Comparative Study of the Clinical Outcomes of Unilateral Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion(TLIF) with Bilateral TLIF using Wiltse Approach and Conventional Approach

Ki-Tack KIM; 손은석; KYUNG-SOO Suk; LEE SANG HUN; 이정희; 박경준; 곽윤호; 홍세혁

Study Design: Comparative study. Objectives: To compare the outcomes of unilateral TLIF, bilateral TLIF using Wiltse approach and bilateral TLIF using conventional midline approach. Summary of Literature Review: There are many studies about outcomes of Unilateral TLIF, but few have compared the 3 different fusion procedures. Materials and Methods: 60 patients were divided into 3 groups. Each group has enrolled 20 patients (Study group: unilateral TLIF,Control group 1: bilateral TLIF using Wiltse approach, Control group 2: bilateral TLIF using conventional midline approach). For clinical outcomes, we compared operative time, blood loss, time for ambulation and discharge, VAS for back pain and leg pain and ODI among three groups. For radiologic evaluation, disc height and segmental lordosis were examined. Results: The mean operative time was 147 minutes in study group(SG), 172 minutes in control group 1(CG1), 167 minutes in control group 2(CG2). The mean total blood loss was 466ml in SG, 569ml in CG1, 1140ml in CG2 respectively. VAS for back pain at the third postoperative day significantly decreased in SG and CG1 compared with CG2. There was no significant difference in ODI, disc height and segmental lordosis among the groups. Conclusion: Using Wiltse approach, there were several advantages in decreasing blood loss, immediate postoperative back pain,hospital stay and early ambulation. Clinical and radiological results of unilateral TLIF were comparable with bilateral TLIF.

Citation status

KCI Citation Counts (0)
REFERENCES (14)
열림/닫힘 버튼
* 2021년 이후 발행 논문의 참고문헌은 현재 구축 중입니다.

[journal] Sihvonen T / 1993 / Local denervation atrophy of paraspinal muscles in postoperative failed back syndrome / Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 18 : 575~581

[journal] Foley KT / 2003 / Minimally invasive lumbar fusion / Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28(15 Suppl) : 26~35

[journal] Holly LT / 2006 / Minimally invasive transforaminal lumar inerbody fusion: indications, technique, and complications / Neurosurg Focus 20 : 6~

[journal] Shunwu F / 2010 / Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases / Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35 : 1615~1620

[journal] Harms JG / 1998 / In Process Citation / Oper Orthop Traumatol 10 : 90~102

[journal] 김기택 / 2003 / The Posterior Decompression and Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using a Mini-open Technique - New Suggestion of Minimally Invasive Technique - A Preliminary Report / 대한정형외과학회지 / 대한정형외과학회 38(7) : 492~497

[journal] Kim KT / 2006 / Clinical outcomes of 3 fusion methods through the posterior approach in the lumbar spine / Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31 : 1351~1357

[journal] Humphreys SC / 2001 / Comparison of posterior and transforaminal approaches to lumbar interbody fusion / Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26 : 567~571

[journal] Lowe TG / 2002 / Unilateral transforaminal posterior lumbar interbody fusion / Clin Orthop Relat Res 394 : 64~72

[journal] Isaacs RE / 2005 / Minimally invasive microendoscopy-assisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion wit instrumentation / J Neurosurg Spine 3 : 98~105

[journal] Jang JS / 2005 / Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with ipsilateral pedicle screw and contralateral facet screw fixation / J Neurosurg Spine 3 : 218~223

[journal] Mummaneni PV / 2005 / The mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion / Neurosurgery 57(4 Suppl) : 256~261

[journal] Ozgur BM / 2005 / Minimally-invasive technique for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) / Eur Spine J 14 : 887~894

[journal] Schwender JD / 2005 / Minimally invasive transforaminal limbar interbody fusion (TLIF): technical feasibility and initial results / J Spinal Disord Tech (18 Suppl) : 1~6

KJC Korea
Journal Central

Statistics

Tools

Sharing

Issue List

Citation status