Abstract
Objective
To compare between the CAMISS-TLIF group and the OP-TLIF group in the clinical efficacy and radiographic manifest.
Methods
This study was a registration study, selected 27 patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis from May 2011 to March 2014 in our hospital. Patients in one group are treated with computer assisted navigation minimally invasive TLIF (CAMISS -TLIF) while the others are treated with the OP-TLIF (OPEN-TLIF). The former group has 13 cases while the latter group has 14 cases. We collected information and present statistical analysis on the following aspects in order to compare the two different surgical methods of treatment. They are the operation duration, blood loss, days of hospitalisation, the preoperative and follow-up JOA and JOA improvement rate, the preoperative and follow-up ODI scores, the preoperative and follow-up VAS and Odom's criteria. By analysing the follow-up CT results, we compare the pedicle screw accuracy rate between the two groups in order to make a comprehensive assessment of these two surgical methods.
Results
There is a significant difference in blood loss, follow-up JOA improvement rate and follow-up ODI scores between the CAMISS-TLIF group and OP-TLIF group (P <0.05), while in other fields there is no statistically significant differences.
Conclusion
CAMISS-TLIF surgical approach has an advantage of less blood loss, less muscle stripping, smaller surgical trauma and more quickly recovery after surgery.
