Oblique Lateral Endoscopic Decompression and Interbody Fusion for Severe Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Technical Note and Preliminary Results

OBJECTIVE

Adequacy of decompression for oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) is a real concern in patients with severe lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). With this in mind, we combined OLIF with spinal endoscopic technique to achieve a solid fusion and an adequate decompression after one operation.

METHODS

This is a technical note. The theoretical basis and operation process of this technique were introduced, and consecutive cases were retrospectively collected. Consecutive patients diagnosed with monosegmental severe LSS (L4/5) and underwent oblique lateral endoscopic decompression and interbody fusion (OLEDIF) from January 2018 to February 2020 were retrospectively collected. Clinical outcomes were assessed by claudication distance, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Secondary indicators included operation time, operative blood loss, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Ten patients were selected for the OLEDIF procedure. They were five women and five men ranging in age from 49 to 75 years (mean age of 63.9 years) and in BMI from 25.4 to 30.2 kg/m² (mean BMI of 27.5 kg/m² ). The preoperative claudication distance was 160.00 ± 68.96 m (range 70-250 m), which was significantly extended on the 3-month and 1-year follow-up (1020.00 ± 407.70 m and 1040.00 ± 416.87 m, respectively). The preoperative VAS score of back pain and radiating leg pain was 5.50 ± 0.97 (range 4-7) and 6.40 ± 0.97 (range 5-8). The score on postoperative month 3 was 1.60 ± 0.52 (range 1-2) and 1.20 ± 0.79 (range 0-2), and the 1-year follow-up score was 1.90 ± 0.74 (range 1-3) and 1.60 ± 0.70 (range 1-3), respectively. The preoperative ODI was 72.23 ± 6.30 (range 64.4-82.2), the 3-month follow-up ODI was 31.12 ± 4.20 (range 24.4-35.6), and the 1-year follow-up ODI was 29.33 ± 5.92 (range 20.0-37.8). Compared with the transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in the literature, the operation time was not prolonged (189.3 ± 32.5 min vs. 214.9 ± 60.0 min) but the amount of blood loss decreased significantly (113.3 ± 26.7 ml vs. 366.8 ± 298.2 ml). No complications were found except one case presented with dysesthesia of the left leg. Imaging results showed good fusion without cage subsidence during 1-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

OLEDIF can achieve complete ventral decompression of the spinal canal and solid fusion of the lumbar spine at one time. It is an effective minimally invasive technique for the treatment of monosegmental severe LSS, which is promising and worthy of further clinical practice.

Evaluation of Spinal Fusion in Thoracic and Thoracolumbar Spine on Standard X-Rays: A New Grading System for Spinal Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective evaluation of prospectively collected data.

OBJECTIVE

Analyzing time course and stages of interbody fusion of a uniformly operated cohort, defining a grading system and establishing diagnosis-dependent periods of bone healing.

METHODS

Sequential lateral radiographs of 238 patients (313 levels) with interbody fusion operated thoracoscopically were analyzed.

RESULTS

Evaluation of 1696 radiographs with a mean follow-up of 65.19 months and average numbers of 5.42 (2-18) images per level was performed. Diagnoses were Pyogenic Spondylitis (74), Fracture (96), Ankylosing Spondylitis (38) and Degenerative Disease (105). No case with Grade 2 deteriorated to Grade 5. On average, Grade 4 persisted for 113 days, Grade 3 for 197 days, Grade 2 for 286 days and Grade 1 for 316 days. The first 95% of levels ("Green Zone", ≤ Grade 2) fused at 1 year, the remaining 4% levels fused between 12 and 17 months ("Yellow Zone") and the last 1% ("Red Zone") fused after 510 days.

CONCLUSION

Sequential lateral radiographs permit evaluation of interbody fusion. Grade 2 is the threshold point for fusion; once accomplished, failure is unlikely. If fusion (Grade 2,1 or 0) is not reached within 510 days, it should be regarded as failed. The 510-day-threshold could reduce the necessity of CT scanning for assessing fusion.

Comparison of Fusion Rate and Functional Outcome Between Local Cancellous Bone Plus Demineralized Bone Matrix and Local Bone in 1-Level Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study with prospectively collected data.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to investigate the difference in fusion rate and clinical outcome of patients with local bone as filler for the graft and demineralized bone matrix (DBM) plus only the cancellous bone from local bone as a filler for cage in 1-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with cage.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Cancellous bone is more advantageous than cortical bone in the local bone for improving bone formation in spine fusion surgery. There are little studies on the difference in fusion rate and reduction of fusion time using only these cancellous bones.

METHODS

Of the 40 patients who underwent 1-level PLIF using cage, 20 patients in group A used local bone and 20 patients in group B used mixture of cancellous bone extracted separately from local bone and commercially available DBM as filler for cage. Changes in fusion rate and intervertebral spacing were measured using lateral radiography, and fusion was determined as nonunion using the Brantigan-Steffee classification. The clinical outcome was evaluated.

RESULTS

There was no difference in height change over time between the two groups. Regarding union grade, group B showed better union grade than group A. However, no difference in union grade change over time was observed between the 2 groups. In group B, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Rolland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and SF-36 mental component score (MCS) significantly decreased, but there was no difference in change over time.

CONCLUSIONS

In 1-level PLIF for degenerative lumbar disease, better fusion rate was observed in the group that used only cancellous bone from local bone plus DBM than that in the group that used local bone; however, there was no difference in fusion grade change over time in the 2 groups.

[Comparative study of microscope assisted minimally invasive anterior fusion and mobile microendoscopic discectomy assisted fusion for lumbar degenerative diseases]

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness of microscope assisted anterior lumbar discectomy and fusion (ALDF) and mobile microendoscopic discectomy assisted lumbar interbody fusion (MMED-LIF) for lumbar degenerative diseases.

METHODS

A clinical data of 163 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases who met the criteria between January 2018 and December 2020 was retrospectively analyzed. Fifty-three cases were treated with microscope assisted ALDF (ALDF group) and 110 cases with MMED-LIF (MMED-LIF group). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of gender, age, disease type, surgical segments, preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of low back pain and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), intervertebral space height, lordosis angle, and spondylolisthesis rate of the patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis ( P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and hospital stay of the two groups were recorded. The effectiveness was evaluated by VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain and ODI. Postoperative lumbar X-ray films were taken to observe the position of Cage and measure the intervertebral space height, lordosis angle, and spondylolisthesis rate of the patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis.

RESULTS

The operations were successfully completed in both groups. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and hospital stay in ALDF group were less than those in MMED-LIF group ( P<0.05). The patients in both groups were followed up 12-36 months, with an average of 24 months. The VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain and ODI after operation were lower than those before operation in the two groups, and showed a continuous downward trend, with significant differences between different time points ( P<0.05). There were significant differences between two groups in VAS score of low back pain and ODI ( P<0.05) and no significant difference in VAS score of leg pain ( P>0.05) at each time point. The improvement rates of VAS score of low back pain and ODI in ALDF group were significantly higher than those in MMED-LIF group ( t=7.187, P=0.000; t=2.716, P=0.007), but there was no significant difference in the improvement rate of VAS score of leg pain ( t=0.556, P=0.579). The postoperative lumbar X-ray films showed the significant recovery of the intervertebral space height, lordosis angle, and spondylolisthesis rate at 2 days after operation when compared with preoperation ( P<0.05), and the improvements were maintained until last follow-up ( P>0.05). The improvement rates of intervertebral space height and lordosis angle in ALDF group were significantly higher than those in MMED-LIF group ( P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the reduction rate of spondylolisthesis between the two groups ( t=1.396, P=0.167). During follow-up, there was no loosening or breakage of the implant and no displacement or sinking of the Cage.

CONCLUSION

Under appropriate indications, microscope assisted ALDF and MMED-LIF both can achieve good results for lumbar degenerative diseases. Microscope assisted ALDF was superior to MMED-LIF in the improvement of low back pain and function and the recovery of intervertebral space height and lordosis angle.

In Vitro and In Vivo Comparison of Bone Growth Characteristics in Additive-Manufactured Porous Titanium, Nonporous Titanium, and Porous Tantalum Interbody Cages

Autogenous bone grafts are the gold standard for interbody fusion implant materials; however, they have several disadvantages. Tantalum (Ta) and titanium (Ti) are ideal materials for interbody cages because of their biocompatibility, particularly when they are incorporated into a three-dimensional (3D) porous structure. We conducted an in vitro investigation of the cell attachment and osteogenic markers of self-fabricated uniform porous Ti (20%, 40%, 60%, and 80%), nonporous Ti, and porous Ta cages (n = 6) in each group. Cell attachment, osteogenic markers, and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) were measured. An in vivo study was performed using a pig-posterior-instrumented anterior interbody fusion model to compare the porous Ti (60%), nonporous Ti, and porous Ta interbody cages in 12 pigs. Implant migration and subsidence, determined using plain radiographs, were recorded before surgery, immediately after surgery, and at 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery. Harvested implants were assessed for bone ingrowth and attachment. Relative to the 20% and 40% porous Ti cages, the 60% and 80% cages achieved superior cellular migration into cage pores. Among the cages, osteogenic marker and ALP activity levels were the highest in the 60% porous Ti cage, osteocalcin expression was the highest in the nonporous Ti cage, and the 60% porous Ti cage exhibited the lowest subsidence. In conclusion, the designed porous Ti cage is biocompatible and suitable for lumbar interbody fusion surgery and exhibits faster fusion with less subsidence compared with porous Ta and nonporous Ti cages.

Treatment of restenosis after lumbar decompression surgery: decompression versus decompression and fusion

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare perioperative complications and postoperative outcomes between patients with lumbar recurrent stenosis without lumbar instability and radiculopathy who underwent decompression surgery and those who underwent decompression with fusion surgery.

METHODS

For this retrospective study, the authors identified 2606 consecutive patients who underwent posterior surgery for lumbar spinal canal stenosis at eight affiliated hospitals between April 2017 and June 2019. Among these patients, those with a history of prior decompression surgery and central canal restenosis with cauda equina syndrome were included in the study. Those patients with instability or radiculopathy were excluded. The patients were divided between the decompression group and decompression with fusion group. The demographic characteristics, numerical rating scale score for low-back pain, incidence rates of lower-extremity pain and lower-extremity numbness, Oswestry Disability Index score, 3-level EQ-5D score, and patient satisfaction rate were compared between the two groups using the Fisher's exact probability test for nominal variables and the Student t-test for continuous variables, with p < 0.05 as the level of statistical significance.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients met the inclusion criteria (35 males and 11 females; 19 patients underwent decompression and 27 decompression and fusion; mean ± SD age 72.5 ± 8.8 years; mean ± SD follow-up 18.8 ± 6.0 months). Demographic data and perioperative complication rates were similar. The percentages of patients who achieved the minimal clinically important differences for patient-reported outcomes or satisfaction rate at 1 year were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with central canal stenosis who underwent revision, the short-term outcomes of the patients who underwent decompression were comparable to those of the patients who underwent decompression and fusion. Decompression surgery may be effective for patients without instability or radiculopathy.

Biomechanical analysis of stand-alone lumbar interbody cages versus 360° constructs: an in vitro and finite element investigation

OBJECTIVE

Low fusion rates and cage subsidence are limitations of lumbar fixation with stand-alone interbody cages. Various approaches to interbody cage placement exist, yet the need for supplemental posterior fixation is not clear from clinical studies. Therefore, as prospective clinical studies are lacking, a comparison of segmental kinematics, cage properties, and load sharing on vertebral endplates is needed. This laboratory investigation evaluates the mechanical stability and biomechanical properties of various interbody fixation techniques by performing cadaveric and finite element (FE) modeling studies.

METHODS

An in vitro experiment using 7 fresh-frozen human cadavers was designed to test intact spines with 1) stand-alone lateral interbody cage constructs (lateral interbody fusion, LIF) and 2) LIF supplemented with posterior pedicle screw-rod fixation (360° constructs). FE and kinematic data were used to validate a ligamentous FE model of the lumbopelvic spine. The validated model was then used to evaluate the stability of stand-alone LIF, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) cages with and without supplemental posterior fixation at the L4-5 level. The FE models of intact and instrumented cases were subjected to a 400-N compressive preload followed by an 8-Nm bending moment to simulate physiological flexion, extension, bending, and axial rotation. Segmental kinematics and load sharing at the inferior endplate were compared.

RESULTS

The FE kinematic predictions were consistent with cadaveric data. The range of motion (ROM) in LIF was significantly lower than intact spines for both stand-alone and 360° constructs. The calculated reduction in motion with respect to intact spines for stand-alone constructs ranged from 43% to 66% for TLIF, 67%-82% for LIF, and 69%-86% for ALIF in flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. In flexion and extension, the maximum reduction in motion was 70% for ALIF versus 81% in LIF for stand-alone cases. When supplemented with posterior fixation, the corresponding reduction in ROM was 76%-87% for TLIF, 86%-91% for LIF, and 90%-92% for ALIF. The addition of posterior instrumentation resulted in a significant reduction in peak stress at the superior endplate of the inferior segment in all scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

Stand-alone ALIF and LIF cages are most effective in providing stability in lateral bending and axial rotation and less so in flexion and extension. Supplemental posterior instrumentation improves stability for all interbody techniques. Comparative clinical data are needed to further define the indications for stand-alone cages in lumbar fusion surgery.

Improving the Management of Patients with Osteoporosis Undergoing Spinal Fusion: The Need for a Bone Mineral Density-Matched Interbody Cage

With an increasingly aging population globally, a confluence has emerged between the rising prevalence of degenerative spinal disease and osteoporosis. Fusion of the anterior spinal column remains the mainstay surgical intervention for many spinal degenerative disorders. However, decreased vertebral bone mineral density (BMD), quantitatively measured by dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA), complicates treatment with surgical interbody fusion as weak underlying bone stock increases the risk of post-operative implant-related adverse events, including cage subsidence. There is a necessity for developing cages with advanced structural designs that incorporate bioengineering and architectural principles to tailor the interbody fusion device directly to the patient’s BMD status. Specifically, lattice-designed cages that mimic the web-like structure of native cancellous bone have demonstrated excellent resistance to post-operative subsidence. This article provides an introductory profile of a spinal interbody implant designed intentionally to simulate the lattice structure of human cancellous bone, with a similar modulus of elasticity, and specialized to match a patient’s bone status across the BMD continuum. The implant incorporates an open pore design where the degree of pore compactness directly corresponds to the patient’s DXA-defined BMD status, including patients with osteoporosis.

[Results of the study of functional recovery of professional athletes after minimally invasive lumbar fusion]

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a comprehensive clinical-neurological assessment and to study the results of functional recovery of professional athletes after minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The retrospective study included 27 patients-professional athletes who were operated on using minimally invasive decompression and stabilization techniques in the period 2010 to 2019. Clinical-neurological effectiveness was assessed when returning to previous sports activity was 14 (9; 17) weeks and 4 (3; 5) years after surgery.

RESULTS

The follow-up showed a significant improvement in clinical and neurological parameters: persistent elimination of radicular and muscular-skeletal symptoms, a decrease in the level of pain according to a visual analogue scale in the lumbar spine from 68 (61; 85) mm to 3 (2; 11) mm (p=0.002) and in the lower extremities from 84 (78; 91) mm to 1 (0; 3) mm (p=0.001), change in the physical component of health from 26.18 (23.58; 28.37) to 49.82 (49.03; 53.04) (p=0.002) and the psychological component of health from 27.87 (26.22; 29.29) to 52.18 (49.12; 55.66) (p=0.001), significant improvement in the perception of physical activity according to the Borg RPE Scale from 17 (16; 18) points to 9 (8; 9) (p<0.001). In one case (3.7%), the patient did not return to his previous sports career.

CONCLUSION

The use of minimally invasive rigid stabilization in the overwhelming majority of professional athletes made it possible in the shortest possible time to achieve regression of neurological symptoms, reduce pain, improve the quality of life, restore the functional state and return to previous sports activities.

Efficacy, Cost, and Complications of Demineralized Bone Matrix in Instrumented Lumbar Fusion: Comparison With rhBMP-2

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate demineralized bone matrix as an adjunct for instrumented lumbar spine fusion compared with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2).

METHODS

Clinical and radiographic review was performed of 43 patients with degenerative spine disease treated with posterolateral spinal fusion with or without posterior or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Final analysis included sixteen patients treated with demineralized bone matrix (DBM; Accell Evo3, SeaSpine) compared with a retrospective matched group of 21 patients treated with rhBMP-2 (rhBMP-2, Infuse, Medtronic). All patients were followed for 24 months. Fusion was evaluated by computed tomography and/or x-ray. Clinical outcomes included visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Short Form 12 (SF-12).

RESULTS

Overall fusion rate, including posterolateral and/or interbody fusion, was 100% for both groups, though the fusion rates in the posterolateral space alone were 93.5% and 100% for the DBM and rhBMP-2 groups, respectively. Clinical outcomes were similar between groups, with the DBM group showing greater improvement in ODI. The rhBMP-2 group showed higher rates of radiographic complications with 7 of 21 patients (33.3%) demonstrating either adjacent level fusion or ectopic bone formation, compared with zero in the DBM group. Average biologic cost per level was $1522 for DBM and $3505 for rhBMP-2.

CONCLUSIONS

DBM and rhBMP-2 demonstrated similar radiographic and clinical outcomes in instrumented lumbar fusions. rhBMP-2 was associated with higher rates of radiographic complications and significantly higher costs.

Comparative Analysis of Unilateral versus Bilateral Instrumentation in TLIF for Lumbar Degenerative Disorder: Single Center Large Series

BACKGROUND

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with bilateral pedicle screw instrumentation is a well-accepted technique in lumbar degenerative disc disorder. Unilateral instrumentation in TLIF has been reported in the literature. This study aims to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of unilateral and bilateral instrumented TLIF in a selected series of patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients operated with unilateral pedicle screw fixation in TLIF (UPSF TLIF) or with bilateral pedicle screw fixation in TLIF (BPSF TLIF) with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Patients were evaluated at regular intervals for functional and radiological outcomes. Functional outcome was assessed using the Oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual analog score (VAS) preoperatively and at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery. Fusion rates were assessed using Bridwell interbody fusion grading.

RESULTS

Our study shows that there was a significant improvement in VAS and ODI in both groups at 2 years follow-up, and there was no significant difference in improvements between the groups. The complication rates between the groups were similar. The fusion rate in UPSF TLIF was 97.3% and was 98.34% in BPSF TLIF; this was not statistically significant between groups. There is a significant difference in terms of blood loss, duration of surgery, and average duration of hospital stay between the groups (P < .001), favoring UPSF TLIF.

CONCLUSIONS

Unilateral pedicle screw fixation in open TLIF is comparable with bilateral pedicle screw fixation in terms of patient-reported clinical outcomes, fusion rates, and complication rates with the additional benefits of less operative time, less blood loss, shorter hospitalization, and less cost in selective cases.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Vulnerability of the L5 nerve root during anterior lumbar interbody fusion at L5-S1: case series and review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

Nerve root injuries associated with anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) are uncommonly reported in the literature. This case series and review aims to describe the etiology of L5 nerve root injury following ALIF at L5-S1.

METHODS

The authors performed a single-center retrospective review of prospectively collected data of patients who underwent surgery between 2017 and 2019 who had postoperative L5 nerve root injuries after stand-alone L5-S1 ALIF. They also reviewed the literature with regard to nerve root injuries after ALIF procedures.

RESULTS

The authors report on 3 patients with postoperative L5 radiculopathy. All 3 patients had pain that improved. Two of the 3 patients had a neurological deficit, one of which improved.

CONCLUSIONS

Stretch neuropraxia from overdistraction is an important cause of postoperative L5 radiculopathy after L5-S1 ALIF. Judicious use of implants and careful preoperative planning to determine optimal implant sizes are paramount.

Peri-Surgical Inflammatory Profile Associated with Mini-Invasive or Standard Open Lumbar Interbody Fusion Approaches

BACKGROUND

Different surgical approaches are available for lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) to treat disc degeneration. However, a quantification of their invasiveness is lacking, and the definition of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has not been biochemically detailed. We aimed at characterizing the inflammatory, hematological, and clinical peri-surgical responses to different LIF techniques.

METHODS

68 healthy subjects affected by single-level discopathy (L3 to S1) were addressed to MIS, anterior (ALIF, n = 21) or lateral (LLIF, n = 23), and conventional approaches, transforaminal (TLIF, n = 24), based on the preoperative clinical assessment. Venous blood samples were taken 24 h before the surgery and 24 and 72 h after surgery to assess a wide panel of inflammatory and hematological markers.

RESULTS

martial (serum iron and transferrin) and pro-angiogenic profiles (MMP-2, TWEAK) were improved in ALIF and LLIF compared to TLIF, while the acute phase response (C-reactive protein, sCD163) was enhanced in LLIF.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS procedures (ALIF and LLIF) associated with a reduced incidence of post-operative anemic status, faster recovery, and enhanced pro-angiogenic stimuli compared with TLIF. LLIF associated with an earlier activation of innate immune mechanisms than ALIF and TLIF. The trend of the inflammation markers confirms that the theoretically defined mini-invasive procedures behave as such.

Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) versus Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) in Interbody Fusion Technique for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Preoperative pathology requiring fusion surgery has a great impact on postoperative outcomes. However, the previous clinical and meta-analysis studies did not control for the pathology. In this systematic review, the authors aimed to compare oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) with transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) as an interbody fusion technique in lumbar fusion surgery for patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). We systematically searched for relevant articles in the available databases. Among the 3022 articles, three studies were identified and met the inclusion criteria. In terms of radiological outcome, the amount of disc height restoration was greater in the OLIF group than in the TLIF group, but there was no significant difference between the two surgical techniques (p = 0.18). In the clinical outcomes, the pain improvement was not significantly different between the two surgical techniques. In terms of surgical outcomes, OLIF resulted in a shorter length of hospital stay and less blood loss than TLIF (p < 0.0001 and p = 0.02, respectively). The present meta-analysis indicated no significant difference in clinical, radiological outcomes, and surgical time between TLIF and OLIF for DS, but the lengths of hospital stay and blood loss were better in OLIF than TLIF. Though encouraging, these findings were based on low-quality evidence from a small number of retrospective studies that are prone to bias.

Factors associated with using an interbody fusion device for low-grade lumbar degenerative versus isthmic spondylolisthesis: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Many studies have utilized a combined cohort of patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) and isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS) to evaluate indications and outcomes. Intuitively, these are very different populations, and rates, indications, and outcomes may differ. The goal of this study was to compare specific patient characteristics associated with the utilization of a posterior lumbar interbody device between cohorts of patients with DS and IS, as well as to compare rates of interbody device use and patient-rated outcomes at 1 year after surgical treatment.

METHODS

The authors included patients who underwent posterior lumbar interbody fusion or instrumented posterolateral fusion for grade I or II DS or IS and had been enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network registry from 2009 to 2016. The outcome measures were score on the Oswestry Disability Index, scores for back pain and leg pain on the numeric rating scale, and mental component summary (MCS) score and physical component summary score on the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey. Descriptive statistics were used to compare spondylolisthesis groups, logistic regression was used to compare interbody device use, and the chi-square test was used to compare the proportions of patients who achieved a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at 1 year after surgery.

RESULTS

In total, 119 patients had IS and 339 had DS. Patients with DS were more commonly women, older, less likely to smoke, and more likely to have neurogenic claudication and comorbidities, whereas patients with IS more commonly had radicular pain, neurological deficits, and worse back pain. Spondylolisthesis was more common at the L4-5 level in patients with DS and at the L5-S1 level in patients with IS. Similar proportions of patients had an interbody device (78.6% of patients with DS vs 82.4% of patients with IS, p = 0.429). Among patients with IS, factors associated with interbody device utilization were BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 and increased baseline leg pain intensity. Factors associated with interbody device utilization in patients with DS were younger age, increased number of total comorbidities, and lower baseline MCS score. For each outcome measure, similar proportions of patients in the surgical treatment and spondylolisthesis groups achieved the MCID at 1 year after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the demographic and patient characteristics associated with interbody device utilization differed between cohorts, similar proportions of patients attained clinically meaningful improvement at 1 year after surgery.

Prone transpsoas lumbar corpectomy: simultaneous posterior and lateral lumbar access for difficult clinical scenarios

OBJECTIVE

Lateral lumbar corpectomy with interbody fusion has been well described via a transpsoas approach in the lateral position, as has lumbar interbody fusion with posterior fixation in the prone position. However, no previous report has described the use of both an open posterior approach and a lateral transpsoas approach simultaneously in the prone position. Here, the authors describe their technique of performing transpsoas lumbar corpectomy in the prone position in order to have simultaneous posterior and lateral access for difficult clinical scenarios, and they report their early clinical experience.

METHODS

The surgical technique for simultaneous posterior and lateral transpsoas access to the lumbar spine was reviewed and described in detail. The cases of 2 patients who underwent simultaneous posterior and lateral access in the prone position for complex lumbar pathology were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical presentation, preoperative radiographs, postoperative course, and postoperative radiographs were reviewed.

RESULTS

The first patient presented after previous transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion that was complicated by significant subsidence of the intervertebral cage, vertebral body split fracture, rotational instability, and resulting spinal stenosis. A simultaneous posterior and lateral transpsoas approach in the prone position allowed for removal of the previous cage, lumbar corpectomy, and rigid posterior fixation with direct decompression. The second patient had a significant pathologic burst fracture secondary to a plasmacytoma with retropulsion, resulting in vertebra plana and significant canal stenosis. Simultaneous approaches allowed for complete resection of the plasmacytoma, restoration of lumbar alignment, rigid fixation, and direct posterior decompression. There were no short-term complications, and both patients had resolution of their preoperative symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous posterior and lateral transpsoas access to the lumbar spine in the prone position is a previously unreported technique that allows a safe surgical approach to difficult clinical scenarios.

One surgeon's learning curve with single position lateral lumbar interbody fusion: perioperative outcomes and complications

BACKGROUND

Single position (SP) lateral transpsoas lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) with posterior pedicle screw fixation (PPSF) reduces operative time compared to dual positioning. However, the learning curve has not yet been described. The purpose of this study was to define the learning curve SP LLIF with PPSF.

METHODS

This retrospective case series included the first 161 consecutive patients who underwent SP LLIF and PPSF with the senior author. Primary analysis of operative time versus case number included single level cases without adjacent level procedures. Secondary analyses included 1-3 level cases without adjacent level procedures. Operative time for 2 and 3 level procedures was normalized to single-level cases. The learning curve was assessed with linear regression, which was found to fit the data better than logarithmic regression as judged by R² values and data visualization. Perioperative outcomes as a function of case number were analyzed by least squares linear regression and Mann Whitney U-tests.

RESULTS

For single level surgeries without adjacent procedures (n=87), operative time decreased by a total of 28.7 (95% CI, 9.6, 47.9) minutes over the series (P<0.001). For 1-3 level cases with no adjacent procedures (n=131), normalized operative time decreased by 23.1 (7.6, 38.6) minutes (P<0.001). Post-operative change in hematocrit, length of hospital stay, post-operative change in lordosis, 90-day complications, suboptimal screw placement, and 6-week post-operative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score did not correlate with case number. Intraoperative fluids decreased 3.7 mL (95% CI, 0.7, 6.7) per case (P=0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

In SP LLIF with PPSF, case number correlated with decreased operative time, but not complications. The surgeon's prior experience with dual position (DP) LLIF likely contributed to the minimal learning curve observed. Surgeons adopting SP LLIF with minimal prior DP LLIF experience may experience a steeper curve.

Minimally invasive injectable lumbar interbody fusion with mineralized collagen-modified PMMA bone cement: A new animal model

This study was to develop a feasible and safe animal model for minimally invasive injectable lumbar interbody fusion using a novel biomaterial, mineralized collagen-polymethylmethacrylate bone cement (MC-PMMA), with unilateral pedicle screw fixation in an in vivo goat model. Eight goats (Capra aegagrus hircus) were divided into three groups: MC-PMMA, unmodified commercial-polymethylmethacrylate bone cement (UC-PMMA), and a control group (titanium cage filled with autogenous bone, TC-AB). Each group of goats was treated with minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion at the L3/L4 and L5/L6 disc spaces (injected for MC-PMMA and UC-PMMA, implanted for TC-AB). The pedicle screws were inserted at the L3, L4, L5, and L6 vertebrae, respectively, and fixed on the left side. The characteristics of osteogenesis and bone growth were assessed at the third and the sixth month, respectively. The methods of evaluation included the survival of each animal, X-ray imaging, and 256-layer spiral computed tomography (256-CT) scanning, imaged with three-dimensional microfocus computed tomography (micro-CT), and histological analysis. The results showed that PMMA bone cement can be extruded smoothly after doping MC, the MC-PMMA integrates better with bone than the UC-PMMA, and all goats recovered after surgery without nerve damage. After 3 and 6 months, the implants were stable. New trabecular bone was observed in the TC-AB group. In the UC-PMMA group a thick fibrous capsule had formed around the implants. The MC-PMMA was observed to have perfect osteogenesis and bone ingrowth to adjacent bone surface. Minimally invasive injectable lumbar interbody fusion using MC-PMMA bone cement was shown to have profound clinical value, and the MC-PMMA showed potential application prospects.

Simultaneous Combined Major Arterial and Lumbar Plexus Injury During Primary Extra Lateral Interbody Fusion: Case Report and Review of the Literature

Extra lateral interbody fusion (XLIF) has been established in recent years as an effective approach to address degenerative lumbar disc disease (DLDD). Although neurological and vascular complications during XLIF have been reported, to our knowledge, a combination of simultaneous vascular and neurovascular complication during XLIF has not been reported to date. A 72-year-old female patient was admitted to our orthopaedic department because of back pain associated with severe neuropathic radicular pain to her both lower extremities, incomplete paraplegia and low back fistula with serous secretion for several weeks. She had been wheel-chair bound since nine years before her admission in our department when she had her initial XLIF operation in another institution. Intraoperatively, an aorta lesion occurred, which was emergently addressed, along with lumbar plexus injury. Since then, she had an extensive history of subsequent operations that ended with a T10-S1 posterior lumbar fusion, with no improvement of her neurological condition, complicated by hardware-induced infection. She underwent her last operation in our department; removal of the posterior lumbar construct and extensive debridement of the posterior lumbar spine. We present this rare case and we perform an extensive literature review. Although XLIF has been established in recent years, the report of major vascular injuries, although rare, has questioned its safety profile. Spine surgeons should be aware of catastrophic major neurovascular complications associated with this procedure and be prepared to address them.

Safety Profile and Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes of Stand-Alone 2-Level Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Case Series of 41 Consecutive Patients

Objective: The use of stand-alone 2-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) for degenerative lumbar disease has been increasing as an alternative to routinely augmenting these constructs with posterior fixation or fusion. Despite the potential benefits of a stand-alone approach (decreased cost and operative time, decreased pain and early mobilization), there is a paucity of information regarding these operations in the literature. This investigation aimed to determine the safety profile, radiographic outcomes including fusion rates, improvement in preoperative pain, and spinopelvic parameter modification, for patients undergoing stand-alone 2-level ALIF.

Methods: This retrospective case series involved a chart review of all patients undergoing 2-level stand-alone ALIF at a single tertiary hospital from 2008 to 2018. Data included patient demographics, hospitalization, complications and radiological studies. Visual analog scale (VAS) back and leg scores were measured via patient-administered surveys preoperatively and up to 18 weeks postoperatively.

Results: Forty-one patients who underwent L4-S1 stand-alone ALIF were included. Sixteen (39%) of patients had undergone previous posterior lumbar surgery. Length of stay averaged 4.2 days. Complication rates were comparable to 1-level ALIF. Two patients required reoperation. Fusion rates were 100% for L4-5 and 94.4% for L5-S1. There was no significant change in lumbar lordosis (LL) or LL-pelvic incidence (PI), but there was improved segmental lordosis (SL) and disc height at L4-S1 on final follow-up imaging. There was also modest but statistically significant improvement in VAS back and leg scores.

Conclusions: Stand-alone 2-level ALIF is an option for a surgeon to perform in the absence of significant instability, even in the setting of prior posterior surgery. These procedures increase SL and disc height, but do not have the same effect on LL or LL-PI.

Expandable Interbody Fusion Cages: An Editorial on the Surgeon's Perspective on Recent Technological Advances and Their Biomechanical Implications

BACKGROUND

Expandable cages have gone through several iterations since they first appeared on the market in the early 2000s. Their development was prompted by some common problems associated with static interbody cages, including migration, expulsion, dural or neural traction injury, and pseudarthrosis.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize current technological advances from earlier expandable lumbar interbody fusion devices to implants with vertical and medial-to-lateral expansion mechanisms.

METHODS

The authors review the currently available expandable cage designs, the incremental technological advances, and how these devices impact minimally invasive surgery interbody procedures and clinical outcomes. The strategic concepts intended to improve the minimally invasive application of expandable interbody fusion implants are reviewed from a surgeon's perspective in a clinical context to discuss how their use may improve patient outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The geometrical configuration, effective stiffness of composite multi-material cage designs may impact the bone-implant contact area with the endplates. Hybridization strategies of expandable cage technology with modern minimally invasive and endoscopic spinal surgery techniques are presented by outlining their advantages and disadvantages.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1 CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Systematic review.

Increasing Fusion Rate Between 1 and 2 Years After Instrumented Posterolateral Spinal Fusion and the Role of Bone Grafting

STUDY DESIGN

Two-year clinical and radiographic follow-up of a double-blind, multicenter, randomized, intra-patient controlled, non-inferiority trial comparing a bone graft substitute (AttraX Putty) with autograft in instrumented posterolateral fusion (PLF) surgery.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare PLF rates between 1 and 2 years of follow-up and between graft types, and to explore the role of bone grafting based on the location of the PLF mass.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There are indications that bony fusion proceeds over time, but it is unknown to what extent this can be related to bone grafting.

METHODS

A total of 100 adult patients underwent a primary, single- or multilevel, thoracolumbar PLF. After instrumentation and preparation for grafting, the randomized allocation side of AttraX Putty was disclosed. The contralateral posterolateral gutters were grafted with autograft. At 1-year follow-up, and in case of no fusion at 2 years, the fusion status of both sides of each segment was blindly assessed on CT scans. Intertransverse and facet fusion were scored separately. Difference in fusion rates after 1 and 2 years and between grafts were analyzed with a Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) model (P < 0.05).

RESULTS

The 2-year PLF rate (66 patients) was 70% at the AttraX Putty and 68% at the autograft side, compared to 55% and 52% after 1 year (87 patients). GEE analysis demonstrated a significant increase for both conditions (odds ratio 2.0, 95% confidence interval 1.5-2.7, P < 0.001), but no difference between the grafts (P = 0.595). Ongoing bone formation was only observed between the facet joints.

CONCLUSION

This intra-patient controlled trial demonstrated a significant increase in PLF rate between 1 and 2 years after instrumented thoracolumbar fusion, but no difference between AttraX Putty and autograft. Based on the location of the PLF mass, this increase is most likely the result of immobilization instead of grafting.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1.

Advances in Spinal Fusion Strategies in Adult Deformity Surgery

BACKGROUND

As the frequency of adult deformity surgery (ADS) continues to increase, our understanding of techniques that enhance fusion must continue to evolve because pseudarthrosis can be a serious and costly event.

PURPOSES/QUESTIONS

We sought to conduct a review of the literature investigating techniques that can enhance outcomes of ADS.

METHODS

Two databases were searched for keywords such as "advances in spinal fusion," "new technology in adult spinal deformity," "interbody devices for adult spinal deformity," "adult spinal deformity rods," and "screw design in adult spinal deformity" to examine recent literature and trends in ADS.

RESULTS

We identified 45 articles for our review. Topics studied include the use of multiple rods, interbody fusion, distal fixation techniques, and bone morphogenetic protein or iliac crest bone graft.

CONCLUSIONS

Many recent innovations in treatments to enhance fusion in ADS have been studied, some more controversial than others. Further research into the efficacy of these techniques may increase fusion rates in ADS.

Factors affecting approach selection for minimally invasive versus open surgery in the treatment of adult spinal deformity: analysis of a prospective, nonrandomized multicenter study

OBJECTIVE

Surgical decision-making and planning is a key factor in optimizing outcomes in adult spinal deformity (ASD). Minimally invasive spinal (MIS) strategies for ASD have been increasingly used as an option to decrease postoperative morbidity. This study analyzes factors involved in the selection of either a traditional open approach or a minimally invasive approach to treat ASD in a prospective, nonrandomized multicenter trial. All centers had at least 5 years of experience in minimally invasive techniques for ASD.

METHODS

The study enrolled 268 patients, of whom 120 underwent open surgery and 148 underwent MIS surgery. Inclusion criteria included age ≥ 18 years, and at least one of the following criteria: coronal curve (CC) ≥ 20°, sagittal vertical axis (SVA) > 5 cm, pelvic tilt (PT) > 25°, or thoracic kyphosis (TK) > 60°. Surgical approach selection was made at the discretion of the operating surgeon. Preoperative significant differences were included in a multivariate logistic regression analysis to determine odds ratios (ORs) for approach selection.

RESULTS

Significant preoperative differences (p < 0.05) between open and MIS groups were noted for age (61.9 vs 66.7 years), numerical rating scale (NRS) back pain score (7.8 vs 7), CC (36° vs 26.1°), PT (26.4° vs 23°), T1 pelvic angle (TPA; 25.8° vs 21.7°), and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL; 19.6° vs 14.9°). No significant differences in BMI (29 vs 28.5 kg/m2), NRS leg pain score (5.2 vs 5.7), Oswestry Disability Index (48.4 vs 47.2), Scoliosis Research Society 22-item questionnaire score (2.7 vs 2.8), PI (58.3° vs 57.1°), LL (38.9° vs 42.3°), or SVA (73.8 mm vs 60.3 mm) were found. Multivariate analysis found that age (OR 1.05, p = 0.002), VAS back pain score (OR 1.21, p = 0.016), CC (OR 1.03, p < 0.001), decompression (OR 4.35, p < 0.001), and TPA (OR 1.09, p = 0.023) were significant factors in approach selection.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing age was the primary driver for selecting MIS surgery. Conversely, increasingly severe deformities and the need for open decompression were the main factors influencing the selection of traditional open surgery. As experience with MIS surgery continues to accumulate, future longitudinal evaluation will reveal if more experience, use of specialized treatment algorithms, refinement of techniques, and technology will expand surgeon adoption of MIS techniques for adult spinal deformity.

Anterior lumbar compared to oblique lumbar interbody approaches for multilevel fusions to the sacrum in adults with spinal deformity and degeneration

OBJECTIVE

In adult spinal deformity and degenerative conditions of the spine, interbody fusion to the sacrum often is performed to enhance arthrodesis, induce lordosis, and alleviate stenosis. Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) has traditionally been performed, but minimally invasive oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) may or may not cause less morbidity because less retraction of the abdominal viscera is required. The authors evaluated whether there was a difference between the results of ALIF and OLIF in multilevel anterior or lateral interbody fusion to the sacrum.

METHODS

Patients from 2013 to 2018 who underwent multilevel ALIF or OLIF to the sacrum were retrospectively studied. Inclusion criteria were adult spinal deformity or degenerative pathology and multilevel ALIF or OLIF to the sacrum. Demographic, implant, perioperative, and radiographic variables were collected. Statistical calculations were performed for significant differences.

RESULTS

Data from a total of 127 patients were analyzed (66 OLIF patients and 61 ALIF patients). The mean follow-up times were 27.21 (ALIF) and 24.11 (OLIF) months. The mean surgical time was 251.48 minutes for ALIF patients and 234.48 minutes for OLIF patients (p = 0.154). The mean hospital stay was 7.79 days for ALIF patients and 7.02 days for OLIF patients (p = 0.159). The mean time to being able to eat solid food was 4.03 days for ALIF patients and 1.30 days for OLIF patients (p < 0.001). After excluding patients who had undergone L5-S1 posterior column osteotomy, 54 ALIF patients and 41 OLIF patients were analyzed for L5-S1 radiographic changes. The mean cage height was 14.94 mm for ALIF patients and 13.56 mm for OLIF patients (p = 0.001), and the mean cage lordosis was 15.87° in the ALIF group and 16.81° in the OLIF group (p = 0.278). The mean increases in anterior disc height were 7.34 mm and 4.72 mm for the ALIF and OLIF groups, respectively (p = 0.001), and the mean increases in posterior disc height were 3.35 mm and 1.24 mm (p < 0.001), respectively. The mean change in L5-S1 lordosis was 4.33° for ALIF patients and 4.59° for OLIF patients (p = 0.829).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who underwent multilevel OLIF and ALIF to the sacrum had comparable operative times. OLIF was associated with a quicker ileus recovery and less blood loss. At L5-S1, ALIF allowed larger cages to be placed, resulting in a greater disc height change, but there was no significant difference in L5-S1 segmental lordosis.