Comparison of the Outcomes of Endoscopic Posterolateral Interbody Fusion and Lateral Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Objective: Although endoscopic technologies have been increasingly applied in lumbar fusion surgery in recent years, the advantages and disadvantages of endoscopic posterolateral fusion compared with lateral fusion remain unclear. Six different single-level lumbar interbody fusion procedures were compared to determine whether indirect decompression fusion could achieve levels of efficacy and safety comparable to those of minimally invasive direct decompression fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease (LDD).

Method: A literature search was conducted in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases, and studies on the treatment of LDD published from 2004 to March 2024 were retrieved. The data of preset clinical outcome measures, including operation time, intraoperative estimated blood loss (EBL), length of hospital stay (LOS), complications, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), were extracted from the studies.

Results: Thirty-five studies with 3467 patients were included in this review. Network meta-analysis revealed no significant differences in improvements in pain and disability or adverse events among the procedures, except for uniportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (UELIF), which resulted in a lower degree of improvement in the ODI than oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF). Stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (SA-LLIF) exhibited the best performance in terms of indicators of early efficacy, such as surgical time and LOS. OLIF and SA-LLIF had higher fusion rates than did UELIF and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). MIS-TLIF resulted in greater EBL than did OLIF, SA-LLIF, and UELIF.

Conclusion: Minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion achieves good therapeutic results in LDD patients regardless of the use of indirect or direct decompression, whereas SA-LLIF has better early efficacy.

Keywords

endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion / lateral lumbar interbody fusion / lumbar degenerative disease / network meta-analysis / oblique lumbar interbody fusion

References

[1] L. Li, Y. Liu, P. Zhang, T. Lei, J. Li, and Y. Shen, “Comparison of Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Treatment of Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Retrospective Study,” Journal of International Medical Research 44, no. 6 (2016): 1424-1429.

[2] J. Harms and H. Rolinger, “A One-Stager Procedure in Operative Treatment of Spondylolistheses: Dorsal Traction-Reposition and Anterior Fusion (author's Transl),” Zeitschrift für Orthopädie und Ihre Grenzgebiete 120, no. 3 (1982): 343-347.

[3] J. P. Price, J. M. Dawson, J. D. Schwender, and K. P. Schellhas, “Clinical and Radiologic Comparison of Minimally Invasive Surgery With Traditional Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Review of 452 Patients From a Single Center,” Clinical Spine Surgery 31, no. 2 (2018): E121-E126.

[4] P. C. McAfee, J. J. Regan, W. P. Geis, et al., “Minimally Invasive Anterior Retroperitoneal Approach to the Lumbar Spine Emphasis on the Lateral BAK,” Spine 23, no. 13 (1998): 1476-1484.

[5] C. Silvestre, J. M. Mac-Thiong, R. Hilmi, and P. Roussouly, “Complications and Morbidities of Mini-Open Anterior Retroperitoneal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion in 179 Patients,” Asian Spine Journal 6, no. 2 (2012): 89-97.

[6] H. Yang, J. Liu, and Y. Hai, “Is Instrumented Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Superior to Stand-Alone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disease? A meta-Analysis,” Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 92 (2021): 136-146.

[7] L. Jiang, L. Liu, L. Dong, Z. Xu, X. Zhang, and L. Qian, “Comparison of Instrumented and Stand-Alone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Systematic Review and meta-Analysis,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 25, no. 1 (February 2024): 108.

[8] X. Hu, L. Yan, X. Jin, H. Liu, J. Chai, and B. Zhao, “Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion, Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion, and Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis,” Global Spine Journal 14, no. 1 (January 2024): 295-305.

[9] H. Guo, Y. Song, R. Weng, H. Tian, J. Yuan, and Y. Li, “Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Complications Between Endoscopic and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Global Spine Journal 13, no. 5 (June 2023): 1394-1404.

[10] W. Li, H. Wei, and R. Zhang, “Different Lumbar Fusion Techniques for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Bayesian Network meta-Analysis,” BMC Surgery 23, no. 1 (November 2023): 345.

[11] A. Stang, “Critical Evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for the Assessment of the Quality of Nonrandomized Studies in meta-Analyses,” European Journal of Epidemiology 25, no. 9 (September 2010): 603-605.

[12] A. Chaimani, J. P. Higgins, D. Mavridis, et al., “Graphical Tools for Network meta-Analysis in STATA,” PLoS One 8, no. 10 (October 2013): e76654.

[13] G. Rücker, “Network Meta-Analysis, Electrical Networks and Graph Theory,” Research Synthesis Methods 3, no. 4 (December 2012): 312-324.

[14] D. Jackson, S. Bujkiewicz, M. Law, R. D. Riley, and I. R. White, “A Matrix-Based Method of Moments for Fitting Multivariate Network meta-Analysis Models With Multiple Outcomes and Random Inconsistency Effects,” Biometrics 74, no. 2 (June 2018): 548-556.

[15] D. Jackson, I. R. White, and R. D. Riley, “Quantifying the Impact of Between-Study Heterogeneity in Multivariate meta-Analyses,” Statistics in Medicine 31, no. 29 (December 2012): 3805-3820.

[16] U. Krahn, H. Binder, and J. König, “A Graphical Tool for Locating Inconsistency in Network Meta-Analyses,” BMC Medical Research Methodology 9, no. 13 (March 2013): 35.

[17] S. Dias, N. J. Welton, D. M. Caldwell, and A. E. Ades, “Checking Consistency in Mixed Treatment Comparison Meta-Analysis,” Statistics in Medicine 29, no. 7-8 (March 2010): 932-944.

[18] J. Wu, C. Zhang, K. Lu, C. Li, and Y. Zhou, “A Novel Inextensible Endoscopic Tube Versus Traditional Extensible Retractor System in Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Prospective Observation Study,” Pain Physician 22, no. 6 (November 2019): E587-E599.

[19] Y. Li, Y. Dai, B. Wang, et al., “Full-Endoscopic Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion via an Interlaminar Approach Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Preliminary Retrospective Study,” World Neurosurgery 144 (December 2020): e475-e482.

[20] S. Ao, W. Zheng, J. Wu, et al., “Comparison of Preliminary Clinical Outcomes Between Percutaneous Endoscopic and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases in a Tertiary Hospital: Is Percutaneous Endoscopic Procedure Superior to MIS-TLIF? A Prospective Cohort Study,” International Journal of Surgery 76 (April 2020): 136-143.

[21] A. R. Gatam, L. Gatam, H. Mahadhipta, A. Ajiantoro, O. Luthfi, and D. Aprilya, “Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Technical Note and an Outcome Comparison With the Conventional Minimally Invasive Fusion,” Orthopedic Research and Reviews 24, no. 13 (November 2021): 229-239.

[22] J. E. Kim, H. S. Yoo, D. J. Choi, E. J. Park, and S. M. Jee, “Comparison of Minimal Invasive Versus Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Single-Level Lumbar Disease,” Clinical Spine Surgery 34, no. 2 (March 2021): E64-E71.

[23] X. B. Zhao, H. J. Ma, B. Geng, H. G. Zhou, and Y. Y. Xia, “Early Clinical Evaluation of Percutaneous Full-Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Pedicle Screw Insertion for Treating Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis,” Orthopaedic Surgery 13, no. 1 (February 2021): 328-337.

[24] Q. Han, F. Meng, M. Chen, et al., “Comparison Between PE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF in the Treatment of Middle-Aged and Elderly Patients With Single-Level Lumbar Disc Herniation,” Journal of Pain Research 29, no. 15 (April 2022): 1271-1282.

[25] L. Lin, X. Q. Liu, L. Shi, et al., “Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes Between Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis,” Frontiers in Surgery 15, no. 9 (June 2022): 916087.

[26] Y. Lv, M. Chen, S. L. Wang, et al., “Endo-TLIF Versus MIS-TLIF in 1-Segment Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Prospective Randomized Pilot Study,” Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery 212 (January 2022): 107082.

[27] M. Ge, Y. Zhang, H. Ying, et al., “Comparison of Hidden Blood Loss and Clinical Efficacy of Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion,” International Orthopaedics 46, no. 9 (September 2022): 2063-2070.

[28] X. Huang, W. Wang, G. Chen, X. Guan, Y. Zhou, and Y. Tang, “Comparison of Surgical Invasiveness, Hidden Blood Loss, and Clinical Outcome Between Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Retrospective Cohort Study,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 24, no. 1 (April 2023): 274.

[29] H. Chen, G. Zheng, Z. Bian, et al., “Comparison of Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Retrospective Observational Study,” Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research 18, no. 1 (May 2023): 389.

[30] Q. Yu, X. Hu, X. Pan, et al., “Early Efficacy and Safety of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Minimal Invasive in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Diseases,” Clinical Spine Surgery 36, no. 8 (October 2023): E390-E396.

[31] W. Guo, T. Li, C. Feng, Y. Yu, Y. Hu, and X. Fan, “Clinical Comparison of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Verse 3D Microscope-Assisted Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Single-Segment Lumbar Spondylolisthesis With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Retrospective Study With 24-Month Follow-Up,” Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research 18, no. 1 (December 2023): 943.

[32] X. Song, Z. Ren, S. Cao, W. Zhou, and Y. Hao, “Clinical Efficacy of Bilateral Decompression Using Biportal Endoscopic Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Diseases,” World Neurosurgery 173 (May 2023): e371-e377.

[33] Z. Song, Z. Zhang, J. Zheng, et al., “Short-Term and Mid-Term Evaluation of Three Types of Minimally Invasive Lumbar Fusion Surgery for Treatment of L4/L5 Degenerative Spondylolisthesis,” Scientific Reports 14, no. 1 (February 2024): 4320.

[34] M. Jin, G. Xu, T. Shen, et al., “Minimally Invasive Surgery for Low-Grade Spondylolisthesis: Percutaneous Endoscopic or Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion,” Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research 9, no. 9 (June 2020): 639-650.

[35] Y. Z. Xie, Y. Shi, Q. Zhou, et al., “Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Uniportal Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A 1-Year Follow-Up,” Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research 17, no. 1 (July 2022): 360.

[36] T. Verla, L. Winnegan, R. Mayer, et al., “Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Versus Direct Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Effect on Return to Work, Narcotic Use, and Quality of Life,” World Neurosurgery 116 (August 2018): e321-e328.

[37] H. D. Jang, J. C. Lee, J. H. Seo, Y. H. Roh, S. W. Choi, and B. J. Shin, “Comparison of Minimally Invasive Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion, Minimally Invasive Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion, and Open Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Single-Level Spondylolisthesis of L4-L5,” World Neurosurgery 158 (February 2022): e10-e18.

[38] W. Yingsakmongkol, K. Jitpakdee, P. Varakornpipat, et al., “Clinical and Radiographic Comparisons Among Minimally Invasive Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comparison With Three-Way Matching,” Asian Spine Journal 16, no. 5 (October 2022): 712-722.

[39] J. M. Parrish, N. W. Jenkins, T. S. Brundage, et al., “Outpatient Minimally Invasive Lumbar Fusion Using Multimodal Analgesic Management in the Ambulatory Surgery Setting,” International Journal of Spine Surgery 14, no. 6 (December 2020): 970-981.

[40] G. X. Lin, K. Akbary, V. Kotheeranurak, et al., “Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes of Direct Versus Indirect Decompression With Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Matched-Pair Comparison Analysis,” World Neurosurgery 119 (November 2018): e898-e909.

[41] Y. Kotani, A. Ikeura, H. Tokunaga, and T. Saito, “Single-Level Controlled Comparison of OLIF51 and Percutaneous Screw in Lateral Position Versus MIS-TLIF for Lumbosacral Degenerative Disorders: Clinical and Radiologic Study,” Journal of Orthopaedic Science 26, no. 5 (September 2021): 756-764.

[42] S. F. Hung, J. C. Liao, T. T. Tsai, et al., “Comparison of Outcomes Between Indirect Decompression of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion and MIS-TLIF in One Single-Level Lumbar Spondylosis,” Scientific Reports 11, no. 1 (June 2021): 12783.

[43] H. F. Zhu, X. Q. Fang, F. D. Zhao, et al., “Comparison of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion (OLIF) and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MI-TLIF) for Treatment of Lumbar Degeneration Disease: A Prospective Cohort Study,” Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 47, no. 6 (March 2022): E233-E242.

[44] Y. Koike, Y. Kotani, H. Terao, and N. Iwasaki, “Comparison of Outcomes of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion With Percutaneous Posterior Fixation in Lateral Position and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis,” Asian Spine Journal 15, no. 1 (February 2021): 97-106.

[45] V. V. R. Chandra, B. C. M Prasad, T. G. Hanu, et al., “Comparison Between Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MISTLIF) for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis,” Neurology India 70, no. 1 (January-February 2022): 127-134.

[46] D. He, W. He, W. Tian, et al., “Clinical and Radiographic Comparison of Oblique Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Patients With L4/5 Grade-1 Degenerative Spondylolisthesis,” Orthopaedic Surgery 15, no. 6 (June 2023): 1477-1487.

[47] L. Liu, H. Xue, Z. Han, L. Jiang, L. Chen, and D. Wang, “Comparison Between OLIF and MISTLIF in Degenerative Lumbar Stenosis: An Age-, Sex-, and Segment-Matched Cohort Study,” Scientific Reports 13, no. 1 (August 2023): 13188.

[48] W. He, D. He, Y. Sun, et al., “Standalone Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion vs. Combined With Percutaneous Pedicle Screw in Spondylolisthesis,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 21, no. 1 (March 2020): 184.

[49] H. Li, J. Li, Y. Tao, F. Li, Q. Chen, and G. Chen, “Is Stand-Alone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Superior to Instrumented Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Single-Level, Low-Grade, Lumbar Spondylolisthesis?,” Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 85 (March 2021): 84-91.

[50] K. Cai, K. Luo, J. Zhu, et al., “Effect of Pedicle-Screw Rod Fixation on Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Patients With Osteoporosis: A Retrospective Cohort Study,” Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research 16, no. 1 (July 2021): 429.

[51] W. Zhao, C. Zhou, H. Zhang, et al., “Clinical, Radiographic and Fusion Comparison of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) Stand-Alone and OLIF With Posterior Pedicle Screw Fixation in Patients With Degenerative Spondylolisthesis,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 24, no. 1 (October 2023): 852.

[52] Y. Yu, Y. Wang, Y. Xie, et al., “Comparison of the Mid-Term Clinical Efficacy of Different Fixtaion Methods Combined With Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Treating Lumbar Degenerative Diseases,” Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery (Hong Kong) 31, no. 3 (September-December 2023): 10225536231209552.

[53] D. Dindo, N. Demartines, and P. A. Clavien, “Classification of Surgical Complications: A New Proposal With Evaluation in a Cohort of 6336 Patients and Results of a Survey,” Annals of Surgery 240, no. 2 (2004): 205-213.

[54] K. H. Bridwell, L. G. Lenke, K. W. McEnery, 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?,” Spine 20 (1995): 1410-1418.

[55] M. Jin, J. Zhang, H. Shao, J. Liu, and Y. Huang, “Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Diseases: A Consecutive Case Series With Mean 2-Year Follow-Up,” Pain Physician 23, no. 2 (March 2020): 165-174.

[56] S. N. Salzmann, G. A. Fantini, I. Okano, A. A. Sama, A. P. Hughes, and F. P. Girardi, “Mini-Open Access for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion,” JBJS Essential Surgical Techniques 9, no. 4 (2019): e37-e39.

[57] B. B. Tan, Y. Kotani, U. Sia, et al., “Effect of Indirect Neural Decompression With Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion Was Influenced by Preoperative Lumbar Lordosis in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery,” Asian Spine Journal 13, no. 5 (2019): 809-814.

[58] G. Lang, M. Perrech, R. Navarro-Ramirez, et al., “Potential and Limitations of Neural Decompression in Extreme Lateral Inter Body Fusion—A Systematic Review,” World Neurosurgery 101 (2017): 99-113.

[59] D. S. Xu, C. T. Walker, J. Godzik, J. D. Turner, W. Smith, and J. S. Uribe, “Minimally Invasive Anterior, Lateral, and Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Literature Review,” Annals of Translational Medicine 6, no. 6 (2018): 104.

[60] M. Relvas-Silva, B. S. Pinto, A. Sousa, M. Loureiro, A. R. Pinho, and P. Pereira, “Is Endoscopic Technique an Effective and Safe Alternative for Lumbar Interbody Fusion? A Systematic Review and meta-Analysis,” EFORT Open Reviews 9, no. 6 (June 2024): 536-555.

[61] Y. Wu, R. Shen, S. Li, T. Luo, L. Rong, and L. Zhang, “Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review With Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials,” World Neurosurgery 185 (May 2024): 327-337.e1.

[62] L. Zhu, T. Cai, Y. Shan, W. Zhang, L. Zhang, and X. Feng, “Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Complications Between Percutaneous Endoscopic and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Pain Physician 24, no. 6 (September 2021): 441-452.

[63] H. Luan, C. Peng, K. Liu, and X. Song, “Comparing the Efficacy of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research 18, no. 1 (November 2023): 888.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2025 The Author(s). Orthopaedic Surgery published by Tianjin Hospital and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.