ABSTRACT
<p><b>BACKGROUND</b>The concept of minimally invasive techniques is to make every effort to reduce tissue damage. Certainly, reducing skin incision is an important part of these techniques. This study aimed to investigate the clinical feasibility of Mast Quadrant-assisted modified transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with a small single posterior median incision.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>During the period of March 2011 to March 2012, 34 patients with single-segment degenerative lumbar disease underwent the minimally invasive modified TLIF assisted by Mast Quadrant with a small single posterior median incision (single incision group). The cases in this group were compared to 37 patients with single-segment degenerative lumbar disease in the double incision group. The perioperative conditions of patients in these two groups were statistically analyzed and compared. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, and sacrospinalis muscle damage evaluation indicators before operation and 3, 12 months postoperation were compared.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>A total of 31 and 35 cases in the single incision and double incision groups, respectively, completed at least 12 months of systemic follow-up. The differences in perioperative conditions between the two groups were not statistically significant. The incision length of the single incision group was significantly shorter than that of the double incision group (P < 0.01). The ODI and VAS scores of patients in both groups improved significantly at 3 and 12 months postoperation. However, these two indicators at 3 and 12 months postoperation and the sacrospinalis muscle damage evaluation indicators at 3 months postoperation did not differ significantly between the two groups (P ≥ 0.05).</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>Mast Quadrant-assisted modified TLIF with a small single posterior median incision has excellent clinical feasibility compared to minimally invasive TLIF with a double paramedian incision.</p>
Subject(s)
Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Lumbar Vertebrae , General Surgery , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures , Methods , Spinal Fusion , Methods , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
<p><b>BACKGROUND</b>In recent years, a variety of minimally invasive lumbar surgery techniques have achieved desirable efficacy, but some dispute remains regarding the advantages over open surgery. This study aimed to compare minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion via MAST Quadrant retractor with open surgery in terms of perioperative factors, postoperative back muscle function, and 24-month postoperative follow-up results.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>From September 2006 to June 2008, patients with single-level degenerative lumbar spine disease who were not responsive to conservative treatment were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomized to undergo either minimally invasive surgery (MIS, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion via MAST Quadrant retractor, 41 cases) or open surgery (improved transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, 38 cases).</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The MIS group had longer intraoperative fluoroscopy time than the open surgery group, and the open surgery group had significantly increased postoperative drainage volume and significantly prolonged postoperative recovery time compared with the MIS group (P < 0.05 for all). MRI scanning showed that the T2 relaxation time in the multifidus muscle was significantly shorter in the MIS group than in the open surgery group at 3 months after surgery (P < 0.01). Surface electromyography of the sacrospinalis muscle showed that the average discharge amplitude and frequency were significantly higher in the MIS group than in the open surgery group (P < 0.01). The Oswestry disability index and visual analog scale scores were better at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively than preoperatively in both groups. Both groups of patients met the imaging convergence criteria at the last follow-up.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>MIS can effectively reduce sacrospinalis muscle injury compared with open surgery, which is conducive to early functional recovery. In the short term, MIS is superior to open surgery, but in the long term there is no significant difference between the two procedures.</p>
Subject(s)
Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Lumbar Vertebrae , General Surgery , Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures , Methods , Spinal Diseases , General Surgery , Spinal Fusion , Methods , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To put some improvements to the traditional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and discuss its clinical significance.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Completed the traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and TLIF procedure in 12 fresh cadavers, dissect further to expose the surrounding anatomical structures, and put the modified TLIF surgery according to the anatomical findings. And simulated the operation in 12 fresh cadavers, analyzed its feasibility and potential advantages.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The early anatomical study found that the related nerve root was in a state of high tension and certain risk of injury when completed the traditional PLIF and TLIF surgery, and found certain operational area between the superior articular process and the midline structures of the spinous processes and interspinous ligaments. Put the modified TLIF surgical approach according to the anatomical findings, which the operating area is located in PLIF outside and TLIF inside. As the following words: Take a posterior-middle incision, preserve the supraspinous and interspinous ligaments, and the spinous processes, dissect the bilateral paravertebral muscle, expose lamina and facet joints, not including transverse process, and remove unilateral inferior two third lamina, inferior articular process and expose the articular surface of the superior articular process, then dispose the intervertebral space for interbody fusion obliquely in the unilateral approach. Successfully completed the modified TLIF procedure in 12 fresh cadavers, the results showed that the technique has the following advantages. (1) Only remove unilateral inferior two third lamina and inferior articular process, preserve the supraspinous and interspinous ligaments, and the spinous processes, not expose the transverse process. (2) Both central canal, and lateral recess and nerve root canal of the operative side can be decompressed effectively simultaneously. (3) Avoid excessive traction to the thecal sac and traversing nerve roots and decrease the injury rate due to the reservation of the midline structures and the oblique manipulation, and less injury rate of the exiting nerve root, because of not necessary to expose it routinely.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>The modified TLIF is safe and feasible, could effectively reduce the nerve roots injuries. Maybe it's a better choice for most of the Chinese patients at present.</p>