Radiological and clinical outcomes of midline lumbar fusion on sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters for degenerative lumbar diseases

doi:10.12998/wjcc.v10.i35.12880

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 10, Issue 35

This Article

Academic Content and Language Evaluation of This Article

CrossCheck and Google Search of This Article

Academic Rules and Norms of This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Research Domain of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

Total Article Views (2494)

All Articles published online

The chart showing PDF series, WORD series, HTML series, Figures (1-2) series, Tables (1-3) series.

Item

Count

PDF

109

WORD

HTML

1198

Figures (1-2)

320

Tables (1-3)

235

Sum=1885

Publishing Process of This Article

The chart showing Browse series, Download series.

Item

Count

Browse

166

Download

443

Sum=609

Dec 16, 2022 (publication date) through Nov 25, 2024

Times Cited of This Article

Times Cited (1)

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Clinical Cases

ISSN

2307-8960

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Retrospective Study

World J Clin Cases. Dec 16, 2022; 10(35): 12880-12889
Published online Dec 16, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i35.12880

Table 1 Comparison of baseline data between the midline lumbar fusion and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion groups

	MIDLF (n = 34)	MIS-TLIF (n = 29)	P value
Age (yr)	62.94 ± 13.03	58.76 ± 8.65	0.146
Gender (male/female)	14/20	16/13	0.268
BMI (kg/cm²)	25.82 ± 3.81	26.06 ± 3.68	0.802
Main diagnosis
Lumbar spinal stenosis	20	8
Lumbar disc herniation	11	19
Lumbar spondylolisthesis	3	2
Operation segment
L3-4	2	0
L4-5	25	20
L5-S1	7	9
Operation duration (min)	227.88 ± 35.53	240.24 ± 38.47	0.190
Estimated blood loss (mL)	400 (200-600)	300 (150-500)	0.013^a
Hospital stay time (d)	7 (4-11)	6 (3-11)	0.085
Follow-up time (mo)	15.65 ± 2.65	15.31 ± 1.85	0.568

^aP < 0.05.

BMI: Body mass index; MIDLF: Midline lumbar fusion; MIS-TLIF: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody.

Table 2 Sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters of the midline lumbar fusion and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion groups

	MIDLF (n = 34)	MIS-TLIF (n = 29)	P value
LL
Preoperative	35.74 ± 14.77	35.17 ± 13.50	0.875
Final follow-up	41.45 ± 12.83	41.21 ± 12.11	0.940
ΔLL	5.48 (-14.13, 33.86)	5.34 (-14.35, 33.85)	0.772
P value (pre-final)	0.005^a	0.002^a
Lower LL
Preoperative	23.21 ± 9.65	22.21 ± 9.90	0.688
Final follow-up	27.57 ± 8.00	26.49 ± 8.74	0.609
ΔLower LL	4.24 (-11.43, 24.02)	4.27 ± 7.19	0.472
P value (pre-final)	0.001^a	0.003^a
L4S
Preoperative	3.79 ± 8.03	4.81 ± 7.70	0.611
Final follow-up	2.65 ± 8.69	4.14 ± 8.35	0.492
ΔL4S	-1.06 (-13.06, 12.83)	-0.63 (-12.74, 13.22)	0.180
P value (pre-final)	0.029^a	0.157
L5S
Preoperative	11.42 ± 7.63	12.74 ± 7.53	0.494
Final follow-up	11.16 ± 9.04	14.44 ± 14.78	0.284
ΔL5S	-0.27 (-10.97, 25.62)	2.58 (-16.20, 41.31)	0.562
P value (pre-final)	0.204	0.673
L5I
Preoperative	21.99 (8.01-55.98)	23.26 (12.15-56.93)	0.270
Final follow-up	19.67 (9.21-44.23)	22.62 ± 9.91	0.440
ΔL5I	-2.08 (15.33-22.47)	-2.65 (-15.77, 21.61)	0.184
P value (pre-final)	0.02^a	0.001^a
LASD
Preoperative	9.04 ± 23.11	14.24 ± 22.70	0.374
Final follow-up	2.80 ± 20.12	4.26 ± 20.85	0.779
ΔLASD	-6.23 (-47.71, 32.43)	-7.91 (-49.24, 30.84)	0.038^a
P value (pre-final)	0.002^a	0.000^a
PI
Preoperative	46.73 ± 10.43	49.15 ± 10.81	0.369
Final follow-up	46.49 ± 11.38	50.21 ± 13.26	0.189
ΔPI	-0.94 (-7.93, 38.08)	0.49 (-8.15, 38.13)	0.319
P value (pre-final)	0.062	0.754
PT
Preoperative	18.92 (7.45, 40.71)	21.14 ± 7.95	0.241
Final follow-up	18.54 ± 7.73	21.14 ± 8.04	0.846
ΔPT	-1.56 (18.10-15.89)	-1.03 ± 6.22	0.673
P value (pre-final)	0.014^a	0.379
SS
Preoperative	26.32 ± 8.52	26.98 ± 8.16	0.754
Final follow-up	28.92 ± 9.92	29.39 ± 9.02	0.196
ΔSS	2.60 (-13.78, 30.10)	2.65 (-11.60, 30.63)	0.847
P value (pre-final)	0.008^a	0.098
PI-LL
Preoperative	10.99 ± 13.60	13.98 ± 13.46	0.385
Final follow-up	4.33 ± 11.87	8.99 ± 11.24	0.117
ΔPI-LL	-6.65 ± 10.19	-4.53 (-28.71, 29.39)	0.453
P value (pre-final)	0.001^a	0.001^a

The unit of Angle is ° and the unit of distance is mm.

^aP < 0.05.

LL: Lumbar lordosis; L4S: L4 slope; L5S: L5 slope; L5I: L5 incidence; LASD: L1 axis and S1 distance; PI: Pelvic incidence; PT: Pelvic tilt; SS: Sacral slope; PI-LL: PI-LL mismatch; MIDLF: Midline lumbar fusion; MIS-TLIF: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody.

Table 3 Clinical outcomes of the midline lumbar fusion and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion groups before and after surgery

	MIDLF (n = 34)	MIS-TLIF (n = 29)	P value
Back pain VAS score
Preoperative	6.00 (0.00-8.00)	6.00 (0.00-9.00)	0.788
3 mo postoperation	2.00 (0.00-5.00)	1.00 (0.00-4.00)	0.028^a
Final follow-up	1.00 (0.00-5.00)	1.00 (0.00-3.00)	0.928
Leg pain VAS score
Preoperative	7.00 (0.00-9.00)	8.00 (2.00-10.00)	0.039^a
3 mo postoperation	2.00 (0.00-3.00)	1.00 (0.00-3.00)	0.270
Final follow-up	1.00 (0.00-2.00)	0.00 (0.00-5.00)	0.107
ODI score
Preoperative	63.50 ± 13.33	66.86 ± 14.61	0.343
3 mo postoperation	23.47 ± 5.66	20.21 ± 6.83	0.042^a
Final follow-up	14.12 ± 6.10	13.28 ± 4.13	0.531

^aP < 0.05.

VAS: Visual analog scale; ODI: Oswestry disability index; MIDLF: Midline lumbar fusion; MIS-TLIF: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody.

Citation: Wang YT, Li BX, Wang SJ, Li CD, Sun HL. Radiological and clinical outcomes of midline lumbar fusion on sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters for degenerative lumbar diseases. World J Clin Cases 2022; 10(35): 12880-12889
URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v10/i35/12880.htm
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v10.i35.12880