Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2021 Jan 22;100(3):e23783.
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000023783.

Comparison of clinical outcomes and spino-pelvic sagittal balance in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: Minimally invasive oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF)

Renjie Li  1 , Xiaofeng Shao, Xuefeng Li, Yijie Liu, Weimin Jiang
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of clinical outcomes and spino-pelvic sagittal balance in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: Minimally invasive oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF)

Renjie Li et al. Medicine (Baltimore). .

Abstract

Spino-pelvic sagittal parameters are closely related to the lumbar degenerative diseases. The present study aims to compare clinical results and spino-pelvic sagittal balance treated with oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis at single segment.We retrospectively reviewed and compared 28 patients who underwent OLIF (OLIF group) and 35 who underwent TLIF (TLIF group). Radiological results were evaluated with disc height (DH), foraminal height (FH), fused segment lordosis (FSL), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI), and sacral slope (SS). Clinical results were evaluated with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and VAS for back and leg pain.The OLIF group showed higher improvement of DH and FH than the TLIF group at all time points after surgery (P < .05). No significant differences were found in PT, PI, and SS between the 2 groups (P > .05). Significant restoration of spino-pelvic sagittal balance was observed in the 2 groups after surgery. Significant differences in postoperative lumbar lordosis and fused segment lordosis were found between the 2 groups (P < .05). Significant difference in the improvement of symptoms was observed between the 2 groups. The OLIF group had lower VAS scores for back pain and ODI compared after surgery (P < .05).It can be concluded that there are exactly differences in improvement of radiographic parameters between 2 approaches, which confirmed that OLIF is better in restoring spinal alignment. Besides, due to the unique minimally invasive approach, OLIF did exhibit a greater advantage in early recovery after surgery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no funding and conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Measurements of radiological parameters. FSL = fused segment lordosis, LL = lumbar lordosis, PI = pelvic incidence, PT = pelvic tilt, SS = sacral slope.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Comparison of spino-pelvic sagittal balance in 2 surgical approaches were shown in the following pictures.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The lateral X-ray radiograph and sagittal-computed tomographic scan (a and b) showed the patient suffered from degenerative spondylolisthesis at the L4 level. The sagittal T2-weighted magnetic resonance image (c) showed the segment of herniation (L4–5) compressed the spinal cord, and the disc signal was changed. The lateral X-ray postoperatively showed oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) at the target level and the screws were inserted anterolaterally.
Figure 4
Figure 4
The lateral X-ray radiograph and sagittal-computed tomographic scan (a and b) showed that the patient suffered from degenerative spondylolisthesis at the L4 level. The sagittal T2-weighted magnetic resonance image (c) showed the segment of herniation (L4–5) compressed the spinal cord, and the disc signal was changed. The lateral X-ray postoperatively showed transforminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) at the target level.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Audat Z, Moutasem O, Yousef K. Comparison of clinical and radiological results of posterolateral fusion, posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion techniques in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine. Singapore Med J 2012;53:183–7. - PubMed
    1. Chen YL, Zhu ZH, Wang YK, et al. Effects of oblique lateral interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for lordosis correction in degenerative lumbar diseases. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi 2018;98:1990–5. DOI 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0376-2491.2018.25.005. - PubMed
    1. Choi UY, Park JY, Kim KH, et al. Unilateral versus bilateral percutaneous pedicle screw fixation in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurg Focus 2013;35:E11.DOI 10.3171/2013.2.FOCUS12398. - PubMed
    1. Cloward RB. The treatment of ruptured lumbar intervertebral discs by vertebral body fusion. I. Indications, operative technique, after care. J Neurosurg 1953;10:154–68. DOI 10.3171/jns.1953.10.2.0154. - PubMed
    1. Fujibayashi S, Hynes RA, Otsuki B, et al. Effect of indirect neural decompression through oblique lateral interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar disease. Spine 2015;40:E175–82. DOI 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000703. - PubMed

Publication types