Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 22, 2026
Three-dimensional Navigation-guided, Prone, Single-position, Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Technique
Published on: July 15, 2021
Changes in Sagittal Alignment Following Short-Level Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Comparison between Posterior and Lateral
Hiroaki Nakashima1, Tokumi Kanemura1, Kotaro Satake1
1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Konan Kosei Hospital, Konan, Japan.
Study Design:
Retrospective case-control study.
Purpose:
We aimed to compare radiologic outcomes between posterior (PLIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) in short-level spinal fusion surgeries.
Overview Of Literature:
Although LLIF enables surgeons to insert large lordotic cages, it is unknown whether LLIF more effectively corrects local and global sagittal alignments compared with PLIF in short-level spinal fusion surgeries.
Methods:
Radiographic data acquired from patients with lumbar interbody fusion (≤3 levels) using PLIF or LLIF for degenerative lumbar diseases were analyzed. The following radiographic parameters were evaluated preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively: segmental lordotic angle, disk height, lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic tilt (PT), C7 sagittal vertical axis, and thoracic kyphosis (TK).
Results:
In total, 144 patients with PLIF (193 fused levels) and 101 with LLIF (159 fused levels) were included. Patients' backgrounds and preoperative radiographic parameters for any level of fusion did not differ significantly between PLIF and LLIF procedures. The LLIF group exhibited significantly greater changes at 1-level fusion compared to the PLIF group in the parameters of segmental lordotic angle (5.1°±5.8° vs. 2.1°±5.0°, p<0.001), disk height (4.2±2.3 mm vs. 2.2±2.0 mm, p<0.001), LL (7.8°±7.6° vs. 3.9°±8.6°, p=0.004), and PI-LL (-6.9°±6.8° vs. -3.6°±10.1°, p=0.03). While, a similar trend was observed regarding 2-level fusion, significantly greater changes were only observed in LL (12.1°±11.1° vs. 4.2°±9.1°, p=0.047) and PI-LL (-11.2°±11.3° vs. -3.0°±9.3°, p=0.043), PT (-6.4°±4.9° vs. -2.5°±5.3°, p=0.049) and TK (7.8°±11.8° vs. -0.3°±9.7°, p=0.047) in the LLIF group at 3-level fusion.
Conclusions:
LLIF provides significantly better local sagittal alignment than PLIF in 1- or 2-level fusion cases and improves spinopelvic alignment and local alignment for 3-level fusion cases. Thus, LLIF was demonstrated to be a useful lumbar interbody fusion technique, constituting a powerful tool for achieving sagittal realignment with minimal surgical invasiveness.
Related Concept Videos
02:45Nuclear Fusion
A helium nucleus has a mass that is 0.7% less than that of four hydrogen nuclei; this lost mass is converted into energy during the fusion. This reaction produces about...
01:24Tagging and Fusion Proteins
01:43SNAREs and Membrane Fusion
SNAREs exist in pairs that symmetrically interact and catalyze the fusion of the lipid bilayers in vesicle and target organelle. v-SNARE in the vesicle membrane are single polypeptide chains that bind to a complementary t-SNARE, composed of 2...
01:26Fusion of Secretory Vesicles with the Plasma Membrane
In 1993, Jim Rothman proposed that the antiparallel pairing of vesicular and transmembrane SNAREs, or...
02:57The Sense of Self: Reflected Self-Appraisal and Social Comparison
01:28Lateralization