Perioperative analysis of the posterior medial approach versus the paravertebral approach for interbody fusion in the treatment of grade Ⅰ~Ⅱ lumbar spondylolisthesis in the elderly / 中华老年医学杂志

ABSTRACT

Objective:To compare perioperative differences between posterior lumbar interbody fusion(PLIF)by a posterior median approach or open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion(TLIF)and minimally invasive surgery TLIF(MIS-TLIF)by a paravertebral approach for lumbar spondylolisthesis(Ⅰ~Ⅱ°)in elderly patients.Methods:A retrospective study was conducted to analyze clinical data of patients aged 60 years and over with lumbar spondylolisthesis(n=68)who underwent PLIF or MIS-TLIF from January 2014 to December 2017.Patients were divided into the PLIF group(n=40, 12 males and 28 females)and the MIS-TLIF group(n=28, 6 males and 22 females)according to the type of surgery.Differences in operating time, blood loss, exposure frequency, postoperative drainage volume, indwelling duration, hospital stay length and complications were compared between the groups.Results:There was no significant difference in operative time between the PLIF group and the MIS-TLIF group(156±51)min vs.(153±38)min( P=0.77). There were significant differences in intraoperative blood loss and radiation exposure frequency between the PLIF group and the MIS-TLIF group(458±272)ml vs.(157±104)ml( P<0.001); (6.7±1.5)times vs.(30.6±6.9)times( P<0.01). There was no significant difference in intraoperative complications between the PLIF group and the MIS-TLIF group(25% or 10/40 vs.7.1% or 2/28, P=0.057). There were more postoperative drainage, longer indwelling time and hospitalization in the PLIF group than in the MIS-TLIF group(664±351)ml vs.(210±127)ml( P<0.001); (3.7±2.9)d vs.(2.2±0.8)d( P=0.002); (9.2±3.6)d vs.(6.9±1.7)d( P=0.001). The incidence of postoperative neurological complications was not significantly different between the PLIF group and the MIS-TLIF group(7.5% or 3/40 vs.14.3% or 4/28, P=0.365). The incidence of postoperative non-neurological complications was higher in the PLIF group than in the MIS-TLIF group(27.5% or 11/40 vs.7.1% or 2/28, P=0.036). Conclusions:Compared with PLIF, MIS-TLIF has the advantages of less intraoperative bleeding and postoperative drainage, shorter indwelling duration of urinary catheters, shorter hospital stays and fewer complications of non-neurological complications in treating Ⅰ-Ⅱ degree lumbar spondylolisthesis in the elderly, but it requires more radiation exposure.