Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/39548
Title: Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion (Direct Lateral Interbody Fusion/Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion) versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery in Spinal Degenerative Disease: A Systematic Review
Authors: BAMPS, Sven 
RAYMAEKERS, Vincent 
Roosen, Gert
PUT, Eric 
Vanvolsem, Steven
Achahbar, Salah-Eddine
Meeuws, Sacha
Wissels, Maarten
PLAZIER, Mark 
Issue Date: 2023
Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
Source: World Neurosurgery, 171 , p. 10 -18
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine are often treated with posterior interbody fusion surgery (posterior lumbar interbody fusion [PLIF]) for spinal instability or intractable back pain with neurologic impairment. Several lateral, less invasive procedures have recently been described (lateral lumbar interbody fusion [LLIF]/direct lateral interbody fusion/extreme lateral interbody fusion [XLIF]). The aim of this systematic review is to compare structural and functional outcomes of lateral surgical approaches to PLIF. -METHODS: We conducted a MEDLINE (PubMed), Web of Science, Science-Direct, and Cochrane Library search for studies focusing on outcomes and complications comparing LLIF (direct lateral interbody fusion/XLIF) and PLIF. The systematic review was reported using the PRISMA criteria.RESULTS: In total, 1000 research articles were identified, of which 5 studies were included comparing the outcomes and complications between the lateral and posterior approach. Three studies found significantly less perioperative blood loss with a lateral approach. Average hospital stay was shorter in pop- -lations who underwent the lateral approach compared with PLIF. Functional outcomes (visual analog scale score/Oswestry Disability Index) were similar or better with LLIF. In most of the included studies, complication rates did not differ between the posterior and lateral approach. Most of the neurologic deficits with XLIF/LLIF were temporary and healed completely within 1 year follow-up.CONCLUSIONS: A lateral approach (XLIF/LLIF) is a good and safe alternative for PLIF in single-level degenerative lumbar diseases, with comparable func-tional outcomes, shorter hospital stays, and less blood loss. Future prospective studies are needed to establish the role of lateral minimally invasive approaches in spinal degenerative surgery.
Notes: Bamps, S (corresponding author), Jessa Hosp, Dept Neurosurg, Hasselt, Belgium.; Bamps, S (corresponding author), St Trudo Hosp, Dept Neurosurg, St Truiden, Belgium.; Bamps, S (corresponding author), St Franciscus Hosp, Dept Neurosurg, Heusden Zolder, Belgium.; Bamps, S (corresponding author), Study & Training Ctr Neurosurg, Virga Jesse, Belgium.; Bamps, S (corresponding author), Hasselt Univ, Fac Med & Life Sci, Hasselt, Belgium.
Sven.bamps@jessazh.be
Keywords: LLIF;Lumbar fusion;PLIF;Structural and functional outcomes;XLIF
Document URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1942/39548
ISSN: 1878-8750
e-ISSN: 1878-8769
DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2022.12.033
ISI #: 000919647800001
Rights: 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Category: A1
Type: Journal Contribution
Appears in Collections:Research publications

Show full item record

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

2
checked on Apr 30, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.