Clinical Short-term Efficacy Of MIS-TLIF In The Treatment Of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Objective: In this study,patients with lumbar spinal stenosis were treated with MIS-TLIF and PLIF.To compare the short-term clinical efficacy of surgical treatment of two kinds of lumbar spinal stenosis,and the advantages and disadvantages of clinical implementation to treat lumbar spinal stenosis.Provide a more effective and more reasonable solution.Methods: Retrospective analysis From January 2016 to June 2018,the Department of Orthopaedics,the First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University,diagnosed lumbar spinal stenosis and completed 40 cases of surgery.According to the surgical method,the experimental group was divided into 15 groups: MIS-TLIF group,15 patients,6 male patients,14 female patients,and control group: 25 patients in the PLIF group,including 11 males and 14 female patients.Record relevant data,operation time,intraoperative blood loss,length of incision,postoperative drainage,bed rest time,hospital stay,etc.The two groups of patients were followed up for 6 months.Pain VAS score and Oswestry functional improvement index score(ODI)were performed before and during postoperative follow-up.Statistical analysis was performed on the collected data using statistical software SPSS 25.0.Results: 1.There is no statistical difference in the composition of the general information and the admission data.2.The operation time of the patients in the MIS-TLIF group was(191.87±9.62)min,and that in the PLIF group was(177.68 ± 9.71)min.The length of the incision in the MIS-TLIF group was(5.87 ± 1.19)cm,and in the PLIF group(10.60 ±).1.58)cm;intraoperative blood loss was(163.33±9.50)ml in the MIS-TLIF group and(250.84±18.49)ml in the PLIF group;(4.8±0.78)d in the MIS-TLIF group,PLIF group(5.8±0.87)d;hospitalization time was(11.93±0.96)d in the MIS-TLIF group and(13.72±1.06)d in the PLIF group.In the above data,the PLIF group was shorter than the operation time.In the MIS-TLIF group,the rest were better in the MIS-TLIF group,withstatistical differences(P<0.05).3.The VAS scores before and after surgery were compared between the two groups.The VAS score at 1 month after operation and the MIS-TLIF group were slightly lower than those in the PLIF group(P<0.05),indicating that MIS-TLIF surgery was excellent in relieving pain symptoms in the short term.For PLIF surgery.Regarding the Oswestry dysfunction index,there was no significant difference between the two groups before and after surgery,indicating that the two surgical procedures have similar effects on the functional recovery of patients.Conclusions: Both MIS-TLIF and PLIF can effectively treat lumbar spinal stenosis.MIS-TLIF is more advantageous in terms of length of incision,intraoperative blood loss,bed time and hospital stay,but in terms of operation time,MIS-TLIF Longer.MIS-TLIF works better in patients with early pain recovery.Therefore,MIS-TLIF can be used as an effective treatment for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.