Elderly Patients Achieving Clinical and Radiological Outcomes Comparable with Those of Younger Patients Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Study Design Retrospective analysis of prospective database. Purpose To compare 2-year clinical and radiological outcomes after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) among “middle-age” (50–64.99 years), “young-old” (65–74.99 years), and “old-old” (>75 years) patients. Overview of Literature Owing to higher perioperative morbidity and mortality rates, elderly patients with degenerative lumbar conditions are occasionally denied surgical care, even after conservative treatment failure. MIS-TLIF advantages include reduced blood loss, reduced analgesia requirements, early mobilization, and shorter hospital stays. Methods Between 2007 and 2012, 22 patients (age >75 years) treated with 1-2 level MIS-TLIF were matched with “young-old” and “middle-age” patients (22 each) based on race, body mass index (BMI), diagnosis, spinal level, number of spinal levels operated upon, and bone graft type. Clinical outcomes included the Oswestry disability index (ODI), neurogenic symptom score (NSS), 36-item short form health survey (SF-36), and visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain. Radiological assessment included plain radiographs and preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and plain radiographs at 1, 3, 6, and 24 months postoperatively. Fusion grade, loosening, cage migration, and adjacent segment degeneration were assessed. Results The groups had similar fluoroscopy time, operation duration, and postoperative analgesia type used. “Old-old” patients took longer to ambulate (1.6 days) and had longer hospital stays (6 days). All patients showed significant improvement in clinical outcome scores at all time-points compared with the preoperative status. “Middle-age” patients showed better ODI and SF-36 physical function scores than “old-old” patients preoperatively and 2 years post surgery. NSS, VAS (back and leg), and SF-36 mental function scores were similar between groups preoperatively and at every time-point postoperatively. Minimal clinical important differences (63.6%–95.5% at 2 years) were achieved. Grade 1 fusion occurred in a minimum of 80% patients in each group 2 years post surgery. Complication rates were similar. Adjacent segment disease occurred in 2 patients from the “young-old” group, with no significant differences between groups. Conclusions MIS-TLIF showed comparable results in selected “old-old” patients compared with “young-old” and “middle-age” patients without increased complication risks.

[1]  Jin-Sung Kim,et al.  Instrumented Minimally Invasive Spinal-Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MIS-TLIF): Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up With Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes , 2012, Clinical spine surgery.

[2]  J. K. Hofer,et al.  A minimum 5-year follow-up of an oxidized zirconium femoral prosthesis used for total knee arthroplasty. , 2014, The Knee.

[3]  W. Yue,et al.  Five-Year Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Matched-Pair Comparison Study , 2013, Spine.

[4]  J. Weinstein,et al.  Epidural Steroid Injections Are Associated With Less Improvement in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Subgroup Analysis of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial , 2013, Spine.

[5]  W. Yue,et al.  Clinical and radiological outcomes of open versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion , 2011, European Spine Journal.

[6]  R. Fessler,et al.  Perioperative and postoperative complications of single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in elderly adults , 2012, Journal of clinical neuroscience.

[7]  Joseph S. Cheng,et al.  Utility of minimum clinically important difference in assessing pain, disability, and health state after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. , 2011, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[8]  S. Nimjee,et al.  Minimally Invasive Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Patients Older Than 70 Years of Age: Analysis of Peri- and Postoperative Complications , 2011, Neurosurgery.

[9]  A. Sharan,et al.  Defining “Complications” in Spine Surgery: Neurosurgery and Orthopedic Spine Surgeons' Survey , 2010, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[10]  Jin-Sung Kim,et al.  Adjacent Segment Degeneration After Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation for Adult Low-Grade Isthmic Spondylolisthesis: Minimum 3 Years of Follow-up , 2010, Neurosurgery.

[11]  W. Yue,et al.  Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion , 2009, Spine.

[12]  D. Polly,et al.  Outcome of lumbar arthrodesis in patients sixty-five years of age or older. , 2009, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[13]  S. Berven,et al.  Minimum clinically important difference in lumbar spine surgery patients: a choice of methods using the Oswestry Disability Index, Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire Short Form 36, and pain scales. , 2008, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[14]  Sang-Ho Lee,et al.  Single-level instrumented mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in elderly patients. , 2008, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[15]  Yongjung Kim,et al.  Adjacent Segment Disease FollowingLumbar/Thoracolumbar Fusion With Pedicle Screw Instrumentation: A Minimum 5-Year Follow-up , 2007, Spine.

[16]  A. Miyauchi,et al.  Surgical outcomes of posterior lumbar interbody fusion in elderly patients. , 2006, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[17]  W. Lauerman,et al.  Predicting Morbidity and Mortality of Lumbar Spine Arthrodesis in Patients in Their Ninth Decade , 2006, Spine.

[18]  P. Santiago,et al.  Minimally invasive microendoscopy-assisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with instrumentation. , 2005, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[19]  John R. Johnson,et al.  Perioperative complications of posterior lumbar decompression and arthrodesis in older adults. , 2003, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[20]  S. Glassman,et al.  Surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in patients older than 75 years of age. , 1999, Journal of neurosurgery.

[21]  J. Kostuik,et al.  Complications of spinal fusion in adult patients more than 60 years of age. , 1998, The Orthopedic clinics of North America.

[22]  L. Lenke,et al.  Anterior Fresh Frozen Structural Allografts in the Thoracic and Lumbar Spine: Do They Work If Combined With Posterior Fusion and Instrumentation in Adult Patients With Kyphosis or Anterior Column Defects? , 1995, Spine.

[23]  Z. Yuan,et al.  Lumbar spine surgery and mortality among Medicare beneficiaries, 1986. , 1994, American journal of public health.

[24]  R. Deyo,et al.  Lumbar spinal fusion. A cohort study of complications, reoperations, and resource use in the Medicare population. , 1993, Spine.

[25]  R. Deyo,et al.  Morbidity and mortality in association with operations on the lumbar spine. The influence of age, diagnosis, and procedure. , 1992, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.