Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar fusion: a systematic review of complications
Open Access
- 18 March 2016
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Nature in International Orthopaedics
- Vol. 40 (9) , 1883-1890
Abstract
The aim of this study is to compare mTLIF vs. oTLIF with regard to peri-operative complications, operative time, estimated blood loss, fluoroscopic time, and the length of hospital stay.Keywords
This publication has 24 references indexed in Scilit:
- Comparison of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in two-level degenerative lumbar diseaseInternational Orthopaedics, 2013
- Minimally invasive surgery compared to open spinal fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine pathologiesJournal of Clinical Neuroscience, 2012
- Clinical and radiological outcomes of open versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusionEuropean Spine Journal, 2012
- Comparison of one-level minimally invasive and open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis grades 1 and 2European Spine Journal, 2010
- Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody FusionSpine, 2009
- Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: evaluating initial experienceInternational Orthopaedics, 2008
- Comparison of One-Level Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Performed With a Minimally Invasive Approach or a Traditional Open ApproachSpine, 2007
- Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody FusionJournal of Spinal Disorders & Techniques, 2005
- Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technique, Complications, and Early ResultsNeurosurgery, 2001
- Comparison of Posterior and Transforaminal Approaches to Lumbar Interbody FusionSpine, 2001