科研速览 · Science Skim继续刷下去 · Keep skimming →
◆ Frontiers in surgery2026-01-01

Oblique lateral interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for single-level lumbar adjacent segment disease: a retrospective comparative study of clinical and radiographic outcomes.

Kaiqiang Zhang, Li Xia, Zhenbin Wang

一句话结论 · In one sentence

OLIF and TLIF provide equivalent clinical outcomes for single-level lumbar ASDis. OLIF offers advantages in reducing intraoperative blood loss and restoring segmental radiographic parameters, at the cost of longer operative time. TLIF is associated with shorter surgery. Both techniques have comparable complication and fusion rates. Surgical choice should be individualized.

原始摘要(英文原文)· Original abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for single-level lumbar adjacent segment disease (ASDis). METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on 107 patients who underwent revision surgery for single-level ASDis. Patients were divided into OLIF group (n = 55) and TLIF group (n = 52). Perioperative parameters (operative time, blood loss), clinical outcomes (VAS for low back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index, EQ-5D), radiographic parameters (disc height, segmental lordosis, segmental coronal angle, lumbar lordosis, PI-LL), complication and fusion rates were compared. Follow-up was ≥12 months. RESULTS: OLIF had significantly longer operative time (308.5 ± 62.7 vs. 271.3 ± 55.9 min, P = 0.002) but less blood loss (362.4 ± 51.3 vs. 608.7 ± 76.5 mL, P < 0.001). No significant differences were found between groups in VAS, ODI, EQ-5D scores at any time point (P > 0.05). OLIF demonstrated superior correction of disc height ( Δ 3.9 ± 1.4 vs. 2.2 ± 0.8 mm, P < 0.001), segmental lordosis ( Δ 3.8°±1.7° vs. 2.3°±1.8°, P < 0.001), and segmental coronal angle ( Δ 1.6°±0.6° vs. 1.2°±0.5°, P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in lumbar lordosis, PI-LL correction, complication rates (10.91% vs. 9.62%, P = 0.826), cage subsidence (12.73% vs. 11.54%, P = 0.850), reoperation rates (3.64% vs. 1.92%, P = 0.618), or fusion rates (92.73% vs. 92.31%, P = 0.934). CONCLUSION: OLIF and TLIF provide equivalent clinical outcomes for single-level lumbar ASDis. OLIF offers advantages in reducing intraoperative blood loss and restoring segmental radiographic parameters, at the cost of longer operative time. TLIF is associated with shorter surgery. Both techniques have comparable complication and fusion rates. Surgical choice should be individualized.
读原文 · Read the paper ↗

AI 追问PRO

登录后使用 AI 追问

讨论区

登录后参与讨论

相关论文 · Related

Oblique lateral interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for single-level lumbar adjacent segment disease: a retrospective comparative study of clinical and radiographic outcomes. — 科研速览 Science Skim