Advertisement

Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Posterior Spinal Instrumentation and Fusion

  • Sean K. Jandhyala
  • Saad B. Chaudhary
Chapter

Abstract

The intervertebral space offers a unique region of the lumbar spine to obtain alignment corrective goals as well as to achieve a solid arthrodesis. The vast majority of the body weight and compressive forces traverse the anteior column of the spine. Concomitantly, the intervertebral space offers a relatively short and vascularized gap across the motion segment, making this a prime environment for solid fusion. The Transforaminal interbody fusion technique uniquely allows the spine surgeon access to both anterior and posterior column pathologies for corrective measures and treatment using a single approach.

Keywords

Intervertebral disc space Anterior lumbar interbody fusion Posterior lumbar interbody fusion Kambin’s triangle Pedicle screw insertion Disc space distraction 

References

  1. 1.
    Harms J, Rolinger H. A one-stage procedure in operative treatment of spondylolisthesis: dorsal raction-reposition and anterior fusion. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 1982;120:343–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Potter BK, Freedman BA, Verwiebe EG, et al. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: A safe technique with satisfactory three to five year results. Eur Spine J. 2005;14:551–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Herkowitz HN, Rothman RH, Simeone FA, editors. The spine. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier; 2011.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    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;7:379–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim JS, Kang BU, Lee SH, et al. Mini-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion augmented by percutaneous pedicle screw fixation: A comparison of surgical outcomes in adult low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2009;22:114–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Resnick DK. Lumbar interbody fusion: Current Status. Neurosurg Q. 2008;18:77–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dennis S, Watkins R, Landaker S, et al. Comparison of disc space heights after anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1989;14:876–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kwon BK, Hilibrand AS, Malloy K, et al. A critical analysis of the literature regarding surgical approach and outcome for adult low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2005;18.(Suppl:S30–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    McAfee PC, Devine JG, Chaput CD, et al. The indications for interbody fusion cages in the treatment of spondylolisthesis: analysis of 120 cases. Spine. 2005;30:S60–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lin PM. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF): past, present, and future. Clin Neurosurg. 2000;47:470–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Moskowitz A. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Orthop Clic North AM. 2002;33:359–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kwon BK, Berta S, Daffner SD, et al. Radiographic analysis of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of adult isthmic spondylolisthesis. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2003;16:469–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lauber S, Schulte TL, Liljenqvist U, et al. Clinical and radiologic 2 to 4 year results of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis grades 1 and 2. Spine. 2006;31:1693–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hackenberg I, Halm H, Bullmann V, et al. Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody fusion a safe technique with satisfactory three to five year results. Eur Spine J. 2005;14:551–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Villavicencio AT, Burneikine S, Bulsara KR, et al. Perioperative complications in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions versus anterior-posterior reconstruction for lumbar disc degeneration and instability. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2006;19:92–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hee HT, Castro FP Jr, Majd ME, et al. Anterior/posterior lumbar fusion versus transformainal lumbar interbody fusion: analysis of complications and predictive factors. J Spinal Disord. 2001;14:533–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ahn J, Jorgenson AY, Bohl DD, et al. Neuroforaminal Bone growth following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with BMP: a computed tomographic Analysis. 30:E754.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Miura Y, Imagama S, et al. Is local bone viable as a source of bone graft in posterior lumbar interbody fusion? Spine. 2003;28:2386–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lee CK, Vessa P, Lee JK. Chronic disabling low back pain syndrome caused by internal derangements: The results of disc excision and posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine. 1995;20:356–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sean K. Jandhyala
    • 1
  • Saad B. Chaudhary
    • 2
  1. 1.Valley Orthopedics SpecialistsSheltonUSA
  2. 2.Mount Sinai HospitalNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations