Benefits of the Paraspinal Muscle-Sparing Approach Versus the Conventional Midline Approach for Posterior Nonfusion Stabilization: Comparative Analysis of Clinical and Functional Outcomes

Wiltse, 1973, The paraspinal sacrospinalis-splitting approach to the lumbar spine, Clin Orthop Relat Res, 91, 48, 10.1097/00003086-197303000-00009 Tuttle, 2006, Paramedian approach for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with unilateral pedicle screw fixation. Technical note and preliminary report on 47 cases, Neurosurg Focus (Electronic), 20, E5 Schwender, 2005, Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): technical feasibility and initial results, J Spinal Disord Tech, 18, S1, 10.1097/01.bsd.0000132291.50455.d0 Holly, 2006, Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: indications, technique, and complications, Neurosurg Focus (Electronic), 20, E6 Chapman, 1985, Pain measurement: an overview, Pain, 22, 1, 10.1016/0304-3959(85)90145-9 Anand, 2006, Cantilever TLIF with structural allograft and RhBMP2 for correction and maintenance of segmental sagittal lordosis: long-term clinical, radiographic, and functional outcome, Spine, 31, E748, 10.1097/01.brs.0000240211.23617.ae Anand N, Regan JJ, Bray RS. Cervical spine disability questionnaire and treatment intensity question: Objective outcome measures of cervical spine functionial status. An analysis of psychometric properties. Presented at meeting of the Cervical Spine Research Society, December 1–2 2001, in Monterey, California. Fairbank, 1980, The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire, Physiotherapy, 66, 271 Ware, 1992, The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection, Med Care, 30, 473, 10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002 Wiltse, 1968, The paraspinal sacrospinalis-splitting approach to the lumbar spine, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 50, 919, 10.2106/00004623-196850050-00004 Vialle, 2006, The Wiltse paraspinal approach to the lumbar spine revisited: an anatomic study, Clin Orthop Relat Res, 445, 175, 10.1097/01.blo.0000203466.20314.2a Suwa, 2000, Postoperative changes in paraspinal muscle thickness after various lumbar back surgery procedures, Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo), 40, 151, 10.2176/nmc.40.151 Gejo, 1999, Serial changes in trunk muscle performance after posterior lumbar surgery, Spine, 24, 1023, 10.1097/00007632-199905150-00017 Kawaguchi, 1996, Back muscle injury after posterior lumbar spine surgery. Topographic evaluation of intramuscular pressure and blood flow in the porcine back muscle during surgery, Spine, 21, 2683, 10.1097/00007632-199611150-00019 Kawaguchi, 1994, Back muscle injury after posterior lumbar spine surgery. Part 2: Histologic and histochemical analyses in humans, Spine, 19, 2598, 10.1097/00007632-199411001-00018 Mayer, 1989, Comparison of CT scan muscle measurements and isokinetic trunk strength in postoperative patients, Spine, 14, 33, 10.1097/00007632-198901000-00006 Rantanen, 1993, The lumbar multifidus muscle five years after surgery for a lumbar intervertebral disc herniation, Spine, 18, 568, 10.1097/00007632-199304000-00008 Sihvonen, 1993, Local denervation atrophy of paraspinal muscles in postoperative failed back syndrome, Spine, 18, 575, 10.1097/00007632-199304000-00009 Sasaoka, 2006, Objective assessment of reduced invasiveness in MED. Compared with conventional one-level laminotomy, Eur Spine J, 15, 577, 10.1007/s00586-005-0912-8 Stevens, 2006, Comparison of minimally invasive and conventional open posterolateral lumbar fusion using magnetic resonance imaging and retraction pressure studies, J Spinal Disord Tech, 19, 77, 10.1097/01.bsd.0000193820.42522.d9 Panjabi, 1992, The stabilizing system of the spine. Part II. Neutral zone and instability hypothesis, J Spinal Dis, 5, 390, 10.1097/00002517-199212000-00002 Palmer, 2002, Use of a tubular retractor system in microscopic lumbar discectomy: 1 year prospective results in 135 patients, Neurosurg Focus, 13, E5, 10.3171/foc.2002.13.2.6 Le, 2003, Clinical outcomes after minimal-access surgery for recurrent lumbar disc herniation, Neurosurg Focus, 15, E12, 10.3171/foc.2003.15.3.12 Deutsch, 2006, Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with unilateral pedicle screw fixation, Neurosurg Focus, 20, E10, 10.3171/foc.2006.20.3.11 Jang, 2005, Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with ipsilateral pedicle screw and contralateral facet screw fixation, J Neurosurg Spine, 3, 218, 10.3171/spi.2005.3.3.0218 Gerszten, 2006, Spine: minimally invasive techniques, Prog Neurol Surg, 19, 135, 10.1159/000095188 Lehman, 2005, Standard and minimally invasive approaches to the spine, Orthop Clin North Am, 36, 281, 10.1016/j.ocl.2005.02.012 Schwarzenbach, 2005, Posterior dynamic stabilization systems: DYNESYS, Orthop Clin North Am, 36, 363, 10.1016/j.ocl.2005.03.001 Mulholland, 2002, Rationale, principles and experimental evaluation of the concept of soft stabilization, Eur Spine J, 11, S198, 10.1007/s00586-002-0422-x Schmoelz, 2006, Influence of a dynamic stabilisation system on load bearing of a bridged disc: an in vitro study of intradiscal pressure, Eur Spine J, 15, 1276, 10.1007/s00586-005-0032-5 Stoll, 2002, The dynamic neutralization system for the spine: a multi-center study of a novel non-fusion system, Eur Spine J, 11, S170, 10.1007/s00586-002-0438-2 Grob, 2005, Clinical experience with the Dynesys semirigid fixation system for the lumbar spine: surgical and patient-oriented outcome in 50 cases after an average of 2 years, Spine, 30, 324, 10.1097/01.brs.0000152584.46266.25 Fairbank, 2000, The Oswestry Disability Index, Spine, 25, 940, 10.1097/00007632-200011150-00017 Ware, 2002 Baron, 2006, Measuring outcomes in cervical spine surgery: think twice before using the SF-36, Spine, 31, 2575, 10.1097/01.brs.0000240694.83621.52