Comparing perioperative and postoperative outcomes and complications of ALIF and LLIF
Keywords:
anterior lumbar interbody fusion, ALIF vs LLIF, lumbar interbody.Abstract
Purpose: This paper compares anterior lumbar intercorporeal fusion (ALIF) and lateral lumbar intercorporeal fusion (LLIF). LLIF is an approach through the lateral retroperitoneal corridor, transpsoas. ALIF is a described alternative to interbody fusion with approach variations described as retroperitoneal, transperitoneal, open, and laparoscopic. Our objective is to compare complications can occur in both approaches the ALIF and the LLIF, to see what the advantages and disadvantages are during the perioperative and postoperative.
Method: This is a literature review article. A MEDLINE search was conducted through PubMed, google scholar, science direct, and Cochrane to identify articles that reported the differences between ALIF, LLIF and other lumbar interbody fusion approaches focusing the complications, cost and length of surgery, length of hospitalization, narcotic use, sagittal balance and surgical technique.
Result: There was no overall significant difference in the postoperative narcotic use, fusion rate, and disc height. However, ALIF was seen to have better postoperative sagittal balance. Although long-term complication rates between ALIF and LLIF are not statistically even though the procedures have procedure-specific complications. Intraoperative blood loss and operative time were relatively higher in ALIF than in LLIF. The risk of injury to the lumbar plexus and iliac vessels is relatively higher than ALIF.
Conclusion: ALIF and LLIF they are considered safe, effective and non-invasive. Both procedures present their pearls and pitfalls, but LLIF is associated with more complications than ALIF, although they do not present great differences of clinical outcomes. There is a need more extensive research to determine the best approach.
Downloads
References
Park HY, Kim YH, Ha KY, Kim SI, Min HK, Oh IS, et al. Minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion for clinical adjacent segment pathology: a comparative study with conventional posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Clin Spin Surg. 2019;32(10):E426-33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000000787
Qureshi R, Puvanesarajah V, Jain A, Shimer AL, Shen FH, Hassanzadeh H. A comparison of anterior and posterior lumbar interbody fusions. Spin. 2017;42(24):1865-70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002248
Upadhyayula PS, Curtis EI, Yue JK, Sidhu N, Ciacci JD. Anterior versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: perioperative risk factors and 30-day outcomes. Int J Spin Surg. 2018;12(5):533-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14444/5065
Vivas AC, Januszewski J, Hajirawala L, Paluzzi JM, Gandhi SV, Uribe JS. Incisional hernia after minimally invasive lateral retroperitoneal surgery: case series and review of the literature. Operat Neurosurg. 2019;16(3):368-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ons/opy089
Allain J, Dufour T. Anterior lumbar fusion techniques: ALIF, OLIF, DLIF, LLIF, IXLIF. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2020;106(1suppl1):S149-S57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2019.05.024
Goodnough LH, Koltsov J, Wang T, Xiong G, Nathan K, Cheng I. Decreased estimated blood loss in lateral trans-psoas versus anterior approach to lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis. J Spin Surg. 2019;5(2):185-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/jss.2019.05.08
Rao PJ, Phan K, Giang G, Maharaj MM, Phan S, Mobbs RJ. Subsidence following anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF): a prospective study. J Spin Surg. 2017;3(2):168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/jss.2017.05.03
Winder MJ, Gambhir S. Comparison of ALIF vs. XLIF for L4/5 interbody fusion: pros, cons, and literature review. J Spin Surg. 2016;2(1):2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/jss.2015.12.01
Xu DS, Bach K, Uribe JS. Minimally invasive anterior and lateral transpsoas approaches for closed reduction of grade II spondylolisthesis: initial clinical and radiographic experience. Neurosurg Focus. 2018;44(1):E4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.10.Focus17574
Kim YH, Ha KY, Rhyu KW, Park HY, Cho CH, Kim HC, et al. Lumbar interbody fusion: techniques, pearls and pitfalls. Asian Spin J. 2020;14(5):730-41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2020.0485
Lee CS, Park SJ, Chung SS, Lee JY, Yum TH, Shin SK. Mini-open anterior lumbar interbody fusion combined with lateral lumbar interbody fusion in corrective surgery for adult spinal deformity. Asian Spin J. 2016;10(6):1023-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4184/asj.2016.10.6.1023
Bateman DK, Millhouse PW, Shahi N, Kadam AB, Maltenfort MG, Koerner JD, et al. Anterior lumbar spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of associated complications. Spin J. 2015;15(5):1118-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2015.02.040
Rajaraman V, Vingan R, Roth P, Heary RF, Conklin L, Jacobs GB. Visceral and vascular complications resulting from anterior lumbar interbody fusion. JNS. 1999;91(1):60-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3171/spi.1999.91.1.0060
Kudo Y, Okano I, Toyone T, Matsuoka A, Maruyama H, Yamamura R, et al. Lateral lumbar interbody fusion in revision surgery for restenosis after posterior decompression. JNS. 2020;49(3):E11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3171/2020.6.FOCUS20361
Härtl R, Joeris A, McGuire RA. Comparison of the safety outcomes between two surgical approaches for anterior lumbar fusion surgery: anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and extreme lateral interbody fusion (ELIF). Eur Spin J. 2016;25(5):1484-521. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4407-6
Malham GM, Parker RM, Blecher CM, Chow FY, Seex KA. Choice of approach does not affect clinical and radiologic outcomes: A comparative cohort of patients having anterior lumbar interbody fusion and patients having lateral lumbar interbody fusion at 24 months. Glob Spin J. 2016;6(5):472-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1569055
Smith W, Christian G, Serrano S, Malone K. A Comparison of perioperative charges and outcome between open anterior and mini-open lateral approaches for lumbar discectomy and fusion. J Clin Neurosci. 2012;19(5):673-80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2011.09.010
Sembrano JN, Tohmeh A, Isaacs R. Two-year comparative outcomes of MIS lateral and MIS transforaminal interbody fusion in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis: Part I: Clinical Findings. Spin. 2016;41suppl8:S123-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000001471
Teng I, Han J, Phan K, Mobbs R. A meta-analysis comparing alif, plif, tlif and llif. J Clin Neurosc. 2017;44:11-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2017.06.013
Watkins RGI, Hanna R, Chang D, Watkins RGI. Sagittal alignment after lumbar interbody fusion: comparing anterior, lateral, and transforaminal approaches. Clin Spin Surg. 2014;27(5):253-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0b013e31828a8447
Bohl DD, Narain AS, Hijji FY, Ahn J, Mayo BC, Massel DH, et al. Narcotic consumption following anterior and lateral lumbar interbody fusion procedures. Clin Spin Surg. 2017;30(9):E1190-E200. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000000518
Nguyen L-CL, Sing DC, Bozic KJ. Preoperative reduction of opioid use before total joint arthroplasty. J Arthrop. 2016;31(9 suppl):282-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.01.068
