Table 1: Benefits and disadvantages of the different surgical approaches. |
||
|
Benefits |
Disadvantages |
ALIF |
• Less bleeding |
• Lower lumbar segments only |
• Big surface for cage placement |
• Visceral or vessels damage |
|
• Less muscular damage |
• Retrograde ejaculation |
|
• Better lordosis restoring |
• Post incisional hernias |
|
LLIF |
• Less bleeding |
• Hip flexion pain |
• Big surface for cage placement |
• Visceral or vessels damage |
|
• Less muscular damage |
• Less lordosis restoring |
|
• Fast surgical timing |
• Post incisional hernias |
|
• Upper and lower segments |
|
|
PLIF |
• Only one approach |
• Most dural tear incidence |
• Almost none visceral or vessels damage |
• Dural sac retraction |
|
• All lumbar segments |
• More bleeding |
|
• More muscular damage |
||
• Less surface for arthrodesis |
||
• Less lordosis restoring |
||
• Laminae and partial or complete facet resection |
||
TLIF |
• Only one approach |
• Complete facet resection |
• Minimal dural sac retraction |
• Nerve root lesion |
|
• Almost none visceral or vessels damage |
• Dural tears |
|
• All lumbar segments |
• More bleeding |
|
• More muscular damage |
||
• Less surface for arthrodesis |
||
• Less lordosis restoring |