Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MI-TLIF): Surgical technique, long-term 4-year prospective outcomes, and complications compared with an open TLIF cohort

Neurosurgery Clinics of North America

Volumn 25, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 279-304

  Wong, Albert P ^a   Smith, Zachary A ^a   Stadler, James A ^a   Hu, Xue Yu ^b   Yan, Jia Zhi ^c   Li, Xin Feng ^d   Lee, Ji Hyun ^e   Khoo, Larry T ^e  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b FOURTH MILITARY MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^c CAPITAL MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^d SHANGHAI JIAO TONG UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (China)

^e UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Minimally invasive spine; Minimally invasive surgery; Spine surgery outcomes; TLIF; TLIF complications; Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL INJURY; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; BLOOD VESSEL INJURY; DEEP VEIN THROMBOSIS; DISABILITY; HEMATOMA; HOSPITAL COST; HUMAN; INCISION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTERVERTEBRAL DISKECTOMY; KIRSCHNER WIRE; LENGTH OF STAY; LIQUORRHEA; LORDOSIS; MEDICAL DEVICE COMPLICATION; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; MINIMALLY INVASIVE TRANSFORAMINAL LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION; OPERATION DURATION; OPERATIVE BLOOD LOSS; ORTHOPEDIC IMPLANT; OSWESTRY DISABILITY INDEX; PATIENT POSITIONING; PEDICLE ROD; PEDICLE SCREW; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; PSEUDARTHROSIS; RADIATION EXPOSURE; RADICULITIS; REOPERATION; RESPIRATORY TRACT INFECTION; REVIEW; SPINAL CORD DECOMPRESSION; SPINE FUSION; SPINE RADIOGRAPHY; SPINE SURGERY; STENOSIS; TRANSFORAMINAL LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; URINARY TRACT INFECTION; VERTEBRAL CANAL STENOSIS; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; WOUND INFECTION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; LUMBAR VERTEBRA; PEROPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PROCEDURES; SURGERY;

HUMANS; INTRAOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGICAL PROCEDURES; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SPINAL FUSION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84897468417     PISSN: 10423680     EISSN: 15581349     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.nec.2013.12.007     Document Type: Review

References (66)

1. Harms J., Rolinger H. Aone-stage procedure in operative treatment of spondylolistheses: dorsal traction-reposition and anterior fusion (author's transl). ZOrthop Ihre Grenzgeb 1982, 120:343-347.
2. Asgarzadie F., Khoo L.T. Minimally invasive operative management for lumbar spinal stenosis: overview of early and long-term outcomes. Orthop Clin North Am 2007, 38:387-399. [abstract vi-vii].
3. Khoo L., Palmer S., Laich D., et al. Percutaneous posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a cadaveric pre-clinical study and preliminary case series. Neurosurgery 2002, 51(Suppl 5):200-210.
4. Adogwa O., Parker S.L., Bydon A., et al. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: 2-year assessment of narcotic use, return to work, disability, and quality of life. JSpinal Disord Tech 2011, 24:479-484.
5. Archavlis E., Carvi Y.N. Comparison of minimally invasive fusion and instrumentation versus open surgery for severe stenotic spondylolisthesis with high-grade facet joint osteoarthritis. Eur Spine J 2013, 22(8):1731-1740.
6. Beringer W.F., Mobasser J.P. Unilateral pedicle screw instrumentation for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurg Focus 2006, 20:E4.
7. Deutsch H., Musacchio M.J. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with unilateral pedicle screw fixation. Neurosurg Focus 2006, 20:E10.
8. Dhall S.S., Wang M.Y., Mummaneni P.V. Clinical and radiographic comparison of mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in 42 patients with long-term follow-up. JNeurosurg Spine 2008, 9:560-565.
9. Jang J.S., Lee S.H. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with ipsilateral pedicle screw and contralateral facet screw fixation. JNeurosurg Spine 2005, 3:218-223.
10. Kasliwal M.K., Deutsch H. Clinical and radiographic outcomes using local bone shavings as autograft in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. World Neurosurg 2012, 78:185-190.
11. Kim J.S., Kang B.U., Lee S.H., et al. Mini-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion augmented by percutaneous pedicle screw fixation: a comparison of surgical outcomes in adult low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. JSpinal Disord Tech 2009, 22:114-121.
12. Kim J.S., Jung B., Lee S.H. Instrumented minimally invasive spinal-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF); minimum 5-years follow-up with clinical and radiologic outcomes. JSpinal Disord Tech 2012, [Epub ahead of print].
13. Kim M.C., Chung H.T., Kim D.J., et al. The clinical and radiological outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody single level fusion. Asian Spine J 2011, 5:111-116.
14. Lau D., Ziewacz J., Park P. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis in patients with significant obesity. JClin Neurosci 2013, 20:80-83.
15. Lee C.K., Park J.Y., Zhang H.Y. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using a single interbody cage and a tubular retraction system: technical tips, and perioperative, radiologic and clinical outcomes. JKorean Neurosurg Soc 2010, 48:219-224.
16. Lee D.Y., Jung T.G., Lee S.H. Single-level instrumented mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in elderly patients. JNeurosurg Spine 2008, 9:137-144.
17. Lee K.H., Yue W.M., Yeo W., et al. Clinical and radiological outcomes of open versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J 2012, 21:2265-2270.
18. Luo W., Zhang F., Liu T., et al. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion aided with computer-assisted spinal navigation system combined with electromyography monitoring. Chin Med J (Engl) 2012, 125:3947-3951.
19. Min S.H., Yoo J.S. The clinical and radiological outcomes of multilevel minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J 2013, 22:1164-1172.
20. Park P., Foley K.T. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with reduction of spondylolisthesis: technique and outcomes after a minimum of 2 years' follow-up. Neurosurg Focus 2008, 25:E16.
21. Park Y., Ha J.W., Lee Y.T., et al. Surgical outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of spondylolisthesis and degenerative segmental instability. Asian Spine J 2011, 5:228-236.
22. Parker S.L., Mendenhall S.K., Shau D.N., et al. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for degenerative spondylolisthesis: comparative effectiveness and cost-utility analysis. World Neurosurg 2013, [Epub ahead of print].
23. Peng C.W., Yue W.M., Poh S.Y., et al. Clinical and radiological outcomes of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009, 34:1385-1389.
24. Rodriguez-Vela J., Lobo-Escolar A., Joven E., et al. Clinical outcomes of minimally invasive versus open approach for one-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at the 3- to 4-year follow-up. Eur Spine J 2013, 22(12):2857-2863.
25. Rosen D.S., Ferguson S.D., Ogden A.T., et al. Obesity and self-reported outcome after minimally invasive lumbar spinal fusion surgery. Neurosurgery 2008, 63:956-960. [discussion: 60].
26. Rouben D., Casnellie M., Ferguson M. Long-term durability of minimal invasive posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a clinical and radiographic follow-up. JSpinal Disord Tech 2011, 24:288-296.
27. Scheufler K.M., Dohmen H., Vougioukas V.I. Percutaneous transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar instability. Neurosurgery 2007, 60:203-212. [discussion: 12-3].
28. Schizas C., Tzinieris N., Tsiridis E., et al. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: evaluating initial experience. Int Orthop 2009, 33:1683-1688.
29. Schwender J.D., Holly L.T., Rouben D.P., et al. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): technical feasibility and initial results. JSpinal Disord Tech 2005, 18(Suppl):S1-S6.
30. Shunwu F., Xing Z., Fengdong Z., et al. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010, 35:1615-1620.
31. Sonmez E., Coven I., Sahinturk F., et al. Unilateral percutaneous pedicle screw instrumentation with Minimally Invasive TLIF for the treatment of recurrent lumbar disk disease: 2 years follow-up. Turk Neurosurg 2013, 23:372-378.
32. Tsahtsarlis A., Wood M. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumber interbody fusion and degenerative lumbar spine disease. Eur Spine J 2012, 21:2300-2305.
33. Villavicencio A.T., Burneikiene S., Roeca C.M., et al. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Surg Neurol Int 2010, 1:12.
34. Villavicencio A.T., Nelson E.L., Mason A., et al. Preliminary results on feasibility of outpatient instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. JSpinal Disord Tech 2012, 26(6):298-304.
35. Wang H.L., Lu F.Z., Jiang J.Y., et al. Minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion via MAST Quadrant retractor versus open surgery: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Chin Med J (Engl) 2011, 124:3868-3874.
36. Wang J., Zhou Y., Zhang Z.F., et al. Comparison of one-level minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis grades 1 and 2. Eur Spine J 2010, 19:1780-1784.
37. Wang J., Zhou Y., Zhang Z.F., et al. Minimally invasive or open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion as revision surgery for patients previously treated by open discectomy and decompression of the lumbar spine. Eur Spine J 2011, 20:623-628.
38. Wang J., Zhou Y., Feng Zhang Z., et al. Comparison of clinical outcome in overweight or obese patients after minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. JSpinal Disord Tech 2012, [Epub ahead of print].
39. Wu W.J., Liang Y., Zhang X.K., et al. Complications and clinical outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of one- or two-level degenerative disc diseases of the lumbar spine in patients older than 65 years. Chin Med J (Engl) 2012, 125:2505-2510.
40. Xue H., Tu Y., Cai M. Comparison of unilateral versus bilateral instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative lumbar diseases. Spine J 2012, 12:209-215.
41. Zairi F., Arikat A., Allaoui M., et al. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: comparison between open and mini-open approaches with two years follow-up. JNeurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2013, 74:131-135.
42. Houten J.K., Post N.H., Dryer J.W., et al. Clinical andradiographically/neuroimaging documented outcome in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurg Focus 2006, 20:E8.
43. Moskowitz A. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Orthop Clin North Am 2002, 33:359-366.
44. Rosenberg W.S., Mummaneni P.V. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: technique, complications, and early results. Neurosurgery 2001, 48:569-574. [discussion: 74-5].
45. Faciszewski T., Winter R.B., Lonstein J.E., et al. The surgical and medical perioperative complications of anterior spinal fusion surgery in the thoracic and lumbar spine in adults. A review of 1223 procedures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1995, 20:1592-1599.
46. McDonnell M.F., Glassman S.D., Dimar J.R., et al. Perioperative complications of anterior procedures on the spine. JBone Joint Surg Am 1996, 78:839-847.
47. Rajaraman V., Vingan R., Roth P., et al. Visceral and vascular complications resulting from anterior lumbar interbody fusion. JNeurosurg 1999, 91:60-64.
48. Brantigan J.W., Steffee A.D., Lewis M.L., et al. Lumbar interbody fusion using the Brantigan I/F cage for posterior lumbar interbody fusion and the variable pedicle screw placement system: two-year results from a Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption clinical trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000, 25:1437-1446.
49. Brantigan J.W., Neidre A., Toohey J.S. The Lumbar I/F Cage for posterior lumbar interbody fusion with the variable screw placement system: 10-year results of a Food and Drug Administration clinical trial. Spine J 2004, 4:681-688.
50. Wetzel F.T., LaRocca H. The failed posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1991, 16:839-845.
51. Gejo R., Matsui H., Kawaguchi Y., et al. Serial changes in trunk muscle performance after posterior lumbar surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1999, 24:1023-1028.
52. Rantanen J., Hurme M., Falck B., et al. The lumbar multifidus muscle five years after surgery for a lumbar intervertebral disc herniation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1993, 18:568-574.
53. Sihvonen T., Herno A., Paljarvi L., et al. Local denervation atrophy of paraspinal muscles in postoperative failed back syndrome. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1993, 18:575-581.
54. Styf J.R., Willen J. The effects of external compression by three different retractors on pressure in the erector spine muscles during and after posterior lumbar spine surgery in humans. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1998, 23:354-358.
55. Fessler R.G., O'Toole J.E., Eichholz K.M., et al. The development of minimally invasive spine surgery. Neurosurg Clin N Am 2006, 17:401-409.
56. Foley K.T., Holly L.T., Schwender J.D. Minimally invasive lumbar fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2003, 28:S26-S35.
57. Holly L.T., Schwender J.D., Rouben D.P., et al. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: indications, technique, and complications. Neurosurg Focus 2006, 20:E6.
58. Isaacs R.E., Podichetty V.K., Santiago P., et al. Minimally invasive microendoscopy-assisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with instrumentation. JNeurosurg Spine 2005, 3:98-105.
59. Lawton C.D., Smith Z.A., Barnawi A., et al. The surgical technique of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. JNeurosurg Sci 2011, 55:259-264.
60. Shih P., Wong A.P., Smith T.R., et al. Complications of open compared to minimally invasive lumbar spine decompression. JClin Neurosci 2011, 18:1360-1364.
61. Wong A.P., Smith Z.A., Lall R.R., et al. The microendoscopic decompression of lumbar stenosis: a review of the current literature and clinical results. Minim Invasive Surg 2012, 2012:325095.
62. Habib A., Smith Z.A., Lawton C.D., et al. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a perspective on current evidence and clinical knowledge. Minim Invasive Surg 2012, 2012:657342.
63. Lau D., Lee J.G., Han S.J., et al. Complications and perioperative factors associated with learning the technique of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). JClin Neurosci 2011, 18:624-627.
64. Lee P., Fessler R.G. Perioperative and postoperative complications of single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in elderly adults. JClin Neurosci 2012, 19:111-114.
65. Selznick L.A., Shamji M.F., Isaacs R.E. Minimally invasive interbody fusion for revision lumbar surgery: technical feasibility and safety. JSpinal Disord Tech 2009, 22:207-213.
66. Villavicencio A.T., Burneikiene S., Bulsara K.R., et al. Perioperative complications in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus anterior-posterior reconstruction for lumbar disc degeneration and instability. JSpinal Disord Tech 2006, 19:92-97.