Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2006 Apr;14(1):21-6.

Posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus intertransverse fusion in the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis.

Author information

1
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Institute of Orthopaedic Research and Accident Surgery, Madurai, India.

Abstract

PURPOSE:

To compare 2 methods of fusion in the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis: posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and intertransverse fusion (ITF).

METHODS:

20 patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis were randomly allocated to one of 2 groups: decompression, posterior instrumentation, and PLIF (n=10) or decompression, posterior instrumentation, and ITF (n=10). The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire was used for clinical assessment. Radiography was performed preoperatively and postoperatively to assess the reduction of spondylolisthesis or slip.

RESULTS:

In the PLIF and ITF groups, 87.5% and 100% had a satisfactory clinical result, and 48% and 39% had reduced spondylolisthesis, respectively. Both had a fusion rate of 100%. PLIF showed better reduction of spondylolisthesis, although ITF achieved a better subjective and clinical outcome.

CONCLUSION:

Morbidity and complications are much higher following PLIF than ITF. ITF is recommended because of the simplicity of the procedure, lower complication rate, and good clinical and radiological results.

PMID:
16598082
DOI:
10.1177/230949900601400106
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Atypon
Loading ...
Support Center