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
Meta-Analysis
. 2023 Sep;143(9):5657-5670.
doi: 10.1007/s00402-023-04880-4. Epub 2023 Apr 20.

Efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Xi-Yong Li #  1   2 , Yun-Lu Wang #  1   2 , Su Yang  2 , Chang-Sheng Liao  2 , Song-Feng Li  2 , Peng-Yong Han  3 , Peng-Fei Han  4
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Xi-Yong Li et al. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2023 Sep.

Abstract

Introduction: This meta-analysis aimed to compare the differences in postoperative efficacy between oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases.

Materials and methods: Strictly based on the search strategy, we searched the published papers on OLIF and TLIF for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library. A total of 607 related papers were retrieved, and 15 articles were finally included. The quality of the papers was evaluated according to the Cochrane systematic review methodology, and the data were extracted and meta-analyzed using Review manager 5.4 software.

Results: Through comparison, it was found that in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases, the OLIF group had certain advantages over the TLIF group in terms of intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, visual analog scale (VAS) for leg pain (VAS-LP), Oswestry disability index (ODI), disc height (DH), foraminal height (FH), fused segmental lordosis (FSL), and cage height, and the differences were statistically significant. The results were similar in terms of surgery time, complications, fusion rate, VAS for back pain (VAS-BP) and various sagittal imaging indicators, and there was no significant difference.

Conclusions: OLIF and TLIF can relieve low back pain symptoms in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases, but OLIF has certain advantages in terms of ODI and VAS-LP. In addition, OLIF has the advantages of minor intraoperative trauma and quick postoperative recovery.

Keywords: Lumbar degenerative diseases; Meta; OLIF; TLIF.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram of study identification and selection
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Forest plot for the surgery time
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Forest plot for the blood loss
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Forest plot for the hospital stay
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Forest plot for the VAS
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Forest plot for the ODI
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Forest plot for the DH
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Forest plot for the FH
Fig. 9
Fig. 9
Forest plot for the FSL
Fig. 10
Fig. 10
Forest plot for the Cage height
Fig. 11
Fig. 11
Forest plot for the Fusion rate
Fig. 12
Fig. 12
Forest plot for the complications
Fig. 13
Fig. 13
Forest plot for the imaging indicators
Fig. 14
Fig. 14
Overall risk of bias assessment of the studies included in the present meta‑analysis
Fig. 15
Fig. 15
Risk of bias assessment of the specific studies included in the present meta‑analysis
Fig. 16
Fig. 16
Funnel plots created to assess publication bias for a surgery time, b Blood loss, shoulder and hand score, c Hospital stay, d VAS e ODI, f DH, g FH, h FSL, i Cage Height, j Fusion rate, k Complications, l Imaging indicators
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Hoy D, Brooks P, Blyth F, Buchbinder R. The epidemiology of low back pain. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2010;24:769–781. doi: 10.1016/j.berh.2010.10.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Czabanka M, Thomé C, Ringel F, et al. Operative treatment of degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine. Nervenarzt. 2018;89:639–647. doi: 10.1007/s00115-018-0523-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Maher C, Underwood M, Buchbinder R. Non-specific low back pain. Lancet. 2017;389:736–747. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30970-9. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Weinstein JN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, et al. Surgical versus nonoperative treatment for lumbar disc herniation: four-year results for the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2008;33:2789–2800. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31818ed8f4. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chen B-L, Guo J-B, Zhang H-W, et al. Surgical versus non-operative treatment for lumbar disc herniation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Rehabil. 2018;32:146–160. doi: 10.1177/0269215517719952. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources