Comparison between transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion in treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy between transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis. A total of 62 patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis were treated at our hospital from 2010 to 2013. These patients were divided into a TLIF group that included 36 patients (mean age: 60 years) and a PLIF group that included 26 patients (mean age: 57 years) according to different surgical methods. For example, the pedicle screws were fixed first and then transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion or posterior lumbar interbody fusion was performed, and the pedicle screws or intralaminar spreading device were used to distract. Next, the surgical durations, the volume of bleeding during surgery, postoperative drainage, and complications were compared between the two groups. All 62 patients were well operated, 2 patients developed a dural sac tear, and 1 patient had injury to the nerve roots in the PLIF group. The average follow-up duration was 20 months and 18 months in the TLIF group and PLIF group respectively. Both TLIF and PLIF technologies could effectively decompress the interbody fusion and fix posterior endplates steadied centrum, which alleviated clinical symptoms, but TLIF had some advantages over PLIF, such as smaller trauma, low incidence rate of nervous injury or dural sac injury, and better protection of end structures.