Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes Between Primary MIS TLIF and MIS TLIF With Revision Decompression.
Academic Article
Overview
abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: To compare postoperative improvements in surgical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between patients undergoing minimally invasive laminectomy and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) as a primary procedure to patients undergoing MIS laminectomy and TLIF as a revision to primary lumbar decompression (LD). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: MIS TLIF and LD have demonstrated to be effective surgical options for lumbar degenerative disease. However, some patients undergoing LD experience recurrent symptoms and eventually require a revision decompression with fusion. METHODS: A prospectively maintained surgical database of patients who underwent a primary or revision one-level MIS TLIF for degenerative spinal pathology between 2014 and 2016 was reviewed. Consecutive patients undergoing primary MIS TLIF and revision lumbar discectomy and/or laminectomy were matched in a one-to-one fashion to primary MIS TLIF patients who had not undergone a previous LD by age and preoperative diagnosis. Differences in patient demographic, comorbidity, and perioperative characteristics between procedure groups were assessed using Pearson chi-squared analysis and Student t test for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Improvements in PROs from preoperative values were compared between primary and revision cohorts using Student t tests. Pearson chi-squared analysis was used to compare rates of minimum clinically important difference achievement between procedure groups. Statistical significant was set at P < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 52 patients were included in this analysis. Twenty-six underwent primary MIS laminectomy and TLIF and 26 underwent MIS TLIF with a revision decompression. No differences in baseline or perioperative variables were observed. Revision and primary MIS TLIF patients experienced similar improvements in PROs at all postoperative time points. CONCLUSION: The results of the present study demonstrate patients undergoing primary MIS TLIF with LD as a revision to a primary decompression experienced similar postoperative improvements in PROs as compared to primary MIS TLIF patients. This indicates a primary decompression does not compromise clinical outcomes in patients undergoing MIS TLIF. As such, patients should not be precluded from undergoing MIS TLIF based on the history of a previous LD. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.
