Hania Shahzad, Maximillian Lee, Frank Epitropoulous, Nazihah Bhatti, Varun K. Singh, Venkat Kavuri, Elizabeth Yu
{"title":"比较微创经椎间孔腰椎椎体融合术 (TLIF) 的趋势和结果:回顾性分析","authors":"Hania Shahzad, Maximillian Lee, Frank Epitropoulous, Nazihah Bhatti, Varun K. Singh, Venkat Kavuri, Elizabeth Yu","doi":"10.1016/j.jor.2024.07.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To describe utilization patterns of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures and to evaluate indirect healthcare utilization indicators such as revisions, infection, and complication rates for various TLIF techniques.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A retrospective analysis using the Pearldiver database was conducted to identify patients who underwent TLIF between 2010 and 2022. The patient population was stratified into four groups: TLIF with an open approach (TLIF-Open), TLIF with stereotactic navigation (TLIF-NAV), TLIF with the assistance of an operating microscope (TLIF-MI), and TLIF utilizing navigation and operating microscope (TLIF-Combined). Revision, infection, and complication rates were analyzed and compared between each technique with open procedure as the reference procedure using multivariate analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Over the past 13 years, TLIF-Open procedures showed a consistent decrease in utilization, while TLIF-NAV, TLIF-MI, and TLIF-Combined approaches remained relatively stable without experiencing the same dramatic increase as the decline in TLIF-Open procedures. Multivariate regression analysis revealed, TLIF-NAV and TLIF-MI procedures were associated with a higher likelihood of undergoing revision surgeries within 30 days post-operatively, with TLIF-NAV also being linked to a higher risk of infection within 30 days. The TLIF-MI group had a lower likelihood of acute kidney injury (AKI), while the TLIF-NAV group had a lower likelihood of pneumonia and urinary tract infections (UTI).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There has been a noticeable shift in the utilization of TLIF procedures from open to minimally invasive approaches. While stereotactic navigation demonstrates favorable outcomes in terms of complications, surgeons must carefully consider infection risks and revision rates.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":16633,"journal":{"name":"Journal of orthopaedics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0972978X24002782/pdfft?md5=b6d3e545052c60a659d6d8bc8b87e72b&pid=1-s2.0-S0972978X24002782-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing trends and outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures: A retrospective analysis\",\"authors\":\"Hania Shahzad, Maximillian Lee, Frank Epitropoulous, Nazihah Bhatti, Varun K. Singh, Venkat Kavuri, Elizabeth Yu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jor.2024.07.010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To describe utilization patterns of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures and to evaluate indirect healthcare utilization indicators such as revisions, infection, and complication rates for various TLIF techniques.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A retrospective analysis using the Pearldiver database was conducted to identify patients who underwent TLIF between 2010 and 2022. The patient population was stratified into four groups: TLIF with an open approach (TLIF-Open), TLIF with stereotactic navigation (TLIF-NAV), TLIF with the assistance of an operating microscope (TLIF-MI), and TLIF utilizing navigation and operating microscope (TLIF-Combined). Revision, infection, and complication rates were analyzed and compared between each technique with open procedure as the reference procedure using multivariate analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Over the past 13 years, TLIF-Open procedures showed a consistent decrease in utilization, while TLIF-NAV, TLIF-MI, and TLIF-Combined approaches remained relatively stable without experiencing the same dramatic increase as the decline in TLIF-Open procedures. Multivariate regression analysis revealed, TLIF-NAV and TLIF-MI procedures were associated with a higher likelihood of undergoing revision surgeries within 30 days post-operatively, with TLIF-NAV also being linked to a higher risk of infection within 30 days. The TLIF-MI group had a lower likelihood of acute kidney injury (AKI), while the TLIF-NAV group had a lower likelihood of pneumonia and urinary tract infections (UTI).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There has been a noticeable shift in the utilization of TLIF procedures from open to minimally invasive approaches. While stereotactic navigation demonstrates favorable outcomes in terms of complications, surgeons must carefully consider infection risks and revision rates.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16633,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of orthopaedics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0972978X24002782/pdfft?md5=b6d3e545052c60a659d6d8bc8b87e72b&pid=1-s2.0-S0972978X24002782-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of orthopaedics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0972978X24002782\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0972978X24002782","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparing trends and outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures: A retrospective analysis
Purpose
To describe utilization patterns of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures and to evaluate indirect healthcare utilization indicators such as revisions, infection, and complication rates for various TLIF techniques.
Methods
A retrospective analysis using the Pearldiver database was conducted to identify patients who underwent TLIF between 2010 and 2022. The patient population was stratified into four groups: TLIF with an open approach (TLIF-Open), TLIF with stereotactic navigation (TLIF-NAV), TLIF with the assistance of an operating microscope (TLIF-MI), and TLIF utilizing navigation and operating microscope (TLIF-Combined). Revision, infection, and complication rates were analyzed and compared between each technique with open procedure as the reference procedure using multivariate analysis.
Results
Over the past 13 years, TLIF-Open procedures showed a consistent decrease in utilization, while TLIF-NAV, TLIF-MI, and TLIF-Combined approaches remained relatively stable without experiencing the same dramatic increase as the decline in TLIF-Open procedures. Multivariate regression analysis revealed, TLIF-NAV and TLIF-MI procedures were associated with a higher likelihood of undergoing revision surgeries within 30 days post-operatively, with TLIF-NAV also being linked to a higher risk of infection within 30 days. The TLIF-MI group had a lower likelihood of acute kidney injury (AKI), while the TLIF-NAV group had a lower likelihood of pneumonia and urinary tract infections (UTI).
Conclusion
There has been a noticeable shift in the utilization of TLIF procedures from open to minimally invasive approaches. While stereotactic navigation demonstrates favorable outcomes in terms of complications, surgeons must carefully consider infection risks and revision rates.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Orthopaedics aims to be a leading journal in orthopaedics and contribute towards the improvement of quality of orthopedic health care. The journal publishes original research work and review articles related to different aspects of orthopaedics including Arthroplasty, Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, Trauma, Spine and Spinal deformities, Pediatric orthopaedics, limb reconstruction procedures, hand surgery, and orthopaedic oncology. It also publishes articles on continuing education, health-related information, case reports and letters to the editor. It is requested to note that the journal has an international readership and all submissions should be aimed at specifying something about the setting in which the work was conducted. Authors must also provide any specific reasons for the research and also provide an elaborate description of the results.