Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2017:2017:7236970.
doi: 10.1155/2017/7236970. Epub 2017 Jun 15.

Standard versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Prospective Randomized Study

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Standard versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Prospective Randomized Study

Daniel Serban et al. Biomed Res Int. 2017.

Abstract

Symptomatic spondylolisthesis patients may benefit from surgical decompression and stabilization. The standard (S) technique is a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Newer, minimally invasive (MI) techniques seem to provide similar results with less morbidity. We enrolled patients with at least 6 months of symptoms and image-confirmed low-grade spondylolisthesis, at a single academic institution, between 2011 and 2015. The patients were randomized to either S or MI TLIF. The primary outcome measure was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) improvement at 1 year. Secondary outcome measures included length of operation, estimated blood loss, length of hospitalization, and fusion rates at 1 year. Forty patients were enrolled in each group. The differences in mean operative time and estimated blood loss were not statistically significant between the two groups. The patients were discharged after surgery at 4.12 days for the S TLIF group and 1.92 days for the MI TLIF group. The ODI improvement was similar and statistically significant in both groups. The fusion was considered solid in 36 (90%) of patients at 1 year in both groups. In conclusion, the two techniques provided similar clinical and radiological outcomes at 1 year. The patients undergoing MI TLIF had a shorter hospital stay. This trial is registered with NCT03155789.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Weinstein J. N., Lurie J. D., Tosteson T. D., et al. Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. New England Journal of Medicine. 2007;356(22):2257–2270. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa070302. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tan G. H., Goss B. G., Thorpe P. J., Williams R. P. CT-based classification of long spinal allograft fusion. European Spine Journal. 2007;16(11):1875–1881. doi: 10.1007/s00586-007-0376-0. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Foley K. T., Holly L. T., Schwender J. D. Spine. Philadelphia, Pa, USA: 2003. Minimally invasive lumbar fusion; pp. S26–S35. - PubMed
    1. Parker S. L., Mendenhall S. K., Shau D. N., et al. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis: comparative effectiveness and cost-utility analysis. World Neurosurgery. 2014;82(1-2):230–238. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2013.01.041. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Goldstein C. L., Macwan K., Sundararajan K., Rampersaud Y. R. Perioperative outcomes and adverse events of minimally invasive versus open posterior lumbar fusion: meta-analysis and systematic review. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine. 2016;24(3):416–427. doi: 10.3171/2015.2.SPINE14973. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources