Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion versus Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Single-Center Retrospective Comparative Study

Abstract

Objective. To compare the efficacy of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in single-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). Methods. A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent single-level DLS surgery in our department from 2015 to 2018 was performed. According to the surgical method, the enrolled patients were divided into two groups, namely, the OLIF group who underwent OLIF combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (PPSF) and the TLIF group. Clinical outcomes included operation time, operation blood loss, postoperative drainage, hospital stay, visual analog scale (VAS) score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and complications, and imaging outcomes included upper vertebral slip, intervertebral space height (ISH), intervertebral foramen height (IFH), intervertebral space angle (ISA), lumbar lordosis (LL), and bone fusion rate. All outcomes were recorded and analyzed. Results. A total of 65 patients were finally included, and there were 28 patients and 37 patients in the OLIF group and the TLIF group, respectively. The OLIF group showed shorter operation time, less blood loss, less postoperative drainage, and shorter hospital stay than the TLIF group ( P < 0.05 ). The ISH, IFH, ISA, and LL were all larger in the OLIF group at postoperative and last follow-up ( P < 0.05 ), but the degree of upper vertebral slip was found no difference between the two groups ( P > 0.05 ). The bone graft fusion rate of OLIF group and TLIF group at 3 months, 6 months, and last follow-up was 78.57%, 92.86%, and 100% and 70.27%, 86.49%, and 97.30%, respectively, and no significant differences were found ( P > 0.05 ). Compared with the TLIF group, the OLIF group showed a superior improvement in VAS and ODI at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months postoperative ( P < 0.05 ), but no differences were found at 12 months postoperative and the last follow-up ( P > 0.05 ). There was no significant difference in complications between the two groups, with 4 patients and 6 patients in the OLIF group and TLIF group, respectively ( P > 0.05 ). Conclusions. Compared with TLIF, OLIF showed the advantages of less surgical invasion, better decompression effect, and faster postoperative recovery in single-level DLS surgery.

Research topics and trends of lumbar spondylolisthesis: a bibliometric study with machine-learning based text mining

“…Percutaneous pedicle screw is another widespread fixation technique with traditional trajectory, but its merits of minimally invasiveness popularized its utility in OLIF, OLLIF, LLIF and MIS-TLIF etc. OLIF takes an anterior retroperitoneal approach surgery through a small incision (42). Within the retroperitoneal space, surgeons will drag the psoas muscle backward, expose the intervertebral space between the psoas muscle and the abdominal aorta, and then perform decompression plus fusion, which is usually followed by posterior fixation of percutaneous pedicle screw.…”

Computational comparison of anterior lumbar interbody fusion and oblique lumbar interbody fusion with various supplementary fixation systems: a finite element analysis

“…These approaches provide direct access to the vertebral column, thereby effectively avoiding injury to the posterior muscle [ 3 ]. Moreover, ALIF and OLIF are applicable to improve endplate preparation for arthrodesis, shorten operation time, and reduce amount of blood loss compared with the traditional posterior approaches [ 4 , 5 ]. Although these two approaches cannot realize direct neural decompression, they can achieve indirect decompression by restoring disc height, foraminal height, and foraminal area, and their clinical effects have been broadly confirmed [ 5 ].…”

Evaluation of the efficacy of OLIF combined posterior internal fixation for single-segment lumbar tuberculosis: a single-center retrospective cohort study

“…However, at present, few scholars have applied OLIF in the treatment of spinal TB. In our previous study, we found that OLIF combined posterior internal fixation in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis has the advantages of less surgical invasion, better decompression effect and faster postoperative recovery (including back pain and lumbar function) compared with the posterior approach surgery [ 11 ]. Thus, we wanted to know whether these positive results of OLIF could be extended to patients with lumbar TB.…”