Dataset Information

Comparison of minimally invasive and open TLIF outcomes with more than seven years of follow-up.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Few studies directly comparing minimally invasive (MI) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and open TLIF offering long-term follow-up data have been performed to date. Therefore, we sought to compare mid- to long-term outcomes between these two surgical approaches.

Methods

This was a retrospective data analysis of two surgical groups. We analyzed the details of 97 patients with degenerative lumbar disease who were treated with MI TLIF (n = 55) or open TLIF (n = 42) between 2011-2014 and had at least seven years of follow-up data available. Peri- and postoperative outcomes were compared. To evaluate rates of adjacent segment disease (ASD) and revisions, frequencies of radiologic, symptomatic, and operative ASD were analyzed accordingly.

Results

In terms of clinical outcome, the Oswestry Disability Index and visual analog scale scores were significantly reduced, with no difference between the groups. However, data for several peri- and postoperative outcomes, including perioperative blood loss, ambulation day, hospital stay, and operation time, varied in a manner favoring the MI TLIF group (P < 0.05). Rates of radiologic ASD and symptomatic ASD were significantly higher in the open TLIF group beginning at five years of follow-up (P < 0.05), while the rate of operative ASD and the revision rate were similar between the groups. Other long-term outcomes, including fusion rate and complications, remained similar between the two groups at 7 years.

Conclusion

Patients undergoing MI TLIF showed favorable immediate postoperative outcomes and less radiographic ASD. However, the rates of fusion and operative ASD remained similar between the two groups after 7 years of follow-up.

SUBMITTER: Hong JY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9243253 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Hallux valgus deformity affects more than 35% of people aged ≥65 years. Surgical correction in this population can be more complicated because of poor bone quality, worse deformity, and postoperative recovery challenges. The purpose of this study was to compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes of patients aged ≥65 years who underwent either open Lapidus or minimally invasive chevron Akin osteotomy for bunion correction. A retrospective review identified 62 patients aged ≥65 years who were treated surgically for hallux valgus with at least 1-year postoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores (physical function and pain interference). Preoperative and at least 6-month postoperative radiographs were measured for the hallux valgus angle and intermetatarsal angle. PROMIS scores were obtained preoperatively and at 1 and/or 2 years postoperatively. Differences in demographic, clinical, and radiographic outcomes were assessed using the Mann Whitney U test and P values were adjusted for a false discovery rate of 5%. There was no difference between the MIS and open cohorts in pre- or postoperative radiographic measurements or clinical outcomes at any time point. At 1 year postoperatively, both groups had statistically significant improvements in the PROMIS pain interference domain but only the MIS group had a statistically significant improvement in the PROMIS physical function domain. Clinical significance was equivocal. At 2 years postoperatively, there were clinically and statistically significant improvements in the PROMIS pain interference and physical function domains for the open and MIS groups. Patients in both surgical groups had improvement in radiographic measurements and 2-year PROMIS scores, although there was no clinical or statistical difference found between groups. MIS and open surgical techniques appear to be safe and effective in correcting hallux valgus in older patients; however, patients may need to be counseled that maximum improvement after surgery may take more than 1 year. Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Project description:Background and Objective: Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MIS-TLIF) has been investigated and shown excellent short- and long-term outcomes. In this paper, we describe a new MIS-TLIF technique and pedicle screw insertion using a marker screw as a guidance method. Moreover, we report perioperative, postoperative, and patient-related outcomes. In addition, this paper outlines major differences in radiation exposure, cost effectiveness and accuracy of Marker Screw Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion (MS-MIS TLIF) compared to other techniques. We report our technique to share our knowledge and experience with the aim of achieving a better MIS-TLIF that would help both surgeons and patients. Materials and Methods: A prospective case series was conducted between October 2018 and February 2021. Patients undergoing MS-MIS TLIF with marker screws were consecutively included. The surgery did not exceed two levels. The patients' medical records were reviewed, and the included patients were asked to complete two outcome-questionnaires before surgery and at the six-month visit. The surgical technique is described in this paper. Results: A total of 37 patients were recruited. The mean age was 57.35 ± 12.8 years, and more than half of the patients were females. The most common indications for surgery were degenerative disc disease and spondylolisthesis, with the typical level at L4-5. The operative time was 3.02 ± 0.83 h, while the estimated blood loss was 127.7 ± 71.1 mL. The average time for ambulation and hospitalization was 1 ± 1.1 and 2.84 ± 1.4 days, respectively. The patients described significant improvement in both questionnaires. No screw-related complications or screw revisions were needed up to two years of follow-up. Conclusions: The use of marker screws for pedicle screw placement through a minimally invasive fashion is shown to be a promising technique that can overcome many drawbacks, including cost, operative time, and radiation exposure. Performing MS-MIS TLIF can achieve a 360- degree fusion compared to percutaneous MIS-TLIF.

Project description:AimTo investigate the role of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer and determine surgical, clinical, and oncological outcomes.MethodsThis is a propensity score-matched case-control study, comparing three treatment arms: robotic gastrectomy (RG), laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG), open gastrectomy (OG). Data collection started after sharing a specific study protocol. Data were recorded through a tailored and protected web-based system. Primary outcomes: harvested lymph nodes, estimated blood loss, hospital stay, complications rate. Among the secondary outcomes, there are: operative time, R0 resections, POD of mobilization, POD of starting liquid diet and soft solid diet. The analysis includes the evaluation of type and grade of postoperative complications. Detailed information of anastomotic leakages is also provided.ResultsThe present analysis was carried out of 1026 gastrectomies. To guarantee homogenous distribution of cases, patients in the RG, LG and OG groups were 1:1:2 matched using a propensity score analysis with a caliper = 0.2. The successful matching resulted in a total sample of 604 patients (RG = 151; LG = 151; OG = 302). The three groups showed no differences in all baseline patients characteristics, type of surgery (P = 0.42) and stage of the disease (P = 0.16). Intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the LG (95.93 ± 119.22) and RG (117.91 ± 68.11) groups compared to the OG (127.26 ± 79.50, P = 0.002). The mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was similar between the RG (27.78 ± 11.45), LG (24.58 ± 13.56) and OG (25.82 ± 12.07) approach. A benefit in favor of the minimally invasive approaches was found in the length of hospital stay (P < 0.0001). A similar complications rate was found (P = 0.13). The leakage rate was not different (P = 0.78) between groups.ConclusionLaparoscopic and robotic surgery can be safely performed and proposed as possible alternative to open surgery. The main highlighted benefit is a faster postoperative functional recovery.