Comparison of PLIF/TLIF and LLIF for two-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

• DOI: 10.1016/j.inat.2023.101770
• Publication Date: 2023-04-19T15:38:12Z
• Authors: Takuma Fukuzawa; Masashi Uehara; Hiromichi Misawa; Mutsuki Yui; Takahiro Tsutsumi...; Terue Hatakenaka; Daisuke Kurogochi; Shota Ikegami; Hiroki Oba; Yoshinari Miyaoka; Tetsuhiko Mimura; Jun Takahashi
• Keywords: Lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis; Posterior lumbar interbody fusion; 0302 clinical medicine; RD1-811; Lateral interbody fusion; Surgery; Neurology. Diseases of the nervous system; RC346-429

In recent years, lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), performed as extreme (XLIF) and oblique (OLIF), has also become widely used for anterior-posterior corrective fusion. However, there are few detailed reports comparing techniques in the treatment of two-level degenerative spondylolisthesis. We compared surgical invasiveness postoperative outcomes between posterior with (PLIF) or transforaminal (TLIF) LLIF Fifteen patients underwent PLIF TLIF at 2 vertebral intervals (posterior group) 8 received XLIF OLIF (LLIF group). The following parameters were examined: operative time, blood loss, preoperative %slip, sagittal parameters, 1-year bone rate 1 year postoperatively, pre- visual analog scale scores, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) complications. group, loss was significantly lower time shorter than group. There no significant differences vertical axis, lordosis, although frequency cases a pelvic incidence (PI)-LL ≤ 10 degrees higher both groups, JOA scores improved postoperatively (both p < 0.01), remarkable difference improvement groups (p = 0.09). less invasive, comparably effective, more preserving global spinal balance correcting spondylolisthesis conventional