. Though encouraging, these findings were based on low-quality evidence from a small number of retrospective studies that are prone to bias.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) versus Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) in Interbody Fusion Technique for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lee

Kim

Choo

et al. 2021

Life

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…OLIF is characterized by minimally invasive, high fusion rate, and low complications ( 28 , 29 ). It has been widely used in spinal degenerative scoliosis ( 30 , 31 ), spondylolisthesis ( 18 ), spinal stenosis ( 32 ), ASD ( 33 , 34 ), and DBP ( 14 ), and has achieved good clinical effects. This study further confirmed the well early and mid-term effects of OLIF in the treatment of DBP.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oblique lateral interbody fusion stand-alone vs. combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of discogenic low back pain

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveOblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) has unique advantages in the treatment of discogenic low back pain (DBP). However, there are few studies in this area, and no established standard for additional posterior internal fixation. The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of OLIF stand-alone vs. combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (PPSF) in the treatment of DBP.MethodsThis retrospective case-control study included forty patients. All patients were diagnosed with DBP by discography and discoblock. Perioperative parameters (surgery duration, blood loss, and muscle damage), complications, Visual analog scale (VAS), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were assessed. Imaging data including cage subsidence, cage retropulsion, fusion rate, and adjacent spondylosis degeneration (ASD) were analyzed.ResultsThere were 23 patients in the OLIF stand-alone group and 17 patients in the OLIF + PPSF group. The mean surgery duration, blood loss, and muscle damage in the OLIF stand-alone group were significantly better than those in the OLIF + PPSF group (P < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference in the average hospitalization time between the two groups (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the VAS and ODI scores between the two groups before surgery (P > 0.05), and VAS and ODI scores significantly improved after surgery (P < 0.05). The VAS and ODI scores in the OLIF stand-alone group were significantly better than those in the OLIF + PPSF group at 1 month (P < 0.05), While there was no significant difference between the two groups at 12 months and last follow up (P > 0.05). At the last follow-up, there was no significant difference in cage subsidence, fusion rate, ASD and complication rate between the two groups (P > 0.05).ConclusionOLIF stand-alone and OLIF + PPSF are both safe and effective in the treatment of DBP, and there is no significant difference in the long-term clinical and radiological outcomes. OLIF stand-alone has the advantages of surgery duration, blood loss, muscle damage, and early clinical effect. More clinical data are needed to confirm the effect of OLIF stand-alone on cage subsidence and ASD. This study provides a basis for the clinical application of standard DBP treatment with OLIF.

show abstract

“…Posterior internal fixation with pedicle screws is thought to have an excellent capacity to stabilize the fused segment due to the high stiffness of the structure and thus has been widely used in the field of spinal surgery. Compared to the posterior approach, in situ screw fixation through the LLIF incision can avoid changes in the patient's position during the operation, the need for a second incision, and injury to the spinal cord and nerve by the pedicle screws 30 . Furthermore, previous biomechanical studies have demonstrated that lateral instrumentation has a good ability to enhance the overall stability and has reasonable biomechanical protection, similar to pedicle screws 8 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of the In Situ Screw Implantation Region and Angle on the Stability of Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Finite Element Study

Zhu

Fang

et al. 2022

Orthopaedic Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To investigate the effect of the in situ screw implantation region and angle on the stability of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) from a biomechanical perspective.Methods: A validated L2-4 finite element (FE) model was modified for simulation. The L3-4 fused segment undergoing LLIF surgery was modeled. The area between the superior and inferior edges and the anterior and posterior edges of the vertebral body (VB) is divided into four zones by three parallel lines in coronal and horizontal planes. In situ screw implantation methods with different angles based on the three parallel lines in coronal plane were applied in Models A, B, and C (A: parallel to inferior line; B: from inferior line to midline; C: from inferior line to superior line). In addition, four implantation methods with different regions based on the three parallel lines in horizontal plane were simulated as types 1-2, 1-3, 2-2, and 2-3 (1-2: from anterior line to midline; 1-3: from anterior line to posterior line; 2-2: parallel to midline; 2-3: from midline to posterior line). L3-4 ROM, interbody cage stress, screw-bone interface stress, and L4 superior endplate stress were tracked and calculated for comparisons among these models. Results:The L3-4 ROM of Models A, B, and C decreased with the extent ranging from 47.9% (flexion-extension) to 62.4% (lateral bending) with no significant differences under any loading condition. Types 2-2 and 2-3 had 45% restriction, while types 1-2 and 1-3 had 51% restriction in ROM under flexion-extension conditions. Under lateral bending, types 2-2 and 2-3 had 70.6% restriction, while types 1-2 and 1-3 had 61.2% restriction in ROM. Under axial rotation, types 2-2 and 2-3 had 65.2% restriction, while types 1-2 and 1-3 had 59.3% restriction in ROM. The stress of the cage in types 2-2 and 2-3 was approximately 20% lower than that in types 1-2 and 1-3 under all loading conditions in all models. The peak stresses at the screw-bone interface in types 2-2 and 2-3 were much lower (approximately 35%) than those in types 1-2 and 1-3 under lateral bending, while no significant differences were observed under flexion-extension and axial rotation. The peak stress on the L4 superior endplate was approximately 30 MPa and was not significantly different in all models under any loading condition.

show abstract

Comparing Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Lateral Screw Fixation and Transforaminal Full-Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy (OLIF-TELD) and Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF) for the Treatment of Adjacent Segment Disease

Cited by 17 publications

References 25 publications

Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) versus Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) in Interbody Fusion Technique for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) versus Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) in Interbody Fusion Technique for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Oblique lateral interbody fusion stand-alone vs. combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of discogenic low back pain

Effect of the In Situ Screw Implantation Region and Angle on the Stability of Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Finite Element Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About