Clinical values of oblique lumbar interbody fusion on the treatment of single-level degenerative lumbar diseases

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 SURGERY Frontiers in Surgery Pub Date : 2024-09-05 DOI:10.3389/fsurg.2024.1424262
Yu Yu
{"title":"Clinical values of oblique lumbar interbody fusion on the treatment of single-level degenerative lumbar diseases","authors":"Yu Yu","doi":"10.3389/fsurg.2024.1424262","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ObjectivesMinimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Mis-TLIF) and oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) are increasingly replacing traditional approaches. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of OLIF and Mis-TLIF in treating single-level degenerative lumbar diseases.MethodsPatients with single-level degenerative lumbar diseases underwent either OLIF (30 patients) or Mis-TLIF (30 patients). Surgical data, including operation time, blood loss, postoperative drainage, and postoperative bed rest duration, were collected. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Oswestry disability index, the visual analog scale scores for low back pain and leg pain, and Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores for daily ability, along with monitoring of complications.ResultsThe OLIF group showed significantly shorter operative times, less blood loss, reduced postoperative drainage, and shorter bed rest durations than the Mis-TLIF group. At the 1-month follow-up, OLIF patients also demonstrated significantly better clinical outcome scores than Mis-TLIF patients. No significant differences were observed between OLIF and Mis-TLIF patients before surgery and after 3 months. Furthermore, lumbar lordosis and disc height were significantly greater in the OLIF group at the final follow-up.ConclusionsBoth OLIF and Mis-TLIF achieved satisfactory and effective long-term clinical outcomes for single-level lumbar degenerative diseases. However, OLIF resulted in less tissue damage, reduced bleeding, better short-term clinical outcomes, and improved recovery of segmental lordosis compared to Mis-TLIF. Therefore, OLIF appears to be the preferable option over Mis-TLIF.","PeriodicalId":12564,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2024.1424262","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectivesMinimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Mis-TLIF) and oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) are increasingly replacing traditional approaches. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of OLIF and Mis-TLIF in treating single-level degenerative lumbar diseases.MethodsPatients with single-level degenerative lumbar diseases underwent either OLIF (30 patients) or Mis-TLIF (30 patients). Surgical data, including operation time, blood loss, postoperative drainage, and postoperative bed rest duration, were collected. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Oswestry disability index, the visual analog scale scores for low back pain and leg pain, and Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores for daily ability, along with monitoring of complications.ResultsThe OLIF group showed significantly shorter operative times, less blood loss, reduced postoperative drainage, and shorter bed rest durations than the Mis-TLIF group. At the 1-month follow-up, OLIF patients also demonstrated significantly better clinical outcome scores than Mis-TLIF patients. No significant differences were observed between OLIF and Mis-TLIF patients before surgery and after 3 months. Furthermore, lumbar lordosis and disc height were significantly greater in the OLIF group at the final follow-up.ConclusionsBoth OLIF and Mis-TLIF achieved satisfactory and effective long-term clinical outcomes for single-level lumbar degenerative diseases. However, OLIF resulted in less tissue damage, reduced bleeding, better short-term clinical outcomes, and improved recovery of segmental lordosis compared to Mis-TLIF. Therefore, OLIF appears to be the preferable option over Mis-TLIF.
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
斜腰椎椎间融合术治疗单层退行性腰椎病的临床价值
目的微创经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术(Mis-TLIF)和斜行腰椎椎体间融合术(OLIF)正逐渐取代传统方法。本研究旨在比较 OLIF 和 Mis-TLIF 治疗单侧退行性腰椎疾病的临床疗效。方法单侧退行性腰椎疾病患者接受 OLIF(30 例)或 Mis-TLIF (30 例)。收集手术数据,包括手术时间、失血量、术后引流量和术后卧床时间。结果与 Mis-TLIF 组相比,OLIF 组的手术时间明显缩短,失血量减少,术后引流量减少,卧床时间缩短。在 1 个月的随访中,OLIF 患者的临床效果评分也明显优于 Mis-TLIF 患者。OLIF 和 Mis-TLIF 患者在术前和术后 3 个月内无明显差异。结论OLIF和Mis-TLIF对单侧腰椎退行性疾病都取得了令人满意和有效的长期临床疗效。然而,与 Mis-TLIF 相比,OLIF 的组织损伤更小、出血更少、短期临床疗效更好、节段前凸恢复更好。因此,OLIF 似乎比 Mis-TLIF 更为可取。
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
Frontiers in Surgery
Frontiers in Surgery Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
1872
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Evidence of surgical interventions go back to prehistoric times. Since then, the field of surgery has developed into a complex array of specialties and procedures, particularly with the advent of microsurgery, lasers and minimally invasive techniques. The advanced skills now required from surgeons has led to ever increasing specialization, though these still share important fundamental principles. Frontiers in Surgery is the umbrella journal representing the publication interests of all surgical specialties. It is divided into several “Specialty Sections” listed below. All these sections have their own Specialty Chief Editor, Editorial Board and homepage, but all articles carry the citation Frontiers in Surgery. Frontiers in Surgery calls upon medical professionals and scientists from all surgical specialties to publish their experimental and clinical studies in this journal. By assembling all surgical specialties, which nonetheless retain their independence, under the common umbrella of Frontiers in Surgery, a powerful publication venue is created. Since there is often overlap and common ground between the different surgical specialties, assembly of all surgical disciplines into a single journal will foster a collaborative dialogue amongst the surgical community. This means that publications, which are also of interest to other surgical specialties, will reach a wider audience and have greater impact. The aim of this multidisciplinary journal is to create a discussion and knowledge platform of advances and research findings in surgical practice today to continuously improve clinical management of patients and foster innovation in this field.
期刊最新文献
Coverage of large soft tissue defects of the lower limb and foot with superficial inferior epigastric artery flap. Robotic colorectal surgery in Latin America: a systematic review on surgical outcomes. Integrating 3D technology with the Sampaio classification for enhanced percutaneous nephrolithotomy in complex renal calculi treatment. Integrative prognostic modeling for stage III lung adenosquamous carcinoma post-tumor resection: machine learning insights and web-based implementation. Extrarenal renal cell carcinoma in the adrenal region: a case report.
×
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