Comparison of clinical and radiologic outcomes between biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion

Ki Han You, Jin Tak Hyun, Sang Min Park, Min Seok Kang, Samuel K. Cho, Hyun Jin Park

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Biportal endoscopic spinal surgery has become increasingly popular, and indications have expanded. Among these, biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (BE-TLIF) has yielded good results. Herein, we compared the clinical and radiological outcomes of 155 patients treated with BE-TLIF and open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) for single-level lumbar degenerative diseases. Clinical outcomes included the visual analog scale for the back (VAS-back) and leg (VAS-leg), Oswestry Disability Index, and EuroQol 5-Dimensions. Radiological parameters and fusion rates were evaluated, and postoperative complications were recorded. In this cohort 68 and 87 patients were treated with BE-TLIF and PLIF, respectively. Both groups showed significant improvements in all clinical parameters compared with baseline, but BE-TLIF exhibited a more significant improvement in VAS-back at 1 and 6 months postoperatively. There were no significant differences in the radiological parameters or fusion rates. BE-TLIF had a significantly longer operation time, whereas PLIF exhibited a significantly higher estimated blood loss and surgical drainage, but no significant differences in postoperative complications. Compared to PLIF, BE-TLIF showed similarly good clinical and radiologic outcomes, with better results in terms of early postoperative outcomes. Thus, BE-TLIF is a viable alternative to PLIF with less back pain at 1 and 6 months postoperatively.

Original languageEnglish
Article number29652
JournalScientific Reports
Volume14
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2024

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of clinical and radiologic outcomes between biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this