» Articles » PMID: 32720524

Safety of Lumbar Interbody Fusion Procedures for Degenerative Disc Disease: A Systematic Review With Network Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies

Overview
Journal Global Spine J
Publisher Sage Publications
Date 2020 Jul 29
PMID 32720524
Citations 7
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Study Design: A network meta-analysis.

Objectives: Lumbar degenerative disc disease (LDDD) is an important issue in aging population, for which lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) is a feasible management in cases refractory to conservative therapy. There are various techniques available to perform LIF, including posterior (PLIF), transforaminal (TLIF), and anterior (ALIF) approaches. However, the comparative safety profile of these procedures remains controversial. Our study aimed to evaluate comparative adverse events of the LIF procedures in patients with LDDD.

Methods: We searched 5 databases for relevant prospective cohort studies and randomized clinical trials. After quality assessments, we extracted neural, spinal, vascular, and wound events for conducting contrast-based network meta-analysis. Results were reported in risk ratio (RR), 95% confidence interval (CI), and surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA).

Results: We identified 14 studies involving 921 participants with LDDD. Pooled result showed that open PLIF (OPLIF) leads to significantly higher overall adverse event rate than does open TLIF (OTLIF; RR = 3.43, 95% CI = 1.21-9.73). OTLIF confers the highest SUCRA in neural (78.7) and spinal (80.8) event rates. Minimally invasive TLIF has the highest SUCRA in vascular event (84.2), and minimally invasive PLIF has the highest SUCRA in wound event (88.1). No inconsistency or publication bias was detected in the results.

Conclusions: Based on our results, perhaps OPLIF should be avoided in the management of LDDD due to the inferiority of overall complications. Specifically, TLIF seems to have the safest profile in terms of neural, spinal, and vascular events. Nevertheless, shared decision making is still mandatory when choosing the proper LIF procedure for patients with LDDD in clinical practice.

Citing Articles

Lateral-PLIF for spinal arthrodesis: concept, technique, results, complications, and outcomes.

Capo G, Calvanese F, Vandenbulcke A, Zaed I, Di Carlo D, Cao R Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2024; 166(1):123.

PMID: 38451339 DOI: 10.1007/s00701-024-06024-y.


Spinal fusion for single-level SPECT/CT positive lumbar degenerative disc disease: the SPINUS I study.

Kaiser R, Varga M, Lang O, Waldauf P, Vanek P, Saur K Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2023; 165(9):2633-2640.

PMID: 37347294 PMC: 10477220. DOI: 10.1007/s00701-023-05666-8.


Deformity Correction with Interbody Fusion Using Lateral versus Posterior Approach in Adult Degenerative Scoliosis: A Systematic Review and Observational Meta-analysis.

Mittal S, Sudhakar P, Ahuja K, Ifthekar S, Yadav G, Sinha S Asian Spine J. 2023; 17(2):431-451.

PMID: 36642969 PMC: 10151641. DOI: 10.31616/asj.2022.0040.


Characteristics of interbody bone graft fusion after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion according to intervertebral space division.

Xu S, Zang L, Lu Q, Zhao P, Wu Q, Chen X Front Surg. 2022; 9:1004230.

PMID: 36386508 PMC: 9640659. DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.1004230.


Risk Factors for 30-day Unplanned Readmission following Surgery for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Systematic Review.

Chen L, Chang Y, Wong C, Chi K, Lee J, Huang C Global Spine J. 2022; 13(2):563-574.

PMID: 36040160 PMC: 9972270. DOI: 10.1177/21925682221116823.


References
1.
Lee N, Kim K, Yi S, Ha Y, Shin D, Yoon D . Comparison of Outcomes of Anterior, Posterior, and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery at a Single Lumbar Level with Degenerative Spinal Disease. World Neurosurg. 2017; 101:216-226. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.01.114. View

2.
Mobbs R, Phan K, Daly D, Rao P, Lennox A . Approach-Related Complications of Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Results of a Combined Spine and Vascular Surgical Team. Global Spine J. 2016; 6(2):147-54. PMC: 4771511. DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1557141. View

3.
Qin R, Liu B, Zhou P, Yao Y, Hao J, Yang K . Minimally Invasive Versus Traditional Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Single-Level Spondylolisthesis Grades 1 and 2: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. World Neurosurg. 2018; 122:180-189. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.10.202. View

4.
Talia A, Wong M, Lau H, Kaye A . Comparison of the different surgical approaches for lumbar interbody fusion. J Clin Neurosci. 2014; 22(2):243-51. DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2014.08.008. View

5.
Lin E, Kuo Y, Kang Y . Effects of three common lumbar interbody fusion procedures for degenerative disc disease: A network meta-analysis of prospective studies. Int J Surg. 2018; 60:224-230. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.11.009. View