Comparison between oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Short-term radiographic and clinical results.

https://doi.org/10.59156/revista.v36i04.617

Abstract

Background. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) is a widely used method. In recent years, oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) has gained some popularity due to its minimally invasive approach and ability of indirect decompression.
Objective. Our objective is to compare retrospectively clinical and radiological results of patients operated by boths techniques in the short term.
Materials and methods. Patients who underwent surgery by the OLIF and PLIF between 2020 and 2021 were gathered. They were divided into two groups according to the technique used; and demographic data and radiographic results were compared between the preoperative and postoperative periods. The Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODI) was used to assess the low back pain disability; and complications were recorded for both groups.
Results. Out of 118 patients, 56 correspond to the OLIF group and 62 to the PLIF group. Regarding the ODI, no significant differences were recorded between the two groups before and after surgery. The OLIF group showed better radiographic results than the PLIF group in the postoperative period, with a significant difference in total lumbar lordosis (p 0.017). The PLIF group showed a higher number of postoperative complications.
Conclusion: The OLIF approach can be an alternative surgical method to the traditional posterior approach in patients with lumbar degenerative pathology. This technique would allow obtaining better radiographic results with fewer complications compared to the traditional technique.