Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Indication and technique of TLIF procedure are described. TLIF provides for anterior column support and posterior tension band. It is a unilateral approach to the spine, and there is no need to expose or manipulate the dura. It provides the benefits of a 360 degrees fusion without performing an anterior approach. It restores the normal anatomy of the motion segment and maintains normal lumbar lordosis. Patients are mobilized quickly and resume activities early.     

经椎间孔椎间融合术治疗高位腰椎间盘突出症

<正>2008年1月~2012年6月,我们采用经椎间孔椎间融合术治疗12例高位腰椎间盘突出症患者,疗效满意。1材料与方法1.1病例资料本组12例,男8例,女4例,年龄30~65岁。突出节段:L1~24例,L2~33例,L3~45例。患者术前均有不同程度的腰痛,同时伴或不伴一侧或双侧下肢放射痛和皮肤麻木等症状;经系统保守治疗无效,症状持续均≥6个     

经椎间孔椎体间植骨治疗下腰椎爆裂性骨折

目的 探讨在下腰椎爆裂性骨折中应用单一后路经椎间孔椎体间植骨融合术重建椎体前中柱的有效性.方法 2009年1月～2011 年6月,采用单一后路切开复位椎弓根内固定经椎间孔椎体间植骨融合术治疗下腰椎爆裂性骨折19例.分别评价术前、术后、末次随访时的影像学指标变化,及术前与术后末次随访时神经功能变化.结果 19例患者平均随访15.6 个月.所有患者术后未发生切口感染、神经功能损伤及内固定器松动断裂等并发症.末次随访时18例患者证实椎间融合,19例患者术前平均伤椎高度为正常椎体高度的（40.62±12.32）%,术后恢复至（96.52±10.62）%,末次随访时为（95.43%9.54）%.腰椎前凸角术前32.2°±5.1°,术后38.4°±5.2°,末次随访时为38.4°±7.2°.末次随访时伴有神经功能障碍的患者均有1级以上的恢复.结论 下腰椎爆裂性骨折行后路椎弓根螺钉内固定经椎间孔椎体间植骨融合术,能完成短节段三柱固定,同时修复了前柱及矫正脊柱后凸,取得满意的骨性融合率.     

内窥镜下经椎间孔减压椎间融合术治疗复发性腰椎间盘突出症

复发性腰椎间盘突出症(recurrent lumbar disc herniation,RLDH)是指腰椎间盘切除术后经过6个月以上的"无痛期",原手术节段残留的椎间盘组织于手术侧或对侧再次突出引发神经症状[1].而初次手术后形成的硬膜外瘢痕、解剖结构紊乱往往给再次手术造成困难.我科自2008年8月～2010年12月采用内窥镜下经椎间孔减压椎间融合术(transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion,TLIF)治疗1 4例RLDH患者,疗效满意,报告如下.     

经椎间孔病灶清除椎间融合术治疗腰椎布鲁杆菌脊柱炎的疗效分析

目的 :探讨经椎间孔病灶清除椎间融合术(TLIDF)治疗腰椎布鲁杆菌脊柱炎的可行性及临床疗效。方法:2010年2月~2015年6月我院采用TLIDF治疗28例腰椎布鲁杆菌脊柱炎患者,术前口服抗布鲁杆菌药物3周,27例采用TLIDF,1例采用TLIDF+前路腰大肌脓肿清除术。术后继续规律口服抗布鲁杆菌药物6周,定期随访。从临床及影像学评价手术疗效,临床评价包括:术前、术后1周内、末次随访时血沉(ESR)、C反应蛋白(CRP),术前、末次随访时腰痛、下肢疼痛视觉模拟评分(visual analogue scales,VAS)及Oswestry功能障碍指数(Oswestry disability index,ODI);影像学评价包括:定期行腰椎X线片、CT及MRI检查,通过腰椎正侧位X线片和CT评估椎间植骨融合情况,MRI评估感染椎体、椎管及椎旁脓肿清除及炎症愈合情况。采用SPSS 19.0统计软件对数据进行统计分析。结果:术后伤口均一期愈合,无局部窦道形成,无脊髓、马尾或神经根损伤发生。术前ESR为39.3±24.9mm/h,CRP为36.2±27.6mg/L;术后1周ESR为49.8±21.6mm/h,CRP为53.1±22.1mg/L,较术前显著性增高(P0.05)。末次随访时ESR为9.4±5.8mm/h,CRP为6.1±3.4mg/L,与术前和术后1周相比ESR与CRP显著性降低(P0.05)。末次随访时腰痛、下肢痛VAS评分和ODI与术前比较均显著性改善(6.28±1.36 vs 2.53±1.26、6.74±2.83 vs 2.05±1.35、37.59±5.85 vs 7.59±2.17,P0.05)。随访期间无复发病例。结论:TLIDF可有效清除布鲁杆菌脊柱炎病灶、重建脊柱的稳定性;在配合抗布鲁杆菌药物治疗的基础上可取得较好临床疗效。     

经椎间孔椎间融合椎弓根螺钉内固定治疗椎间盘源性腰痛

目的观察经椎间孔椎间融合椎弓根螺钉内固定治疗椎间盘源性腰痛的近期疗效。方法将经临床检查和椎间盘造影确诊的19例椎间盘源性腰痛患者行经椎间孔椎间融合椎弓根螺钉内固定术,术后经12～24个月的随访,观察患者腰痛改善率和椎间融合情况。结果根据JOA标准评定,腰痛改善率平均92％,17例骨性融合,2例未融合。结论经椎间孔椎间融合椎弓根螺钉内固定治疗椎间盘源性腰痛近期疗效满意。     

经椎间孔入路腰椎椎间融合术治疗连续双节段腰椎滑脱

目的 分析经椎间孔入路腰椎椎间融合术(TLIF)治疗连续双节段腰椎滑脱(LS)的临床疗效。方法 2015年1月—2021年5月,采用TILF治疗连续双节段腰椎前滑脱患者36例,记录所有患者手术时间、术中出血量及并发症发生情况。术前、术后48 h及末次随访时采用腰腿痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分、日本骨科学会(JOA)评分、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)评估腰椎功能情况。测量并比较术前、术后及末次随访时标准站立位全脊柱正侧位X线片上滑脱距离(SD)、滑脱角度(SA)、胸椎后凸角(TK)、腰椎前凸角(LL)、骨盆入射角(PI)、骨盆倾斜角(PT)、骶骨倾斜角(SS)、矢状位垂直轴(SVA)、T₁骨盆角(TPA)、T₁倾斜角(T₁S)、胸腰和谐角(TLA)、PI与LL差值(PI-LL)等影像学参数。结果 所有手术顺利完成,手术时间为120～275(190.28±6.12) min,术中出血量为210～550(345±11) m L。所有患者术后和末次随访SD、SA较术前明显改善,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。...     

Transforaminal interbody fusion versus anterior-posterior interbody fusion of the lumbar spine: a financial analysis

Lumbar interbody fusion can be performed anteriorly or posteriorly. An anterior approach generally requires an access surgeon and often is combined with a posterior fusion. A traditional posterior interbody fusion can destabilize the spinal motion segment and requires neural retraction. A new surgical technique, a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), was recently described. It requires minimal neural retraction, and the disk space is exposed posterolaterally with removal of only one facet joint. This study compares the cost of an anterior-posterior one-level lumbar fusion with the cost of the same procedure performed using the TLIF technique. Table 1 lists the specific demographics. A retrospective review of the hospital charges of 80 patients undergoing interbody lumbar stabilization was conducted. The two groups consisted of 40 patients with an anterior-posterior fusion and 40 patients who were fused circumferentially using the TLIF technique. A cost analysis with normalization of 1998 dollars between the two groups was performed. The TLIF group had an average operative time of 213 minutes, compared with 269 minutes for the anterior-posterior group. In addition, an average additional 38 minutes were required to turn the patient from the anterior or posterior position. The average blood loss for the anterior-posterior procedure was 969 mL, compared with 489 mL for the TLIF group. Twenty-three of the anterior-posterior patients received an average of 2.2 units of blood and six of the TLIF patients received an average of 1.3 units. Use of the surgical intensive care unit was much lower in the TLIF group (38 of 40 patients versus 2 of 40 patients). The average length of stay was 6.1 days for the anterior-posterior group compared with an average of 3.3 days for the TLIF group. The average cost of the anterior-posterior patients was $49,085, compared with $33,784 for the TLIF group. Cost analysis between the two groups show the TLIF patients had an average savings of approximately $15,000 per admission. This cost comparison was conducted only for the time of the operative procedure. No attempt was made to analyze rates of fusion between the two groups or ultimate clinic outcome. There were no major complications in either group, and no patient returned to surgery for a lumbar spinal problem at the authors' hospital within 1 year of the index procedure.     

Transforaminal thoracic interbody fusion

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the early clinical safety and efficacy of transforaminal thoracic interbody fusion (TTIF) with interbody cage application for thoracic myelopathy caused by anterior compression (TMAC).

Methods

A total of 10 patients who underwent TTIF for TMAC from July 2009 to July 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Thoracic spinal lesions included thoracic disc herniation, thoracic ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament, thoracic vertebral compression fracture, and thoracic spine fracture dislocation. Demographic data, radiological findings as well as operative information were collected. Postoperative functional outcomes evaluated by the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) score and complications were analyzed.

Results

The mean operation time was 186.5?min (range 110–315?min), the mean operative blood loss was 845.0?ml (range 400–2000?ml), and the mean recumbent period was 2.7 days (range 1–8 days). During the follow-up period all patients exhibited significant improvements in neurological deficits. The mJOA score improved from a mean of 6.1?±?1.7 preoperatively to 7.4?±?1.6 postoperatively and to 9.3?±?1.6?at final follow-up (P <0.01), with an overall recovery rate of 69.0?±?26.1%. Solid fusion was observed in all cases. A wound infection was found in one case, in which the patient recovered with no residual neurological deficits after surgical debridement and administration of intravenous antibiotics. No cage-related complications were found in this study.

Conclusion

The use of TTIF with cage application can be an effective treatment method of thoracic myelopathy caused by anterior compression, with favorable efficacy and safety.

     

经椎间孔髓核摘除并椎间融合术治疗高位腰椎间盘突出症

目的探讨经椎间孔入路髓核摘除椎管减压并椎间植骨融合内固定术治疗高位腰椎间盘突出症的临床疗效。方法对27例采用经椎间孔髓核摘除椎管减压并椎间植骨融合内固定术治疗的高位腰椎间盘突出症患者的临床资料进行回顾分析。观察指标包括术前及术后1年疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)及植骨融合情况。结果术前VAS评分(8.1±0.7)分,术后1年VAS评分(1.9±0.5)分,两者比较有明显差异(P0.05)。术前ODI评分(53.26±8.97)%,术后1年(18.47±5.37)%,两者比较有明显差异(P0.05)。术后1年椎间均融合,内固定物未出现松动和断裂。1例术后出现神经根牵拉损伤的症状,经对症处理6周后恢复。结论经椎间孔入路髓核摘除椎管减压并椎间植骨融合内固定术治疗高位腰椎间盘突出症临床疗效可靠。     

经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术在胸腰段爆裂性骨折手术中的应用

目的 探讨经椎间孔腰椎椎体间融合术(TLIF)在胸腰段爆裂性骨折手术中的作用.方法 2010年1月至2012年1月应用TLIF技术治疗椎体前缘高度丢失大于50％,椎管占位率大于40％的胸腰段单节段爆裂性骨折患者共23例,男15例,女8例;年龄22～61岁,平均45.3岁;损伤节段:T12 5例,L115例,L23例.骨折按照Denis分型:均为爆裂性骨折.脊髓神经功能受损情况按美国脊髓损伤协会(ASIA)脊髓神经功能障碍分级:A级1例,B级2例,C级7例,D级11例,E级2例.结果 本组患者手术时间100～160 min,平均140 min;出血量200～750 mL,平均370 mL.无术中、术后并发症发生.术后随访5 ～ 24个月(平均12.3个月),末次随访时脊髓神经功能按ASIA分级:A级1例,B级1例,C级4例,D级7例,E级10例,平均提高1.8级.伤椎前缘高度由术前45.2％±17.6％恢复至术后90.2％±13.7％,后缘高度由术前81.5％±14.3％恢复至术后93.5％±15.4％,cobb角由术前28.4°±11.8°改善至术后6.4°±3.8°,以上指标差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.05).结论 TLIF技术可用于胸腰段爆裂性骨折的治疗,能完成对骨折的减压、固定和前柱的支撑植骨融合,值得推广应用.     

Quadrant辅助下TLIF治疗腰椎退变性疾病

[目的]探讨采用常规腰椎固定系统经椎旁肌间隙入路Quadrant辅助下经椎间孔椎体间融合(TLIF)治疗腰椎退变性疾病临床疗效。[方法]回顾性分析37例采用本手术方式治疗的腰椎退变性疾病患者,椎旁小切口Quadrant辅助下肌间隙入路,行患侧关节突切除,减压后椎体间融合,常规固定系统固定。术前、术后3个月及末次随访时采用疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)和Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)分别评估患者疼痛、神经功能情况,影像学检查评估椎体间融合情况。[结果]所有患者均完成1年以上随访时间,患者VAS、ODI和术前相比获得较好的改善(P0.05),影像学数据显示骨性融合率为84.4%。[结论]采用常规腰椎固定系统经椎旁肌间隙入路Quadrant辅助下TLIF治疗腰椎退变性疾病,手术损伤小、手术费用低,并有良好的临床疗效。     

经肌间隙入路椎间孔椎体间融合术治疗腰椎滑脱症

目的比较经肌间隙入路椎间孔椎体间融合术(TLIF)与常规TLIF治疗Ⅰ、Ⅱ度腰椎滑脱的临床疗效。方法将50例Ⅰ、Ⅱ度腰椎滑脱患者按随机数字表法分为常规TLIF手术组(常规组,25例)和经肌间隙入路TLIF手术组(研究组,25例)。记录手术时间、术中出血量、伤口引流量,观察术后14 d疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)、术后3个月Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI),评价术后6个月融合率、术后12个月临床疗效满意率。结果患者均获得随访,时间12~24个月。手术时间、术中出血量、伤口引流量、术后14 d VAS评分、术后3个月ODI评分研究组均优于常规组,差异均有统计学意义(P0.05);术后6个月融合率、术后12个月临床疗效满意率两组比较差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论经肌间隙入路TLIF治疗Ⅰ、Ⅱ度腰椎滑脱近期疗效可靠。     

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with one cage and excised local bone

Introduction

The effect of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with one cage and excised local bone were investigated in 52 patients with a mean follow-up of 18.2 months.

Method

The clinical outcomes including the modified Prolo scale and a visual analog scale (VAS), and radiological assessments including the ratio of interbody graft area, fusion rate, posterior disk height (PH), and the lordosis angle (LA) of the motion segment were studied.

Results

According to a modified Prolo scale, 90.4% of the patients obtained either excellent or good results. The VAS significantly decreased postoperatively. There was significant postoperative improvement of the PH and LA, and no significant loss of the PH and LA was found at final follow-up. The fusion rate in this series was 96.6%.

Conclusion

In conclusion, TLIF with one cage and excised local bone grafting can provide satisfactory treatment outcomes and solid interbody fusion without harvesting and grafting autologous iliac bone.     

经椎间孔入路腰椎体间融合治疗下腰椎退变

目的总结经椎间孔入路腰椎体间融合治疗下腰椎退变的临床效果。方法采用半椎板或全椎板切除、经椎间孔入路腰椎体间融合、椎弓根螺钉固定治疗下腰椎退变患者26例。结果26例随访4~28个月,平均11个月。临床评价:优13例,良12例,尚可1例。无1例出现永久性神经损伤手术并发症。术后X线片显示植骨密度随术后时间的延长而加深,钛网融合器无下陷,椎间隙高度无丢失,椎弓根螺钉系统无断裂和移位。结论经椎间孔入路腰椎体间融合治疗下腰椎退变创伤小,并发症少,临床效果较好。     

经椎间孔融合联合单侧椎弓根钉内固定治疗高位腰椎椎间盘突出症

目的观察经椎间孔融合(transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion,TLIF)联合单侧椎弓根钉内固定治疗高位腰椎椎间盘突出症的临床疗效。方法 2006年3月～2008年12月收治且获得随访的单间隙高位腰椎椎间盘突出症患者23例,其中L1/L25例,L2/L38例,L3/L410例。均采用经椎间孔单枚Cage植骨融合并单侧椎弓根螺钉内固定术治疗。根据日本骨科学会(Japanese Orthopaedic Association,JOA)(29分)评分法评估术后疗效,计算改善率和优良率,观察植骨融合情况。结果 1例硬脊膜撕裂,1例椎弓根螺钉位置偏斜。随访23～52个月,平均40.2个月,JOA评分由术前10.04±2.12提高到随访23个月时的24.13±3.39,优良率为91.3%。23个月时骨性融合率为95.8%。结论TLIF联合单侧椎弓根钉内固定治疗高位腰椎椎间盘突出症具有不破坏健侧结构,手术和住院时间短,内固定费用低,神经功能康复好的优点,是治疗高位腰椎椎间盘突出症可供选择的较好方法。     

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using unilateral pedicle screws and a translaminar screw

Lumbar spinal fusion is advancing with minimally invasive techniques, bone graft alternatives, and new implants. This has resulted in significant reductions of operative time, duration of hospitalization, and higher success in fusion rates. However, costs have increased as many new technologies are expensive. This study was carried out to investigate the clinical outcomes and fusion rates of a low implant load construct of unilateral pedicle screws and a translaminar screw in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) which reduced the cost of the posterior implants by almost 50%. Nineteen consecutive patients who underwent single level TLIF with this construct were included in the study. Sixteen patients had a TLIF allograft interbody spacer placed, while in three a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage was used. Follow-up ranged from 15 to 54 months with a mean of 32 months. A clinical and radiographic evaluation was carried out preoperatively and at multiple time points following surgery. An overall improvement in Oswestry scores and visual analogue scales for leg and back pain (VAS) was observed. Three patients underwent revision surgery due to recurrence of back pain. All patients showed radiographic evidence of fusion from 9 to 26 months (mean 19) following surgery. This study suggests that unilateral pedicle screws and a contralateral translaminar screw are a cheaper and viable option for single level lumbar fusion.     

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Context

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) are both frequently used as a surgical treatment for lumbar spondylolisthesis. Because of the unilateral transforaminal route to the intervertebral space used in TLIF, as opposed to the bilateral route used in PLIF, TLIF could be associated with fewer complications, shorter duration of surgery, and less blood loss, whereas the effectiveness of both techniques on back or leg pain is equal.

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: surgical technique and results in 24 patients

OBJECTIVE: The advantage of anterior column support and fusion in addition to pedicle fixation in patients with degenerative spinal disorders has become increasingly clear. With the increase in popularity of this treatment, a variety of techniques have been used to achieve the goal of anterior column support, fusion, and segmental instrumentation. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion has been used since the late 1940s in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine. We evaluated a modification to posterior lumbar interbody fusion called transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on 24 patients (9 women, 15 men) who underwent TLIF. The approach involved a unilateral laminectomy and inferior facetectomy at the level of fusion. The interbody fusion was achieved from this unilateral approach by performing discectomy, arthrodesis, and insertion of one or two titanium cages packed with autologous bone. The average age of the patients in this study was 42.6 +/- 12.5 years. Five patients were smokers. Five cases were related to workmen's compensation. Seventeen patients' original symptoms were a combination of low back pain and radiculopathy. Ten patients had had a previous spine operation. RESULTS: Eleven patients had L4-S1 TLIFs. The rest of the patients had a single-level TLIF (L2-S1). Average intensive care unit and floor days were 1.1 +/- 1.0 and 5.8 +/- 2.2 days, respectively. The number of days to ambulation was 2.8 +/- 1.6 days. There were a total of six self-limited complications in 24 patients (including one transient neurological complication). The average follow-up time was 16.9 +/- 9.1 months. Twenty-two patients had solid fusions. A modified Prolo scale (4 worst, 20 best) was used to evaluate the clinical outcome. The average score was 16.1 +/- 4.1. CONCLUSION: TLIF is a reliable and safe technique for interbody support that can be performed with excellent clinical outcome. In the authors' experience, TLIF offers excellent exposure with minimal risk. This applies particularly in cases of repeat spine surgery, in which the presence of scar tissue makes traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion techniques difficult or impossible. In addition, TLIF seems to be a viable alternative to anteroposterior circumferential fusion and/or anterior lumbar interbody fusion.