Full-Endoscopic versus Minimally Invasive Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases : A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysisopen access
- Authors
- Son, Seong; Yoo, Byung Rhae; Lee, Sang Gu; Kim, Woo Kyung; Jung, Jong Myung
- Issue Date
- Jul-2022
- Publisher
- KOREAN NEUROSURGICAL SOC
- Keywords
- Lumbar vertebrae · Intervertebral disc degeneration · Endoscopy · Minimally invasive surgical procedures · Systematic review
- Citation
- JOURNAL OF KOREAN NEUROSURGICAL SOCIETY, v.65, no.4, pp.539 - 548
- Journal Title
- JOURNAL OF KOREAN NEUROSURGICAL SOCIETY
- Volume
- 65
- Number
- 4
- Start Page
- 539
- End Page
- 548
- URI
- https://scholarworks.bwise.kr/gachon/handle/2020.sw.gachon/85227
- DOI
- 10.3340/jkns.2021.0168
- ISSN
- 2005-3711
- Abstract
- Objective : Although full-endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-LIF) has been tried as the latest alternative technique to minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interobody fusion (MIS-TLIF) since mid-2010, the evidence is still lacking. We compared the clinical outcome and safety of Endo-LIF to MIS-TLIF for lumbar degenerative disease.
Methods : We systematically searched electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library to find literature comparing Endo-LIF to MIS-TLIF. The results retrieved were last updated on December 11, 2020. The perioperative outcome included the operation time, blood loss, complication, and hospital stay. The clinical outcomes included Visual analog scale (VAS) of low back pain and leg pain and Oswestry disability index (ODI), and the radiological outcome included pseudoarthosis rate with 12-month minimum follow-up.
Results : Four retrospective observational studies and one prospective observational study comprising 423 patients (183 Endo-LIF and 241 MIS-TLIF) were included, and the pooled data analysis revealed low heterogeneity between studies in our review. Baseline characteristics including age and sex were not different between the two groups. Operation time was significantly longer in Endo- LIF (mean difference [MD], 23.220 minutes; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10.669–35.771; p=0.001). However, Endo-LIF resulted in less perioperative blood loss (MD, -144.710 mL; 95% CI, 247.941–41.478; p=0.023). Although VAS back pain at final (MD, -0.120; p=0.586), leg pain within 2 weeks (MD, 0.005; p=0.293), VAS leg pain at final (MD, 0.099; p=0.099), ODI at final (MD, 0.141; p=0.093) were not different, VAS back pain within 2 weeks was more favorable in the Endo-LIF (MD, -1.538; 95% CI, -2.044 to -1.032; p<0.001). On the other hand, no statistically significant group difference in complication rate (relative risk [RR], 0.709; p=0.774), hospital stay (MD, -2.399; p=0.151), and pseudoarthrosis rate (RR, 1.284; p=0.736) were found.
Conclusion : Relative to MIS-TLIF, immediate outcomes were favorable in Endo-LIF in terms of blood loss and immediate VAS back pain, although complication rate, mid-term clinical outcomes, and fusion rate were not different. However, the challenges for Endo-LIF include longer operation time which means a difficult learning curve and limited surgical indication which means patient selection bias. Larger-scale, well-designed study with long-term follow-up and randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm and update the results of this systematic review.
- Files in This Item
- There are no files associated with this item.
- Appears in
Collections - 의과대학 > 의학과 > 1. Journal Articles
![qrcode](https://api.qrserver.com/v1/create-qr-code/?size=55x55&data=https://scholarworks.bwise.kr/gachon/handle/2020.sw.gachon/85227)
Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.