Arabic
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Clinical Spine Surgery 2018-Nov

Posterolateral Versus Transforaminal Interbody L4/5 Fusion: Correlation With Subsequent Surgery.

يمكن للمستخدمين المسجلين فقط ترجمة المقالات
الدخول التسجيل فى الموقع
يتم حفظ الارتباط في الحافظة
Christian J Gaffney
Manuel R Pinto
Abdul F Buyuk
Timothy A Garvey
Benjamin Mueller
James D Schwender
Ensor E Transfeldt
Harrison K Tam
John M Dawson

الكلمات الدالة

نبذة مختصرة

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To compare posterolateral versus transforaminal interbody fusion (PLF vs. PLF+TLIF) of the L4/5 segment regarding rates of subsequent surgery, clinical and radiographic parameters, and patient satisfaction.

BACKGROUND

Surgical treatment of lumbar stenosis, decompression with or without fusion, is an efficacious treatment in select patients. Reoperation is thought to be a problem after lumbar fusion. Despite multiple studies, the fusion method that minimizes the need for subsequent surgery has yet to be determined.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 89 patients who had an isolated L4/5 decompression and fusion, from January 2006 to 2012. All patients had stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis at the L4/5 level. All surgeries were performed at a single center, using either PLF (31 patients) or PLF+TLIF (58 patients) techniques. Preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcome measures (Oswestry disability index, visual analog scale back pain, visual analog scale leg pain) and radiographic parameters (L4/5 lordosis and overall lumbar lordosis) were measured. Patient satisfaction was acquired via a questionnaire. Chart reviews and patient questionnaires were used to determine the incidence of subsequent lumbar surgery over a minimum follow-up of 5 years.

RESULTS

At an average of 8.7 years follow-up, 2 of 31 patients in the PLF group had subsequent lumbar surgery, compared with 16 of 58 patients in the PLF+TLIF group (6% vs. 28%; P=0.02). There were no significant differences between groups with respect to sex, age, body mass index, tobacco, perioperative measures, patient-reported outcomes, or radiographic parameters (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both PLF and PLF+TLIF are effective fusion methods for L4/5 stenosis and spondylolisthesis. In this study, patients treated with PLF were less likely to undergo a subsequent lumbar surgery. More research is needed to determine which factors influence whether PLF or PLF+TLIF should be used in these patients.

METHODS

Level III.

انضم إلى صفحتنا على الفيسبوك

قاعدة بيانات الأعشاب الطبية الأكثر اكتمالا التي يدعمها العلم

  • يعمل في 55 لغة
  • العلاجات العشبية مدعومة بالعلم
  • التعرف على الأعشاب بالصورة
  • خريطة GPS تفاعلية - ضع علامة على الأعشاب في الموقع (قريبًا)
  • اقرأ المنشورات العلمية المتعلقة ببحثك
  • البحث عن الأعشاب الطبية من آثارها
  • نظّم اهتماماتك وابقَ على اطلاع دائم بأبحاث الأخبار والتجارب السريرية وبراءات الاختراع

اكتب أحد الأعراض أو المرض واقرأ عن الأعشاب التي قد تساعد ، واكتب عشبًا واطلع على الأمراض والأعراض التي تستخدم ضدها.
* تستند جميع المعلومات إلى البحوث العلمية المنشورة

Google Play badgeApp Store badge