Wenlong Hu, Fei He, Kai Sun, Haiwu Wan, Sijun Ruan, Bo Huang
{"title":"Modified single-incision MIS-TLIF with expandable tubular assistance for degenerative lumbar spine diseases.","authors":"Wenlong Hu, Fei He, Kai Sun, Haiwu Wan, Sijun Ruan, Bo Huang","doi":"10.3389/fsurg.2024.1482067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Evaluating the clinical value of the modified single-incision posterior median approach with expandable tubular assistance for lumbar interbody fusion in managing degenerative lumbar spine diseases.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on 121 patients with single-level degenerative lumbar spine disease treated in our spine surgery department from January 2017 to December 2021. Of these, 72 patients underwent a modified single-incision posterior median approach with expandable tubular assistance lumbar interbody fusion (single-incision MIS-TLIF group), while 49 patients received the classic open posterior median incision P-TLIF (open surgery group). We collected basic demographic data including age, gender, BMI, and surgical level. Surgical-related indicators such as operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, length of hospital stay, hospital costs, and complication rates were compared between the two groups. Laboratory results [whole blood C-reactive protein (CRP), serum creatine kinase (CK)] and clinical outcomes [VAS scores for low back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), excellent and good rate according to the modified MacNab criteria, and interbody fusion rate according to the Brantigan criteria] were also evaluated.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>There were no significant differences in the basic demographics between the two groups. The operation time, postoperative hospital stay, and hospital costs were also similar between the groups. However, significant differences were observed in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, and complication rates. On postoperative days 1 and 3, whole blood CRP and CK levels showed marked differences between the groups. At 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively, the single-incision MIS-TLIF group had lower ODI scores and VAS scores for back pain compared to the open surgery group. The excellent and good rate according to the MacNab criteria was higher in the single-incision MIS-TLIF group. There were no significant differences in leg pain VAS scores and interbody fusion rates at 12 months postoperatively between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The modified single-incision posterior median approach with expandable tubular assistance lumbar interbody fusion is highly effective in treating degenerative lumbar spine diseases. It results in less postoperative pain, faster recovery, and significant improvement in postoperative functional outcomes, making it a valuable treatment option.</p>","PeriodicalId":12564,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Surgery","volume":"11 ","pages":"1482067"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11743704/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2024.1482067","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: Evaluating the clinical value of the modified single-incision posterior median approach with expandable tubular assistance for lumbar interbody fusion in managing degenerative lumbar spine diseases.
Method: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 121 patients with single-level degenerative lumbar spine disease treated in our spine surgery department from January 2017 to December 2021. Of these, 72 patients underwent a modified single-incision posterior median approach with expandable tubular assistance lumbar interbody fusion (single-incision MIS-TLIF group), while 49 patients received the classic open posterior median incision P-TLIF (open surgery group). We collected basic demographic data including age, gender, BMI, and surgical level. Surgical-related indicators such as operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, length of hospital stay, hospital costs, and complication rates were compared between the two groups. Laboratory results [whole blood C-reactive protein (CRP), serum creatine kinase (CK)] and clinical outcomes [VAS scores for low back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), excellent and good rate according to the modified MacNab criteria, and interbody fusion rate according to the Brantigan criteria] were also evaluated.
Result: There were no significant differences in the basic demographics between the two groups. The operation time, postoperative hospital stay, and hospital costs were also similar between the groups. However, significant differences were observed in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, and complication rates. On postoperative days 1 and 3, whole blood CRP and CK levels showed marked differences between the groups. At 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively, the single-incision MIS-TLIF group had lower ODI scores and VAS scores for back pain compared to the open surgery group. The excellent and good rate according to the MacNab criteria was higher in the single-incision MIS-TLIF group. There were no significant differences in leg pain VAS scores and interbody fusion rates at 12 months postoperatively between the groups.
Conclusion: The modified single-incision posterior median approach with expandable tubular assistance lumbar interbody fusion is highly effective in treating degenerative lumbar spine diseases. It results in less postoperative pain, faster recovery, and significant improvement in postoperative functional outcomes, making it a valuable treatment option.
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.