Skip to main content

Table 2 The perioperative condition of the two groups

From: Comparison of safety and efficacy of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and modified transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (M-TLIF) in the treatment of single-segment lumbar degenerative diseases

 

PLIF (n = 74)

M-TLIF (n = 74)

P

Operation location, n (%)

  

0.218*

 L2/3

1 (1.35%)

0

 

 L3/4

1 (1.35%)

3 (4.05%)

 

 L4/5

43 (58.11%)

51 (68.92%)

 

 L5/S1

29 (39.19%)

20 (27.03%)

 

Bone cement reinforcement, n (%)

  

0.492

 No

68 (91.89%)

71 (95.95%)

 

 Yes

6 (8.11%)

3 (4.05%)

 

Operation time (min), mean (SD)

180.51 (41.94)

159.34 (34.65)

0.001

Incision length (cm), mean (SD)

9.30 (1.98)

9.01 (1.85)

0.368

Intraoperative bleeding volume (ml), mean (SD)

186.49 (44.80)

132.16 (55.43)

0.001

Length of connecting rod (cm), mean (SD)

4.52 (0.76)

4.51 (0.42)

0.894

Decompressed intervertebral disc (ml), mean (SD)

7.30 (2.19)

6.14(1.76)

0.001

Extraction time of drainage tube after operation (days), mean (SD)

3.30 (1.40)

2.39 (0.77)

 < 0.001

Postoperative bed rest time (days), mean (SD)

3.35 (0.63)

2.95 (0.66)

 < 0.001

Length of stay (days), mean (SD)

12.19 (3.53)

10.87 (2.33)

0.008

  1. *Results from fisher’s exact test. PLIF, posterior lumbar interbody fusion. M-TLIF, modified transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion