Original ArticleHow Does Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Influence Lumbar Radiologic Parameters?
Introduction
The surgical approach to spinal disorders that require lumbar arthrodesis has evolved significantly over the years and includes a variety of surgical techniques that range from posterolateral fusion to lumbar interbody fusion techniques.1
Lumbar interbody fusion has been reported to have higher fusion rates, improved deformity correction, and capability for indirect decompression and increasing of foraminal height.1, 2 It can be performed using 5 main approaches: posterior lumbar interbody fusion, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), anterior lumbar interbody fusion, oblique lumbar interbody fusion/anterior to psoas, and lateral lumbar interbody fusion.1
Posterior approaches, such as posterior lumbar interbody fusion and TLIF, are frequent options for the treatment of degenerative lumbar disorders, allowing for complete decompression of the spinal canal and nerve roots, restoration of intervertebral height, near-total discectomy, and restoration of segmental lordosis at the fused level. Additionally, the posterior approaches have minimal risk of damaging retroperitoneal structures as opposed to anterior lumbar interbody fusion.3, 4, 5
However, in the posterior lumbar interbody fusion procedure, significant retraction of the thecal sac and nerve roots is required to provide adequate access to the posterior disc space. Hence, the risk of damage to nerve roots or conus medullaris, dural tears, epidural fibrosis, and neuropathic pain usually limit the technique to the lower spine (L3-S1). The TLIF procedure was developed to overcome this limitation by providing a more lateral approach and unilateral exposure of the disc space that involves less neural retraction and decreases the risk of neurologic or dural injury. TLIF enables placement of the graft and the cage within the anterior or middle third of the disc space, aiming to restore lumbar lordosis (LL), and allows preservation of the contralateral lamina, facet, and pars interarticularis.1, 4
As in other open posterior procedures, the iatrogenic injury of soft tissues and paraspinal muscles is an important cause of postoperative low back pain and can adversely affect short- and long-term patient outcomes. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) was introduced to minimize the morbidity related to muscle trauma without compromising operative and clinical outcomes and is increasingly being used for lumbar arthrodesis. Reported benefits include less intraoperative blood loss, decreased pain and postoperative narcotics use, shortened hospital stay, and faster recovery.1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 However, there is a limited number of reports evaluating radiologic changes and their influence on outcomes after MIS-TLIF procedure. The restoration and maintenance of lumbar and segmental sagittal plane alignment are major concerns when performing intersomatic fusion. Factors related to the intersomatic cage influence the anterior and posterior disc space height and therefore the alignment and structural stability of the operated segment.13
There is indeed a claim of TLIF to restore segmental lordosis. However, this potentiality of the procedure is not well documented in the literature, in particular with the use of straight cages in minimally invasive (MI) surgery.
In this study, we reviewed our experience with this type of cage in single-level MIS-TLIF and report the differences observed after the surgery in the segmental parameters, either of the operated disc or the adjacent ones, and in LL. In addition, possible correlations of these variables with the clinical outcomes were investigated.
Section snippets
Study and Inclusion Criteria
This study retrospectively identified patients who underwent a single-level MIS-TLIF surgery in the Department of Neurosurgery of Centro Hospitalar S. João, Porto from March 2009 to September 2016. The surgery was performed by the same team of neurosurgeons affiliated with the institution and experienced in the procedure. The hospital's ethics committee approved the study protocol.
Patients over 18 years of age, who underwent single-level MIS-TLIF to treat a symptomatic lumbar degenerative
Sample Description and Surgical Data
One hundred and seventeen patients (73 women and 44 men) were included in this study. Eighty-three patients (85.6%) were nonsmokers, and the mean age at surgery was 56.8 ± 11.52 years old. Mean body mass index was 28.2 ± 4.87 kg/m2. Most patients (55.6%) were operated at the L4-5 level, and the most common indication for surgery was degenerative spondylolisthesis (50.4%). A 32- × 10-mm bullet-shaped cage was used in most of the cases (81%), 26- × 10-mm bullet-shaped cages were used in 12%, and
Discussion
MIS-TLIF has become a popular method of interbody fusion because of its similarity in terms of effectiveness to the conventional open TLIF, with the advantage of minimizing iatrogenic injury and the potential for reducing the risk of adjacent segment degeneration.7
Restoration of normal segmental and lumbar sagittal alignment are primary concerns when performing an interbody fusion. There is a paucity of studies relating MIS-TLIF with radiologic parameters. In our study, we focused on the
Conclusions
This study suggests that single-level MIS-TLIF significantly increases disc height but not the SA at the operated level. However, LL seems to get a slight but significant improvement, mostly resulting from an increase of the cranial SA. The clinical significance of these results remains unclear, and further studies are necessary to outline it.
References (44)
- et al.
Vascular complications of exposure for anterior lumbar interbody fusion
J Vasc Surg
(2010) - et al.
[Low back pain disability assessment tools]
Ann Readapt Med Phys
(2005) - et al.
Minimally invasive posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: one-year postoperative morbidity, clinical and radiological results of a prospective multicenter study of 182 cases
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res
(2015) - et al.
Effect of single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion on segmental and overall lumbar lordosis in patients with lumbar degenerative disease
World Neurosurg
(2018) - et al.
Lumbar interbody fusion: techniques, indications and comparison of interbody fusion options including PLIF, TLIF, MI-TLIF, OLIF/ATP, LLIF and ALIF
J Spine Surg
(2015) - et al.
Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a review of techniques and outcomes
Spine (Phila Pa 1976)
(2010) - et al.
Degenerative lumbar stenosis: the neurosurgical perspective
Clin Orthop Relat Res
(2001) - et al.
Comparison of low back fusion techniques: transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) or posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) approaches
Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med
(2009) - et al.
Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: indications, technique, and complications
Neurosurg Focus
(2006) - et al.
Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases
Spine (Phila Pa 1976)
(2010)
Learning curve and clinical outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
Spine (Phila Pa 1976)
Minimally-invasive technique for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF)
Eur Spine J
Surgical data and early postoperative outcomes after minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion: results of a prospective, multicenter, observational data-monitored study
PLoS One
MASTERS-D Study: a prospective, multicenter, pragmatic, observational, data-monitored trial of minimally invasive fusion to treat degenerative lumbar disorders, one-year follow-up
Cureus
Clinical and radiologic comparison of minimally invasive surgery with traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
Clin Spine Surg
Restoration of lordosis and disk height after single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
Orthop Surg
Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): technical feasibility and initial results
J Spinal Disord Tech
Measures of adult pain: Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), Short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and Measure of Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP)
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)
The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire
Physiotherapy
The subjective experience of acute pain. An assessment of the utility of 10 indices
Clin J Pain
Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with expandable versus static interbody devices: radiographic assessment of sagittal segmental and pelvic parameters
Neurosurg Focus
Anterior lumbar interbody fusion in comparison with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: implications for the restoration of foraminal height, local disc angle, lumbar lordosis, and sagittal balance
J Neurosurg Spine
Cited by (12)
Indirect Effects on Adjacent Segments After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
2022, World NeurosurgeryCitation Excerpt :In cases of asymptomatic stenosis adjacent to the index level for the planned operation, perioperative and postoperative changes that occur at the unperformed adjacent segment might affect the patient’s symptoms and recovery. Interbody fusion increases disc height and lordosis8; studies have also reported that adjacent segments and overall lumbar lordosis are affected.8-14 However, most of these studies focused on segmental and regional alignment changes, which increase the risk of adjacent segment degeneration during long-term follow-up.
Is Unilateral Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Sufficient in Patients with Claudication? A Comparative Matched Cohort Study
2021, World NeurosurgeryCitation Excerpt :A central spinal canal area of <75 mm2 is related to claudication symptoms.6 Patients with claudication caused by spinal stenosis who undergo MIS-TLIF can experience improvement from the resulting increase in the spinal canal area.7,8 The most important surgical techniques to relieve nerve root compression are decompressive laminectomy and facetectomy.
at 2 years following short-segment lumbar fusions?
2024, Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine
Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that the article content was composed in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.