doi: 10.3390/brainsci11091169.
1
, Pang-Hung Wu
1
2
, Jin-Woo An
3
, Yeon-Jin Lee
1
, Jun-Hyung Lee
1
, Myeong-Hun Kim
1
, Inkyung Lee
1
, Jong-Sung Park
1
, Jun-Hyung Lee
4
, Jun-Hwan Park
5
, Il-Tae Jang
1
Affiliations
Affiliations
- 1 Spine Surgery, Nanoori Gangnam Hospital, Seoul 06048, Korea.
- 2 Orthopaedic Surgery, JurongHealth Campus, National University Health System, Singapore 609606, Singapore.
- 3 Nanoori Hospital Spine And Joints Clinic, Dubai 66566, United Arab Emirates.
- 4 Department of Internal Medicine, Chosun University School of Medicine, Gwangju 61452, Korea.
- 5 Neurosurgery Department, Medical School University, 4032 Debrecen, Hungary.
Item in Clipboard
Hyeun-Sung Kim et al.
Brain Sci.
.
Display options
Format
doi: 10.3390/brainsci11091169.
Authors
1
, Pang-Hung Wu
1
2
, Jin-Woo An
3
, Yeon-Jin Lee
1
, Jun-Hyung Lee
1
, Myeong-Hun Kim
1
, Inkyung Lee
1
, Jong-Sung Park
1
, Jun-Hyung Lee
4
, Jun-Hwan Park
5
, Il-Tae Jang
1
Affiliations
- 1 Spine Surgery, Nanoori Gangnam Hospital, Seoul 06048, Korea.
- 2 Orthopaedic Surgery, JurongHealth Campus, National University Health System, Singapore 609606, Singapore.
- 3 Nanoori Hospital Spine And Joints Clinic, Dubai 66566, United Arab Emirates.
- 4 Department of Internal Medicine, Chosun University School of Medicine, Gwangju 61452, Korea.
- 5 Neurosurgery Department, Medical School University, 4032 Debrecen, Hungary.
Item in Clipboard
Display options
Format
Abstract
Objective: There is limited literature comparing the uniportal full endoscopic posterolateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion outside-in approach (ETLIF (O)) with the inside-out approach (ETLIF (I)). Methods: Radiological evaluation was performed on disc height restoration and coronal wedging angle, and operation time (inferior articular process resection time/total operation time) and clinical evaluation were made. Result: 48 cases of inside-out and 38 cases of outside-in cases were included. Compared to inside-out, the outside-in approach had significantly less operative time required to resect inferior articular process: 36.55 ± 10.37, and total operative time: 87.45 ± 20.14 min compared to 49.83 ± 23.97 and 102.56 ± 36.53 min, respectively, for the inside-out approach, p < 0.05. Compared to the preoperative state, both cohorts achieved significant improvement of VAS and ODI at post-operative 1 week, 3 months and at final follow up. Both cohorts achieved statistically significant increased disc height with 5.00 ± 2.87 mm, 5.49 ± 2.33 mm and statistically significant improvement in coronal wedge angle with 1.76 ± 1.63°, 3.24 ± 2.92° in the inside-out and outside-in approaches respectively. Conclusions: Complete removal of inferior articular process is the key part of endoscopic fusion with two methods that can be applied: an inside-out approach or an outside-in approach. Comparing both techniques, the outside-in approach has a shorter operative time required for inferior articular process resection and total length of operation with similar good clinical and radiological outcomes.
Keywords:
degenerative spine disease; endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion; endoscopic spine surgery; minimally invasive spine surgery; spinal fusion; transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.