Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF): a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BMC Surgery

Ye Li¹  Bin Yu¹  Zhengyao Li¹  Yipeng Wang¹  Liang Wang¹ 

[1] Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, 1 Shuaifuyuan Hutong, Beijing 100730, China

关键词: Pedicle screw fixation;    Bilateral;    Unilateral;    Minimally invasive;    Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF);   

Others  :  1091371
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2482-14-87

 received in 2014-07-09, accepted in 2014-10-27,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

A few studies focused on unilateral or bilateral pedicle screw (PS) fixation of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) to treat lumbar degenerative diseases have been published. There is still debate over whether one method is superior to another. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) was performed to compare the efficacy of the two methods.

Methods

We searched the established electronic literature databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for RCTs comparing the unilateral with bilateral pedicle screw fixation of MIS-TLIF. Pooled mean differences (MD) and odds ratios (OR) and with 95% CIs were calculated for the outcomes.

Results

Three RCTs were identified and analyzed. The results showed that there is no significant difference between the two methods in terms of postoperative VAS-BP score (WMD = -0.09; 95% CI: -0.69 to 0.51; P =0.78), ODI (WMD, -0.09; 95% CI -5.85 to 5.67; P =0.98), fusion rate (OR = 2.99; 95% CI 0.55 to 16.38; P = 0.21) or complication rate (OR = 1.61, 95% CI: 0.49 to 5.37; P =0.43). Unilateral pedicle screw fixation was associated with less blood loss (WMD = -87.83; 95% CI: -160.70 to -14.96; P =0.02).

Conclusions

The existing evidence indicate that no superiority exists between the two fixation methods of MIS-TLIF in terms of functional outcome, fusion rate and complication rate, in spite of that unilateral pedicle screw fixation can achieve less blood loss than bilateral fixation.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Wang et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

Figure 7.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Beringer WF, Mobasser JP: Unilateral pedicle screw instrumentation for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurg Focus 2006, 20:E4.
• [2]Wu RH, Fraser JF, Hartl R: Minimal access versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: meta-analysis of fusion rates. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010, 35:2273-2281.
• [3]Tian NF, Wu YS, Zhang XL, Xu HZ, Chi YL, Mao FM: Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a meta-analysis based on the current evidence. Eur Spine J 2013, 22:1741-1749.
• [4]Sun ZJ, Li WJ, Zhao Y, Qiu GX: Comparing minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of degenerative lumbar disease: a meta-analysis. Chin Med J (Engl) 2013, 126:3962-3971.
• [5]Sim HB, Murovic JA, Cho BY, Lim TJ, Park J: Biomechanical comparison of single-level posterior versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions with bilateral pedicle screw fixation: segmental stability and the effects on adjacent motion segments. J Neurosurg Spine 2010, 12:700-708.
• [6]Lee CS, Hwang CJ, Lee SW, Ahn YJ, Kim YT, Lee DH, Lee MY: Risk factors for adjacent segment disease after lumbar fusion. Eur Spine J 2009, 18:1637-1643.
• [7]Park P, Garton HJ, Gala VC, Hoff JT, McGillicuddy JE: Adjacent segment disease after lumbar or lumbosacral fusion: review of the literature. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2004, 29:1938-1944.
• [8]Schizas C, Tzinieris N, Tsiridis E, Kosmopoulos V: Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: evaluating initial experience. Int Orthop 2009, 33:1683-1688.
• [9]Deutsch H, Musacchio MJ Jr: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with unilateral pedicle screw fixation. Neurosurg Focus 2006, 20:E10.
• [10]Tuttle J, Shakir A, Choudhri HF: Paramedian approach for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with unilateral pedicle screw fixation. Technical note and preliminary report on 47 cases. Neurosurg Focus 2006, 20:E5.
• [11]Xue H, Tu Y, Cai M: Comparison of unilateral versus bilateral instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative lumbar diseases. Spine J 2012, 12:209-215.
• [12]Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M, Devereaux PJ, Kleijnen J, Moher D: The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2009, 6:e1000100.
• [13]Furlan AD, Pennick V, Bombardier C, van Tulder M: 2009 updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Back Review Group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009, 34:1929-1941.
• [14]Oremus M, Wolfson C, Perrault A, Demers L, Momoli F, Moride Y: Interrater reliability of the modified Jadad quality scale for systematic reviews of Alzheimer’s disease drug trials. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2001, 12:232-236.
• [15]Choi UY, Park JY, Kim KH, Kuh SU, Chin DK, Kim KS, Cho YE: Unilateral versus bilateral percutaneous pedicle screw fixation in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurg Focus 2013, 35:E11.
• [16]Xiaolong S, Lei W, Hailong Z, Xin G, Guangfei G, Shisheng H: Radiographic analysis of one-level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MI-TLIF) with unilateral pedicle screw fixation for lumbar degenerative diseases. J Spinal Disord Tech 2013. [Epub ahead of print]
• [17]Dahdaleh NS, Nixon AT, Lawton CD, Wong AP, Smith ZA, Fessler RG: Outcome following unilateral versus bilateral instrumentation in patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a single-center randomized prospective study. Neurosurg Focus 2013, 35:E13.
• [18]Moskowitz A: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Orthop Clin North Am 2002, 33:359-366.
• [19]Hackenberg L, Halm H, Bullmann V, Vieth V, Schneider M, Liljenqvist U: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a safe technique with satisfactory three to five year results. Eur Spine J 2005, 14:551-558.
• [20]Schwender JD, Holly LT, Rouben DP, Foley KT: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): technical feasibility and initial results. J Spinal Disord Tech 2005, 18(Suppl):S1-S6.
• [21]Tsahtsarlis A, Wood M: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumber interbody fusion and degenerative lumbar spine disease. Eur Spine J 2012, 21:2300-2305.
• [22]Foley KT, Lefkowitz MA: Advances in minimally invasive spine surgery. Clin Neurosurg 2002, 49:499-517.
• [23]Mummaneni PV, Rodts GE Jr: The mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurgery 2005, 57:256-261. discussion 256-261
• [24]Scheufler KM, Dohmen H, Vougioukas VI: Percutaneous transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar instability. Neurosurgery 2007, 60:203-212. discussion 212-213
• [25]Harris BM, Hilibrand AS, Savas PE, Pellegrino A, Vaccaro AR, Siegler S, Albert TJ: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: the effect of various instrumentation techniques on the flexibility of the lumbar spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2004, 29:E65-E70.
• [26]Schleicher P, Beth P, Ottenbacher A, Pflugmacher R, Scholz M, Schnake KJ, Haas NP, Kandziora F: Biomechanical evaluation of different asymmetrical posterior stabilization methods for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 2008, 9:363-371.
• [27]Slucky AV, Brodke DS, Bachus KN, Droge JA, Braun JT: Less invasive posterior fixation method following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a biomechanical analysis. Spine J 2006, 6:78-85.
• [28]Yucesoy K, Yuksel KZ, Baek S, Sonntag VK, Crawford NR: Biomechanics of unilateral compared with bilateral lumbar pedicle screw fixation for stabilization of unilateral vertebral disease. J Neurosurg Spine 2008, 8:44-51.
• [29]Suk KS, Lee HM, Kim NH, Ha JW: Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in lumbar spinal fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000, 25:1843-1847.
• [30]Yuan C, Chen K, Zhang H, Zhang H, He S: Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in lumbar interbody fusion: a meta-analysis of complication and fusion rate. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2014, 117:28-32.