Comparison of surgical outcomes of degenerative spondylolisthesis with open or minimally invasive (MIS) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF)

Abstract

Introduction. One of the most commonly used surgical treatment methods for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) is transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). It can be performed either with an open classic posterior midline approach or the minimally invasive (MIS) method using Wiltse paraspinal intermuscular accesses.Aim. To prospectively compare clinical and radiological outcomes of DLS treatment with open (O) or (MIS) TLIF.Materials and methods. Forty six surgically treated patients who met the study criteria were divided into two groups according to the access method used: O group – 24 patients, MIS group – 22 patients. Clinical and radiological outcomes were evaluated before and after the surgery and after the follow-up period in both groups. The clinical peri and postoperative parameters and complications, back and leg pain with the VAS scale, and the outcomes in the ODI scale were evaluated. Radiological outcomes were measured with the standing X-ray images in the AP and lateral projections, as well as MRI/CT and functional X-rays. During statistical comparisons, both groups were adjusted in terms of pre-operative and postoperative data. Results. Preoperative demographic data in both groups did not differ significantly, except for the follow–up period, which was longer for the O group (mean 33.2 months), and 19.5 months for the MIS group. Both VAS and ODI clinical outcomes improved in both groups. Patients from the MIS group achieved significantly better clinical results immediately after the procedure and in the early outcomes. After the follow–up period, no significant differences were found. In the MIS group, only blood loss and the length of the postoperative stay were significantly lower than in the O group. The X-ray doses were significantly higher in the MIS group. Postoperative X-ray parameters improved in both groups with no significant differences, except for the slip correction, which was better in the O group. Conclusions. Both TLIF methods lead to significant clinical and radiological improvement in patients with DLS. In certain aspects, MIS has advantages over the “open” TLIF technique in the surgical treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Keywords

• minimally or open invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF)
• degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis