Welcome, Friend!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Veritas-Health LLC has recently released patient forums to our Arthritis-Health web site.

Please visit http://www.arthritis-health.com/forum

There are several patient story videos on Spine-Health that talk about Arthritis. Search on Patient stories
Protect anonymity
We strongly suggest that members do not include their email addresses. Once that is published , your email address is available to anyone on the internet , including hackers.

All discussions and comments that contain an external URL will be automatically moved to the spam queue. No external URL pointing to a medical web site is permitted. Forum rules also indicate that you need prior moderator approval. If you are going to post an external URL, contact one of the moderators to get their approval.
Attention New Members
Your initial discussion or comment automatically is sent to a moderator's approval queue before it can be published.
There are no medical professionals on this forum side of the site. Therefore, no one is capable or permitted to provide any type of medical advice.
This includes any analysis, interpretation, or advice based on any diagnostic test

After the many consultations it seems a pattern is emerging..

mkim680mmkim680 Posts: 19
edited 06/11/2012 - 8:48 AM in Back Surgery and Neck Surgery
A lot of the spinal surgeons I have seen want to perform a fusion. ADR is ruled out because of the degeneration in my facets that might be able to handle the load. Also, I don't feel comfortable with ADR since the technology is not new and the fact that I still have radicular pain after my lumbar microD. I am just torn because most of the surgeons are saying I would do fine with either a minimally invasive PLIF, TLIF, or just doing a ALIF. I was just wondering what would be the pros and cons of each technique? Also, is it true that if the fusion is done from the back and if the cage and screws are properly placed that adjacent segmental levels might not be effected? Also, i heard ALIF stops the adjacent levels from being affected the least because the paraspinal muscles are not being cut which are crucial for healing and stability. Please let me know. My biggest worry with fusion is the possibility of having another surgery down the line because of the adjacent levels being effected. I want to know which method might stop or be the slowest progression.


  • Your question is a bit confusing to me because it's your surgeon who should be telling you which technique would be best for you, not giving you a choice. Each surgery has it's own pros and cons and is performed for certain probems that they need to fix.

    I believe that adjacent disc problems can occur with any fusion surgery, but I might be wrong. If the discs above and below are healthy, the percentages of having the adjacent discs go bad is low and should occur at a very slow rate (that's according to my surgeon). For instance, I had some major problems at my L4/5, but my surgeon doesn't believe that the ones above and below will be a problem for many years to come because they don't have any issues. However, my cervical is a whole other matter in that I have problems above my fusion, but those levels were bad to begin with and are just getting worse as time goes by.

    It's true that an anterior approach to lumbar surgery doesn't require the surgeon to cut into the crucial back muscles, but if you have a posterior surgery, the muscles to heal and knit back together, especially with post-op PT.

    All of us who have had fusion surgery worry about future surgery, but you can't let that stop you from getting something fixed that needs to be fixed. Spineys have to just deal with things one day at a time and whatever the future holds isn't in our hands or the hands of the surgeon (assuming you have a great surgeon).

    Anyway, that's just my two cents.

    Take care,
Sign In or Register to comment.