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
. 2024 Dec 30;19(1):891.
doi: 10.1186/s13018-024-05422-3.

Meta-analysis of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus oblique lumbar interbody fusion for treating lumbar degenerative diseases

Dun Liu  1 , Xinyu Huang  1 , Chongyang Zhang  2 , Qin Wang  3 , Hua Jiang  4
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Meta-analysis of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus oblique lumbar interbody fusion for treating lumbar degenerative diseases

Dun Liu et al. J Orthop Surg Res. .

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to perform a meta-analysis that integrates multiple literature sources to evaluate the clinical efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) for treating lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD).

Methods: A systematic search was conducted across various databases, including CNKI, VIP, WANFANG DATA, SinoMed, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science, for clinical comparative studies on OLIF and MIS-TLIF for treating LDD, covering the time frame from the inception of the databases to September 2024. Following PRISMA guidelines, studies were screened, assessed, and data were extracted rigorously. Indicators extracted included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), disc height (DH), segmental lordotic angle (SLA), lumbar lordosis angle (LLA), postoperative JOA scores, patient satisfaction, complication rates, and fusion rates. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4 software.

Results: A total of 24 studies were included, comprising 11 randomized controlled trials and 13 retrospective cohort studies. The total population consisted of 1785 patients, with 898 in the OLIF group and 887 in the MIS-TLIF group. The meta-analysis indicated that, compared to the MIS-TLIF group, the OLIF group exhibited significantly lower intraoperative blood loss, shorter hospital stays, improved postoperative DH, shorter operative time, reduced postoperative VAS scores, lower postoperative ODI scores, and improved postoperative SLA and LLA. No significant differences were observed between the groups in postoperative JOA scores, fusion rates, complication rates, or patient satisfaction. The OLIF group exhibited advantages such as lower blood loss, shorter hospital stays, higher postoperative fusion rates, and improved recovery of disc and foraminal heights.

Conclusion: Compared to MIS-TLIF, OLIF is associated with a shorter operative time and less intraoperative blood loss, potentially leading to better relief of leg pain, restoration of DH, and prevention of subsidence. These findings offer valuable insights for clinical practice.

Keywords: Lumbar degenerative disease; Meta-analysis; Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion; Oblique lumbar interbody fusion.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: This meta-analysis uses data from published studies; therefore, ethical approval and individual consent to participate were not required. All included studies were conducted in accordance with ethical standards. Consent for publication: Not applicable, as this meta-analysis does not include individual patient data. Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests related to this study.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study flow diagram
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Khechen B, Haws BF, Patel DV, Narain AS, Hijji FY, Guntin JA, Cardinal KL, et al. Comparison of postoperative outcomes between primary MIS TLIF and MIS TLIF with revision decompression. (1528-1159 (Electronic)). - PubMed
    1. Ge DH, Stekas NF, Varlotta CG, Fischer CR, Petrizzo A, Protopsaltis TS, Passias PG, et al. Comparative analysis of two transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion techniques: open TLIF versus Wiltse MIS TLIF (1528-1159 (Electronic)). - PubMed
    1. Reid P, Morr S, Kaiser MG. State of the union: a review of lumbar fusion indications and techniques for degenerative spine disease. (1547-5646 (Electronic)). - PubMed
    1. Foley KT, Lefkowitz MA. Advances in minimally invasive spine surgery. (0069-4827 (Print)). - PubMed
    1. Silvestre C, Mac-Thiong J, Hilmi R, Roussouly P. Complications and morbidities of mini-open anterior retroperitoneal lumbar interbody fusion: oblique lumbar interbody fusion in 179 patients. (1976-7846 (Electronic)). - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources