Comparison of Posterolateral Fusion and Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Lumbar Spondylolithesis: A Meta-Analysis

Chen, Ying‐Chun; Zhang, Lin; Li, Er-Nan; Ding, Lei; Zhang, Genai; Hou, Yu; Yuan, Wei

doi:10.1080/08941939.2017.1411543

Cited by 12 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a most applied surgical approach, PLIF is considered superior to other fusion procedures in terms of anterior column support, sufficient decompression of nerve roots, and restoration of lumbar alignment [16]. Several prior studies have reported the effective improvement of clinical efficacy of PLIF for DS [17].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Spinopelvic Sagittal Balance and Persistent Low Back Pain (PLBP) for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis (DS) following Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF)

Zhang

et al. 2020

Pain Research and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. To investigate the change of spinopelvic sagittal balance and clinical outcomes after posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS), especially the relationship between sagittal spinopelvic parameters and persistent low back pain (PLBP). Methods. 107 patients who were diagnosed with DS and underwent PLIF in our department were enrolled retrospectively in the present study. Sagittal spinopelvic parameters including lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), height of the disc (HOD), sacral slope (SS), pelvic incidence (PI), and pelvic tilt (PT) were recorded pre- and postoperatively. Sagittal balance and clinical outcomes were compared between patients with and without PLBP. Pearson correlation was used to analyze the change of sagittal balance parameters and clinical functions. Logistic regression analysis was performed to examine the risk factors of PLBP. Results. It showed significant improvements of SL, HOD, and PT postoperatively. Both the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) had significant improvement postoperatively. Change of PT and SL also differed observably between patients with and without PLBP. SL and PT were correlated with NRS and ODI, and insufficient restoration of PT was an independent factor for PLBP. Conclusion. The sagittal balance parameters and clinical outcomes can be improved markedly via PLIF for treating DS. Restoration of SL and PT was correlated with satisfactory outcomes, and adequate improvement of PT may have positive impact on reducing PLBP.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Spinopelvic Sagittal Balance and Persistent Low Back Pain (PLBP) for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis (DS) following Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF)

Zhang

et al. 2020

Pain Research and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A comprehensive pathological evaluation for glioma should include both histopathological and molecular pathological examinations according to the 2016 WHO classification . Special attention should be paid to IDH1 mutation status, which is closely associated with GRE, especially for LGG patients …”

Section: The Diagnostic Process For Grementioning

confidence: 99%

“…20 Special attention should be paid to IDH1 mutation status, which is closely associated with GRE, especially for LGG patients. 12,23 As for the diagnosis of epilepsy, seizure history and clinical signs of epileptic seizures should be conventionally documented for patients with glioma. 2 Moreover, a 2-hour video electroencephalogram (EEG), including a non-rapid eye movement stage I-II sleep EEG, should be performed for patients with definite or possible epileptic seizures.…”

Section: For Grementioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of adult diffuse glioma‐related epilepsy

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Glioma‐related epilepsy (GRE) is defined as symptomatic epileptic seizures secondary to gliomas, it brings both heavy financial and psychosocial burdens to patients with diffuse glioma and significantly decreases their quality of life. To date, there have been no clinical guidelines that provide recommendations for the optimal diagnostic and therapeutic procedures for GRE patients. Methods In March 2017, the Joint Task Force for GRE of China Association Against Epilepsy and Society for Neuro‐Oncology of China launched the guideline committee for the diagnosis and treatment of GRE. The guideline committee conducted a comprehensive review of relevant domestic and international literatures that were evaluated and graded based on the Oxford Centre for Evidence‐Based Medicine Levels of Evidence, and then held three consensus meetings to discuss relevant recommendations. The recommendations were eventually given according to those relevant literatures, together with the experiences in the diagnosis and treatment of over 3000 GRE cases from 24 tertiary level hospitals that specialize in clinical research of epilepsy, glioma, and GRE in China. Results The manuscript presented the current standard recommendations for the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures of GRE. Conclusions The current work will provide a framework and assurance for the diagnosis and treatment strategy of GRE to reduce complications and costs caused by unnecessary treatment. Additionally, it can serve as a reference for all professionals involved in the management of patients with GRE.

show abstract

“…Lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis is an usual low back pain disease with morbidity of 4–6% in the population [1,2]. The character of this disease is the upper vertebrae slips over the subjacent vertebrae because of a defect in the isthmus in adolescence or adulthood [3]. The main symptoms of lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis are low back pain, paresthesia in lower limbs, weakness of the legs and even impaired ambulation, intermittent claudication, etc [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Minimally invasive TLIF (MIS-TLIF), as a novel operation, was firstly described by Foley in 2002 [13], with less complications such as blood loss and soft tissue injury [9,14]. Comparing with open TLIF, this minimally invasive procedure had some advantages in terms of amount of bleeding, operation time, hospitalisation time and fusion rates [3,12]. As a novel technology, O-arm navigation has the advancement by providing real-time intraoperative images of the key operating area to assist surgeons improve the performing accuracy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of O-arm navigation and microscope-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and conventional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis

Peng

Chen

et al. 2020

Journal of Orthopaedic Translation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe objective of this study is to compare the clinical efficacy of O-arm navigation and microscope-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (modified MIS-TLIF) versus conventional TLIF in the lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis.Materials and methodsForty patients with 1-level lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis were enrolled in the study. Perioperative indexes including operation time, intraoperative bleeding, bed rest time, time of hospitalisation stay and the accuracy rate of screw placement were analysed. Preoperative and postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were assessed.ResultsThe operation time in the modified MIS-TLIF group was longer than the conventional TLIF group (p < 0.05). However, intraoperative blood loss in the modified MIS-TLIF group was less than the comparative group (p < 0.05). The average bed rest time and hospitalisation stay in the modified MIS-TLIF group was shorter than conventional TLIF group (p < 0.05). The screw placement in the modified MIS-TLIF group was more precisely than that in the conventional TLIF group (p < 0.05). Meanwhile, the improvement of VAS and ODI in the modified MIS-TLIF group were lower than that in the conventional TLIF group 1 and 6 months after operation (p < 0.05). There was no difference in the VAS and ODI score between the two group at the last follow-up (p > 0.05).ConclusionNavigation and microscope-assisted MIS-TLIF is safe and reliable for treatment of lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis (Meyerding degree I or II) with potential advantages including less injury, less blood loss, higher screw accuracy and faster recovery after operation.The translational potential of this articleCompared with conventional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, O-arm navigation and microscope-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion has a huge advantage in surgery treatment of lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis. Hence, this article provided a better surgery method to deal with lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis, and robot-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion will be adopted in the future.

show abstract

Comparison of Posterolateral Fusion and Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Lumbar Spondylolithesis: A Meta-Analysis

Abstract: Both these two procedures provide excellent outcomes for patients with spondylolisthesis. There was no significant difference of clinical outcome, complication rate, fusion rate and blood loss between PLIF and PLF techniques.

Cited by 12 publications

References 31 publications

Analysis of Spinopelvic Sagittal Balance and Persistent Low Back Pain (PLBP) for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis (DS) following Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF)

Analysis of Spinopelvic Sagittal Balance and Persistent Low Back Pain (PLBP) for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis (DS) following Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF)

Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of adult diffuse glioma‐related epilepsy

Comparison of O-arm navigation and microscope-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and conventional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About