Abstract
Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is the standard minimally invasive fusion technique based on the tubular retractor to minimize muscle damage. The tubular retractor is used to effectively expose the desired area by promoting inclination with a small incision. A unilateral facet joint is removed through a paramedian incision, and the disc can be accessed through this space to obtain interbody fusion. The desired level of contralateral decompression can be performed by tilting the table, even without contralateral facetectomy. The advantages of MIS-TLIF include not only the cosmetic effect due to the small incision but more importantly, the minimization of injury to paraspinal structures during surgery. Unlike conventional open fusion surgery, which requires extensive periosteal dissection, MIS-TLIF mostly preserves paraspinal muscular structures. Furthermore, MIS-TLIF has been associated with reduced blood loss, shorter operative times, and a low perioperative complication rate. Another merit of MIS-TLIF is that it has a wide indication, as in conventional open fusion surgery, except for the invisible pedicle with fluoroscopy. It is worth noting that a learning curve for MIS-TLIF can be overcome in 20-40 cases. Therefore, this chapter will provide a guide for overcoming this learning curve early.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Foley KT, Holly LT, Schwender JD. Minimally invasive lumbar fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28:S26–35.
Wu A-M, Hu Z-C, Li X-B, et al. Comparison of minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of single segmental lumbar spondylolisthesis: minimum two-year follow up. Ann Transl Med. 2018;6:105.
Li X-C, Huang C-M, Zhong C-F, Liang R-W, Luo S-J. Minimally invasive procedure reduces adjacent segment degeneration and disease: new benefit-based global meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0171546.
Lee MJ, Mok J, Patel P. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: traditional open versus minimally invasive techniques. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2017;26:124–31.
Orita S, Inage K, Sainoh T, et al. Lower lumbar segmental arteries can intersect over the intervertebral disc in the oblique lateral interbody fusion approach with a risk for arterial injury: radiological analysis of lumbar segmental arteries by using magnetic resonance imaging. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017;42:135–42.
Garces J, Berry JF, Valle-Giler EP, Sulaiman WAR. Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring for minimally invasive 1- and 2-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: does it improve patient outcome? Ochsner J. 2014;14:57–61.
Khechen B, Haws BE, Patel DV, et al. Comparison of postoperative outcomes between primary MIS TLIF and MIS TLIF with revision decompression. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019;44:150–6.
Wang J, Zhou Y, Zhang ZF, Li CQ, Zheng WJ, Liu J. Minimally invasive or open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion as revision surgery for patients previously treated by open discectomy and decompression of the lumbar spine. Eur Spine J. 2011;20:623–8.
Lee W-C, Park J-Y, Kim KH, et al. Minimally invasive Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in multilevel: comparison with conventional Transforaminal interbody fusion. World Neurosurg. 2016;85:236–43.
Lee JC, Jang H-D, Shin B-J. Learning curve and clinical outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: our experience in 86 consecutive cases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37:1548–57.
Park Y, Lee SB, Seok SO, Jo BW, Ha JW. Perioperative surgical complications and learning curve associated with minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a single-institute experience. Clin Orthop Surg. 2015;7:91–6.
Yang Y, Liu Z-Y, Zhang L-M, et al. Risk factor of contralateral radiculopathy following microendoscopy-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J. 2018;27:1925–32.
Kim K-R, Park J-Y. The technical feasibility of unilateral Biportal endoscopic decompression for the unpredicted complication following minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: case report. Neurospine. 2020;17:S154–9.
Lw M, Hm Z, Lr S, Azam B, Ma B, Victor C. Assessment of radiographic and clinical outcomes of an articulating expandable interbody cage in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis. Neurosurg Focus. 2020;44:E8. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.10.FOCUS17562.
Price JP, Dawson JM, Schwender JD, Schellhas KP. Clinical and radiologic comparison of minimally invasive surgery with traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: A review of 452 patients from a single center. Clin Spine Surg. 2018;31:E121–6.
Chen X, Song Q, Wang K, et al. Robot-assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective matched-control analysis for clinical and quality-of-life outcomes. J Comp Eff Res. 2021;10:845–56.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ryu, D., Park, JY. (2023). Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. In: Ahn, Y., Park, JK., Park, CK. (eds) Core Techniques of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9849-2_21
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9849-2_21
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-19-9848-5
Online ISBN: 978-981-19-9849-2
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)