Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Research Articles

Comparison of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and midline lumbar interbody fusion in patients with spondylolisthesis

BackgroundThis study aimed to compare surgical outcomes, clinical outcomes, and complications between minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) and midline lumbar interbody fusion (MIDLIF) in patients with spondylolisthesis.MethodsThis study retrospectively compared the patients who underwent MIS TLIF (n = 37) or MIDLIF (n = 50) for spinal spondylolisthesis. Data of surgical outcomes (postoperative one-year fusion rate and time to bony fusion), clinical outcomes (visual analog scale [VAS] for pain and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] for spine function), and complications were collected and analyzed.ResultsThere was more 2-level fusion in MIDLIF (46% vs. 24.3%, p = 0.038). The MIS TLIF and MIDLIF groups had similar one-year fusion rate and time to fusion. The MIDLIF group had significantly lower VAS at postoperative 3-months (2.2 vs. 3.1, p = 0.002) and postoperative 1-year (1.1 vs. 2.1, p = < 0.001). ODI was not significantly different. The operation time was shorter in MIDLIF (166.1 min vs. 196.2 min, p = 0.014). The facet joint violation is higher in MIS TLIF (21.6% vs. 2%, p = 0.009). The other complications were not significantly different including rate of implant removal, revision, and adjacent segment disease.ConclusionIn this study, postoperative VAS, operation time, and the rate of facet joint violation were significantly higher in the MIS TLIF group. Comparable outcomes were observed between MIDLIF and MIS TLIF in terms of fusion rate, time to fusion, and postoperative ODI score.

Temporal Trends of Improvement After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. To analyze temporal trends in improvement after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF). Although several studies have shown that patients improve significantly after MIS TLIF, evidence regarding the temporal trends in improvement is still largely lacking. Patients who underwent primary single-level MIS TLIF for degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine and had a minimum of 2-year follow-up were included. Outcome measures were: 1) patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) (Oswestry Disability Index, ODI; Visual Analog Scale, VAS back and leg; 12-Item Short Form Survey Physical Component Score, SF-12 PCS); 2) global rating change (GRC); 3) minimal clinically important difference (MCID); and 4) return to activities. Timepoints analyzed were preoperative, 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years. Trends across these timepoints were plotted on graphs. 236 patients were included. VAS back and VAS leg were found to have statistically significant improvement compared to the previous timepoint up to 3 months after surgery. ODI and SF-12 PCS were found to have statistically significant improvement compared to the previous timepoint up to 6 months after surgery. Beyond these timepoints, there was no significant improvement in PROMs. 80% of patients reported feeling better compared to preoperative by 3 months. >50% of patients achieved MCID in all PROMs by 3 months. Most patients returned to driving, returned to work, and discontinued narcotics at an average of 21, 20, and 10 days, respectively. Patients are expected to improve up to 6 months after MIS TLIF. Back pain and leg pain improve up to 3 months and disability and physical function improve up to 6 months. Beyond these timepoints, the trends in improvement tend to reach a plateau. 80% of patients feel better compared to preoperative by 3 months after surgery.

Surgeon Perceptions of Performing Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in an Ambulatory Surgical Center vs Hospital Setting in the Elderly Population: Results of a Surgeon Survey.

There is an increasing acceptance of conducting minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs). The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) introduced the Hospitals Without Walls (HWW) program in March 2020. This program granted hospitals regulatory flexibility to offer services and procedures in nontraditional locations, including ASCs. However, implementation hurdles persist. A survey was sent to 235 surgeons regarding the use of ASCs for performing TLIF surgeries on elderly patients. Multiple-choice questions covering various aspects of TLIF practice preferences, including surgical indications, decision factors for choosing ASCs over hospitals, implementation hurdles, reimbursement concerns, staffing issues, and the impact of CMS rules and regulations on TLIF in ASCs, particularly concerning physician ownership and self-referral conflicts governed by the Stark law, were asked. The survey completion rate was 25.8% (Figure 1). The most common surgical indications for TLIF in ASCs were spondylolisthesis (80%), spinal stenosis (62.5%), and low back pain (47.5%). Most surgeons (78%) believed TLIF could be safely performed in ASCs. Streamlined workflow, lower infection rates, and cost-effectiveness were advantages listed by 58.5% of surgeons. Patient's medical history (75.8%), followed by ASC resources and capabilities (61%) and surgeon preference (61%), were relevant factors. Higher efficiencies at ASCs (14.6%), contractual issues (9.8%), and ownership issues (7.3%) were less relevant to surgeons. About 65.9% of surgeons reported lower reimbursement in ASCs, and 43.9% said it was an implementation hurdle. Lower direct costs were reported by 53.7% of surgeons. Other hurdles included a lack of trained staff (24.4%), inadequate staffing (22.0%), cost overruns (26.8%), high Joint Commission or the Accreditation Association for Ambulatory Health Care credentialing costs, and surgeons feeling uncomfortable performing TLIF in ASCs (22.0%). Only 17.1% listed medical problems as a reason their patient was considered unsuitable for the ASC environment. A majority (53.7%) stated that their ASCs complied with strict Stark requirements by disclosing physician ownership interests. However, 22% of surgeons reported self-referrals under the "In-Office Ancillary Services Exception" allowed by the Stark law. Our survey data show that surgeons' perceptions of current CMS rules and regulations may hinder the transition into the ASC setting because they think the reimbursement is too low and the regulatory burden is too high. ASCs have disproportionally higher initial acquisition and ongoing costs related to staff training and maintenance of the TLIF technology that CMS should consider when determining the appropriate financial remuneration for these complex procedures. ASC offers a viable and attractive option for their TLIF procedure with the advantage of same-day discharge and at-home recovery.

Ultrasonic bone curette-assisted unilateral approach for bilateral decompression with MIS-TLIF for severe lumbar spinal stenosis

PurposeWe aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of bilateral decompression with minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) assisted by an ultrasonic bone curette (UBC) for treating severe degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) and traditional tool laminectomy decompression MIS-TLIF for treating severe DLSS.MethodsThe clinical data of 128 patients with single-segment severe DLSS who were admitted between January 2017 and December 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 67 patients were treated with unilateral fenestration and bilateral decompression MIS-TLIF using an ultrasonic bone curette (UBC group), whereas 61 patients were treated with unilateral fenestration and bilateral decompression MIS-TLIF using traditional tools (traditional group, control). A visual analog scale (VAS) was used to evaluate back and lower limb pain before the operation,immediate postoperative, and one week, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after the operation. Oswestry disability index (ODI) and Zurich claudication score (ZCQ) were employed to evaluate the improvement in low back and lower limb function. At the last follow-up, the Bridwell bone graft fusion standard was utilized to evaluate bone graft fusion.ResultsThe decompression time of laminectomy was significantly shorter in the UBC group than in the traditional group (control group), and the intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage volume were significantly less in those in the control group (P < 0.05). The VAS, ODI, and ZCQ scores of the two groups after the operation were significantly improved compared to those before the operation (P < 0.05). The UBC group had better VAS back scores than the control group immediate postoperative and one week after the operation(P < 0.05). The UBC group had better VAS lower limb scores than the control group immediate postoperative (P < 0.05).The incidence of perioperative complications, hospitalization time, dural sac cross-sectional area (CSA), and dural sac CSA improvement rate did not differ significantly between the two groups (P > 0.05). VAS and ODI scores did not differ significantly between the two groups before,three, six months, one year, and two years after surgery (P > 0.05). The ZCQ scores did not differ significantly between the two groups before the operation at one week, six months, one year, and two years after the operation (P > 0.05). According to the Bridwell bone graft fusion standard, bone graft fusion did not occur significantly between the two groups (P > 0.05) at the last follow-up.ConclusionsUBC unilateral fenestration bilateral decompression MIS-TLIF in treating severe DLSS can achieve clinical efficacy as traditional tool unilateral fenestration bilateral decompression MIS-TLIF and reduce intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage. It can also shorten the operation time, effectively reduce the work intensity of the operator, and reduce the degree of low back pain during short-term follow-ups. Therefore, this is a safe and effective surgical method.

Evolution of the Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF): From Open to Percutaneous to Patient-Specific.

The transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has seen significant evolution since its early inception, reflecting advancements in surgical techniques, patient safety, and outcomes. Originally described as an improvement over the posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), the TLIF began as an open surgical procedure, that notably reduced the need for the extensive neural retractation that hindered the PLIF. In line with the broader practice of surgery, trending toward minimally invasive access, the TLIF was followed by the development of the minimally invasive TLIF (MIS-TLIF), a technique that further decreased tissue trauma and postoperative complications. Subsequent advancements, including Trans-Kambin's Triangle TLIF (percLIF) and transfacet LIF, have continued to refine surgical access, minimize surgical footprint, and reduce the risk of injury to the patient. The latest evolution, as we will describe it, the patient-specific TLIF, is a culmination of the aforementioned adaptations and incorporates advanced imaging and segmentation technologies into perioperative planning, allowing surgeons to tailor approaches based on individual patient anatomy and pathology. These developments signify a shift towards more precise methods in spine surgery. The ongoing evolution of the TLIF technique illustrates the dynamic nature of surgery and emphasizes the need for continued adaptation and refinement.

Impact of bilateral facet joint violation on radiographic degeneration of superior adjacent segments and clinical outcomes.

Facet joint violation (FJV) is associated with postoperative low-back pain and is a confirmed risk factor for adjacent-segment degeneration, a long-term complication of lumbar fusion surgery. The authors' knowledge of its mechanisms comes from in vitro biomechanical research only; there is a lack of radiographic evidence of the effects of violation on the superior adjacent-segment facet joint, intervertebral disc, and other local radiographic parameters. Furthermore, any differences between unilateral and bilateral violation remain relatively unclear. The authors therefore aimed to explore the effects of nonviolation and unilateral and bilateral violation on radiographic degeneration of the facet joint and intervertebral disc at the fusion and superior adjacent segment. Patient-reported clinical outcomes were compared at the 2-year follow-up. The authors retrospectively analyzed data from 148 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases who underwent single-segment minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion between 2016 and 2020. FJV and facet joint degeneration were evaluated and graded using Shah's method and Pathria's standard, respectively. Radiographic parameters, including disc height and intervertebral Cobb angle at the fusion and superior adjacent segment, were measured. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using visual analog scale (VAS) and Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores. Preoperative data were comparable among the 3 groups (nonviolation, unilateral violation, and bilateral violation) (p > 0.05). Patient-reported clinical outcomes were followed up for at least 2 years (average duration 28.17 ± 6.17 months). At the last follow-up, facet joint degeneration grades were sequentially increased in the nonviolation, unilateral violation, and bilateral violation groups (p = 0.006). The unilateral (2.45 ± 2.17 mm) and bilateral (2.70 ± 1.94 mm) violation groups had more severe losses of disc height in the superior adjacent segment than did the nonviolation group (1.31 ± 2.01 mm). The VAS low-back pain and Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores in the bilateral (2.57 ± 1.44 and 19.83 ± 2.84, respectively) and unilateral (2.26 ± 0.79 and 20.43 ± 3.85, respectively) violation groups were significantly worse than in the nonviolation group (1.69 ± 1.12 and 21.80 ± 3.36, respectively) (p < 0.05). By contrast, there were no significant between-group differences in disc height, intervertebral Cobb angle in the fusion segment, or VAS leg pain scores (p > 0.05). FJV was associated with postoperative low-back pain and worse functional outcomes. It also aggravated facet joint and intervertebral disc changes in the superior adjacent segment, especially when bilateral violation occurred; this may be part of the mechanisms of adjacent-segment degeneration.

Postoperative Adjacent Segment Disease in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Adjacent Laminectomy for Grade I-II Spondylolisthesis and Adjacent Spinal Stenosis

Studies have demonstrated increased risk of adjacent segment disease (ASD) after open fusion with adjacent-level laminectomy, with rates ranging from 16%-47%, potentially related to disruption of the posterior ligamentous complex. Minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approaches may offer a more durable result. We report institutional outcomes of simultaneous MIS transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MISTLIF) and adjacent-level laminectomy for patients with low grade spondylolisthesis and ASD. Retrospective analysis was performed on patients who underwent MISTLIF with adjacent level laminectomy to treat grade I-II spondylolisthesis with adjacent stenosis at a single institution from 2007-2022. A total of 34 patients met criteria, with mean follow-up of 23.1 months. In total, 37 levels were fused and 45 laminectomies performed. In this group, 21 patients received a single level laminectomy and single-level MISTLIF, 10 patients received a 2-level laminectomy and single-level MISTLIF, 2 patients received a single-level laminectomy and 2-level MISTLIF, and 1 patient received a 2-level laminectomy and 2-level MISTLIF. Three (8.8%) patients experienced clinically significant postoperative ASD requiring reoperation. Three other patients required reoperation for other reasons. Multiple logistic regression did not reveal any association between development of ASD and surgical covariates. MISTLIF with adjacent-level laminectomy demonstrated a favorable safety profile with rates of postoperative ASD lower than published rates after open fusion and on par with the published rates of ASD from MISTLIF alone. Future prospective studies may better elucidate the durability of adjacent-level laminectomies when performed alongside MISTLIF, but retrospective data suggests it is safe and durable.

Comparing OLIF Combined with Lateral Screw Fixation Versus Minimally Invasive TLIF for Treating Single-Level Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

The present study aimed to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) combined with lateral screw fixation and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Mis-TLIF) for the treatment of single-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). Data regarding clinical and radiological outcomes for single-level DLS treated using OLIF combined with lateral screw fixation or Mis-TLIF between November 2017 and June 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Seventy-five patients with single-level DLS (≥ 2 years' follow-up) were included and divided into 2 groups according to surgical method: OLIF (n=33); and Mis-TLIF (n=42). Operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay were significantly lower in the OLIF group than that in the Mis-TLIF group. There were no significant differences in preoperative low back pain (LBP), leg pain (LP) visual analog scale (VAS) scores, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) between the two groups, although the OLIF group had significantly lower LBP VAS scores at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. Additionally, the LP VAS score was significantly lower in the Mis-TLIF group than that in the OLIF group at 1 month postoperatively, and the ODI of the OLIF group at 3 months postoperatively was significantly lower than that of the Mis-TLIF group. There was no significant difference in the preoperative and postoperative lumbar lordosis angles between the two groups, whereas the postoperative surgical segmental lordosis angle and disc height (1, 6, 12, and 24 months) in the OLIF group were significantly higher than those in the Mis-TLIF group. Additionally, there was no significant difference in complication rates between the two groups (OLIF, 18.2% versus Mis-TLIF, 11.9%; p=0.520). Conclusion OLIF combined with lateral screw fixation yielded better clinical and radiological outcomes than Mis-TLIF in patients with single-level DLS.

Endoscopic MIS-TLIF with Destandau's system: leveraging endoscopy with conventional instruments.

This presentation showcases an endoscopic minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) technique for lumbar interbody fusion. Significantly expanding the scope of Destandau's system within MISS, it serves as a pivotal link to unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) for endofusion. The method involves minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) using a 4-mm rigid endoscope through Destandau's system. With the widespread familiarity with Destandau's system and the absence of specialized instrument requirements, this approach is easily adoptable, particularly in resource-limited centers. The favorable clinical and radiological outcomes underscore the effectiveness of this technique, propelling the role of endoscopy in MISS, particularly in endofusion. The video can be found here: https://stream.cadmore.media/r10.3171/2024.1.FOCVID23216.

Comparison of the Medium-term Outcomes of Anterior Lumbar Discectomy and Fusion with Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Lumbar degenerative diseases (LDDs) with huge herniation in the left lateral recess or central canal present challenges for oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) or endoscope-assisted OLIF procedures. Currently, minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is the primary approach for this issue. This study aims to provide a standardized technical description of the anterior lumbar discectomy and fusion (ALDF) and evaluate the medium-term clinical effectiveness of both ALDF and MIS-TLIF techniques. A retrospective review was performed on LDDs who underwent ALDF and MIS-TLIF surgery from January 2018 to January 2020. The evaluation encompassed various clinical outcomes, such as the visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for back pain and leg pain (VAS-back, VAS-leg), the Oswestry disability index (ODI), the 36-item short-form health survey mental component summary (SF-36 MCS), and the physical component summary (SF-36 PCS). Additionally, radiological parameters, including disc height (DH), segmental disk angle (SDA), lumbar lordosis (LL), and cross-sectional area (CSA), were assessed. Data including radiculopathy, estimated blood loss, operation time, time of getting out of bed, fusion rate, and complications were recorded. Student's independent samples t test and Pearson's chi-square test were used to compare the differences between groups. In total, 47 patients were treated by ALDF and 48 patients were treated by MIS-TLIF. The ALDF group exhibited statistically significant lower estimated blood loss and earlier time of getting out of bed compared to the MIS-TLIF group (p < 0.05). The ALDF group demonstrated lower VAS-back scores and a higher remission rate of low back pain 3 years after the surgery (p < 0.05). During the entire follow-up period, the ALDF group exhibited higher increases in DH and SDA compared to the MIS-TLIF group (p < 0.05). At 6 months, the fusion rate in the ALDF group was significantly higher than in the MIS-TLIF group (p < 0.05). The comparison revealed no statistically significant differences in complication rates between the two groups (p > 0.05). The ALDF could be considered as a viable surgical alternative for the treatment of LDDs that necessitate ventral neural direct decompression. ALDF exhibited favorable medium-term outcomes in patients with LDDs, displaying advantages in facilitating expedited recovery, enhancing radiographic outcomes, and elevating the remission rate of low back pain. Although ALDF presents slightly higher complication rates compared to MIS-TLIF, it does not adversely affect clinical outcomes.

Predictors for Failure to Respond to Erector Spinae Plane Block Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. To identify the risk factors associated with failure to respond to erector spinae plane (ESP) block following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF). ESP block is an emerging opioid-sparing regional anesthetic that has been shown to reduce immediate postoperative pain and opioid demand following MI-TLIF-however, not all patients who receive ESP blocks perioperatively experience a reduction in immediate postoperative pain. This was a retrospective review of consecutive patients undergoing 1-level MI-TLIF who received ESP blocks by a single anesthesiologist perioperatively at a single institution. ESP blocks were administered in the OR following induction. Failure to respond to ESP block was defined as patients with a first numerical rating scale (NRS) score post-surgery of >5.7 (mean immediate postoperative NRS score of control cohort undergoing MI TLIF without ESP block). Multivariable logistic regressions were performed to identify predictors for failure to respond to ESP block. A total of 134 patients were included (mean age 60.6 years, 43.3% females). The median and interquartile range (IQR) first pain score post-surgery was 2.5 (0.0-7.5). Forty-nine (36.6%) of patients failed to respond to ESP block. In the multivariable regression analysis, several independent predictors for failure to respond to ESP block following MI TLIF were identified: female sex (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.04-5.98, P=0.040), preoperative opioid use (OR 2.75, 95% CI 1.03- 7.30, P=0.043), anxiety requiring medication (OR 3.83, 95% CI 1.27-11.49, P=0.017), and hyperlipidemia (OR 3.15, 95% CI 1.31-7.55, P=0.010). Our study identified several predictors for failure to respond to ESP block following MI TLIF including female sex, preoperative opioid pain medication use, anxiety, and hyperlipidemia. These findings may help inform the approach to counseling patients on perioperative outcomes and pain expectations following MI-TLIF with ESP block. III.

Impact of Obesity on Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgeries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

To evaluate the impact of obesity on various outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgeries. PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were screened for studies reporting outcomes in obese and non-obese patients undergoing TLIF surgeries. Studies reporting operative time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, incidence of pseudoarthrosis, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, pain scores (Visual Analog Scale, VAS), and PROMIS PF scores were included. A qualitative and quantitative analysis was performed to calculate mean differences or odds ratios using random-effects models. Fourteen good-quality studies were included in this review, with a combined sample size of 4,889 participants. The analysis revealed that patients with obesity had slightly longer operative times compared to patients with normal weight, with a mean difference of 14.87 minutes, though not significant. Similarly, morbidly obese patients had a mean difference of 21.44 minutes in operative time. Estimated blood loss was comparable in both groups. However, morbidly obese patients had longer hospital stays, with a mean difference of 8.18 days and obese patients have 20% higher odds of experiencing complications compared to non-obese patients. The incidence of pseudoarthrosis, ODI scores, or pain scores (VAS back and leg) were similar in obese and normal weight patients. Obesity, particularly morbid obesity, may have an impact on certain outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive TLIF surgeries. Morbidly obese patients tend to have significantly longer operative times with significantly longer hospital stays than non-obese patients.

Expandable cages that expand both height and lordosis provide improved immediate effect on sagittal alignment and short-term clinical outcomes following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF).

Failure to restore lordotic alignment is not an uncommon problem following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF), even with expandable cages that increase disc height. This study aims to investigate the effect of the expandable cage that is specifically designed to expand both height and lordosis. We evaluated the outcomes of MIS TLIF in restoring immediate postoperative sagittal alignment by comparing two different types of expandable cages. One cage is designed to solely increase disc height (Group H), while the other can expand both height and lordosis (Group HL). Patients undergoing MIS TLIF using expandable cages were retrospectively reviewed, including 40 cases in Group H and 109 cases in Group HL. Visual analog scores of back and leg pain, and Oswestry disability index were collected. Disc height, disc angle, and sagittal alignment were measured. Complications were recorded, including early subsidence which was evaluated with computed tomography. Clinical and radiographic outcomes significantly improved in both groups postoperatively. Group HL showed superior improvement in segmental lordosis (4.4°±3.5° vs. 2.1°±4.8°, P=0.01) and disc angle (6.3°±3.8 vs. 2.2°±4.3°, P<0.001) compared to Group H. Overall incidence of early subsidence was 23.3%, predominantly observed during initial cases as part of the learning curve, but decreased to 18% after completion of the first 20 cases. Expandable cages with a design specifically aimed at increasing lordotic angle can provide favorable outcomes and effectively improve immediate sagittal alignment following MIS TLIF, compared to conventional cages that only increase in height. However, regardless of the type of expandable cage used, it is crucial to avoid applying excessive force to achieve greater disc height or lordosis, as this may contribute to subsidence and a possible reduction in lordotic alignment restoration. Long-term results are needed to evaluate the clinical outcome, fusion rate, and maintenance of the sagittal alignment.

Evaluation of the safety, efficacy and technical advantages of spinal anesthesia in patients undergoing single lower lumbar level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, as an alternative to general anesthesia: a prospective study

Background: In spinal anesthesia, patients experience shorter OT, quicker recovery and ambulation, better post-operative analgesia and fewer complications than general anesthesia. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) shows fewer complications and early ambulation than open TLIF. Our study aims to assess spinal anesthesia’s safety, efficacy and technical benefits in MIS-TLIF. Methods: Patients unresponsive to conservative treatment for 6-8 weeks underwent MIS TLIF for lower lumbar degenerative pathologies. The demographic data, OT entry to incision time, blood loss, bandaging to exit from OT time, post anesthesia care unit (PACU) time, post-op complications, requirement of analgesia, visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores, hospital stay, fusion rates and satisfaction scores were noted and assessed. Results: The study included a total of 200 patients undergoing MIS-TLIF with mean age being 54.32±10.36 years; mean surgery time being 165.23±21.41 minutes; and mean blood loss being 123.56±65.14 ml. The mean OT entry to incision time was 28.91±9.63 minutes, while the mean bandaging to exit time was 7.43±4.12 minutes. The mean PACU stay was 41.35±5.78 minutes. The mean hospital stay was 3.28±1.23 days, with 97% patients showing solid radiographic fusion while 92.5% patients were fully satisfied with the surgery. VAS and ODI scores were significantly improved as compared to the pre operative status. Conclusions: Spinal anesthesia for lower lumbar MIS-TLIF is cost effective and safe alternative to general anesthesia with lesser post operative pain and other side effects; taking into consideration proper patient selection for the same.

Comparison of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Mis-TLIF) with bilateral decompression via unilateral approach and open-TLIF with bilateral decompression for degenerative lumbar diseases: a retrospective cohort study

ObjectivePresently, no study has compared the clinical outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Mis-TLIF) with bilateral decompression via the unilateral approach (BDUA) and Open-TLIF with bilateral decompression for degenerative lumbar diseases (DLD). We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of through Mis-TLIF combined with BDUA and Open-TLIF with bilateral decompression for the treatment of DLD, and reported the learning curve of the procedure of MIS-TLIF with BDUA.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the prospectively collected data of consecutive DLD patients in the two groups from January 2016 to January 2020.ResultsThe operative time (OT) was significantly longer in the Mis-TLIF group (n = 113) than in the Open-TLIF group (n = 135). The postoperative drainage volume (PDV) and length of stay (LOS) were significantly higher in the Open-TLIF group than in the Mis-TLIF group. Additionally, the complication rate was significantly higher in the Open-TLIF group than in the Mis-TLIF group (14.8% vs. 6.2%, P = 0.030), while there was no significant difference in the reoperation and adjacent segment disease rates between the two groups. There were no significant differences in back pain and leg pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) between the two groups preoperatively, at discharge, and 2 years postoperatively. Patients in both groups showed significant improvements in NRS scores and ODI scores after surgery. OT was negatively correlated with the number of surgeries performed (P < 0.001, r =  −0.43). The learning curve of Mis-TLIF with BDUA was steep, with OT tapered to steady state in 43 cases.ConclusionCompared with Open-TLIF with bilateral decompression, Mis-TLIF with BDUA can achieve equivalent clinical outcomes, lower PDV and LOS, and lower complication rates. Although this procedure took longer, it could be a viable alternative for the treatment of DLD after a steep learning curve.

Comparative study on the technique and efficacy of microscope-assisted MI-TLIF and naked-eye MI-TLIF in lumbar revision surgery

BackgroundLumbar revision surgery can be performed by simple lumbar nerve decompression or lumbar interbody fusion, including percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), etc. However, lumbar revision surgery is very difficult in surgical operation. We sought to explore the technique safety and efficacy of microscope-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) in lumbar revision surgery.MethodsCases of postoperative recurrence following lumbar spine surgery (n = 63) treated from December 2016 to July 2021 were retrospectively analyzed, including 24 cases of microscope-assisted MI-TLIF (microscopic group) and 39 cases of naked-eye MI-TLIF (naked-eye group). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, incision length, postoperative drainage, length of hospital stay, initial operation, and visual analog score (VAS) of low back and leg pain before and at 7 days and 3 months after the operation and the last follow-up were compared between the two groups. The Oswestry Dysfunction Index (ODI) and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores before and after the operation and the Bridwell interbody fusion grades at 1 year were compared. The independent t tests, Mann–Whitney U tests, and Chi-square tests were used for analysis.ResultsAll 63 patients were successfully treated by operation and were followed up for an average of 31.5 ± 8.6 months (range 12–48 months). The two groups had no significant difference in sex, age, incision length, initial operation, or operative segment (P > 0.05). There was no significance in operation time, VAS score, ODI score, and JOA score of low back pain or Bridwell interbody fusion grade between the two groups (P > 0.05). Significant differences in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, and the lengths of hospital stay were observed between the two groups (P < 0.05). Cerebrospinal fluid leakage (n = 2), edema of nerve roots (n = 2), and incision infection (n = 1) were observed in the naked-eye group. There were no complications in the microscopic group, such as cerebrospinal fluid leakage, edema of nerve roots, and incision infection.ConclusionAlthough microscope-assisted MI-TLIF and naked-eye MI-TLIF are both effective during lumbar revision surgery, microscope-assisted MI-TLIF brings less trauma, less bleeding, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and faster recovery. Unlike traditional surgery, microscope-assisted MI-TLIF provides a clear visual field, adequate hemostasis, and nerve decompression.

Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with the Space-D Access System

The Space-D Access System is a new, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) retractor system that allows spine surgeons to perform transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with intraoperative navigation. Unlike other retractors, this system allows distraction/compression and lateral retraction. This is the first description of the technical aspects of the Space-D Access System for MIS TLIF since its public debut in May 2021. This study introduces the components and applicability of the Space-D Access System and provides step-by-step instructions with visuals to perform a MIS TLIF using this novel device. The Space-D Access System, StealthStation, CD Horizon Solera Voyager, and an anatomic lumbar spine model were used to demonstrate the steps to successfully perform MIS TLIF. The components and applicability of the Space-D Access System are discussed. Detailed written instructions and visuals are provided in a stepwise fashion to complete MIS TLIF effectively and efficiently. The Space-D Access System is the only multifunctional device that allows tissue retraction and pedicle-to-pedicle distraction/compression while performing MIS TLIF. To our knowledge, this is the first paper to describe the device and its use for MIS TLIF with written instructions and visuals using an anatomic model.

Effectiveness and safety of robot-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spinal diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Robot-assisted (RA) technology has been widely used in spine surgery. This analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of RA minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and fluoroscopy-assisted (FA) MIS-TLIF for degenerative lumbar spinal diseases (DLSD). PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure were systematically searched, and the outcomes included surgical parameters [operation time, blood loss, number of fluoroscopic, accuracy of pedicle screw position, superior facet joint violation (FJV)], and clinical indexes (Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, clinical efficacy, hospital stays, complications). Eleven articles involving 1066 patients were included. RA group produced better results than the FA group in operation time (WMD = -6.59; 95% CI -12.79 to -0.40; P = 0.04), blood loss (WMD = -34.81; 95% CI -50.55 to -19.08; P < 0.0001), number of fluoroscopic (WMD = -18.24; 95% CI -30.63 to -5.85; P = 0.004), accuracy of pedicle screw position: Grade A (OR = 3.16; 95% CI 2.36-4.23; P < 0.00001), Grade B (OR = 0.39; 95% CI 0.28-0.54; P < 0.00001), Grade C (OR = 0.27; 95% CI 0.13-0.54; P = 0.0002), and Grade D (OR = 0.17; 95% CI 0.03-0.98; P = 0.05), FJV: Grade 0 (OR = 3.27; 95% CI 1.34-8.02; P = 0.010), Grade 1 (OR = 0.24; 95% CI 0.16-0.38; P < 0.00001), Grade 2 (OR = 0.24; 95% CI 0.12-0.51; P = 0.0002), and Grade 3 (OR = 0.26; 95% CI 0.07-0.93; P = 0.04). But no significant differences in VAS score, ODI, JOA score, clinical efficacy, hospital stays, and complications. These results demonstrate a significant improvement in the intraoperative course of the RA technique. However, RA-MIS-TLIF has not yet demonstrated significant advantages in terms of postoperative symptom relief and functional improvement. Future research and clinical practice should further explore the efficacy of this technique to optimize outcomes and quality of life for patients with DLSD. The study was registered in the PROSPERO (CRD42023454405).

Impact of Preoperative Symptom Duration on Patient-reported Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis.

Retrospective cohort study. To assess the impact of preoperative symptom duration (PSD) on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after minimally invasive (MIS) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for degenerative spondylolisthesis (DSpond). A prolonged duration of preoperative symptoms may implicate inferior long-term outcomes postsurgery. Prior studies of lumbar fusion recipients are limited by the inclusion of heterogeneous populations. A single-surgeon registry was retrospectively queried for privately insured patients who had undergone primary, elective, single-level MIS-TLIF for DSpond with a recorded symptom start date. Cohorts were formed by PSD: shorter duration (PSD <1 y) or greater duration (GD; PSD ≥1 y). PROMs evaluated included Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Physical Function, Oswestry Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale-Back, Visual Analog Scale-Leg, and 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire. The magnitude of PROM (∆PROM) improvement from preoperative baseline to 6 weeks and final follow-up (∆PROM-FF) were compared between cohorts. Intercohort achievement rates of a minimum clinically important difference in each PROM were compared. A total of 133 patients included 85 patients with GD cohort. There were no significant differences in pre hoc demographics and perioperative characteristics between cohorts, as well as preoperative, 6-week, or final follow-up PROMs between cohorts. Both cohorts demonstrated significant improvement in all PROMs at 6 weeks and final follow-up (P ≤ 0.049, all). There were no significant intercohort differences demonstrated in minimum clinically important difference achievement rates, ∆PROM-6W, or ∆PROM-FF in any PROM. Regardless of the symptom duration before MIS-TLIF for DSpond, patients demonstrate significant improvement in physical function, pain, disability, and mental health. Patients with a GD of preoperative symptoms did not report inferior scores in any PROM domain. Patients with a GD of preoperative symptoms did not suffer inferior rates of clinically meaningful improvement after surgical intervention. These findings should be considered when counseling patients before surgical intervention for DSpond.

Does Preoperative Back Pain Impact Patient-reported Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Isthmic Spondylolisthesis?

Retrospective review. To determine postoperative clinical outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive (MIS) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS). Few studies have examined the postoperative clinical trajectory in patients undergoing MIS-TLIF specifically for IS. Patients were separated into two cohorts based on the previously defined Visual Analog Scale (VAS) back pain (BP) for severe pain: VAS-BP <7 and VAS-BP ≥7. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-physical function (PF), 12-item Short Form (SF-12) Physical/Mental Component Score, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, VAS-BP, VAS leg pain, and Oswestry Disability Index were collected preoperatively and up to 2-year postoperatively. Minimum clinically important difference (MCID) was calculated through previously defined thresholds. A total of 160 patients were recorded, with 58 patients in the VAS-BP <7 cohort. The VAS-BP <7 cohort demonstrated significant improvement in all PROMs at one or more postoperative time points. The VAS-BP ≥7 demonstrated significant improvement at 3 or more postoperative time points in all PROMs except for SF-12 Mental Component Score. The VAS-BP <7 cohort reported significantly superior preoperative and postoperative PROMs in all domains, except for SF-12 Physical Component Score. The VAS-BP ≥7 cohort had higher MCID achievement rates at one or more time points in multiple PROMs. Patients undergoing MIS-TLIF for IS demonstrated significant postoperative improvement in PF, mental function, pain, and disability outcomes independent of preoperative severity of BP. Patients with lower preoperative BP demonstrated superior outcomes in PF, mental function, pain, and disability. However, patients with greater preoperative BP achieved higher rates of MCID in mental function, BP, and disability outcomes. Patients with greater severity of preoperative BP undergoing MIS-TLIF for IS may experience greater rates of clinically relevant improvement in mental function, BP, and disability outcomes.