45mm �� 2.76 to 9.82mm �� 3.25 (P < 0.043).For the normolordotic subgroup, the mean segmental Cobb angle increased from 13.02�� �� 8.37 to 15.30�� �� sellckchem 7.84 (P < 0.001). The mean regional Cobb angle increased from 56.40�� �� 8.21 to 57.34�� �� 9.52 (P = 0.498). The mean preoperative disc height increased from 6.51mm �� 2.49 to 10.08mm �� 2.68 (P < 0.001).4. DiscussionThe MIS LIF via the retroperitoneal transpsoas lumbar interbody fusion is an alternative to traditional open anterior-only, posterior-only, or circumferential operations [8]. Though the most common complications associated with this procedure include transient ipsilateral thigh numbness and iliopsoas weakness, in general, major complications are lower, there tends to be less blood loss, less wound infections, patients mobilize earlier, and hospital stays are shorter [1�C7].

Clinical outcomes data are also promising as reported by Mundis et al. [10], where they demonstrated improved radiographic parameters as well as improved clinical results with a lower complication profile compared to traditional open approaches. Traditional open operations, such as, anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) have led to the development of this technique. Briefly, advantages of the ALIF include a large interbody graft for disc space reexpansion, restoration of LL, and elimination of discogenic pain [14]. In addition, posterior facet joint complexes and tension bands remain intact.

However, an access surgeon may be needed, and complications can include a risk of vascular injury and also rare iatrogenic retrograde ejaculation in males postoperatively. The TLIF[15, 16] was developed as a modification of the PLIF [17] to decrease the degree of nerve root and thecal sac manipulation, and it allows for interbody fusion, concurrent posterior segmental instrumentation, and circumferential fusion. Potential restoration of LL is gained by shortening of the posterior Batimastat aspect of the spine by applying compressive forces to the segmental pedicle screws. It can be performed either in an open or minimally invasive manner. The graft size is typically smaller than that of the ALIF, however. Hsieh et al. [18] compared the postoperative radiographic changes of disc height, foraminal height, local (segmental) disc angle, and LL for ALIF and TLIF. Though both involve placement of an interbody graft and subsequently an increase in disc height, ALIF was found to be superior to TLIF in its capacity to restore foraminal height (18.5% increase versus 0.4% decrease), local disc angle (8.3�� increase versus 0.1�� decrease), and LL (6.2�� increase versus 2.1�� decrease).