Minimally Invasive Versus Open Spinal Fusion Surgery for Spondylolisthesis Treatment

Background: In recent years, there has been a growing utilization of minimally invasive (MI) techniques, which provide the potential advantages of minimizing surgical stress, post-operative pain, and hospitalization duration. Nevertheless, the existing body of literature primarily comprises of studi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Shahzad Waqas Munazzam, Vikramaditya Rai, Qazi Adam Asfandyar, Shandana Khan, Cara Mohammed
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Indian Orthopaedic Research Group 2025-01-01
Series:Journal of Orthopaedic Case Reports
Subjects:
Online Access:https://jocr.co.in/wp/2025/01/01/minimally-invasive-versus-open-spinal-fusion-surgery-for-spondylolisthesis-treatment/
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849421649267392512
author Shahzad Waqas Munazzam
Vikramaditya Rai
Qazi Adam Asfandyar
Shandana Khan
Cara Mohammed
author_facet Shahzad Waqas Munazzam
Vikramaditya Rai
Qazi Adam Asfandyar
Shandana Khan
Cara Mohammed
author_sort Shahzad Waqas Munazzam
collection DOAJ
description Background: In recent years, there has been a growing utilization of minimally invasive (MI) techniques, which provide the potential advantages of minimizing surgical stress, post-operative pain, and hospitalization duration. Nevertheless, the existing body of literature primarily comprises of studies conducted at a single medical site, which are of low quality and lack a comprehensive analysis of treatment techniques exclusively focused on spondylolisthesis. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open surgery (OS) spinal fusion outcomes for the treatment of spondylolisthesis. OS spinal fusion is an interventional option for patients with spinal illness who have not had success with non-surgical treatments. Materials and Methods: This systematic review of the literature regarding MI and OS spinal fusion for spondylolisthesis treatment was performed using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines for article identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion. Electronic literature search of Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases yielded 1078 articles. These articles were screened against established criteria for inclusion into this study. Results: A total of eight retrospective and four prospective articles with a total of 3354 patients were found. Reported spondylolisthesis grades were I and II only. Overall, MI was associated with lower operative time (mean difference [MD], −6.44 min; 95% confidence interval [CI], −45.57–32.71; P = 0.0001) and shorter length of hospital stay (MD, −0.49 days; 95% CI, −0.58 to −0.40; P = 0.000). There was no significant difference overall between MIS and OS in terms of functional or pain outcomes. Rates of complications were not significantly different between the MI group and the OS group, though overall 75 and 153 complications were observed in MI group and OS group. Conclusion: Available data indicate that MI spinal fusion is a secure and efficient method for managing Grade I and Grade II spondylolisthesis. Furthermore, whereas prospective trials establish a connection between MI and improved functional outcomes, it is necessary to conduct longer-term and randomized trials to confirm any correlation identified in this study.
format Article
id doaj-art-0b7350bd4db348e8b33332809160ba1d
institution Kabale University
issn 2250-0685
2321-3817
language English
publishDate 2025-01-01
publisher Indian Orthopaedic Research Group
record_format Article
series Journal of Orthopaedic Case Reports
spelling doaj-art-0b7350bd4db348e8b33332809160ba1d2025-08-20T03:31:24ZengIndian Orthopaedic Research GroupJournal of Orthopaedic Case Reports2250-06852321-38172025-01-0115122423410.13107/jocr.2025.v15.i01.5184Minimally Invasive Versus Open Spinal Fusion Surgery for Spondylolisthesis TreatmentShahzad Waqas MunazzamVikramaditya RaiQazi Adam AsfandyarShandana KhanCara MohammedBackground: In recent years, there has been a growing utilization of minimally invasive (MI) techniques, which provide the potential advantages of minimizing surgical stress, post-operative pain, and hospitalization duration. Nevertheless, the existing body of literature primarily comprises of studies conducted at a single medical site, which are of low quality and lack a comprehensive analysis of treatment techniques exclusively focused on spondylolisthesis. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open surgery (OS) spinal fusion outcomes for the treatment of spondylolisthesis. OS spinal fusion is an interventional option for patients with spinal illness who have not had success with non-surgical treatments. Materials and Methods: This systematic review of the literature regarding MI and OS spinal fusion for spondylolisthesis treatment was performed using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines for article identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion. Electronic literature search of Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases yielded 1078 articles. These articles were screened against established criteria for inclusion into this study. Results: A total of eight retrospective and four prospective articles with a total of 3354 patients were found. Reported spondylolisthesis grades were I and II only. Overall, MI was associated with lower operative time (mean difference [MD], −6.44 min; 95% confidence interval [CI], −45.57–32.71; P = 0.0001) and shorter length of hospital stay (MD, −0.49 days; 95% CI, −0.58 to −0.40; P = 0.000). There was no significant difference overall between MIS and OS in terms of functional or pain outcomes. Rates of complications were not significantly different between the MI group and the OS group, though overall 75 and 153 complications were observed in MI group and OS group. Conclusion: Available data indicate that MI spinal fusion is a secure and efficient method for managing Grade I and Grade II spondylolisthesis. Furthermore, whereas prospective trials establish a connection between MI and improved functional outcomes, it is necessary to conduct longer-term and randomized trials to confirm any correlation identified in this study.https://jocr.co.in/wp/2025/01/01/minimally-invasive-versus-open-spinal-fusion-surgery-for-spondylolisthesis-treatment/minimally invasive spinal fusionopen surgical spinal fusionlumbar spine fusionspondylolisthesisfunctional outcomescomplication ratessystematic reviewmeta-analysis
spellingShingle Shahzad Waqas Munazzam
Vikramaditya Rai
Qazi Adam Asfandyar
Shandana Khan
Cara Mohammed
Minimally Invasive Versus Open Spinal Fusion Surgery for Spondylolisthesis Treatment
Journal of Orthopaedic Case Reports
minimally invasive spinal fusion
open surgical spinal fusion
lumbar spine fusion
spondylolisthesis
functional outcomes
complication rates
systematic review
meta-analysis
title Minimally Invasive Versus Open Spinal Fusion Surgery for Spondylolisthesis Treatment
title_full Minimally Invasive Versus Open Spinal Fusion Surgery for Spondylolisthesis Treatment
title_fullStr Minimally Invasive Versus Open Spinal Fusion Surgery for Spondylolisthesis Treatment
title_full_unstemmed Minimally Invasive Versus Open Spinal Fusion Surgery for Spondylolisthesis Treatment
title_short Minimally Invasive Versus Open Spinal Fusion Surgery for Spondylolisthesis Treatment
title_sort minimally invasive versus open spinal fusion surgery for spondylolisthesis treatment
topic minimally invasive spinal fusion
open surgical spinal fusion
lumbar spine fusion
spondylolisthesis
functional outcomes
complication rates
systematic review
meta-analysis
url https://jocr.co.in/wp/2025/01/01/minimally-invasive-versus-open-spinal-fusion-surgery-for-spondylolisthesis-treatment/
work_keys_str_mv AT shahzadwaqasmunazzam minimallyinvasiveversusopenspinalfusionsurgeryforspondylolisthesistreatment
AT vikramadityarai minimallyinvasiveversusopenspinalfusionsurgeryforspondylolisthesistreatment
AT qaziadamasfandyar minimallyinvasiveversusopenspinalfusionsurgeryforspondylolisthesistreatment
AT shandanakhan minimallyinvasiveversusopenspinalfusionsurgeryforspondylolisthesistreatment
AT caramohammed minimallyinvasiveversusopenspinalfusionsurgeryforspondylolisthesistreatment