Advertisement

Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

  • Ankur S. Narain
  • Fady Y. Hijji
  • Miguel A. Pelton
  • Sreeharsa V. Nandyala
  • Alejandro Marquez-Lara
  • Kern SinghEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

The minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion approach is a versatile technique for the surgical treatment of a multitude of degenerative spinal maladies. It represents a robust and durable approach that provides three-column stability and significant pain relief. The TLIF technique involves a complete facetectomy and thereby allows for a more lateral exposure to the disk space obviating neural retraction. This chapter describes the indications and contraindications for the MIS TLIF approach. We describe the detailed technique necessary to successfully accomplish restoration of lordotic curvature. In order to enhance clinical outcomes, pearls and pitfalls pertaining to the approach are addressed. Also, possible surgical complications are herein described, and specific ways to avoid these errors are reported. Lastly, a review of the most current literature related to the MIS TLIF approach provides evidence of the advantages, feasibility, and applications of the technique.

Keywords

Minimally invasive TLIF Muscle splitting Tubular access Pedicle screws 

Notes

Disclosure

No funds were received in support of this work. No benefits in any form have been or will be received from any commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Allen RT, Garfin SR. The economics of minimally invasive spine surgery: the value perspective. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:S375–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fessler RG. Minimally invasive spine surgery. Neurosurgery. 2002;51:Siii–v.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kim CW, Siemionow K, Anderson DG, et al. The current state of minimally invasive spine surgery. Instr Course Lect. 2011;60:353–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Knight RQ. Minimally invasive spine surgery. Curr Orthop Pract. 2009;20:227–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McAfee PC, Phillips FM, Andersson G, et al. Minimally invasive spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:S271–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ozgur BM, Benzel EC, Garfin S. Minimally invasive spine surgery: a practical guide to anatomy and techniquesed. Dordrecht: Springer; 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Park P, Foley KT. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with reduction of spondylolisthesis: technique and outcomes after a minimum of 2 years’ follow-up. Neurosurg Focus. 2008;25:E16.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Figueiredo N, Martins JW, Arruda AA, et al. TLIF—transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2004;62:815–20.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hackenberg L, 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.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harris BM, Hilibrand AS, Savas PE, et al. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: the effect of various instrumentation techniques on the flexibility of the lumbar spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004;29:E65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baaj AA. Handbook of spine surgeryed. New York: Thieme; 2012.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Singh K, Vaccaro A. Treatment of lumbar instability: transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Semin Spine Surg. 2005;17:259–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vaccaro A, Bono CM. Minimally invasive spine surgery. Minimally invasive procedures in orthopedic surgery. New York: Informa Healthcare; 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chaudhary KS, Groff M. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spine. Tech Orthop. 2011;26:146–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hoh DJ, Wang MY, Ritland SL. Anatomic features of the paramedian muscle-splitting approaches to the lumbar spine. Neurosurgery. 2010;66:13–24; discussion -5.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lehman RA Jr, Vaccaro AR, Bertagnoli R, et al. Standard and minimally invasive approaches to the spine. Orthop Clin North Am. 2005;36:281–92.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Peng CW, Yue WM, Poh SY, et al. Clinical and radiological outcomes of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34:1385–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang JC. Advanced reconstruction spineed. Rosemont: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons; 2011.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gonzalez AA, Jeyanandarajan D, Hansen C, et al. Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring during spine surgery: a review. Neurosurg Focus. 2009;27:E6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wiesel SW. Operative techniques in orthopaedic surgeryed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2011.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Blondel B, Adetchessi T, Pech-Gourg G, et al. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion through a unilateral approach and percutaneous osteosynthesis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2011;97:595–601.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hey HW, Hee HT. Lumbar degenerative spinal deformity: surgical options of PLIF, TLIF and MI-TLIF. Indian J Orthop. 2010;44:159–62.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lau D, Lee JG, Han SJ, et al. Complications and perioperative factors associated with learning the technique of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). J Clin Neurosci. 2011;18:624–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Neal CJ, Rosner MK. Resident learning curve for minimal-access transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in a military training program. Neurosurg Focus. 2010;28:E21.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Bindal RK, Glaze S, Ognoskie M, et al. Surgeon and patient radiation exposure in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2008;9:570–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chen NF, Smith ZA, Stiner E, et al. Symptomatic ectopic bone formation after off-label use of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010;12:40–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Glassman SD, Howard JM, Sweet A, et al. Complications and concerns with osteobiologics for spine fusion in clinical practice. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:1621–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Knox JB, Dai JM 3rd, Orchowski J. Osteolysis in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with bone morphogenetic protein-2. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011;36:672–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rihn JA, Makda J, Hong J, et al. The use of RhBMP-2 in single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a clinical and radiographic analysis. Eur Spine J. 2009;18:1629–36.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Adogwa O, Parker SL, Bydon A, et al. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: 2-year assessment of narcotic use, return to work, disability, and quality of life. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2011;24:479–84.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Brodano GB, Martikos K, Lolli F, et al. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative disk disease and spondylolisthesis grade I: minimally invasive versus open surgery. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2015;28:E559–64.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Goldstein CL, Macwan K, Sundararajan K, et al. Perioperative outcomes and adverse events of minimally invasive versus open posterior lumbar fusion: meta-analysis and systematic review. J Neurosurg Spine. 2016;24:416–27.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hey HW, Hee HT. Open and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: comparison of intermediate results and complications. Asian Spine J. 2015;9:185–93.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Isaacs RE, Podichetty VK, Santiago P, et al. Minimally invasive microendoscopy-assisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with instrumentation. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005;3:98–105.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Khan NR, Clark AJ, Lee SL, et al. Surgical outcomes for minimally invasive vs open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosurgery. 2015;77:847–74; discussion 74.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Schwender JD, Holly LT, Rouben DP, et al. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): technical feasibility and initial results. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2005;18. Suppl:S1–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Shunwu F, Xing Z, Fengdong Z, et al. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:1615–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Singh K, Nandyala SV, Marquez-Lara A, et al. A perioperative cost analysis comparing single-level minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J. 2014;14:1694–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tian NF, Wu YS, Zhang XL, et al. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a meta-analysis based on the current evidence. Eur Spine J. 2013;22:1741–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Jang JS, Lee SH. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with ipsilateral pedicle screw and contralateral facet screw fixation. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005;3:218–23.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kim JS, Jung B, Lee SH. Instrumented minimally invasive spinal-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF); minimum 5-years follow-up with clinical and radiologic outcomes. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2012;31:302–9.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Park Y, Ha JW, Lee YT, et al. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis and degenerative spondylosis: 5-year results. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472:1813–23.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rouben D, Casnellie M, Ferguson M. Long-term durability of minimal invasive posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a clinical and radiographic follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2011;24:288–96.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kim CW, Doerr TM, Luna IY, et al. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using expandable technology: a clinical and radiographic analysis of 50 patients. World Neurosurg. 2016;90:228–35.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Shen X, Wang L, Zhang H, et al. Radiographic analysis of one-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) with unilateral pedicle screw fixation for lumbar degenerative diseases. Clin Spine Surg. 2016;29:E1–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Villavicencio AT, Burneikiene S, Roeca CM, et al. Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Surg Neurol Int. 2010;1:12.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Wang MY. Improvement of sagittal balance and lumbar lordosis following less invasive adult spinal deformity surgery with expandable cages and percutaneous instrumentation. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;18:4–12.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Parker SL, Adogwa O, Bydon A, et al. Cost-effectiveness of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis associated low-back and leg pain over two years. World Neurosurg. 2012;78:178–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Beringer WF, Mobasser JP. Unilateral pedicle screw instrumentation for minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurg Focus. 2006;20:E4.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Holly LT, Schwender JD, Rouben DP, et al. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: indications, technique, and complications. Neurosurg Focus. 2006;20:E6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Deutsch H, Musacchio MJ Jr. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with unilateral pedicle screw fixation. Neurosurg Focus. 2006;20:E10.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Rosen DS, Ferguson SD, Ogden AT, et al. Obesity and self-reported outcome after minimally invasive lumbar spinal fusion surgery. Neurosurgery. 2008;63:956–60; discussion 60.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Tuttle J, Shakir A, Choudhri HF. Paramedian approach for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with unilateral pedicle screw fixation. Technical note and preliminary report on 47 cases. Neurosurg Focus. 2006;20:E5.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ankur S. Narain
    • 1
  • Fady Y. Hijji
    • 1
  • Miguel A. Pelton
    • 1
  • Sreeharsa V. Nandyala
    • 1
  • Alejandro Marquez-Lara
    • 1
  • Kern Singh
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryRush University Medical CenterChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations