Orthop Surg. 2025 Sep 4. doi: 10.1111/os.70166. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Lumbar spondylolisthesis (LS) is a spinal disorder that often necessitates surgical intervention. However, evidence on the comparative clinical value of robot-assisted full-endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (RA FE-TLIF) versus conventional FE-TLIF in early-grade (Grades I and II) LS remains limited, leaving uncertainty about its true clinical value in this patient population. This study aims to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of FE-TLIF with RA FE-TLIF in patients with Grade I and II LS.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 47 patients who underwent surgical treatment for LS between April 2022 and April 2023 at our hospital. Patients were divided into two groups: 22 underwent RA FE-TLIF, and 25 underwent FE-TLIF. Key outcomes measured included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative recovery time, fusion rate, screw placement accuracy, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, and the incidence of postoperative complications. Statistical analyses were performed using the independent-sample t test for continuous variables and the chi-square test for categorical variables, with a significance threshold of p < 0.05.
RESULTS: The RA FE-TLIF group exhibited significantly shorter operative times and lower intraoperative blood loss compared to the FE-TLIF group (p < 0.05). Postoperative recovery, as measured by hospital stay, was also shorter in the RA FE-TLIF group (p = 0.001). VAS and JOA scores indicated greater pain relief and functional improvement in the RA FE-TLIF group, with statistically significant differences observed at both 1 month and final follow-up (p < 0.05). The incidence of postoperative complications was lower in the RA FE-TLIF group, though this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.144). Complete fusion rates were 95.45% in the RA FE-TLIF group and 88.00% in the FE-TLIF group, with no significant difference (p > 0.05). Screw placement accuracy was higher in the RA FE-TLIF group (97.73%) than in the FE-TLIF group (89.00%), with a significant difference (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: RA FE-TLIF demonstrates superior clinical outcomes compared to FE-TLIF in the treatment of LS. These findings support the broader adoption of RA FE-TLIF as a preferred surgical technique for this condition.
PMID:40908279 | DOI:10.1111/os.70166
