Home About Journal AHEAD OF PRINT Current Issue Back Issues Instructions Submission Search Subscribe Blog    
Login 

Users Online: 645 
Print this page  Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 51  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 131-138

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus instrumented posterolateral fusion in Grade I/II spondylolisthesis


Department of Orthopaedics, Saveetha Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

Correspondence Address:
Niranjanan Raghavn Muralidharagopalan
Flat Number 1, Durbar Apartments, Plot Number 56, MMTC Colony, Nanganallur, Chennai - 600 061, Tamil Nadu
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0019-5413.201703

Rights and Permissions

Background: Spondylolisthesis refers to slippage of one vertebra over the other, which may be caused by a variety of reasons such as degenerative, trauma, and isthmic. Surgical management forms the mainstay of treatment to prevent further slip and worsening. However, there is no consensus regarding the best surgical option to treat these patients. This study compares TLIF and instrumented PLF in patients with Grade I and II spondylolisthesis and analysis the outcome with respect to functional outcome, pain, fusion rate, adequacy of medial facetectomy for decompression, and complications. Materials and Methods: Forty patients operated for spondylolisthesis by instrumented posterolateral or transforaminal fusion between January 1, 2010, and June 30, 2012 were included in this retrospective study. They were followed up for 3 years. Twenty one cases were of instrumented posterolateral fusion (PLF) and 19 cases were of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). The patients were asked to fill up the Oswestry disability index (ODI), Dallas Pain Questionnaire (DPQ), and low back pain rating scale (LBPRS) preoperatively, at 1-month postoperatively, and at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months postoperatively. Radiological parameters were assessed using radiographs. Results: No significant differences were found in DPQ, LBPRS, or ODI scores preoperative, 1-month postoperative, and at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months followup. No significant difference was found between the two groups in blood loss. The only significant difference between the two groups was in the operative time, in which the instrumented PLF group had a mean of 50 min lesser than the TLIF group (P = 0.02). Conclusions: TLIF and instrumented PLF are equally efficacious options in the treatment of Grade I and II spondylolisthesis, except lytic type.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed990    
    Printed36    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded83    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal