Surgical Outcomes and adverse effects for Minimally Invasive versus Open Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Abstract

Abstract Background Minimal invasive techniques for lumbar interbody fusion is a novel surgical procedure developed to reduce approach-related morbidity associated with traditional open techniques. Objective To determine the clinical comparative effectiveness and adverse event rates of posterior minimally invasive surgery (MIS) compared to open transforaminal or posterior lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF/PLIF) for early and late outcomes by using the visual analogue scale for back pain (VAS–back) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Data Sources Medline databases (PubMed, Medscape, ScienceDirect. EMF-Portal) and all materials available in the Internet till 2018. Data Extraction If the studies did not fulfill the inclusion criteria, they were excluded. Study quality assessment included whether ethical approval was gained, eligibility criteria specified, appropriate controls, and adequate information and defined assessment measures. Conclusion MIS techniques for lumbar interbody fusion is a safe alternative for classic open procedures but due to the limited number of the included RCTs, more well-designed multicenter RCTs with larger sample sizes and long-term follow-up are still needed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of both techniques.