Next Article in Journal
Four-Dimensional Transvaginal Ultrasonography as a First-Line Non-Invasive Follow-Up After Hysteroscopic Metroplasty in Dysmorphic Uterus Cases
Previous Article in Journal
Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Assessment of Bone Marrow Fat and T2 Relaxation in Adolescents with Obesity and Liver Steatosis: A Feasibility Pilot Study
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JCM
Volume 14
Issue 21
10.3390/jcm14217595
jcm-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Article

Sagittal Alignment Correction in Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion with Unilateral vs. Bilateral Facetectomy

by
Sergej Telentschak
1,*,
Eva Fruechtl
1,
Moritz Perrech
1,
Moritz Lenschow
1,
Niklas von Spreckelsen
1,2,
Dierk-Marko Czybulka
1,
Roland Goldbrunner
1 and
Volker Neuschmelting
1,*
1
Department of General Neurosurgery, Centre of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 62, 50937 Köln, Germany
2
Department of Neurosurgery, Westkuestenklinikum, Esmarchstraße 50, 25746 Heide, Germany
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14(21), 7595; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14217595 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 7 September 2025 / Revised: 15 October 2025 / Accepted: 17 October 2025 / Published: 26 October 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Latest Advances in Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery)
Versions Notes

Abstract

Objective: Bilateral facetectomy (BF) within minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) remains debated regarding its advantages over unilateral facetectomy (UF) in restoring segmental lordosis, addressing spondylolisthesis and decompressing both neural foramina. The evidence is limited. We sought to determine the benefits of contralateral facetectomy on radiographic and clinical outcomes. Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective analysis on patients with lumbar degenerative disease who underwent single-level percutaneous instrumentation and MI-TLIF with either UF or BF. Plain radiographs, CT and MRI were utilized for comparative radiographic analysis. Various intraoperative and clinical parameters were evaluated to assess surgical effort and clinical outcomes. Results: We included 81 UF and 23 BF cases; complete radiological data were available for 27 and 13 patients, respectively. Both techniques demonstrated a comparable increase in segmental lordosis (UF 2.1° ± 5.3° vs. BF 4.3° ± 5.4°, p > 0.1), which is below the study’s minimum detectable effect (MDE ≈ 5.1° at 80% power). Spondylolisthesis reduction was similar, with UF achieving a mean of 2.8 ± 2.2 mm and BF 2.4 ± 1.9 mm (p > 0.1). Mean posterior disc height did not differ significantly between groups (p > 0.1). The mean intraoperative blood loss was significantly higher with BF (803 ± 347 mL) compared to UF (437 ± 207 mL, p < 0.001). The mean duration of surgery was significantly longer for BF (240 ± 48 min) compared to UF (197 ± 37 min, p = 0.001). Conclusions: This study found no evidence of a large advantage of BF over UF in restoring segmental lordosis, spondylolisthesis and posterior disc height in monosegmental MI-TLIF surgery. Given the higher blood loss and longer operative time observed with BF, its use should be selective for specific indications.
Keywords: transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF); minimally invasive surgery (MIS); unilateral facetectomy (UF); bilateral facetectomy (BF); segmental lordosis transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF); minimally invasive surgery (MIS); unilateral facetectomy (UF); bilateral facetectomy (BF); segmental lordosis

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Telentschak, S.; Fruechtl, E.; Perrech, M.; Lenschow, M.; von Spreckelsen, N.; Czybulka, D.-M.; Goldbrunner, R.; Neuschmelting, V. Sagittal Alignment Correction in Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion with Unilateral vs. Bilateral Facetectomy. J. Clin. Med. 2025, 14, 7595. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14217595

AMA Style

Telentschak S, Fruechtl E, Perrech M, Lenschow M, von Spreckelsen N, Czybulka D-M, Goldbrunner R, Neuschmelting V. Sagittal Alignment Correction in Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion with Unilateral vs. Bilateral Facetectomy. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2025; 14(21):7595. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14217595

Chicago/Turabian Style

Telentschak, Sergej, Eva Fruechtl, Moritz Perrech, Moritz Lenschow, Niklas von Spreckelsen, Dierk-Marko Czybulka, Roland Goldbrunner, and Volker Neuschmelting. 2025. "Sagittal Alignment Correction in Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion with Unilateral vs. Bilateral Facetectomy" Journal of Clinical Medicine 14, no. 21: 7595. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14217595

APA Style

Telentschak, S., Fruechtl, E., Perrech, M., Lenschow, M., von Spreckelsen, N., Czybulka, D.-M., Goldbrunner, R., & Neuschmelting, V. (2025). Sagittal Alignment Correction in Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion with Unilateral vs. Bilateral Facetectomy. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 14(21), 7595. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14217595

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop