Top

Published in:

13-02-2024 | Original Article

Comparison of the clinical outcomes of VBE-TLIF versus MIS-TLIF for single-level degenerative lumbar diseases

Authors: Xinbo Wu, Wei Liu, Xiao Xiao, Yunshan Fan, Guangfei Gu, Shunzhi Yu, Huang Yan, Xiang Wang, Xifan Li, Yingchuan Zhao, Haijian Ni, Shisheng He

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 3/2024

Abstract

Objective

This research aims to compare the clinical outcomes of VBE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF for the treatment of patients with single-level degenerative lumbar diseases.

Methods

Ninety patients were enrolled in this study. The estimated blood loss, operation time, postoperative hospitalization days, time to functional exercise, amount of surgical drain and inflammatory index were recorded. The visual analog scale, Oswestry dysfunction index and modified MacNab criteria were used to assessed the patient’s back and leg pain, functional status and clinical satisfaction rates.

Results

The average operation time of the VBE-TLIF group was longer than that of the MIS-TLIF group. The time for functional exercise, length of hospital stay, estimated blood loss and amount of surgical drain in the VBE-TLIF group were relative shorter than those in the MIS-TLIF group. Additionally, the levels of CRP, neutrophil, IL-6 and CPK in the VBE-TLIF group were significantly lower than those in the MIS-TLIF group at postoperative days 1 and 3, respectively (P < 0.001). Patients undergoing VBE-TLIF had significantly lower back VAS scores than those in the MIS-TLIF group on postoperative days 1 and 3 (P < 0.001). No significant differences were found in the clinical satisfaction rates (95.83 vs. 95.24%, P = 0.458) or interbody fusion rate (97.92 vs. 95.24%, P = 0.730) between these two surgical procedures.

Conclusions

Both VBE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF are safe and effective surgical procedures for patients with lumbar diseases, but VBE-TLIF technique is a preferred surgical procedure with merits of reduced surgical trauma and quicker recovery.

Meng B, Bunch J, Burton D, Wang J (2021) Lumbar interbody fusion: recent advances in surgical techniques and bone healing strategies. Eur Spine J 30:22–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-020-06596-0CrossRefPubMed

Allain J, Dufour T (2020) Anterior lumbar fusion techniques: ALIF, OLIF, DLIF, LLIF, IXLIF. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 106:S149-s157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2019.05.024CrossRefPubMed

Fenton-White HA (2021) Trailblazing: the historical development of the posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Spine J 21:1528–1541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2021.03.016CrossRefPubMed

Li R, Li X, Zhou H, Jiang W (2020) Development and application of oblique lumbar interbody fusion. Orthop Surg 12:355–365. https://doi.org/10.1111/os.12625CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Schnake KJ, Rappert D, Storzer B, Schreyer S, Hilber F, Mehren C (2019) Lumbar fusion-indications and techniques. Orthopade 48:50–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00132-018-03670-wCrossRefPubMed

de Kunder SL, van Kuijk SMJ, Rijkers K, Caelers I, van Hemert WLW, de Bie RA, van Santbrink H (2017) Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine J 17:1712–1721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2017.06.018CrossRefPubMed

Heemskerk JL, Oluwadara Akinduro O, Clifton W, Quiñones-Hinojosa A, Abode-Iyamah KO (2021) Long-term clinical outcome of minimally invasive versus open single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar diseases: a meta-analysis. Spine J 21:2049–2065. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2021.07.006CrossRefPubMed

Badlani N, Yu E, Kreitz T, Khan S, Kurd MF (2020) Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Clin Spine Surg 33:62–64. https://doi.org/10.1097/bsd.0000000000000902CrossRefPubMed

Kim CH, Easley K, Lee JS, Hong JY, Virk M, Hsieh PC, Yoon ST (2020) Comparison of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal interbody lumbar fusion. Global Spine J 10:143s–150s. https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568219882344CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Phani Kiran S, Sudhir G (2021) Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion—a narrative review on the present status. J Clin Orthop Trauma 22:101592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcot.2021.101592CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Ahn Y, Youn MS, Heo DH (2019) Endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a comprehensive review. Expert Rev Med Devices 16:373–380. https://doi.org/10.1080/17434440.2019.1610388CrossRefPubMed

12.

Ao S, Zheng W, Wu J, Tang Y, Zhang C, Zhou Y, Li C (2020) Comparison of preliminary clinical outcomes between percutaneous endoscopic and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative diseases in a tertiary hospital: is percutaneous endoscopic procedure superior to MIS-TLIF? A prospective cohort study. Int J Surg 76:136–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.02.043CrossRefPubMed

13.

Chen G, Li LB, Shangguan Z, Wang Z, Liu W, Li J (2022) Clinical effect of minimally invasive microendoscopic-assisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for single-level lumbar disc herniation. Orthop Surg 14:3300–3312. https://doi.org/10.1111/os.13443CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Kang MS, Heo DH, Kim HB, Chung HT (2021) Biportal endoscopic technique for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: review of current research. Int J Spine Surg 15:S84–S92. https://doi.org/10.14444/8167CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Yang H, Cheng F, Hai Y, Liu Y, Pan A (2022) Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion enhanced the recovery of patients with the lumbar degenerative disease compared with the conventional posterior procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Neurol 13:1089981. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.1089981CrossRefPubMed

16.

Gong H, Fan Y, Zhao Y, Chen F, Chen J, Yan H, Gu G, Wang C, Ni H, He S (2023) Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion by a novel two-medium compatible bichannel endoscopy system, technique note and preliminary clinical results. Eur Spine J 32:2845–2852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-023-07746-wCrossRefPubMed

17.

Zhao Y, Zhu Y, Zhang H, Wang C, He S, Gu G (2018) Comparison of bilateral versus unilateral decompression incision of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in two-level degenerative lumbar diseases. Int Orthop 42:2835–2842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-018-3974-zCrossRefPubMed

18.

Heo DH, Park CK (2019) Clinical results of percutaneous biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion with application of enhanced recovery after surgery. Neurosurg Focus 46:E18. https://doi.org/10.3171/2019.1.Focus18695CrossRefPubMed

19.

Wang JC, Cao Z, Li ZZ, Zhao HL, Hou SX (2022) Full-endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with a tubular retractor system: a retrospective controlled study. World Neurosurg 165:e457–e468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2022.06.083CrossRefPubMed

20.

Tong Y, Fernandez L, Bendo JA, Spivak JM (2020) Enhanced recovery after surgery trends in adult spine surgery: a systematic review. Int J Spine Surg 14:623–640. https://doi.org/10.14444/7083CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Debono B, Wainwright TW, Wang MY, Sigmundsson FG, Yang MMH, Smid-Nanninga H, Bonnal A, Le Huec JC, Fawcett WJ, Ljungqvist O, Lonjon G, de Boer HD (2021) Consensus statement for perioperative care in lumbar spinal fusion: enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS®) society recommendations. Spine J 21:729–752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2021.01.001CrossRefPubMed

22.

Arts MP, Nieborg A, Brand R, Peul WC (2007) Serum creatine phosphokinase as an indicator of muscle injury after various spinal and nonspinal surgical procedures. J Neurosurg Spine 7:282–286. https://doi.org/10.3171/spi-07/09/282CrossRefPubMed

23.

Portella ST, Escudeiro GP, Mansilla R, Freitas BS, de Resende MAC, Fernandes FC, Salomão R, Lima CR, Landeiro JA, Acioly MA (2019) Predictive factors for muscle injury after posterior lumbar spinal surgery. World Neurosurg 129:e514–e521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2019.05.197CrossRefPubMed

24.

Huang X, Wang W, Chen G, Guan X, Zhou Y, Tang Y (2023) Comparison of surgical invasiveness, hidden blood loss, and clinical outcome between unilateral biportal endoscopic and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disease: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 24:274. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-06374-1CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Folman Y, Lee SH, Silvera JR, Gepstein R (2003) Posterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative disc disease using a minimally invasive B-twin expandable spinal spacer: a multicenter study. J Spinal Disord Tech 16:455–460. https://doi.org/10.1097/00024720-200310000-00004CrossRefPubMed

26.

Wang TY, Mehta VA, Gabr M, Sankey EW, Bwensa A, Rory Goodwin C, Karikari IO, Chi JH, Abd-El-Barr MM (2021) Percutaneous lumbar interbody fusion with an expandable titanium cage through kambin’s triangle: a case series with initial clinical and radiographic results. Int J Spine Surg 15:1133–1141. https://doi.org/10.14444/8144CrossRefPubMed

Title: Comparison of the clinical outcomes of VBE-TLIF versus MIS-TLIF for single-level degenerative lumbar diseases
Authors: Xinbo Wu
Wei Liu
Xiao Xiao
Yunshan Fan
Guangfei Gu
Shunzhi Yu
Huang Yan
Xiang Wang
Xifan Li
Yingchuan Zhao
Haijian Ni
Shisheng He
Publication date: 13-02-2024
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: European Spine Journal / Issue 3/2024
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-023-08096-3

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Comparison of the clinical outcomes of VBE-TLIF versus MIS-TLIF for single-level degenerative lumbar diseases

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2024

Patient-reported outcomes 1 and 2 years after transforaminal thoracic interbody fusion (TTIF)

Diagnostic value of cervical spine ZOOM-DWI in cervical spondylotic myelopathy

A comparison of the effects of thoracolumbar interfascial plane (TLIP) block and erector spinae plane (ESP) block in postoperative acute pain in spinal surgery

Accuracy of augmented reality-assisted pedicle screw placement: a systematic review

Heterotopic ossification, osteolysis and implant failure following cervical total disc replacement with the M6-C™ artificial disc