Download PDF
J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2014; 75(05): 329-335
DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1372432
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

ALIF versus TLIF for Post-Discectomy Syndrome

Max Jägersberg
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
,
Kristian Schneider
2   Spine Center, St. Josef Hospital, Wiesbaden, Germany
,
Carlo Schaller
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
,
Marcus Richter
2   Spine Center, St. Josef Hospital, Wiesbaden, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

15 September 2013

12 December 2013

Publication Date:
12 May 2014 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective To evaluate whether anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is superior to transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in cases of post-discectomy syndrome (PDS).

Methods In this retrospective study, we analyzed the consecutive results of 83 patients operated for PDS refractory to conservative treatment. A total of 46 patients underwent ALIF via a retroperitoneal approach; 37 patients underwent TLIF. Both fusion types were augmented by means of pedicle screw instrumentation. Early and delayed complications were registered within the course of hospitalization or outpatient clinical follow-up, respectively. Parameters such as patient satisfaction, current pain levels, pain medication, and change in work ability were obtained via telephone follow-up.

Results Overall, 81.9% of patients were available for follow-up. Both ALIF and TLIF significantly improved back and leg pain (p < 0.01) and were described as satisfying operations by 75.8% and 73.3% of the patients, respectively. No significant difference between ALIF and TLIF results could be observed. Complications included dural tears, screw malposition, bleeding from major vessels (ALIF), abdominal wall insufficiency (ALIF), and nerve root injury (TLIF). One patient in the ALIF group and seven patients in the TLIF group required fusion extensions to adjacent levels within the observation period (observation period was 34 and 71 months, respectively).

Conclusions Both ALIF and TLIF techniques can be applied for PDS with equally good results. The technical advantages of ALIF have to be balanced with the additional morbidity and operation time owed to the additional approach. ALIF might be associated with a lower incidence of adjacent level disease compared with TLIF.

Keywords

post-discectomy syndrome - ALIF - TLIF
 

  • References

  • 1 Taylor VM, Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Kreuter W. Low back pain hospitalization. Recent United States trends and regional variations. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1994; 19 (11) 1207-1212 ; discussion 121
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Deyo RA, Weinstein JN. Low back pain. N Engl J Med 2001; 344 (5) 363-370
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Wang M, Zhou Y, Wang J, Zhang Z, Li C. A 10-year follow-up study on long-tern clinical outcomes of lumbar microendoscopic discectomy. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurge 2012; 73 (4) 195-198
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Daneyemez M, Sali A, Kahraman S, Beduk A, Seber N. Outcome analyses in 1072 surgically treated lumbar disc herniations. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 1999; 42 (2) 63-68
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Davis RA. A long-term outcome analysis of 984 surgically treated herniated lumbar discs. J Neurosurg 1994; 80 (3) 415-421
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Pappas CT, Harrington T, Sonntag VK. Outcome analysis in 654 surgically treated lumbar disc herniations. Neurosurgery 1992; 30 (6) 862-866
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Cinotti G, Roysam GS, Eisenstein SM, Postacchini F. Ipsilateral recurrent lumbar disc herniation. A prospective, controlled study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998; 80 (5) 825-832
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Herron L. Recurrent lumbar disc herniation: results of repeat laminectomy and discectomy. J Spinal Disord 1994; 7 (2) 161-166
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Papadopoulos EC, Girardi FP, Sandhu HS , et al. Outcome of revision discectomies following recurrent lumbar disc herniation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006; 31 (13) 1473-1476
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Krödel A. Post disc surgery syndrome: indications for surgery and conservative and operative treatment possibilities [in German]. Orthopade 2008; 37 (4) 300-306
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Ivanic GM, Pink TP, Homann NC, Scheitza W, Goyal S. The post-discectomy syndrome. Aetiology, diagnosis, treatment, prevention. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2001; 121 (9) 494-500
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Cinotti G, Gumina S, Giannicola G, Postacchini F. Contralateral recurrent lumbar disc herniation. Results of discectomy compared with those in primary herniation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1999; 24 (8) 800-806
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Iida Y, Kataoka O, Sho T , et al. Postoperative lumbar spinal instability occurring or progressing secondary to laminectomy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1990; 15 (11) 1186-1189
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Osterman H, Sund R, Seitsalo S, Keskimäki I. Risk of multiple reoperations after lumbar discectomy: a population-based study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2003; 28 (6) 621-627
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Ozgen S, Naderi S, Ozek MM, Pamir MN. Findings and outcome of revision lumbar disc surgery. J Spinal Disord 1999; 12 (4) 287-292
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Fritzell P, Hägg O, Wessberg P, Nordwall A ; Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. Chronic low back pain and fusion: a comparison of three surgical techniques: a prospective multicenter randomized study from the Swedish lumbar spine study group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2002; 27 (11) 1131-1141
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Madan SS, Harley JM, Boeree NR. Circumferential and posterolateral fusion for lumbar disc disease. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2003; (409) 114-123
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Krämer J. The post-diskotomy syndrome [in German]. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 1987; 125 (6) 622-625
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Epter RS, Helm II S, Hayek SM, Benyamin RM, Smith HS, Abdi S. Systematic review of percutaneous adhesiolysis and management of chronic low back pain in post lumbar surgery syndrome. Pain Physician 2009; 12 (2) 361-378
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Maroon JC, Abla A, Bost J. Association between peridural scar and persistent low back pain after lumbar discectomy. Neurol Res 1999; 21 (Suppl. 01) S43-S46
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Cloward RB. The treatment of ruptured lumbar intervertebral disc by vertebral body fusion. III. Method of use of banked bone. Ann Surg 1952; 136 (6) 987-992
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Fink B, Kothe R, Browa A, Wiesner L, Schulitz KP. Segmental hypermobility of the spine before and following discectomy [in German]. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 1996; 134 (6) 483-487
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Morgan FP, King T. Primary instability of lumbar vertebrae as a common cause of low back pain. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1957; 39-B (1) 6-22
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Burton CV. Conservative management of low back pain. Postgrad Med 1981; 70 (5) 168-171 , 174–183
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Wilkinson HA. Failed-back syndrome. J Neurosurg 1989; 70 (4) 659-660
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Niemeyer T, Halm H, Hackenberg L, Liljenqvist U, Bövingloh AS. Post-discectomy syndrome treated with lumbar interbody fusion. Int Orthop 2006; 30 (3) 163-166
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Duggal N, Mendiondo I, Pares HR , et al. Anterior lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of failed back surgery syndrome: an outcome analysis. Neurosurgery 2004; 54 (3) 636-6 ; discussion 643–644
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Jiang SD, Chen JW, Jiang LS. Which procedure is better for lumbar interbody fusion: anterior lumbar interbody fusion or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion?. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2012; 132 (9) 1259-1266
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Tang S. Does TLIF aggravate adjacent segmental degeneration more adversely than ALIF? A finite element study. Turk Neurosurg 2012; 22 (3) 324-328
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Tang S, Meng X. Does disc space height of fused segment affect adjacent degeneration in ALIF? A finite element study. Turk Neurosurg 2011; 21 (3) 296-303
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Hsieh PC, Koski TR, O'Shaughnessy BA , et al. Anterior lumbar interbody fusion in comparison with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: implications for the restoration of foraminal height, local disc angle, lumbar lordosis, and sagittal balance. J Neurosurg Spine 2007; 7 (4) 379-386
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Ma C, Wu JB, Zhao M , et al. Treatment of upper cervical spine instability with posterior fusion plus atlantoaxial pedicle screw [in Chinese]. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi 2011; 91 (43) 3062-3065
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Martin BI, Mirza SK, Comstock BA, Gray DT, Kreuter W, Deyo RA. Reoperation rates following lumbar spine surgery and the influence of spinal fusion procedures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007; 32 (3) 382-387
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Tian NF, Huang QS, Zhou P , et al. Pedicle screw insertion accuracy with different assisted methods: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. Eur Spine J 2011; 20 (6) 846-859
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Turunen V, Nyyssönen T, Miettinen H , et al. Lumbar instrumented posterolateral fusion in spondylolisthetic and failed back patients: a long-term follow-up study spanning 11-13 years. Eur Spine J 2012; 21 (11) 2140-2148
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Park P, Garton HJ, Gala VC, Hoff JT, McGillicuddy JE. Adjacent segment disease after lumbar or lumbosacral fusion: review of the literature. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2004; 29 (17) 1938-1944
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Oxland TR, Lund T. Biomechanics of stand-alone cages and cages in combination with posterior fixation: a literature review. Eur Spine J 2000; 9 (Suppl. 01) S95-S101
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Chitnavis B, Barbagallo G, Selway R, Dardis R, Hussain A, Gullan R. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion for revision disc surgery: review of 50 cases in which carbon fiber cages were implanted. J Neurosurg 2001; 95 (2, Suppl): 190-195
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Beaubien BP, Derincek A, Lew WD, Wood KB. In vitro, biomechanical comparison of an anterior lumbar interbody fusion with an anteriorly placed, low-profile lumbar plate and posteriorly placed pedicle screws or translaminar screws. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005; 30 (16) 1846-1851
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar