Huang Qingyang, Zhu Weiguo, Cui Peng, Wang Shuaikang, Han Di, Wang Peng, Lu Shibao
Department of Orthopedics, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 10053, China.
BMC Surg. 2025 Apr 29;25(1):188. doi: 10.1186/s12893-025-02920-x.
To investigate the perioperative outcomes, clinical manifestations, and radiographic indicators in patients who underwent oblique lateral lumbar fusion (OLIF) and posterior instrumentation, compared with those who underwent posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and instrumentation.
In this retrospective cohort analysis, elderly patients diagnosed with L4-5 lumbar spinal stenosis between July 2022 and July 2023 at our institution who underwent OLIF and posterior instrumentation (OLIF group), compared with those who underwent posterior TLIF and instrumentation (TLIF group). Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol was implemented for all patients. The perioperative data, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), radiographic assessments, and complications were gathered immediately after surgery and again at the 1-year follow-up. The perioperative outcomes and immediately postoperative and follow-up radiographic outcomes were compared between the two groups.
A total of 120 patients participated in this study, with 60 patients assigned to the OLIF group and 60 to the TLIF group. With respect to outcomes, the length of stay was notably shorter in the OLIF group compared to the TLIF group (P < 0.001). Patients in the OLIF group exhibited significantly reduced postoperative drainage volume (P < 0.001), first ambulation on the postoperative day (POD) (P < 0.001), drain placement duration (P < 0.001), and urinary catheter retention (P = 0.037) compared to those in the TLIF group. Furthermore, there were statistically significant differences between the two groups in the incidence of postoperative deep venous thrombosis (DVT) (1 vs. 8, P = 0.015), urinary tract infection (2 vs. 11, P = 0.008), pulmonary infection (2 vs. 10, P = 0.015), and nausea and vomiting (3 vs. 11, P = 0.023). With respect to radiographic measurements, At the 1-year follow-up, the posterior disc height (PDH) and intervertebral disc angle (IDA) demonstrated statistically increase in the OLIF group. The sagittal vertical axis (SVA) was statistically decrease and Lumbosacral lordosis (LL) was statistically increase in the OLIF group.
OLIF was demonstrated to have significant advantages in terms of perioperative, clinical outcomes and radiographic parameters for L4-5 lumbar spinal stenosis for elderly patients, comapred with TLIF.
比较接受斜外侧腰椎融合术(OLIF)及后路内固定术的患者与接受后路经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术(TLIF)及内固定术的患者的围手术期结局、临床表现和影像学指标。
在这项回顾性队列分析中,将2022年7月至2023年7月在我院诊断为L4-5腰椎管狭窄的老年患者分为接受OLIF及后路内固定术的患者(OLIF组)和接受后路TLIF及内固定术的患者(TLIF组)。所有患者均实施加速康复外科(ERAS)方案。在术后即刻及1年随访时收集围手术期数据、患者报告结局(PROs)、影像学评估结果及并发症情况。比较两组的围手术期结局以及术后即刻和随访时的影像学结局。
共有120例患者参与本研究,其中60例患者被分配至OLIF组,60例患者被分配至TLIF组。在结局方面,OLIF组的住院时间明显短于TLIF组(P<0.001)。与TLIF组相比,OLIF组患者术后引流量(P<0.001)、术后第1天首次下床活动时间(POD)(P<0.001)、引流管留置时间(P<0.001)及导尿管留置时间(P=0.037)均显著减少。此外,两组在术后深静脉血栓形成(DVT)发生率(1例 vs. 8例,P=0.015)、尿路感染(2例 vs. 11例,P=0.008)、肺部感染(2例 vs. 10例,P=0.015)以及恶心呕吐(3例 vs. 11例,P=0.023)方面存在统计学显著差异。在影像学测量方面,在1年随访时,OLIF组的后椎间盘高度(PDH)和椎间盘角度(IDA)有统计学意义的增加。OLIF组的矢状垂直轴(SVA)有统计学意义的降低,腰骶前凸(LL)有统计学意义的增加。
对于老年L4-5腰椎管狭窄患者,与TLIF相比,OLIF在围手术期、临床结局和影像学参数方面具有显著优势。