Chan Andrew K, Ambati Vardhaan S, Upadhyayula Pavan, Chou Dean, Bydon Mohamad, Bisson Erica F, Glassman Steven D, Foley Kevin T, Shaffrey Christopher I, Potts Eric A, Yen Chun-Po, Coric Domagoj, Knightly John J, Park Paul, Wang Michael Y, Fu Kai-Ming, Slotkin Jonathan R, Asher Anthony L, Virk Michael S, Haid Regis W, Mummaneni Praveen V
1Department of Neurological Surgery, Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, The Och Spine Hospital at NewYork-Presbyterian, New York, New York.
2Department of Neurosurgery, University of California, San Francisco, California.
J Neurosurg Spine. 2025 Aug 29:1-10. doi: 10.3171/2025.5.SPINE25324.
The Spinal Laminectomy Versus Instrumented Pedicle Screw trial reported the superiority of fusion compared to laminectomy alone for patients with grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis. However, it remains unclear if the advantages of fusion extend to using minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques. This study compared 60-month outcomes following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus decompression for grade 1 spondylolisthesis.
The authors analyzed patients who underwent single-segment MIS TLIF or MIS tubular decompression for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis from the prospective Quality Outcomes Database's 12 highest enrolling sites (SpineCORe team). Uni- and multivariable analyses compared outcomes including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), numeric rating scale (NRS) for back pain (NRS-BP), NRS for leg pain (NRS-LP), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), North American Spine Society (NASS) satisfaction score, and cumulative related reoperation rate.
Of 608 total patients, 143 underwent MIS TLIF (n = 72, 50.3%) or MIS decompression (n = 71, 49.7%). The overall study cohort's 60-month follow-up rate was 86.8%. The MIS TLIF cohort was significantly younger (mean 62.1 ± 10.6 vs 72.3 ± 9.7 years), had lower rates of diabetes (9.7% vs 22.5%), higher rates of private insurance utilization (65.3% vs 26.8%), was more likely to be employed preoperatively (54.2% vs 23.9%), and had higher baseline NRS-BP scores (mean 6.9 ± 2.6 vs 5.6 ± 3.2, p < 0.05). Otherwise, the cohorts were similar in baseline characteristics. Sixty months postoperatively, both cohorts had significant mean improvements in ODI, NRS-LP, NRS-BP, and EQ-5D scores compared to their respective baselines (p < 0.05). MIS TLIF had a significantly lower reoperation rate (2.8% vs 15.5%, p = 0.008). The minimal clinically important difference rates for the ODI, NRS-LP, NRS-BP, and EQ-5D were equivalent (p > 0.05). MIS TLIF demonstrated significantly larger reductions in NRS-BP scores (-4.0 ± 3.5 vs -2.2 ± 3.4) and higher rates of satisfaction (NASS score 1 or 2 = 87.7% vs 74.5%; p < 0.05) but similar absolute 60-month ODI, NRS-LP, NRS-BP, and EQ-5D scores (p > 0.05). On multivariable analyses, fusion significantly reduced the odds of reoperation (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.008-0.39; p = 0.006), but fusion status was neither a significant predictor of ODI, NRS-LP, NRS-BP, or EQ-5D scores, nor NASS satisfaction scores.
Regardless of the surgical approach, a dorsal-based MIS technique was associated with clinical benefits in patients with grade 1 spondylolisthesis. These 60-month results demonstrate that MIS TLIF and MIS decompression are associated with similar patient-reported outcomes. However, MIS TLIF is associated with significantly fewer reoperations.
“脊柱椎板切除术与椎弓根螺钉内固定术”试验报告称,对于1级退变性腰椎滑脱患者,融合术优于单纯椎板切除术。然而,融合术的优势是否能扩展到使用微创外科(MIS)技术仍不清楚。本研究比较了1级腰椎滑脱患者行微创经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术(TLIF)与减压术后60个月的疗效。
作者分析了前瞻性质量结果数据库中12个入组患者最多的研究点(脊柱核心团队)接受单节段MIS TLIF或MIS管状减压术治疗1级退变性腰椎滑脱的患者。单变量和多变量分析比较了包括Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)、背痛数字评定量表(NRS-BP)、腿痛数字评定量表(NRS-LP)、欧洲五维健康量表(EQ-5D)、北美脊柱协会(NASS)满意度评分以及累计相关再手术率等结果。
在608例患者中,143例接受了MIS TLIF(n = 72,50.3%)或MIS减压术(n = 71,49.7%)。整个研究队列的60个月随访率为86.8%。MIS TLIF队列患者明显更年轻(平均62.1±10.6岁对72.3±9.7岁),糖尿病发生率更低(9.7%对22.5%),私人保险使用率更高(65.3%对26.8%),术前就业可能性更大(54.2%对23.9%),且基线NRS-BP评分更高(平均6.9±2.6对5.6±3.2,p < 0.05)。除此之外,两组患者的基线特征相似。术后60个月,与各自基线相比,两组患者的ODI、NRS-LP、NRS-BP和EQ-5D评分均有显著的平均改善(p < 0.05)。MIS TLIF的再手术率显著更低(2.8%对15.5%,p = 0.008)。ODI、NRS-LP、NRS-BP和EQ-5D的最小临床重要差异率相当(p > 0.05)。MIS TLIF术后NRS-BP评分的降低幅度显著更大(-4.0±3.5对-2.2±3.4),满意度更高(NASS评分为1或2 = 87.7%对74.5%;p < 0.05),但60个月时的绝对ODI、NRS-LP、NRS-BP和EQ-5D评分相似(p > 0.05)。多变量分析显示,融合术显著降低了再手术的几率(OR 0.07,95%CI 0.008 - 0.39;p = 0.006),但融合状态既不是ODI、NRS-LP、NRS-BP或EQ-5D评分的显著预测因素,也不是NASS满意度评分的显著预测因素。
无论采用何种手术方式,基于后路的MIS技术对1级腰椎滑脱患者均有临床益处。这些60个月的结果表明,MIS TLIF和MIS减压术在患者报告的结果方面相似。然而,MIS TLIF的再手术次数明显更少。