Biomechanical evaluation of different asymmetrical posterior stabilization methods for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: Laboratory investigation

Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine

Volumn 9, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 363-371

  Schleicher, Philipp ^a,c   Beth, Paavo ^a   Ottenbacher, Andreas ^b   Pflugmacher, Robert ^a   Scholz, Matti ^a   Schnake, Klaus John ^a   Haas, Norbert P ^a   Kandziora, Frank ^a  

^a CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

^b KRANKENHAUS DER BARMHERZIGEN BRÜDER   (Germany)

^c Zentrum fur Wirbelsaulenchirurgie und Neurotraumatologie   (Germany)

Author keywords

Biomechanical testing; Lumbar spine; Minimally invasive surgery; Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BIOMECHANICS; BONE SCREW; BRAIN ASYMMETRY; CADAVER; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FIXATION DEVICE; HUMAN; LUMBAR SPINE; MALE; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; PEDICLE SCREW; RANGE OF MOTION; RIGIDITY; ROTATION; SPINE FUSION; SPINE STABILIZATION; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TRANSFORAMINAL LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION; FEASIBILITY STUDY; INSTRUMENTATION; INTERNAL FIXATOR; JOINT CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONS; LUMBAR VERTEBRA; MATERIALS TESTING; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; TENSILE STRENGTH; ZYGAPOPHYSEAL JOINT;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CADAVER; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERNAL FIXATORS; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MALE; MATERIALS TESTING; MIDDLE AGED; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; SPINAL FUSION; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MINIMALLY INVASIVE; TENSILE STRENGTH; ZYGAPOPHYSEAL JOINT;

EID: 85047683251     PISSN: 15475654     EISSN: 15475646     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3171/SPI.2008.9.10.363     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Ames CP, Acosta FLJ, Chi J, Iyengar J, Muiru W, Acaroglu E, et al: Biomechanical comparison of posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion performed at 1 and 2 levels. Spine 30:E562-E566, 2005
2. Beringer WF, Mobasser JP: Unilateral pedicle screw instrumentation for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurg Focus 20(3):E4, 2006
3. Blume H, Rojas CH: Unilateral lumbar interbody fusion (posterior approach) utilizing dowel graft. J Neurol Orthop Surg 2:171-175, 1981
4. Brislin B, Vaccaro AR: Advances in posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Orthop Clin North Am 33:367-374, 2002 (Pubitemid 34701282)
5. Ferrara LA, Secor JL, Jin BH, Wakefield A, Inceoglu S, Benzel EC: A biomechanical comparison of facet screw fixation and pedicle screw fixation: effects of short-term and long-term repetitive cycling. Spine 28:1226-1234, 2003 (Pubitemid 36734611)
6. Foley KT, Holly LT, Schwender JD: Minimally invasive lumbar fusion. Spine 28:S26-S35, 2003
7. Foley KT, Lefkowitz MA: Advances in minimally invasive spine surgery. Clin Neurosurg 49:499-517, 2002
8. Fritzell P, Hagg O, Wessberg P, Nordwall A: Chronic low back pain and fusion: a comparison of three surgical techniques: a prospective multicenter randomized study from the Swedish lumbar spine study group. Spine 27:1131-1141, 2002 (Pubitemid 34596329)
9. Fritzell P, Hagg O, Wessberg P, Nordwall A: 2001 Volvo Award Winner in Clinical Studies: Lumbar fusion versus non-surgical treatment for chronic low back pain: a multicenter randomized controlled trial from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. Spine 26:2521-2524, 2001 (Pubitemid 33134299)
10. Hackenberg L, Halm H, Bullmann V, Vieth V, Schneider M, Liljenqvist U: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a safe technique with satisfactory three to five year results. Eur Spine J 14:551-558, 2005 (Pubitemid 41159462)
11. Harms J, Rolinger H: [A one-stager procedure in operative treatment of spondylolistheses: dorsal traction-reposition and anterior fusion (author's transl).] Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 120:343-347, 1982 (Ger)
12. Harris BM, Hilibrand AS, Savas PE, Pellegrino A, Vaccaro AR, Siegler S, et al: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: the effect of various instrumentation techniques on the flexibility of the lumbar spine. Spine 29:E65-E70, 2004
13. Hee HT, Castro FPJ, Majd ME, Holt RT, Myers L: Anterior/posterior lumbar fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: analysis of complications and predictive factors. J Spinal Disord 14:533-540, 2001
14. Humphreys SC, Hodges SD, Patwardhan AG, Eck JC, Murphy RB, Covington LA: Comparison of posterior and transforaminal approaches to lumbar interbody fusion. Spine 26:567-571, 2001
15. Jang JS, Lee SH: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with ipsilateral pedicle screw and contralateral facet screw fixation. J Neurosurg Spine 3:218-223, 2005
16. Kabins MB, Weinstein JN, Spratt KF, Found EM, Goel VK, Woody J, et al: Isolated L4-L5 fusions using the variable screw placement system: unilateral versus bilateral. J Spinal Disord 5:39-49, 1992
17. Kandziora F, Schleicher P, Scholz M, Pflugmacher R, Eindorf T, Haas NP, et al: Biomechanical testing of the lumbar facet interference screw. Spine 30:E34-E39, 2005
18. Kettler A, Schmoelz W, Kast E, Gottwald M, Claes L, Wilke HJ: In vitro stabilizing effect of a transforaminal compared with two posterior lumbar interbody fusion cages. Spine 30:E665-E670, 2005 (Pubitemid 41669076)
19. Lowe TG, Tahernia AD, O'Brien MF, Smith DA: Unilateral transforaminal posterior lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): indications, technique, and 2-year results. J Spinal Disord Tech 15:31-38, 2002
20. Magerl FP: Stabilization of the lower thoracic and lumbar spine with external skeletal fixation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 189:125-141, 1984
21. Mummaneni PV, Haid RW, Rodts GE: Lumbar interbody fusion: state-of-the-art technical advances. Invited submission from the Joint Section Meeting on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves, March 2004. J Neurosurg Spine 1:24-30, 2004
22. Okuyama K, Abe E, Suzuki T, Tamura Y, Chiba M, Sato K: Posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective study of complications after facet joint excision and pedicle screw fixation in 148 cases. Acta Orthop Scand 70:329-334, 1999 (Pubitemid 29497466)
23. Ray CD: Threaded titanium cages for lumbar interbody fusions. Spine 22:667-680, 1997
24. Resnick DK, Choudhri TF, Dailey AT, Groff MW, Khoo L, Matz PG, et al: Guidelines for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 12: pedicle screw fixation as an adjunct to posterolateral fusion for low-back pain. J Neurosurg Spine 2:700-706, 2005
25. Rosenberg WS, Mummaneni PV: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: technique, complications, and early results. Neurosurgery 48:569-574, 2001
26. Schneid S, Sabitzer RJ, Fuss FK, Grupp TM, Blömer W: [In vitro stability study of an improved implant system for minimally invasive transforaminal approach.] Orthopade 31:488-493, 2002 (Ger)
27. Slucky AV, Brodke DS, Bachus KN, Droge JA, Braun JT: Less invasive posterior fixation method following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a biomechanical analysis. Spine J 6:78-85, 2006
28. Suk KS, Lee HM, Kim NH, Ha JW: Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in lumbar spinal fusion. Spine 25:1843-1847, 2000
29. Taneichi H, Suda K, Kajino T, Matsumura A, Moridaira H, Kaneda K: Unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and bilateral anterior-column fixation with two Brantigan I/F cages per level: clinical outcomes during a minimum 2-year follow-up period. J Neurosurg Spine 4:198-205, 2006 (Pubitemid 47325470)
30. Tuttle J, Shakir A, Choudhri HF: Paramedian approach for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with unilateral pedicle screw fixation. Technical note and preliminary report on 47 cases. Neurosurg Focus 20(3):E5, 2006
31. Villavicencio AT, Burneikiene S, Bulsara KR, Thramann JJ: Perioperative complications in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus anterior-posterior reconstruction for lumbar disc degeneration and instability. J Spinal Disord Tech 19:92-97, 2006 (Pubitemid 44284152)