Recent Efficacy of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion Combined With Wiltse Approach Pedicle Screw Fixation for Degenerative Single-Level Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

The study aimed to explore the recent efficacy of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) combined with Wiltse approach pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of single-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS).

Related collections

Most cited references 24

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Lumbar interbody fusion: techniques, indications and comparison of interbody fusion options including PLIF, TLIF, MI-TLIF, OLIF/ATP, LLIF and ALIF.

Ralph J Mobbs, Kevin Phan, Greg Malham … (2015)

Degenerative disc and facet joint disease of the lumbar spine is common in the ageing population, and is one of the most frequent causes of disability. Lumbar spondylosis may result in mechanical back pain, radicular and claudicant symptoms, reduced mobility and poor quality of life. Surgical interbody fusion of degenerative levels is an effective treatment option to stabilize the painful motion segment, and may provide indirect decompression of the neural elements, restore lordosis and correct deformity. The surgical options for interbody fusion of the lumbar spine include: posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF), oblique lumbar interbody fusion/anterior to psoas (OLIF/ATP), lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). The indications may include: discogenic/facetogenic low back pain, neurogenic claudication, radiculopathy due to foraminal stenosis, lumbar degenerative spinal deformity including symptomatic spondylolisthesis and degenerative scoliosis. In general, traditional posterior approaches are frequently used with acceptable fusion rates and low complication rates, however they are limited by thecal sac and nerve root retraction, along with iatrogenic injury to the paraspinal musculature and disruption of the posterior tension band. Minimally invasive (MIS) posterior approaches have evolved in an attempt to reduce approach related complications. Anterior approaches avoid the spinal canal, cauda equina and nerve roots, however have issues with approach related abdominal and vascular complications. In addition, lateral and OLIF techniques have potential risks to the lumbar plexus and psoas muscle. The present study aims firstly to comprehensively review the available literature and evidence for different lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) techniques. Secondly, we propose a set of recommendations and guidelines for the indications for interbody fusion options. Thirdly, this article provides a description of each approach, and illustrates the potential benefits and disadvantages of each technique with reference to indication and spine level performed.

0 comments Cited 332 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Complications and Morbidities of Mini-open Anterior Retroperitoneal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion in 179 Patients

Clément Silvestre, Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong, Radwan Hilmi … (2012)

Study Design A retrospective study including 179 patients who underwent oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) at one institution. Purpose To report the complications associated with a minimally invasive technique of a retroperitoneal anterolateral approach to the lumbar spine. Overview of Literature Different approaches to the lumbar spine have been proposed, but they are associated with an increased risk of complications and a longer operation. Methods A total of 179 patients with previous posterior instrumented fusion undergoing OLIF were included. The technique is described in terms of: the number of levels fused, operative time and blood loss. Persurgical and postsurgical complications were noted. Results Patients were age 54.1 ± 10.6 with a BMI of 24.8 ± 4.1 kg/m2. The procedure was performed in the lumbar spine at L1-L2 in 4, L2-L3 in 54, L3-L4 in 120, L4-L5 in 134, and L5-S1 in 6 patients. It was done at 1 level in 56, 2 levels in 107, and 3 levels in 16 patients. Surgery time and blood loss were, respectively, 32.5 ± 13.2 minutes and 57 ± 131 ml per level fused. There were 19 patients with a single complication and one with two complications, including two patients with postoperative radiculopathy after L3-5 OLIF. There was no abdominal weakness or herniation. Conclusions Minimally invasive OLIF can be performed easily and safely in the lumbar spine from L2 to L5, and at L1-2 for selected cases. Up to 3 levels can be addressed through a 'sliding window'. It is associated with minimal blood loss and short operations, and with decreased risk of abdominal wall weakness or herniation.