DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20201734

Low-grade spondylolisthesis: is transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion superior to posterolateral fusion

Hiranya Kumar Seenappa, Karthik Narayanamurthy Mittemari, Vamshikrishna Chand Nimmagadda

Abstract


Background: Spondylolisthesis is anterior translation of the cephalad vertebra relative to the adjacent caudal segment. Both posterolateral fusion (PLF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and have shown high fusion rates with good clinical outcomes. But it is not clear which treatment leads to better outcomes, as limited studies have been done to compare PLF and TLIF in low grade spondylolisthesis. Our objective is to determine whether PLF or TLIF was associated with better clinical and radiological outcomes in patients with low grade spondylolisthesis.

Methods: Fourty patients were enrolled and assigned into PLF (n=20) or TLIF (n=20) group. The outcome measures were: clinical outcomes as assessed with a visual analogue scale and the modified Oswestry disability index, the fusion rate based on radiographs.

Results: The improvement of visual analog score (VAS) of low back pain was greater in TLIF than in PLF (89.6% versus 88.7%, p=0.79). The improvement of VAS of leg pain was greater in TLIF than in PLF (96.5% versus 94.8%; p=0.27). The improvement of Oswestry disability index (ODI) was greater in TLIF than in PLF (71.7% vs 69.8%, p=0.32). The fusion rate was 85% in TLIF and 75% in PLF (p=0.43).  Overall outcome was excellent in 80% in TLIF compared to 65% in PLF (p=0.29).

Conclusions: Fusion rates are higher in TLIF and average functional outcomes (VAS and ODI) were better in TLIF compared to PLF.  Larger and longer studies may provide a significant outcome. Based on our results and literature review, we conclude that TLIF is superior to PLF.


Keywords


Spondylolisthesis, Fusion, PLF, TLIF, Oswestry disability index

Full Text:

PDF

References


Barbarawi AMM, Audat ZM, Allouh MZ. Analytical comparison study of the clinical and radiological outcome of spine fixation using posterolateral, posteriorlumber interbody and transforaminal lumber interbody spinal fixation techniques to treat lumber spine degenerative disc disease. Scoliosis. 2015;10:17.

Bridwell KH, Sedgwick TA, Brien OMF, Lenke LG, Baldus C. The role of fusion and instrumentation in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord. 1993;6(6):461-72.

Harms J, Rolinger H. A one-stage procedure in operative treatment of spondylolisthesis: dorsal traction-reposition and anterior fusion. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 1982;120:343-7.

Ye YP, Xu H, Chen D. Comparison between posterior lumbar interbody fusion and posterolateral fusion with transpedicular screw fixation for isthmic spondylolithesis: a meta-analysis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2013;133(12):1649-55.

Abdu WA, Lurie JD, Spratt KF. Degenerative spondylolisthesis: does fusion method influence outcome? Four-year results of the spine patient outcomes research trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34(21):2351-60.

Glassman SD, Carreon LY, Ghogawala Z, Foley KT, McGirt MJ, Asher AL. Benefit of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion vs Posterolateral Spinal Fusion in Lumbar Spine Disorders: A Propensity-Matched Analysis from the National Neurosurgical Quality and Outcomes Database Registry. Neurosurgery. 2016;79(3):397-405.

Hoy K, Bunger C, Niederman B, Helmig P, Hansen ES, Li H, et al. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus posterolateral instrumented fusion (PLF) in degenerative lumbar disorders: a randomized clinical trial with 2-year follow-up. Eur Spine J. 2013;22(9):2022-9.

Fujimori T, Le H, Schairer WW, Berven SH, Qamirani E, Hu SS. Does Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Have Advantages over Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis. Global Spine J. 2015;5(2):102-9.

Ghasemi AA. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus instrumented posterolateral fusion in degenerative spondylolisthesis: An attempt to evaluate the superiority of one method over the other. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2016;150:1-5.

Williams KD. Spondylolisthesis. In: Frederick M. Azar, James H. Beaty, S. Terry Canale, editors. Campbell’s Operative Orthopaedics. 13th ed. Canada: Elsevier, Inc; 2017:1741-1744.

Aygun H, Cakar A, Huseyinoglu N, Huseyinoglu U, Celik R. Clinical and radiological comparison of posterolateral fusion and posterior interbody fusion techniques for multilevel lumbar spinal stabilization in manual workers. Asian Spine J. 2014;8(5):571-80.

Liu XY, Wang G, Qiu X, Yu WB. A systematic review with meta-analysis of posterior interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion in lumbar spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J. 2014;23:43-56.

Wang YXJ, Kaplar Z, Deng M, Leung JCS. Lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis epidemiology: A systematic review with a focus on gender-specific and age-specific prevalence. J Orthop Translat. 2016;11:39-52.

Fitzgerald J, Newman PH. Degenerative spondylolisthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1976;58:184-192.

Wiltse LL, Winter RB. Terminology and measurement of spondylolisthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1983;65:768-72.

Challier V, Boissiere L, Obeid I, Vital JM, Castelain JE, Benard A, et al. One-Level Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis and Posterior Approach: Is Transforaminal Lateral Interbody Fusion Mandatory: A Randomized Controlled Trial With 2-Year Follow-Up. Spine. 2017;42:531-9.

Etemadifar MR, Hadi A, Masouleh MF. Posterolateral instrumented fusion with and without transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of adult isthmic spondylolisthesis: A randomized clinical trial with 2-year follow-up. J Craniovertebral Junction Spine. 2016;7:43-9.

Carreon LY, Glassman SD, Ghogawala Z, Mummaneni PV, McGirt MJ, Asher AL. Modeled 30 cost-effectiveness of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion compared with 31 posterolateral fusion for spondylolisthesis using N (2) QOD data. J Neurosurg Spine. 32 2016;24:916-21.

Ghasemi AA. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus instrumented posterolateral fusion in degenerative spondylolisthesis: An attempt to evaluate the superiority of one method over the other. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2016;150:1-5.

Levin JM, Tanenbaum JE, Steinmetz MP, Mroz TE, Overley SC. Posterolateral fusion (PLF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Spine J. 2018;18(6):1088-98.