Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11434/786
Title: Choice of approach does not affect clinical and radiologic outcomes: a comparative cohort of patients having anterior lumbar interbody fusion and patients having lateral lumbar interbody fusion at 24 months.
Epworth Authors: Malham, Gregory
Blecher, Carl
Other Authors: Parker, Rhiannon
Chow, F. Y.
Seex, Kevin
Keywords: Spondylolisthesis
Degenerative Disc Disease
Oswestry Disability Index
ODI
Physical Component Score
PCS
Mental Component Score
MCS
Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion
ALIF
Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion
LLIF
Lordosis
Neurosciences Clinical Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Victoria, Australia
Issue Date: Aug-2016
Publisher: Thieme
Citation: Global Spine J. 2016 Aug;6(5):472-81
Abstract: STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected registry data. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes between comparative cohorts of patients having anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and patients having lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). METHODS: Ninety consecutive patients were treated by a single surgeon with either ALIF (n = 50) or LLIF (n = 40). Inclusion criteria were patients age 45 to 70 years with degenerative disk disease or grade 1 to 2 spondylolisthesis and single-level pathology from L1 to S1. Patient-reported outcome measures included pain (visual analog scale), disability (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]), and quality of life (Short Form 36 physical component score [PCS] and mental component scores [MCS]). Assessment of fusion and measurement of lordosis and posterior disk height were performed on computed tomography scans. RESULTS: At 24 months, patients having ALIF had significant improvements in back (64%) and leg (65%) pain and ODI (60%), PCS (44%), and MCS (26%; p < 0.05) scores. Patients having LLIF had significant improvements in back (56%) and leg (57%) pain and ODI (52%), PCS (48%), and MCS (12%; p < 0.05) scores. Fourteen complications occurred in the ALIF group, and in the LLIF group, there were 17 complications (p > 0.05). The fusion rate was 100% for ALIF and 95% for LLIF (p = 0.1948). ALIF added ∼6 degrees of lordosis and 3 mm of height, primarily measured at L5-S1, and LLIF added ∼3 degrees of lordosis and 2 mm of height between L1 to L5. Mean follow-up was 34.1 months. CONCLUSIONS: In comparative cohorts of patients having ALIF and patients having LLIF at 24 months postoperatively, there were no significant differences in clinical outcomes, complication rates, or fusion rates.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11434/786
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1569055
PubMed URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27433432
ISSN: 2192-5682
Journal Title: Global Spine Journal
Type: Journal Article
Affiliated Organisations: Neurosurgery Department, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Type of Clinical Study or Trial: Retrospective studies
Appears in Collections:Neurosciences

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


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