Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus oblique lateral interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disease: a meta-analysis

• Published in: BMC musculoskeletal disorders Vol. 22; no. 1; pp. 1 - 10
• Main Authors: Zhang, Qing-Yi, Tan, Jie, Huang, Kai, Xie, Hui-Qi
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London BioMed Central Ltd 18.09.2021; BioMed Central; BMC
• Subjects: Back pain; Back surgery; Blood; Care and treatment; Comparative analysis; Degenerative disc disease; Degenerative diseases; Degenerative lumbar diseases; Diagnosis; Intervertebral discs; Literature reviews; Meta-analysis; Methods; Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF); Oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF); Pain; Recovery of function; Spinal diseases; Spinal fusion; Subsidence; China
• DOI: 10.1186/s12891-021-04687-7
• ISSN: 1471-2474

Background Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) are widely used in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. In the present study, a meta-analysis was conducted to compare the clinical and radiographic efficacy of these two procedures. Methods A systematic literature review was performed, and the quality of retrieved studies was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Clinical outcomes, including operation time, intraoperative blood loss, improvement in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), improvement in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) effectiveness rate and complications, in addition to radiographic outcomes, including restoration of disc height, disc angle, overall lumbar lordosis, fusion rate and subsidence, were extracted and input into a fixed or random effect model to compare the efficacy of MIS-TLIF and OLIF. Results Seven qualified studies were included. Clinically, OLIF resulted in less intraoperative blood loss and shorter operation time than MIS-TLIF. Improvement of VAS for leg pain was more obvious in the OLIF group (P < 0.0001), whereas improvement of VAS for back pain (P = 0.08) and ODI (P = 0.98) as well as JOABPEQ effectiveness rate (P = 0.18) were similar in the two groups. Radiographically, OLIF was more effective in restoring disc height (P = 0.01) and equivalent in improving the disc angle (P = 0.18) and lumbar lordosis (P = 0.48) compared with MIS-TLIF. The fusion rate (P = 0.11) was similar in both groups, while the subsidence was more severe in the MIS-TLIF group (P < 0.00001). Conclusions The above evidence suggests that OLIF is associated with a shorter operation time (with supplementary fixation in the prone position) and less intraoperative blood loss than MIS-TLIF and can lead to better leg pain alleviation, disc height restoration and subsidence resistance. No differences regarding back pain relief, functional recovery, complications, disc angle restoration, lumbar lordosis restoration and fusion rate were found. However, due to the limited number of studies, our results should be confirmed with high-level studies to fully compare the therapeutic efficacy of MIS-TLIF and OLIF. Trial registration PROSPERO ID: CRD42020201903. Keywords: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF), Oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF), Degenerative lumbar diseases