Skip to main content

Table 4 Length of hospital stay (days)

From: Open versus minimally invasive TLIF: literature review and meta-analysis

Author

MITLIF

OTLIF

Mean

SD

Nr. of Pat.

Mean

SD

Nr. of Pat.

Zhang et al. 2017 [14]

7.9

± 2.8

48

10.1

± 3.2

59

Tschugg et al. 2017 [16]

13.7

± 5

19

19.1

± 12

48

Kulkarni et al. 2016 [17]

4.11

± 1.8

36

5.84

± 2.249

25

Hey et al. 2015 [18]

10.0

–

25

7.7

–

25

Terman et al. 2014 [21]

2

–

53

3

–

21

Wong et al. 2014 [22]

2.75

–

144

4.40

–

54

Sulaiman et al. 2014 [13]

3.6

± 1

57

3.2

± 0.2

11

Singh et al. 2014 [23]

2.3

± 1.2

33

2.9

± 1.1

33

Gu et al. 2014 [24]

9.3

± 3.7

44

12.1

± 3.6

38

Brodano et al. 2013 [25]

4.1

–

30

7.4

–

34

Seng et al. 2013 [26]

3.6

± 0.3

40

5.9

± 0.4

40

Cheng et al. 2013 [27]

4.8

± 1.8

50

6.05

± 1.8

25

Lau et al. 2013 [28]

3.1

± 1.7

78

4.7

± 2.1

49

Parker et al. 2013 [30]

3

–

50

4

–

50

Adogwa et al. 2012 [31]

3

–

14

4

–

7

Pelton et al. 2012 [33]

2

± 0.713

33

3

± 1.1

33

Lee et al. 2012 [6]

3.2

± 2.9

72

6.8

± 3.4

72

Parker et al. 2012 [34]

3.0

–

15

5.0

–

15

Lau et al. 2010 [35]

5.00

–

10

6.17

–

12

Villavicen et al. 2010 [42]

3.0

± 2.3

76

4.2

± 3.5

63

Shunwu et al. 2009 [38]

9.3

± 2.6

32

12.50

± 1.8

30

Wang et al. 2010 [37]

10.6

± 2.5

42

14.6

± 3.8

43

Peng et al. 2009 [39]

4.0

–

29

6.7

–

29

Dhall et al. 2008 [40]

3

–

21

5.5

–

21

Schizas et al. 2008 [41]

6.1

–

18

8.2

–

18

  1. MITLIF minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, OTLIF open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, SD standard deviation, Nr. number, Pat. patients