Midline Lumbar Fusion Versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Involving L5–S1 For Degenerative Lumbar Diseases: A Comparative Study

A retrospective cohort study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of midline lumbar fusion (MIDLF) for lumbosacral fusion compared to posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Patients who had undergone posterior lumbosacral fusion surgery were divided into a MIDLF group (n = 37) and a PLIF group (n ...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:World neurosurgery 2023-04, Vol.172, p.e86-e93
Main Authors: Wang, Yuetian, Feng, Tianhao, Wang, Shijun, Fu, Haoyong, Li, Chunde, Sun, Haolin
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Bone Screws
Humans
Lumbar Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging
Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery
Lumbosacral fusion
Lumbosacral Region - surgery
Midline lumbar fusion
Minimally invasive surgery
Retrospective Studies
Spinal Fusion - methods
Treatment Outcome
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:A retrospective cohort study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of midline lumbar fusion (MIDLF) for lumbosacral fusion compared to posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Patients who had undergone posterior lumbosacral fusion surgery were divided into a MIDLF group (n = 37) and a PLIF group (n = 42). The follow-up time was at least 12 months. The operation data, recovery condition, complications, clinical outcomes, and status of implants and fusion were compared between the 2 groups. The MIDLF group experienced significantly less blood loss, lower postoperative creatine kinase levels and total drainage volume, earlier time to ambulation, and less hospital stay times after surgery compared to the PLIF group (P 
ISSN:1878-8750
1878-8769
1878-8769
DOI:10.1016/j.wneu.2022.12.031