Minimally invasive versus open posterior lumbar interbody fusion: A systematic review

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research

Volumn 472, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 1792-1799

  Sidhu, Gursukhman S ^a   Henkelman, Erik ^a   Vaccaro, Alexander R ^a   Albert, Todd J ^a   Hilibrand, Alan ^a   Greg Anderson, D ^a   Rihn, Jeffrey A ^a  

^a THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONFERENCE PAPER; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LENGTH OF STAY; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; NAMED INVENTORIES, QUESTIONNAIRES AND RATING SCALES; OPEN POSTERIOR LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION; OPERATION DURATION; OPERATIVE BLOOD LOSS; OSWESTRY DISABILITY INDEX; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERIOPERATIVE PERIOD; PEROPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTERIOR SPINE FUSION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE INFECTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROLO SCORE; REOPERATION; SELF REPORT; SURGICAL DRAINAGE; SURGICAL PATIENT; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE;

BIOMECHANICAL PHENOMENA; BLOOD LOSS, SURGICAL; HUMANS; JOINT INSTABILITY; LENGTH OF STAY; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; OPERATIVE TIME; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; REOPERATION; SPINAL FUSION; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MINIMALLY INVASIVE; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84901236483     PISSN: 0009921X     EISSN: 15281132     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11999-014-3619-5     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (32)

1. Ames CP, Acosta FL Jr, Chi J, Iyengar J, Muiru W, Acaroglu E, Puttlitz CM. Biomechanical comparison of posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion performed at 1 and 2 levels. Spine. 2005;30:E562-566.
2. Audat Z, Moutasem O, Yousef K, Mohammad B. Comparison of clinical and radiological results of posterolateral fusion, posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion techniques in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine. Singapore Med J. 2012;53:183-187.
3. Brislin B, Vaccaro AR. Advances in posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Orthop Clin North Am. 2002;33:367-374. (Pubitemid 34701282)
4. Cheung NK, Ferch RD, Ghahreman A, Bogduk N. Long-term follow-up of minimal-access and open posterior lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis. Neurosurgery. 2013;72:443-450; discussion 450-451.
5. Chrastil J, Patel AA. Complications associated with posterior and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2012;20:283-291.
6. Eck JC, Hodges S, Humphreys SC. Minimally invasive lumbar spinal fusion. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2007;15:321-329.
7. Fan S, Hu Z, Zhao F, Zhao X, Huang Y, Fang X. Multifidus muscle changes and clinical effects of one-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion: minimally invasive procedure versus conventional open approach. Eur Spine J. 2010;19:316-324.
8. Foley KT, Gupta SK, Justis JR, Sherman MC. Percutaneous pedicle screw fixation of the lumbar spine. Neurosurg Focus. 2001;10:E10.
9. Ghahreman A, Ferch RD, Rao PJ, Bogduk N. Minimal access versus open posterior lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of spondylolisthesis. Neurosurgery. 2010;66:296-304; discussion 304.
10. Groth AT, Kuklo TR, Klemme WR, Polly DW, Schroeder TM. Comparison of sagittal contour and posterior disc height following interbody fusion: threaded cylindrical cages versus structural allograft versus vertical cages. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2005;18:332-336. (Pubitemid 44378150)
11. Jang KS, Kim HS, Ju CI, Kim SW, Lee SM, Shin H. Paraspinal muscle sparing versus percutaneous screw fixation: a prospective and comparative study for the treatment of L5-S1 spondylolisthesis. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2011;49:163-166.
12. Kawaguchi Y, Matsui H, Tsuji H. Back muscle injury after posterior lumbar spine surgery. Part 1: histologic and histochemical analyses in rats. Spine. 1994;19:2590-2597. (Pubitemid 24356464)
13. Kawaguchi Y, Matsui H, Tsuji H. Back muscle injury after posterior lumbar spine surgery. Part 2: histologic and histochemical analyses in humans. Spine. 1994;19:2598-2602. (Pubitemid 24356465)
14. Kawaguchi Y, Yabuki S, Styf J, Olmarker K, Rydevik B, Matsui H, Tsuji H. Back muscle injury after posterior lumbar spine surgery. Topographic evaluation of intramuscular pressure and blood flow in the porcine back muscle during surgery. Spine. 1996;21:2683-2688. (Pubitemid 26419106)
15. Kim DH, Jeong ST, Lee SS. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a unilateral single cage and a local morselized bone graft in the degenerative lumbar spine. Clin Orthop Surg. 2009;1:214-221.
16. Lau D, Lee JG, Han SJ, Lu DC, Chou D. Complications and perioperative factors associated with learning the technique of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). J Clin Neurosci. 2011;18:624-627.
17. McLaughlin MR, Haid RW Jr, Rodts GE Jr, Subach BR. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion: indications, techniques, and results. Clin Neurosurg. 2000;47:514-527.
18. Ntoukas V, Muller A. Minimally invasive approach versus traditional open approach for one level posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Minim Invasive Neurosurg. 2010;53:21-24.
19. Ono A, Suetsuna F, Irie T, Yokoyama T, Numasawa T, Wada K, Toh S. Clinical significance of the redundant nerve roots of the cauda equina documented on magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;7:27-32. (Pubitemid 47067736)
20. Park Y, Ha JW. Comparison of one-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion performed with a minimally invasive approach or a traditional open approach. Spine. 2007;32:537-543. (Pubitemid 46398919)
21. Prolo DJ, Oklund SA, Butcher M. Toward uniformity in evaluating results of lumbar spine operations. A paradigm applied to posterior lumbar interbody fusions. Spine. 1986;11:601-606. (Pubitemid 16002977)
22. Rousseau MA, Lazennec JY, Bass EC, Saillant G. Predictors of outcomes after posterior decompression and fusion in degenerative spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J. 2005;14:55-60. (Pubitemid 40379288)
23. Schizas C, Tzinieris N, Tsiridis E, Kosmopoulos V. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: evaluating initial experience. Int Orthop. 2009;33:1683-1688.
24. Teng H, Wang L, Guo Z, Fan L, Zhang D, Zhang W, Wang S. [Research of single incision via MAST Quadrant retractor in management of lumbar spondylolisthesis] [in Chinese]. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2010;24:517-520.
25. Tian NF, Wu YS, Zhang XL, Xu HZ, Chi YL, Mao FM. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a meta-analysis based on the current evidence. Eur Spine J. 2013;22:1741-1749.
26. Tsutsumimoto T, Shimogata M, Ohta H, Misawa H. Mini-open versus conventional open posterior lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: comparison of paraspinal muscle damage and slip reduction. Spine. 2009;34:1923-1928.
27. Wang J, Zhou Y, Zhang ZF, Li CQ, Zheng WJ, Liu J. 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.
28. Wang MY, Cummock MD, Yu Y, Trivedi RA. An analysis of the differences in the acute hospitalization charges following minimally invasive versus open posterior lumbar interbody fusion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010;12:694-699.
29. Wang MY, Lerner J, Lesko J, McGirt MJ. Acute hospital costs after minimally invasive versus open lumbar interbody fusion: data from a US national database with 6106 patients. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2012;25:324-328.
30. Wang YP, Fei Q, Qiu GX, Zhao H, Zhang JG, Tian Y, Lin J, Weng XS, Yu B. Outcome of posterolateral fusion versus circumferential fusion with cage for lumbar stenosis and low degree lumbar spondylolisthesis. Chin Med Sci J. 2006;21:41-47. (Pubitemid 43844557)
31. Wright JG, Swiontkowski MF, Heckman JD. Introducing levels of evidence to the journal. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85:1-3. (Pubitemid 36537965)
32. Zhao J, Zhang F, Chen X, Yao Y. Posterior interbody fusion using a diagonal cage with unilateral transpedicular screw fixation for lumbar stenosis. J Clin Neurosci. 2011;18:324-328.