NDLI: Comparative effectiveness of two different interbody fusion methods for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: cage versus morselized impacted bone grafts

Content Provider	Springer Nature : BioMed Central
Author	Lv, Chaoliang Li, Xianzhou Zhang, Haicheng Lv, Junrong Zhang, Hongmei
Abstract	Background The use of an interbody fusion device (cage) to assist fusion and increase intervertebral stability is widely supported. We applied the morselized impacted bone graft method without using a cage in a single level interbody fusion with encouraging medium-term clinical results. The purpose of this paper is to compare the clinical and radiological results of local bone grafts with a cage to morselized impacted bone grafts without cage, in patients undergoing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgery. Methods One hundred eighty-nine consecutive patients who underwent TLIF in our hospital were evaluated from July 2009 to July 2012. Eighty-four patients received TLIF and local bone graft with one polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage, while 96 patients received the TLIF with local morselized impacted bone grafts without a cage. The clinical data and perioperative parameters of the patients in the two groups were recorded and compared. Results The mean follow-up time was 35 months. There were no significant differences in operation time and blood loss between the two groups. Single-level fusion was performed in all patients. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups, according to the preoperative or postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score. No statistically significant differences in fusion rate were observed between the two groups. At the final follow-up, the ratio of the disc height to vertebral height (HR) was not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion Morselized impacted bone graft is as beneficial as local bone grafts with a cage for TLIF. Since the no cage procedure is less expensive, the morselized impacted bone graft is an affordable choice for single level TLIF, especially in less developed regions.
Related Links	https://bmcmusculoskeletdisord.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s12891-015-0675-2.pdf
Ending Page	6
Page Count	6
Starting Page	1
File Format	HTM / HTML
ISSN	14712474
DOI	10.1186/s12891-015-0675-2
Journal	BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
Issue Number	1
Volume Number	16
Language	English
Publisher	BioMed Central
Publisher Date	2015-08-19
Access Restriction	Open
Subject Keyword	Orthopedics Rehabilitation Rheumatology Sports Medicine Internal Medicine Epidemiology Interbody fusion Bone graft Cage Lumbar spinal stenosis
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article
Subject	Orthopedics and Sports Medicine Rheumatology
Journal Impact Factor	2.2/2023
5-Year Journal Impact Factor	2.6/2023

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Comparative effectiveness of two different interbody fusion methods for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: cage versus morselized impacted bone grafts

Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) versus endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF) in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis along with intervertebral disc herniation: a retrospective analysis

Clinico-radiological outcomes of single level TLIF using local morselized impacted bone graft vs cage with local bone graft

Comparative clinical efficacy of percutaneous coaxial large-channel endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective study

Titanium interlayer-mediated hydroxyapatite-coated polyetheretherketone cage in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery

Is local autogenous morselized bone harvested from decompression through a posterior-transforaminal approach sufficient for single-level interbody fusion in the lower lumbar spine?

Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a unilateral single cage and a local morselized bone graft in the degenerative lumbar spine.

Comparison of lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy bilateral decompression and minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for one-level lumbar spinal stenosis

The value of Hounsfield units in predicting cage subsidence after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Comparative effectiveness of two different interbody fusion methods for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: cage versus morselized impacted bone grafts

Similar Documents

Comparative effectiveness of two different interbody fusion methods for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: cage versus morselized impacted bone grafts

Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) versus endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF) in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis along with intervertebral disc herniation: a retrospective analysis

Clinico-radiological outcomes of single level TLIF using local morselized impacted bone graft vs cage with local bone graft

Comparative clinical efficacy of percutaneous coaxial large-channel endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective study

Titanium interlayer-mediated hydroxyapatite-coated polyetheretherketone cage in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery

Is local autogenous morselized bone harvested from decompression through a posterior-transforaminal approach sufficient for single-level interbody fusion in the lower lumbar spine?

Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a unilateral single cage and a local morselized bone graft in the degenerative lumbar spine.

Comparison of lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy bilateral decompression and minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for one-level lumbar spinal stenosis

The value of Hounsfield units in predicting cage subsidence after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Comparative effectiveness of two different interbody fusion methods for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: cage versus morselized impacted bone grafts