Published online Dec 16, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i35.12880
Peer-review started: August 11, 2022
First decision: September 25, 2022
Revised: October 7, 2022
Accepted: November 17, 2022
Article in press: November 17, 2022
Published online: December 16, 2022
Processing time: 125 Days and 0.4 Hours
Improving the sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters after fusion surgery is important for improving clinical outcomes. The impact of midline lumbar fusion (MIDLF) on sagittal lumbar-pelvic alignment for the management of degenerative lumbar diseases is still unknown.
To analyze the effects of short-segment MIDLF and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) on sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters.
We retrospectively analyzed 63 patients with degenerative lumbar diseases who underwent single-segment MIDLF or MIS-TLIF. The imaging data of patients were collected before surgery and at the final follow-up. The radiological sagittal parameters included the lumbar lordosis (LL), lower LL, L4 slope (L4S), L5 slope (L5S), L5 incidence (L5I), L1 axis and S1 distance (LASD), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), and PI-LL mismatch (PI-LL). Additionally, the clinical outcomes, including lower back and leg pain visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores, were also analyzed.
In both groups, LL and Lower LL significantly increased, while L5I and LASD significantly decreased at the final follow-up compared to that recorded prior to operation (P < 0.05). In the MIDLF group, L4S significantly decreased compared to that recorded prior to operation (P < 0.05), while the mean SS significantly increased and the PT significantly decreased compared to that recorded prior to operation (P < 0.05). In the MIS-TLIF group, SS slightly increased and the mean PT value decreased compared to that recorded prior to operation, but without a statistically significant difference (P > 0.05). However, the PI-LL in both groups was significantly reduced compared to that recorded prior to operation (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters between the two groups prior to operation and at the final follow-up (P > 0.05). In addition, the change in sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters did not differ significantly, except for ΔLASD within the two groups (P > 0.05). The mean lower back and leg pain VAS and ODI scores in both groups were significantly improved three months after surgery and at the final follow-up. Though the mean ODI score in the MIDLF group three months after surgery was slightly higher than that in the MIS-TLIF group, there was no significant difference between the two groups at the final follow-up.
Short-segment MIDLF and MIS-TLIF can equally improve sagittal lumbar parameters such as LL, Lower LL, L5I, and LASD in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. However, MIDLF had a larger impact on pelvic parameters than MIS-TLIF.
Core Tip: It is important for clinical outcomes to improve the sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters after fusion surgery. However, whether midline lumbar fusion (MIDLF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) differ in the impact of the sagittal lumbar-pelvic alignment for degenerative lumbar diseases is still unknown. The current study compared the imaging data and clinical efficacy of MIDLF with those of MIS-TLIF to evaluate the impact of the two procedures on the sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases.