Comparison of Clinical Outcomes After Transforaminal Interbody Fusion Using Cortical Bone Trajectory versus Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation.

Maruo, Keishi; Arizumi, Fumihiro; Kusuyama, Kazuki; Yoshie, Norichika; Tomoyuki, Kusukawa; Tachibana, Toshiya · World Neurosurg · 2021

retrospective_cohort · Level III

Where this comes from

Abstract

The study aim was to compare clinical outcomes between patients undergoing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) using percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) and cortical bone trajectory (CBT) by a single surgeon. This was a retrospective matched-cohort study of 77 patients (mean age, 71.7 years; 56% female) who underwent TLIF using CBT or PPS. Thirty-nine consecutive patients in the CBT group and 38 patients in the PPS group were matched for age, sex, and fused levels. All CBT screws were inserted by using a three-dimensional patient-specific guide (MySpine MC, Medacta). Perioperative outcomes of operative time, estimated blood loss, numeric rating scale scores, and serum concentration of creatine kinase were compared between the 2 groups. At 1 year postoperatively, clinical outcomes and radiographic outcomes, including cage subsidence, screw loosening, and fusion rates, were compared between the 2 groups. The numeric rating scale scores on postoperative days 3 and 7 and serum creatine kinase levels on postoperative days 1 and 3 were significantly lower in the CBT group than in the PPS group (all P < 0.005). There were no significant intergroup differences in operation time and estimated blood loss. At postoperative 1 year, there were no significant differences in cage subsidence, screw loosening, and fusion rates between the CBT group and PPS group. Clinical outcomes were equivalent between the 2 groups. The CBT technique using three-dimensional patient-specific guides resulted in lower perioperative pain and quicker recovery after surgery, which suggests that CBT is a less invasive procedure than PPS.

Medical subject headings