Limits...
Minimally Invasive Unilateral vs. Bilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation and Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Treatment of Multi-Segment Lumbar Degenerative Disorders.

Liu X, Li G, Wang J, Zhang H - Med. Sci. Monit. (2015)

Bottom Line: RESULTS Both groups showed similar clinical function scores in VAS and ODI.CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated similar clinical outcomes between UPS fixation and BPS procedure after MIS-TLIF for multi-level DLD.Moreover, UPS technique was superior in operative time and blood loss, but represented lower fusion rate than the BPS construct did.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Spine Surgery, Yuhuangding Hospital, Yantai, Shandong, China (mainland).

ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND The choice for instrumentation with minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in treatment of degenerative lumbar disorders (DLD) remains controversial. The goal of this study was to investigate clinical outcomes in consecutive patients with multi-segment DLD treated with unilateral pedicle screw (UPS) vs. bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) instrumented TLIF. MATERIAL AND METHODS Eighty-four consecutive patients who had multi-level MIS-TLIF were retrospectively reviewed. All data were collected to compare the clinical outcomes between the 2 groups. RESULTS Both groups showed similar clinical function scores in VAS and ODI. The two groups differed significantly in operative time (P<0.001), blood loss (P<0.001), and fusion rate (P=0.043), respectively. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated similar clinical outcomes between UPS fixation and BPS procedure after MIS-TLIF for multi-level DLD. Moreover, UPS technique was superior in operative time and blood loss, but represented lower fusion rate than the BPS construct did.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

X-ray films showed MIS-TLIF with pedicle screw fixation. (A) MIS TLIF with BPS fixation. (B) MIS TLIF with UPS fixation.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4664222&req=5

f1-medscimonit-21-3652: X-ray films showed MIS-TLIF with pedicle screw fixation. (A) MIS TLIF with BPS fixation. (B) MIS TLIF with UPS fixation.

Mentions: The patients were placed in the prone position under general anesthesia. A C-arm image intensifier was used to determine the location of the interbody level. We used the local autograft and Capstone cages (Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis, Tennessee) and pedicle screws (Legacy; Medtronic Sofamor Danek) in the surgery. UPS fixation placed at the time of MIS-TLIF applied in this study was previously described by Lee et al. [21], and BPS was introduced as by Choi et al. [22]. All operations were performed by the same surgeon (Figure 1).


Minimally Invasive Unilateral vs. Bilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation and Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Treatment of Multi-Segment Lumbar Degenerative Disorders.

Liu X, Li G, Wang J, Zhang H - Med. Sci. Monit. (2015)

X-ray films showed MIS-TLIF with pedicle screw fixation. (A) MIS TLIF with BPS fixation. (B) MIS TLIF with UPS fixation.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4664222&req=5

f1-medscimonit-21-3652: X-ray films showed MIS-TLIF with pedicle screw fixation. (A) MIS TLIF with BPS fixation. (B) MIS TLIF with UPS fixation.
Mentions: The patients were placed in the prone position under general anesthesia. A C-arm image intensifier was used to determine the location of the interbody level. We used the local autograft and Capstone cages (Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis, Tennessee) and pedicle screws (Legacy; Medtronic Sofamor Danek) in the surgery. UPS fixation placed at the time of MIS-TLIF applied in this study was previously described by Lee et al. [21], and BPS was introduced as by Choi et al. [22]. All operations were performed by the same surgeon (Figure 1).

Bottom Line: RESULTS Both groups showed similar clinical function scores in VAS and ODI.CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated similar clinical outcomes between UPS fixation and BPS procedure after MIS-TLIF for multi-level DLD.Moreover, UPS technique was superior in operative time and blood loss, but represented lower fusion rate than the BPS construct did.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Spine Surgery, Yuhuangding Hospital, Yantai, Shandong, China (mainland).

ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND The choice for instrumentation with minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in treatment of degenerative lumbar disorders (DLD) remains controversial. The goal of this study was to investigate clinical outcomes in consecutive patients with multi-segment DLD treated with unilateral pedicle screw (UPS) vs. bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) instrumented TLIF. MATERIAL AND METHODS Eighty-four consecutive patients who had multi-level MIS-TLIF were retrospectively reviewed. All data were collected to compare the clinical outcomes between the 2 groups. RESULTS Both groups showed similar clinical function scores in VAS and ODI. The two groups differed significantly in operative time (P<0.001), blood loss (P<0.001), and fusion rate (P=0.043), respectively. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated similar clinical outcomes between UPS fixation and BPS procedure after MIS-TLIF for multi-level DLD. Moreover, UPS technique was superior in operative time and blood loss, but represented lower fusion rate than the BPS construct did.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus