Clinical efficacy of lateral interbody fusion versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of severe lumbar spinal stenosis
10.3760/cma.j.cn121113-20250219-00153
- VernacularTitle:侧方椎间融合术与后路椎间融合术治疗重度腰椎椎管狭窄症的临床疗效
- Author:
Bing CHEN
1
;
Chao CHEN
;
Xiaopeng LI
;
Hanming BIAN
;
Wentao WAN
;
Gang LIU
;
Dong ZHAO
;
Haiyun YANG
;
Limin SUN
;
Baoshan XU
;
Xiangqian FANG
;
Xinlong MA
;
Qiang YANG
Author Information
1. 天津医科大学骨科临床学院，天津 300070
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Lumbar vertebrae;
Spinal stenosis;
Decompression, surgical
- From:
Chinese Journal of Orthopaedics
2025;45(9):596-603
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To investigate the clinical efficacy of lumbar lateral interbody fusion (LLIF) versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in the treatment of severe lumbar spinal stenosis.Methods:The data of patients with severe lumbar spinal stenosis who underwent LLIF or PLIF from February 2019 to December 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 30 patients in the LLIF group, 10 males and 20 females, aged 62.7±5.6 years (range, 53-74 years), including 21 cases of single segment and 9 cases of double segment. There were 46 patients in the PLIF group, including 20 males and 26 females, aged 63.2±8.4 years (range, 43-75 years), 40 cases of single segment and 6 cases of double segment. The visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), intervertebral space height, intervertebral foramen height and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups.Results:All patients were followed up for an average of 21.3±6.4 months (range, 12-32 months). The intraoperative blood loss in the LLIF group was 112.2±76.9 ml, which was significantly lower than 193.9±88.2 ml in the PLIF group ( P<0.05). The VAS scores of back pain and leg pain after operation were significantly lower than those before operation in the two groups ( P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between groups in back pain VAS scores at preoperative, 6 months postoperative, and final follow-up ( P>0.05); the back pain VAS score at 1 month postoperatively in the LLIF group was 1.6±1.2, which was less than 2.8±0.7 in the PLIF group ( P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between groups in leg pain VAS scores at preoperative, 1 month postoperative, and 6 months postoperative ( P>0.05); the leg pain VAS score at the final follow-up in the LLIF group was 1.2±1.5, which was smaller than 1.8±1.0 in the PLIF group ( P<0.05). The postoperative ODI was smaller than the preoperative one in both groups, and the difference was statistically significant ( P<0.05); the preoperative, 1-month postoperative, 6-month postoperative, and final follow-up ODIs in the LLIF group were 45.7%±16.0%, 17.9%±12.0%, 16.2%±11.6%, and 15.7%±11.7%, and those in the PLIF group were 47.9%±15.4%, 20.1%±9.3%, 16.9%±10.6%, and 14.6%±11.0% in the PLIF group, and the difference between the groups was not statistically significant ( P>0.05). The preoperative intervertebral space height in the LLIF group was 10.6±2.0 mm, which was smaller than that in the PLIF group 11.8±2.2 mm ( P<0.05). The intervertebral space heights in the immediate postoperative period and at the final follow-up were 13.3±2.3 mm and 12.3±2.2 mm in the LLIF group and 13.7±1.7 mm and 13.0±1.9 mm in the PLIF group ( P>0.05). The preoperative intervertebral foraminal height in the LLIF group was 18.0±3.2 mm, which was smaller than that of 19.7±2.4 mm in the PLIF group ( P<0.05); the intervertebral foraminal heights in the immediate postoperative period and at the final follow-up were 21.4±2.5 mm and 20.2±2.4 mm in the LLIF group, and in the PLIF group were 20.7±2.4 mm and 19.7±2.6 mm in the PLIF group ( P>0.05). In the LLIF group, 2 cases had femoral nerve injury and 2 cases had transient back pain after operation. There were 2 cases of cerebrospinal fluid leakage, 1 case of screw loosening, and 2 cases of deep vein thrombosis in the PLIF group. In the PLIF group, 2 patients underwent revision, including 1 case due to cage displacement and 1 case due to screw malposition. The fusion settling rate was 21% (8/39) in the LLIF group and 12% (6/52) in the PLIF group ( P>0.05). Conclusion:Both LLIF and PLIF can effectively restore the intervertebral height, improve the lumbar function and the symptoms of back and leg pain in the treatment of severe lumbar spinal stenosis.
