Comparative Analysis of Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Wiltse Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Approaches for Treating Single-Level Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Single-Center Retrospective Study

Surgeries Pub Date : 2023-11-28 DOI:10.3390/surgeries4040060
R. Nurmukhametov, Medet Dosanov, Abakirov Medetbek, M.J. Encarnacion Ramirez, Vishal Chavda, Gennady Chmutin, N. Montemurro
{"title":"Comparative Analysis of Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Wiltse Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Approaches for Treating Single-Level Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Single-Center Retrospective Study","authors":"R. Nurmukhametov, Medet Dosanov, Abakirov Medetbek, M.J. Encarnacion Ramirez, Vishal Chavda, Gennady Chmutin, N. Montemurro","doi":"10.3390/surgeries4040060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The aim of this study is to compare the surgical outcomes of two different surgical approaches, open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and Wiltse TLIF, in the treatment of single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis and also to provide the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. Methods: This retrospective study included 600 patients with single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis who underwent fusion surgery at a single academic institution between January 2018 and December 2022. Patients were divided into two groups: traditional open TLIF (group A; 300 patients) and the Wiltse TLIF approach (group B; 300 patients). Preoperative diagnostic tests were performed on all patients. Results: The fluoroscopy time for the Wiltse TLIF group was longer, whereas the mean blood loss for the Wiltse TLIF approach was less. Both techniques resulted in significant improvements in pain relief and functional disability, with no significant difference between the two groups in terms of their pre- or post-operative (Oswestry Disability Index) ODI scores. The Wiltse TLIF technique resulted in significantly shorter hospital stays and had a lower rate of complications compared with the open TLIF technique. Conclusion: The Wiltse TLIF approach showed advantages in shorter surgical times, reduced blood loss, and shorter hospital stays, whereas the traditional open TLIF approach exhibited shorter fluoroscopy times.","PeriodicalId":506240,"journal":{"name":"Surgeries","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgeries","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/surgeries4040060","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study is to compare the surgical outcomes of two different surgical approaches, open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and Wiltse TLIF, in the treatment of single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis and also to provide the advantages and disadvantages of each approach. Methods: This retrospective study included 600 patients with single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis who underwent fusion surgery at a single academic institution between January 2018 and December 2022. Patients were divided into two groups: traditional open TLIF (group A; 300 patients) and the Wiltse TLIF approach (group B; 300 patients). Preoperative diagnostic tests were performed on all patients. Results: The fluoroscopy time for the Wiltse TLIF group was longer, whereas the mean blood loss for the Wiltse TLIF approach was less. Both techniques resulted in significant improvements in pain relief and functional disability, with no significant difference between the two groups in terms of their pre- or post-operative (Oswestry Disability Index) ODI scores. The Wiltse TLIF technique resulted in significantly shorter hospital stays and had a lower rate of complications compared with the open TLIF technique. Conclusion: The Wiltse TLIF approach showed advantages in shorter surgical times, reduced blood loss, and shorter hospital stays, whereas the traditional open TLIF approach exhibited shorter fluoroscopy times.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
开放式经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术与 Wiltse 经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术治疗单水平腰椎滑脱症的比较分析:单中心回顾性研究
背景:本研究旨在比较两种不同手术方法(开放式经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术(TLIF)和 Wiltse TLIF)在治疗单水平腰椎间盘突出症中的手术效果,并说明每种方法的优缺点。研究方法这项回顾性研究纳入了 2018 年 1 月至 2022 年 12 月期间在一家学术机构接受融合手术的 600 例单层腰椎滑脱症患者。患者分为两组:传统开放式 TLIF(A 组;300 名患者)和 Wiltse TLIF 方法(B 组;300 名患者)。对所有患者进行术前诊断测试。结果:Wiltse TLIF 组的透视时间较长,而 Wiltse TLIF 方法的平均失血量较少。两种技术都能明显改善疼痛缓解和功能障碍,两组患者术前和术后(Oswestry 残疾指数)ODI 评分无明显差异。与开放式 TLIF 技术相比,Wiltse TLIF 技术的住院时间明显更短,并发症发生率更低。结论:Wiltse TLIF 方法在缩短手术时间、减少失血量和缩短住院时间方面具有优势,而传统的开放式 TLIF 方法的透视时间更短。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Severe Attrition and Poor Satisfaction in Patients Undergoing Telerehabilitation vs. Standard In-Person Rehabilitation after Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repairs and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstructions Pediatric Intracranial Aneurysms: Experience from a Singapore Children’s Hospital Evaluating Anticoagulant and Antiplatelet Therapies in Rhesus and Cynomolgus Macaques for Predictive Modeling in Humans A Bosniak III Cyst Unmasking Tubulocystic Renal Cell Carcinoma in an Adolescent: Management with Selective Arterial Clamping and Robotic Enucleation Osteoimmunology: An Overview of the Interplay of the Immune System and the Bone Tissue in Fracture Healing
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1