Is stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion superior to instrumented lateral lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of single-level, low-grade, lumbar spondylolisthesis?
- PMID: 33581796
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2020.11.040
Is stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion superior to instrumented lateral lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of single-level, low-grade, lumbar spondylolisthesis?
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study was to compare surgical trauma and radiographic and clinical outcomes of stand-alone and instrumented lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) in the treatment of single-level low-grade lumbar spondylolisthesis.
Methods: Ninety-five patients with single-level low-grade lumbar spondylolisthesis, who underwent stand-alone LLIF (stand-alone group, [n = 54]) or LLIF plus percutaneous posterior fixation (instrumented group, [n = 41]) were enrolled in this study. Operative time, intraoperative blood loss, serum C-reactive protein (CRP) and creatine kinase (CK) levels, the length of postoperative bed rest time, and hospital stay were compared between the 2 groups. Disc height, the percent of slip, segment lordosis, lumbar lordosis, the visual analog scale score, the Oswestry Disability Index and complications were also compared.
Results: Operative and bed rest time were shorter, intraoperative blood loss was less, and postoperative CRP and CK levels were lower in the stand-alone group. During follow-up, 6 patients in stand-alone group underwent posterior fixation due to cage subsidence. Although satisfactory radiographic results were achieved in both groups, the maintenance of increased disc heights and segment lordosis was inferior in the stand-alone group at the final follow-up. Greater improvement in postoperative VAS scores and ODI were observed in the stand-alone group, although the rates of cage subsidence and revision were higher.
Conclusion: Stand-alone LLIF was superior to instrumented LLIF in terms of tissue trauma for the treatment of single-level low-grade lumbar spondylolisthesis. However, stand-alone LLIF was inferior in the maintenance of disc height and segment lordosis, and the occurrence of cage subsidence and revision.
Keywords: Instrumentation; Lateral lumbar interbody fusion; Lumbar spondylolisthesis; Minimally invasive; Stand-alone.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration following previous lumbar fusion.Spine J. 2018 Nov;18(11):2025-2032. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2018.04.008. Epub 2018 Apr 18. Spine J. 2018. PMID: 29679730
-
Comparison of instrumented and stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024 Feb 3;25(1):108. doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-07214-6. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024. PMID: 38310205 Free PMC article.
-
Minimally invasive anterior and lateral transpsoas approaches for closed reduction of grade II spondylolisthesis: initial clinical and radiographic experience.Neurosurg Focus. 2018 Jan;44(1):E4. doi: 10.3171/2017.10.FOCUS17574. Neurosurg Focus. 2018. PMID: 29290134
-
Radiographic and clinical evaluation of cage subsidence after stand-alone lateral interbody fusion.J Neurosurg Spine. 2013 Jul;19(1):110-8. doi: 10.3171/2013.4.SPINE12319. Epub 2013 May 10. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013. PMID: 23662890 Clinical Trial.
-
Is instrumented lateral lumbar interbody fusion superior to stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease? A meta-analysis.J Clin Neurosci. 2021 Oct;92:136-146. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2021.08.002. Epub 2021 Aug 14. J Clin Neurosci. 2021. PMID: 34509241 Review.
Cited by
-
Fusion assessment in standalone lateral lumbar interbody fusion: 3D-printed titanium versus polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages.J Spine Surg. 2022 Sep;8(3):323-332. doi: 10.21037/jss-22-17. J Spine Surg. 2022. PMID: 36285103 Free PMC article.
-
Efficacy and safety of lateral lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative diseases with or without auxiliary posterior fixation: a meta-analysis and systematic review.BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2025 Feb 13;26(1):147. doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-08094-6. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2025. PMID: 39948572 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of the Outcomes of Endoscopic Posterolateral Interbody Fusion and Lateral Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Orthop Surg. 2025 May;17(5):1287-1297. doi: 10.1111/os.14371. Epub 2025 Feb 3. Orthop Surg. 2025. PMID: 39895414 Free PMC article.
-
Defining cage subsidence in anterior, oblique, and lateral lumbar spine fusion approaches: a systematic review of the literature.Neurosurg Rev. 2024 Jul 16;47(1):332. doi: 10.1007/s10143-024-02551-5. Neurosurg Rev. 2024. PMID: 39009745
-
Comparing clinical and radiological outcomes between single-level OLIF and XLIF: A systematic review and meta-analysis.N Am Spine Soc J. 2023 Apr 3;14:100216. doi: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2023.100216. eCollection 2023 Jun. N Am Spine Soc J. 2023. PMID: 37234475 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous