Lumbale Spondylodese – Indikationen und Techniken

Hemodynamic changes in the prone position according to fluid loading after anaesthesia induction in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery: a randomized, assessor-blind, prospective study

INTRODUCTION

A change from the supine to prone position causes hemodynamic alterations. We aimed to evaluate the effect of fluid preloading in the supine position, the subsequent hemodynamic changes in the prone position and postoperative outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective, assessor-blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted between March and June 2023. Adults scheduled for elective orthopaedic lumbar surgery under general anaesthesia were enrolled. In total, 80 participants were randomly assigned to fluid maintenance (M) or loading (L) groups. Both groups were administered intravenous fluid at a rate of 2 ml/kg/h until surgical incision; Group L was loaded with an additional 5 ml/kg intravenous fluid for 10 min after anaesthesia induction. The primary outcome was incidence of hypotension before surgical incision. Secondary outcomes included differences in the mean blood pressure (mBP), heart rate, pleth variability index (PVi), stroke volume variation (SVV), pulse pressure variation (PPV), stroke volume index and cardiac index before surgical incision between the two groups. Additionally, postoperative complications until postoperative day 2 and postoperative hospital length of stay were investigated.

RESULTS

Hypotension was prevalent in Group M before surgical incision and could be predicted by a baseline PVi >16. The mBP was significantly higher in Group L immediately after fluid loading. The PVi, SVV and PPV were lower in Group L after fluid loading, with continued differences at 2-3 time points for SVV and PPV. Other outcomes did not differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Fluid loading after inducing general anaesthesia could reduce the occurrence of hypotension until surgical incision in patients scheduled for surgery in the prone position. Additionally, hypotension could be predicted in patients with a baseline PVi >16. Therefore, intravenous fluid loading is strongly recommended in patients with high baseline PVi to prevent hypotension after anaesthesia induction and in the prone position.

TRIAL NUMBER

KCT0008294 (date of registration: 16 March 2023).

Radiographic and Patient-Reported Outcomes in Anteriorly Placed Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cage Versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Posterior Instrumentation

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcomes in anteriorly placed transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIFs) and anterior lumbar interbody fusions (ALIFs).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

TLIF and ALIF are surgical techniques that have become more prevalent in recent years. Although studies have compared the two, none have considered TLIFs with anteriorly placed cages, which may serve as a better comparison to ALIFs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients undergoing TLIF or ALIF with posterior instrumentation from 2010 to 2020 at a tertiary care institution were retrospectively identified. TLIF cage position was assessed and those with anterior placement were included. Electronic medical records were reviewed to identify patient characteristics and patient-reported outcomes. Radiographic outcomes included posterior disc height (DH), lumbar lordosis (LL), sacral slope, pelvic incidence, and pelvic tilt. Statistical analysis was performed to compare the two groups.

RESULTS

Of the 351 patients, 108 had ALIF with posterior instrumentation and 207 had a TLIF. Preoperatively, patients undergoing TLIF had less LL (53.7° vs . 60.6°, P < 0.001), sacral slope (38.3° vs . 43.7°, P < 0.001), and pelvic incidence (60.1° vs . 66.1°, P < 0.001), all of which remained significant at 1-year and long-term follow-up ( P < 0.001). The TLIF group had less ∆DH (1.51° vs . 5.43°, P < 0.001), ∆LL (1.8° vs . 2.97°, P = 0.038), and ∆segmental lordosis (0.18° vs . 4.40°, P < 0.001) at 1 year postoperatively. At 2 to 3 years, ∆DH ( P < 0.001) and ∆segmental lordosis ( P = 0.001) remained significant, but ∆LL ( P = 0.695) did not. Patients in the TLIF group had higher Visual Analog Scale-Back scores 1 year postoperatively (3.68 vs . 2.16, P = 0.008) and experienced less improvement in Oswestry Disability Index (-17.1 vs . -28.6, P = 0.012) and Visual Analog Scale-Back (-2.67 vs . -4.50, P = 0.008) compared with patients undergoing ALIF.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that ALIF with posterior instrumentation performed superiorly in radiographic outcomes and patient-reported outcomes compared with anteriorly placed TLIFs. Anteriorly placed TLIF cages may not achieve the same results as those of ALIF cages.

Comparison of ALIF and PLIF in Isthmic Lumbosacral Spondylolisthesis. A Multicenter Surveillance Study of 602 cases from the German Spine Registry (DWG Register)

BACKGROUND

 Isthmic spondylolisthesis most commonly occurs in the lumbosacral junction and can cause backpain and radicular pain as well as stiffness with progressive immobilization, with a negative impact on an individual's ability to work and quality of life. Multiple operative treatments are currently available. This study aims to compare complications, demography, and clinical features between anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and posterior lumber body fusion (PLIF) in the operative treatment in isthmic spondylolisthesis.

METHODS

 An analysis of data from the German spine registry (Deutsche Wirbelsäulengesellschaft [DWG]-Register) of patients who underwent operative treatment (PLIF and ALIF) for isthmic spondylolisthesis in the sacrolumbar junction in 170 departments between January 2017 and May 2021 was performed. Age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, surgical approach, smoker/nonsmoker, as well as severeness of the spondylolisthesis according to the Meyerding classification were evaluated.

RESULTS

 In total, 602 patients undergoing fusion in L5/S1 were identified in the registry, n = 570 PLIF (group 1) and n = 32 ALIF (group 2). A significant difference in the ASA score between the two groups was noted; group 1 had more patients suffering a more debilitating disease in comparison to group 2. There was no significant difference in gender, grade of spondylolisthesis, age, or smoking status. Significant differences were found in operative and postoperative variables and complications (fusion material, dura injury).

CONCLUSION

 No difference was found between the two procedures in terms of symptomatic benefit of patients who underwent either ALIF or PLIF. According to the DWG Register, PLIF was the preferred method to treat isthmic spondylolisthesis in the sacrolumbar junction in Germany. To compare these two spine fusion techniques, further studies with an adequate sample size and follow-up period are required.

Do TLIF and PLIF Techniques Differ in Perioperative Complications? - Comparison of Complications Rates of Two High Volume Centers

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective bicentric Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE

Posterior (PLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) have been clinically proven for the surgical treatment of degenerative spinal disorders. Despite many retrospective studies, the superiority of either technique has not been proven to date. In the literature, the complication rate of the conventional PLIF technique is reported to be significantly higher, but with inconsistent complication recording. In this retrospective bicentric study, a less invasive PLIF technique was compared with the conventional TLIF technique and complications were recorded using the validated SAVES V2 classification system.

METHODS

1142 patients underwent PLIF (702) or TLIF (n = 440) up to 3 levels in two specialized centers. Epidemiological data, intra- and postoperative complications during hospitalization and after discharge were analyzed according to SAVES V2.

RESULTS

The overall complication rate was 13.74%. TLIF-patients had slightly significant more complications than PLIF-patients (TLIF = 16.6%/PLIF = 11.9%, P = .0338). Accordingly, complications during revision surgeries were more frequent in the first cohort (TLIF = 20.9%/PLIF = 12.6%; P = .03252). In primary interventions, the surgical technique did not correlate with the complication rate (TLIF = 12.4%/PLIF = 11.7%). There were no significant differences regarding severity of complications.

CONCLUSIONS

An important component of this work is the complication recording according to a uniform classification system (SAVES V2). In contrast to previous literature, we could demonstrate that there is not a significant difference between the two surgical techniques.

Comparison of the clinical outcomes of VBE-TLIF versus MIS-TLIF for single-level degenerative lumbar diseases

OBJECTIVE

This research aims to compare the clinical outcomes of VBE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF for the treatment of patients with single-level degenerative lumbar diseases.

METHODS

Ninety patients were enrolled in this study. The estimated blood loss, operation time, postoperative hospitalization days, time to functional exercise, amount of surgical drain and inflammatory index were recorded. The visual analog scale, Oswestry dysfunction index and modified MacNab criteria were used to assessed the patient's back and leg pain, functional status and clinical satisfaction rates.

RESULTS

The average operation time of the VBE-TLIF group was longer than that of the MIS-TLIF group. The time for functional exercise, length of hospital stay, estimated blood loss and amount of surgical drain in the VBE-TLIF group were relative shorter than those in the MIS-TLIF group. Additionally, the levels of CRP, neutrophil, IL-6 and CPK in the VBE-TLIF group were significantly lower than those in the MIS-TLIF group at postoperative days 1 and 3, respectively (P < 0.001). Patients undergoing VBE-TLIF had significantly lower back VAS scores than those in the MIS-TLIF group on postoperative days 1 and 3 (P < 0.001). No significant differences were found in the clinical satisfaction rates (95.83 vs. 95.24%, P = 0.458) or interbody fusion rate (97.92 vs. 95.24%, P = 0.730) between these two surgical procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Both VBE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF are safe and effective surgical procedures for patients with lumbar diseases, but VBE-TLIF technique is a preferred surgical procedure with merits of reduced surgical trauma and quicker recovery.

Intraoperative capsule protection can reduce the potential risk of adjacent segment degeneration acceleration biomechanically: an in silico study

BACKGROUND

The capsule of the zygapophyseal joint plays an important role in motion segmental stability maintenance. Iatrogenic capsule injury is a common phenomenon in posterior approach lumbar interbody fusion operations, but whether this procedure will cause a higher risk of adjacent segment degeneration acceleration biomechanically has yet to be identified.

METHODS

Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with different grades of iatrogenic capsule injury was simulated in our calibrated and validated numerical model. By adjusting the cross-sectional area of the capsule, different grades of capsule injury were simulated. The stress distribution on the cranial motion segment was computed under different loading conditions to judge the potential risk of adjacent segment degeneration acceleration.

RESULTS

Compared to the PLIF model with an intact capsule, a stepwise increase in the stress value on the cranial motion segment can be observed with a step decrease in capsule cross-sectional areas. Moreover, compared to the difference between models with intact and slightly injured capsules, the difference in stress values was more evident between models with slight and severe iatrogenic capsule injury.

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative capsule protection can reduce the potential risk of adjacent segment degeneration acceleration biomechanically, and iatrogenic capsule damage on the cranial motion segment should be reduced to optimize patients' long-term prognosis.

Finite element biomechanical analysis of 3D printed intervertebral fusion cage in osteoporotic population

OBJECTIVE

To study the biomechanical characteristics of each tissue structure when using different 3D printing Cage in osteoporotic patients undergoing interbody fusion.

METHODS

A finite element model of the lumbar spine was reconstructed and validated with regarding a range of motion and intervertebral disc pressure from previous in vitro studies. Cage and pedicle screws were implanted and part of the lamina, spinous process, and facet joints were removed in the L4/5 segment of the validated mode to simulate interbody fusion. A 280 N follower load and 7.5 N·m moment were applied to different postoperative models and intact osteoporotic model to simulate lumbar motion. The biomechanical characteristics of different models were evaluated by calculating and analyzing the range of motion of the fixed and cephalic adjacent segment, the stress of the screw-rod system, the stress at the interface between cage and L5 endplate, and intervertebral disc pressure of the adjacent segment.

RESULTS

After rigid fixation, the range of motion of the fixed segment of model A-C decreased significantly, which was much smaller than that of the osteoporotic model. And with the increase of the axial area of the interbody fusion cages, the fixed segment of model A-C tended to be more stable. The range of motion and intradiscal pressure of the spinal models with different interbody fusion cages were higher than those of the complete osteoporosis model, but there was no significant difference between the postoperative models. On the other hand, the L5 upper endplate stress and screw-rod system stress of model A-C show a decreasing trend in different directions of motion. The stress of the endplate is the highest during flexion, which can reach 40.5 MPa (model A). The difference in endplate stress between models A-C was the largest during lateral bending. The endplate stress of models A and B was 150.5% and 140.9% of that of model C, respectively. The stress of the screw-rod system was the highest during lateral bending (model A, 102.0 MPa), which was 108.4%, 102.4%, 110.4%, 114.2% of model B and 158.5%, 110.1%, 115.8%, 125.4% of model C in flexion, extension, lateral bending, and rotation, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

For people with osteoporosis, no matter what type of cage is used, good immediate stability can be achieved after surgery. Larger cage sizes provide better fixation without significantly increasing ROM and IDP in adjacent segments, which may contribute to the development of ASD. In addition, larger cage sizes can disperse endplate stress and reduce stress concentration, which is of positive significance in preventing cage subsidence after operation. The cage and screw rod system establish a stress conduction pathway on the spine, and a larger cage greatly enhances the stress-bearing capacity of the front column, which can better distribute the stress of the posterior spine structure and the stress borne by the posterior screw rod system, reduce the stress concentration phenomenon of the nail rod system, and avoid exceeding the yield strength of the material, resulting in the risk of future instrument failure.

Comparing the Efficacy of Transforaminal and Caudal Epidural Injections of Calcitonin in Treating Degenerative Spinal Canal Stenosis: A Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Background

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is the most common indication for lumbar surgery in elderly patients. Epidural injections of calcitonin are effective in managing LSS.

Objectives

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of transforaminal and caudal injections of calcitonin in patients with LSS.

Methods

In this double-blind randomized clinical trial, LSS patients were divided into two equal groups (N = 20). The first group received 50 IU (international units) of calcitonin via caudal epidural injection (CEI), and the second group received 50 IU of calcitonin via transforaminal epidural injection (TEI). The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire (ODI) were used to assess the patient's pain and ability to stand, respectively. Visual Analogue Scale and ODI scores were recorded and analyzed.

Results

The results showed that caudal and TEIs of calcitonin significantly improved pain and ability to stand during follow-up compared to before intervention (P < 0.05). Additionally, CEI of calcitonin after 6 months significantly reduced pain in LSS patients compared to TEI of calcitonin (P < 0.05). However, no significant difference was observed between the two epidural injection techniques in improving the patient's ability to stand (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

The results of the study indicate that epidural injection of calcitonin in long-term follow-up (6 months) had a significant effect on improving pain intensity and mobility in patients with LSS, and its effect on pain in the TEI method was significantly greater than that in the CEI method.

Factors associated with intervertebral cage subsidence in posterior lumbar fusion

BACKGROUND

The interbody fusion apparatus is a key component of the operation and plays a key role in the postoperative efficacy. Cage subsidence is one of the common complications after lumbar fusion and internal fixation. Clinical studies on the risk factors of cage subsidence are incomplete and inaccurate, especially paravertebral muscle atrophy and intervertebral bone fusion time.

METHODS

Among the patients who underwent PLIF surgery in our hospital from January 2016 to January 2019, 30 patients with cage subsidence and 30 patients without cage subsidence were randomly selected to be included in this study. The differences between the two groups were compared, and the relevant factors of cage subsidence were explored by single factor comparison and multiple logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Bone mineral density (T) of the subsidence group [(- 1.84 ± 1.81) g/cm2 vs (- 0.87 ± 1.63) g/cm2, P = 0.018] was significantly lower than that of the normal group. There were 4 patients with end plate injury in the subsidence group (P = 0.038). Preoperative end plate Modic changes [I/II/III, (7/2/2) vs (2/5/8), P = 0.043] were significantly different between the two groups. In the subsidence group, preoperative rCSA of psoas major muscle [(1.43 ± 0.40) vs (1.64 ± 0.41), P = 0.043], CSA of paravertebral muscle [(4530.25 ± 776.55) mm2 vs (4964.75 ± 888.48) mm2, P = 0.047], paravertebral muscle rCSA [(3.03 ± 0.72) vs (3.84 ± 0.73), P < 0.001] and paravertebral muscle rFCSA [(2.29 ± 0.60) vs (2.89 ± 0.66), P < 0.001] were significantly lower than those in normal group. In the subsidence group, the vertebral body area [(1547.81 ± 309.89) mm2 vs (1326.48 ± 297.21) mm2, P = 0.004], the height of the immediately corrected vertebral space [(2.86 ± 1.10) mm vs (1.65 ± 1.02) mm, P = 0.020], immediately SL corrective Angle [(5.81 + 4.71)° vs (3.24 + 3.57) °, P = 0.009), postoperative PI-LL [(11.69 + 6.99)° vs (6.66 + 9.62) °, P = 0.029] and intervertebral fusion time [(5.38 ± 1.85) months vs (4.30 ± 1.49) months, P = 0.023] were significantly higher than those in the normal group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the time of intervertebral fusion (OR = 1.158, P = 0.045), the height of immediate intervertebral space correction (OR = 1.438, P = 0.038), and the Angle of immediate SL correction (OR = 1.101, P = 0.019) were the risk factors for cage subsidence. Bone mineral density (OR = 0.544, P = 0.016) and preoperative paravertebral muscle rFCSA (OR = 0.525, P = 0.048) were protective factors.

CONCLUSION

Intervertebral fusion time, correctable height of intervertebral space, excessive Angle of immediate SL correction, bone mineral density and preoperative paravertebral muscle rFCSA are risk factors for cage subsidence after PLIF.

Imaging study of the effect of postural changes on the retroperitoneal oblique corridor in degenerative lumbar scoliosis

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of postural changes on access for the OLIF of L2 to L5 in patients with degenerative lumbar scoliosis.

METHODS

Twenty-one individuals with degenerative lumbar scoliosis were chosen at random, 11 with left-sided convexity and 10 with left-sided concavity. Axial T2-weighted images were used to measure the following variables: (1) the distance between the left psoas major muscle and the abdominal aorta; (2) the angle of the surgical access; (3) the distance between the psoas major muscle attachment point and the vertebral body's transverse axis; (4) the region of the psoas major muscle above the vertebrae; and (5) the width-to-thickness ratio. A statistical analysis of the measured parameters was done.

RESULTS

The L2-5 segment in the supine position had a significantly longer window distance in the left convex and left concave groups than in the right lateral recumbent posture (P < 0.05). In all segments, the left concave group outperformed the left convex group, which was substantially higher in the right lateral recumbent posture than in the supine position (P < 0.05). After the position change, the spanning area was significantly higher compared to the same segment in the supine position. The psoas major muscle's morphology was stretched.

CONCLUSIONS

The right lateral recumbent position limits access to OLIF for degenerative lumbar scoliosis, and the "safety window" for OLIF operation in the parietal region is smaller in the left convex group compared to the left concave group, posing a higher risk of intraoperative vascular and neurological injury.

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative disease of the lumbar spine: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis compared the efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. A computer search for the published literature on OLIF and MIS-TLIF for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases in the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and other databases was performed, from which 522 related articles were retrieved and 13 were finally included. Two reviewers independently extracted data from the included studies and analyzed them using RevMan 5.4. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane systematic analysis and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Meta-analysis showed that the blood loss [95% confidence intervals (CI) (- 121.01, - 54.56), [Formula: see text]], hospital stay [95% CI (- 1.98, - 0.85), [Formula: see text]], postoperative fusion rate [95%CI (1.04, 3.60), [Formula: see text]], postoperative disc height [95% CI (0.50, 3.63), [Formula: see text]], and postoperative foraminal height [95% CI (0.96, 4.13), [Formula: see text]] were all better in the OLIF group; however, the complication rates were significantly lower in the MIS-TLIF group [95% CI (1.01, 2.06), [Formula: see text]]. However, there were no significant differences between the two in terms of surgery time, patient satisfaction, or postoperative functional scores. The OLIF group had the advantages of lower blood loss, a shorter hospital stay, a higher postoperative fusion rate, and better recovery of the disc and foraminal heights, whereas MIS-TLIF had a relatively lower complication rate.

Biomechanical evaluation of different sizes of 3D printed cage in lumbar interbody fusion-a finite element analysis

OBJECTIVE

To study the biomechanical characteristics of various tissue structures of different sizes of 3D printed Cage in lumbar interbody fusion.

METHODS

A finite element model of normal spine was reconstructed and verified. Pedicle screws and Cage of different sizes were implanted in the L4/5 segment to simulate lumbar interbody fusion. The range of motion of the fixed and cephalic adjacent segment, the stress of the screw-rod system, the stress at the interface between cage and L5 endplate, and intervertebral disc pressure of the adjacent segment were calculated and analyzed.

RESULTS

The range of motion and intervertebral disc pressure of the adjacent segment of each postoperative model were larger than those of the intact model, but there was not much difference between them. The stress of cage-endplate interface was also larger than that of the intact model. However, the difference is that the stress of the endplate and the screw-rod system has a tendency to decrease with the increase of the axial area of cage.

CONCLUSIONS

Cage with larger axial area in lumbar interbody fusion can reduce the stress of internal fixation system and endplate, but will not increase the range of motion and intervertebral disc pressure of adjacent segment. It has a certain effect in preventing the cage subsidence, internal fixation system failure and screw rod fracture.

Radiological and clinical outcomes of midline lumbar fusion on sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters for degenerative lumbar diseases

BACKGROUND

Improving the sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters after fusion surgery is important for improving clinical outcomes. The impact of midline lumbar fusion (MIDLF) on sagittal lumbar-pelvic alignment for the management of degenerative lumbar diseases is still unknown.

AIM

To analyze the effects of short-segment MIDLF and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) on sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 63 patients with degenerative lumbar diseases who underwent single-segment MIDLF or MIS-TLIF. The imaging data of patients were collected before surgery and at the final follow-up. The radiological sagittal parameters included the lumbar lordosis (LL), lower LL, L4 slope (L4S), L5 slope (L5S), L5 incidence (L5I), L1 axis and S1 distance (LASD), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), and PI-LL mismatch (PI-LL). Additionally, the clinical outcomes, including lower back and leg pain visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores, were also analyzed.

RESULTS

In both groups, LL and Lower LL significantly increased, while L5I and LASD significantly decreased at the final follow-up compared to that recorded prior to operation (P < 0.05). In the MIDLF group, L4S significantly decreased compared to that recorded prior to operation (P < 0.05), while the mean SS significantly increased and the PT significantly decreased compared to that recorded prior to operation (P < 0.05). In the MIS-TLIF group, SS slightly increased and the mean PT value decreased compared to that recorded prior to operation, but without a statistically significant difference (P > 0.05). However, the PI-LL in both groups was significantly reduced compared to that recorded prior to operation (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters between the two groups prior to operation and at the final follow-up (P > 0.05). In addition, the change in sagittal lumbar-pelvic parameters did not differ significantly, except for ΔLASD within the two groups (P > 0.05). The mean lower back and leg pain VAS and ODI scores in both groups were significantly improved three months after surgery and at the final follow-up. Though the mean ODI score in the MIDLF group three months after surgery was slightly higher than that in the MIS-TLIF group, there was no significant difference between the two groups at the final follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Short-segment MIDLF and MIS-TLIF can equally improve sagittal lumbar parameters such as LL, Lower LL, L5I, and LASD in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. However, MIDLF had a larger impact on pelvic parameters than MIS-TLIF.

Anterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery associated with lower risk of stroke, pneumonia, and infection compared to posterior lumbar spinal fusion surgery

BACKGROUND

Prior studies, comparing anterior and posterior approaches to lumbar fusion surgery, found similar fusion rates and clinical outcomes, but are limited by sample size. Further evaluation of the postoperative complications of each approach is necessary.

METHODS

The MSpine database by PearlDiver was queried using ICD-9, ICD-10, and CPT codes to identify patients who had undergone single-level anterior or posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery. Readmission rates, ileus, lower extremity DVT, infection, pneumonia, and stroke were used to compare post-operative complications of an anterior vs. posterior approach.

RESULTS

112,023 patients were included in this study, with 38,529 (34.4%) in the anterior group (ALIF/LLIF) and 73,494 (65.6%) in the posterior group (PLIF/TLIF). At both 30 and 90-days postoperative, patients undergoing an anterior approach to lumbar interbody fusion had a higher odds ratio of lower extremity DVT (30-day OR: 1.19, 90-day OR: 1.16; P<0.05) and ileus complication (30-day OR: 1.87, P= <.05; 90-day OR: 1.81, P<.05). At both 30 and 90-days postoperative, patients undergoing a posterior approach had a higher odds ratio of stroke (30-day: OR: 0.79, 90-day OR: 0.87; P<0.05), transfusion (30-day OR: 0.66, 90-day OR: 0.69; P<.05), infection (30-day OR: 0.88, 90-day OR: 0.91; P <.05), and pneumonia (30-day OR: 0.85, 90-day OR: 0.90; P<.05). There was no statistically significant difference in myocardial infarction or pulmonary embolism between both approaches at 30 and 90-days postoperative.

CONCLUSIONS

Anterior and posterior approaches for lumbar interbody fusion were associated with differences in postoperative complications at 30 and 90-days. The complication profiles associated with each approach can inform surgeon treatment decisions based on patient profiles.

[Research progress of effect of cage height on outcomes of lumbar interbody fusion surgery]

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the effect of cage height on outcomes of lumbar interbody fusion surgery and the importance of the cage height selection.

METHODS

The related literature was widely reviewed to summarize the research progress on the complications caused by inappropriate height of the cage and the methods of selecting cage height.

RESULTS

Inappropriate height of the cage can lead to endplate injury, cage subsidence, internal fixation failure, adjacent segmental degeneration, over-distraction related pain, insufficient indirect decompression, instability of operation segment, poor interbody fusion, poor sequence of spine, and cage displacement. At present, the selection of the cage height is based on the results of the intraoperative model test, which is reliable but high requirements for surgical experience and hard to standardize.

CONCLUSION

The inappropriate height of the cage may have an adverse impact on the postoperative outcome of patients. It is important to develop a selection standard of the cage height by screening the related influential factors.

Diagnosis and treatment of left ureteral injury as a rare complication of oblique lumbar interbody fusion surgery: a case report and literature review

Background

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) surgery has been performed as a minimally invasive lateral lumbar fusion technique in recent years. Reports of operative complications of OLIF are limited, and there are fewer reports of ureteral injuries.

Case presentation

A 62-year-old Chinese woman diagnosed with "lumbar spondylolisthesis (L4 forward slip, I degree)" underwent OLIF treatment. The surgical decompression process was smooth, and the cage was successfully placed. After the expansion sleeve of OLIF was removed, clear liquid continuous outflow from the peritoneum was found. The patient was diagnosed with a ureteral injury. The urological surgeon expanded the original incision, and left ureteral injury anastomosis and ureteral stent implantation were performed. The patient was changed to the prone position and a percutaneous pedicle screw was placed in the corresponding vertebral body. The patient was indwelled with a catheter for 2 weeks, and regular oral administration of levofloxacin to prevent urinary tract infection. After 2 months, the double J tube was removed using a cystoscope. One year after surgery, the symptoms of lumbar back were significantly improved, and there were no urinary system symptoms. However, the patient needed an annual left ureter and kidney B-ultrasound.

Conclusion

Ureteral injury is a rare complication and is easily missed in OLIF surgery. If the diagnosis is missed, the consequences can be serious. Patients should undergo catheterization before the operation and hematuria should be observed during the operation. We emphasize the careful use of surgical instruments to prevent intraoperative complications. In addition, after withdrawing the leaf in the operation, it is necessary to carefully observe whether a clear liquid continues to leak. If ureteral injury is found, one-stage ureteral injury repair operation should be performed to prevent ureteral stricture.

[Treatment of trauma-related vertebral body fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine with orthotic devices : A review]

BACKGROUND

Trauma-related fractures of the thoracic and lumbar spine occur after exposure to high kinetic energy. To assign patients to the correct kind of treatment the AO spine classification is used.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to describe the role of orthotic devices in the treatment of thoracic and lumbar fractures in the nondegenerative spine.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A review of the literature was carried out according to the PRISMA protocol (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) in PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane and Google.Scholar. A total of 118 potentially important publications were found and 16 studies with a prospective study design could be included in this analysis. RoB 2 (Cochrane Risk of Bias tool in the second Version) in the case of randomized studies and the ROBINS‑I (Risk Of Bias In Nonrandomised Studies of Interventions) for nonrandomized studies were used to assess publication quality. The level of evidence was determined according to AHCPR (Agency for Health Care Policy and Research).

RESULTS

In the case of fractures (AO types A0-A3) without degenerative changes in the bone structure of the thoracic and lumbar spine without indications for operative procedure, conservative treatment with analgesia, physiotherapy and early mobilization is recommended and orthotic treatment is not superior. Surgical treatment, even in cases where conservative treatment was possible, led to improved functionality and pain sensation faster but there were no differences in the long-term results. Assessing the neurological functional deficit, the functional success of the treatment and the kyphosis angle were measured in different ways, reducing the extent of comparability. Although mainly a level of evidence Ib-IIa could be assigned, nearly all included studies had a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

In individual cases treatment with an orthotic device could be a helpful add-on in conservative treatment of fractures in the thoracic and lumbar spine. A treatment with orthotic devices alone cannot be recommended in these cases.

Full Endoscopic Posterolateral Transarticular Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Transparent Plastic Working Tubes: Technical Note and Preliminary Clinical Results

Background

A series of full-endoscopic lumbar interbody fusions have been reported, but special fusion cages or operating instruments are often needed, and there are many complications in the operation and the learning curve is long. We have used a single portal endoscopic system for lumbar interbody fusion in a novel posterolateral transarticular approach, which will take advantage of the incision for pedicle screw insertion and avoid nerve root damage by using a transparent plastic working tube. The purpose of this study was to present the surgical technique of full endoscopic posterolateral transarticular lumbar interbody fusion (FE-PTLIF) and to analyze the preliminary clinical results.

Methods

A total of 39 patients (17 men and 22 women; mean age [x̅ ± s] 55.2 ± 12.2 years) have been enrolled in this retrospective study between March 2019 and January 2021 in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University. All patients were treated with full endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion via posterolateral transarticular approach with a transparent plastic working tube. Demographic characteristics, diagnosis, operative time, and estimated blood loss were evaluated. Intraoperative photo and perioperative imaging were recorded. The preoperative and postoperative clinical data were collected for statistical analysis.

Results

The preliminary clinical follow-up data achieved good results. No patients had serious postoperative complications and none of these patients required revision surgery during the perioperative or follow-up period. We compared the visual analogue scale and Oswestry disability index scores before and after surgery. The differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). The mean total blood loss (including drainage blood) was 54.4 ± 20.3 ml. The mean operative time was 130.5 ± 23.8 min. At the last follow-up, the fusion rate of the lumbar intervertebral space was 100%.

Conclusions

This novel posterolateral transarticular approach and transparent plastic working tube can reduce the difficulty of the operation, so that the conventional intervertebral fusion cage [bullet-shaped polyetheretherketone (PEEK) nonexpandable fusion cage] and surgical instruments can be used in the full endoscopic lumbar intervertebral fusion surgery, which can reduce the cost and improve the efficiency of the operation.

Learning Curve and Initial Outcomes of Full-Endoscopic Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Study Design

This was a retrospective cohort study.

Objective

We evaluated the feasibility, safety, and accuracy of full-endoscopic posterior lumbar interbody fusion (FE-PLIF) by assessing the learning curve and initial clinical outcomes.

Summary of Background Data

Low back pain is one of the crucial medical conditions worldwide. FE-PLIF has been reported to be a minimally invasive method to treat mechanical low back pain, but there lacks a thorough evaluation on this new technique.

Methods

The patients were divided into three groups in the order of operating date, implying that Group A consisted of the initial 12 cases, Group B the subsequent 12 cases, and Group C the last 12 cases. The data of patients were reviewed for gender, age, preoperative symptoms, satisfaction, as well as clinical outcomes demonstrated by visual analog scale (VAS). The operative time and intraoperative fluoroscopy were recorded to demonstrate the learning curve and the extent of radiographic exposure. Statistical significance was set at a p &lt; 0.05 (two-sided).

Results

The patients enrolled in this study were followed up at an average of 1.41 ± 0.24 years. Overall, patients were satisfied with the surgery. The average number of intraoperative fluoroscopy was 6.97 ± 0.74. A significant improvement was observed in the VAS of both lumbar pain and leg pain. The overall fusion rate was 77.7%. Complications were reported in two patients in Group A, one in Group B, and none in Group C. The average operative time showed a trend of gradual decline. The learning curve was characterized using a cubic regression analysis as y = –27.07x + 1.42x2–0.24x3 + 521.84 (R2 = 0.617, p = 0.000).

Conclusions

FE-PLIF is an effective and safe method for treating low back pain caused by short-segmental degenerative diseases. The learning curve of this technique is steep at the initial stage but acceptable and shows great potential for improvement.

Longitudinal Trends of Patient Demographics and Morbidity of Different Approaches in Lumbar Interbody Fusion: An Analysis Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to determine the time trend of demographics, complications, and outcomes for patients undergoing posterior lumbar interbody fusion/transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF/TLIF) or anterior lumbar interbody fusion/lateral lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF/LLIF) and to compare the differences in the time trends between both procedures.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for patients undergoing PLIF/TLIF and ALIF/LLIF procedures. Outcomes were analyzed for differences between 2 time periods in the PLIF/TLIF and ALIF/LLIF cohorts separately (2009-2013 and 2015-2019). Longitudinal time trends of the 2 procedures were determined by difference-in-differences (DID) analysis. Statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05.

RESULTS

For both approaches, there was an increase in age and American Society of Anesthesiologists class over time, accompanied by a significant decrease in blood transfusions and morbidity. The DID analysis showed a greater change in age (DID:-1.8%; P < 0.001), and more patients were rated American Society of Anesthesiologists class 3 (DID: -2.4%; P = 0.033) in the ALIF/LLIF cohort than in the PLIF/TLIF cohort. Length of stay declined significantly over time in both cohorts, with a greater reduction observed for patients who underwent ALIF/LLIF than for patients who underwent PLIF/TLIF (DID: 0.2%; P = 0.014). There were no changes in readmission rates over time in either cohort (PLIF/TLIF DID: 0.6%; P = 0.080; ALIF/LLIF DID: -0.2%; P = 0.696).

CONCLUSIONS

Time trends for PLIF/TLIF and ALIF/LIIF showed a significant increase in the number of older patients with complex medical status undergoing surgery. Despite these trends, there were decreases in overall postoperative morbidity, incidence of blood transfusion, and length of stay, without increasing readmission. These results suggest general improvement in surgical and perioperative management of lumbar fusion over time with greater gains found in ALIF/LLIF-specific care than in PLIF/TLIF.

The Effect of Daily Teriparatide versus One-Time Annually Zoledronic Acid Administration After Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Osteoporotic Patients

Purpose

The research aimed to compare the therapeutic effect of teriparatide (TPTD) and zoledronic acid (ZOL) therapy on bone formation and spinal fusion in patients with osteoporosis (OP) who underwent transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

Methods

On the basis of different anti-OP treatment options, the TPTD group was treated daily with TPTD (20 μg. ih. qd) for at least 6 months, while the ZOL group was treated with a single dose of ZOL (5 mg. ivgtt. st) postoperatively. The visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), bone mineral density (BMD), and concentration of bone turnover markers before, 6, and 12 months after surgery were evaluated. X-ray and three-dimensional computed tomography scans were performed at 6 and 12 months postoperatively to assess interbody fusion.

Results

The number of patients in the TPTD and ZOL groups was 29 and 38 patients, respectively. The VAS and ODI scores in both groups were significantly reduced at 6 and 12 months after TLIF. Compared with that of baseline, the lumbar spine BMD of TPTD patients increased significantly from 0.716±0.137 g/cm² to 0.745±0.124 g/cm² and 0.795±0.123 g/cm² at 6 and 12 months, respectively, and was significantly higher than that of the ZOL group at 12 months (0.720±0.128 g/cm²). The bone formation marker, P1NP, in the TPTD group increased significantly (145.48±66.64 ng/mL and 119.55±88.27 ng/mL) compared with baseline (44.67±25.15 ng/mL) and in the ZOL group (28.82±19.76 ng/mL and 29.94±20.67 ng/mL) at 6 and 12 months, respectively. The fusion rates in the TPTD and ZOL groups were 57% and 45% at 6 months, without statistical significance. However, TPTD had a more statistically significant positive influence on fusion rate than ZOL at 12 months (86% vs 70%).

Conclusion

TPTD was more efficient than ZOL in bone formation and spinal fusion in OP patients who underwent TLIF.

How old is too old?: Matched analysis of geriatric patients undergoing anterior lumbar interbody fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Review INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to utilize a national database to identify how age affects patient outcomes following anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). There are no established age guidelines for the geriatric population within the spine specialty, which makes patient selection challenging. Furthermore, there are conflicting studies for the risks of performing spine surgeries in the elderly.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the Mariner Claims Database was conducted on patients who underwent a single level ALIF (CPT 22558) between 2010 and 2018. Patients were separated into three groups by age: 50-64, 65-74, and 75-84 and matched with respect to gender, smoking, and comorbidity burden. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the independent effect of outpatient surgery on the postoperative outcomes after adjusting for demographic factors and pertinent comorbidities. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The study identified 8459 matched patients (3350 50-64; 3350 65-74; and 1759 75-84). Compared with patients aged 50-64, patients aged 65-74 and 75-84 had significantly increased risks of pneumonia (65-74: OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.06-2.24, p = 0.025; 75-84: OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.07-2.42, p = 0.022), sepsis (65-74: OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.36-3.76, p = 0.002; 75-84: OR 2.42, 95% CI 1.43-4.13, p = 0.001), and major complications (65-74: OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.05-1.74, p = 0.021; 75-84: OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11-1.95, p = 0.006) (Table 2). There were no significant differences between patients aged 65-74 and 75-84 for risks of postoperative pneumonia, sepsis, and major complications (p > 0.05). There were no differences between any groups in terms of long-term outcomes such as pseudoarthrosis, implant related complications, or reoperation (p > 0.05) (Table 3).

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

The study showed that those older than 65 had a significant increase in risk of pneumonia, sepsis, and major complications following ALIF. In the two cohorts above the age of 65 (65-74 and 75-84) there was no significant differences in postoperative outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Finite analysis of stability between modified articular fusion technique, posterior lumbar interbody fusion and posteriorlateral lumbar fusion

Background

It is not clear whether modified facet fusion (MFF) is biomechanically different from traditional fusion techniques such as posterior lateral lumbar fusion (PLF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF).

Methods

In this study, a healthy adult Chinese male volunteer was selected to perform 3D reconstruction of CT image data and simulate the successful fusion of L4–5 MFF, PLF and PLIF, respectively. The motion range of L4–5 segments of the model was simulated under 6 working conditions, including forward flexion, extension, lateral flexion and rotation under normal physiological conditions, and the stability of the three fusion procedures in the pathological segments of the lumbar spine was compared.

Results

There was no difference in range of motion between MFF model and PLF or PLIF model (P < 0.05). Also, the stiffness of the PLFand the MFF model were comparable (P > 0.05), but were smaller than the PLIF model (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

MFF provides reliable stability at the lumbar fixation fusion level and does not differ significantly from PLF and PLIF in terms of range of motion.

Computational comparison of three different cage porosities in posterior lumbar interbody fusion with porous cage

Porous interbody cages, manufactured using additive laser melting technology, have recently been used in lumbar fusion surgery. The major advantage of a porous cage is the presence of space inside the cage for bone ingrowth. However, the biomechanical effects of different porosities on the lumbar segment with and without bone fusion (ingrowth) are still unclear. Hence, the present study aimed to compare the biomechanical responses, including the stress and range of motion (ROM) of the lumbar L3-L4 segments with three different types of porous cages along with a posterior instrument (PI) with and without bone fusion using computer simulation. A lumbar L3-L4 segment model with a PI and porous cages was used in this study. Three different porosities, namely 12.5, 41.2, and 80.84% were used. The diameter of the pores of the porous cage was uniformly set to 0.5 mm. In addition, a traditional PEEK cage was used in this study. Two different bone statuses, with and without bone fusion (ingrowth into the pores of the porous cage and the inner space of the PEEK cage), were considered. The results indicated that although the contact pressure on the bone surface reduced, the cage stress increased with increasing cage porosity. Furthermore, cage stress and contact pressure also increased in cases with bone fusion compared with those without bone fusion. The contact pressure on the bone surface with a cage porosity of 80.8% decreased by 40% (from 943.1 to 575.5 MPa), 37.7% (from 133 to 82.9 MPa), 40.4% (from 690.8 to 412 MPa), and 34.2% (from 533 to 351.1 MPa), respectively, for flexion, extension, lateral bending, and rotation, respectively, compared with that with a cage porosity of 12.5%. The rotational ROM of the PEEK cage with bone fusion was clearly larger than those of the porous cages. Porous cages have recently become popular owing to improved manufacturing technology. This study provides scientific data on the strength and weakness of porous cages with different porosities for clinical use.

The Role of miR-34c-5p in Osteogenic Differentiation of Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells

Background and Objectives

Osteogenic differentiation of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs) plays a critical role in the success of lumbar spinal fusion with autogenous bone graft. This study aims to explore the role and specific mechanism of miR-34c-5p in osteogenic differentiation of BMSCs.

Methods and Results

Rabbit model of lumbar fusion was established by surgery. The osteogenic differentiation dataset of mesenchymal stem cells was obtained from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database, and differentially expressed miRNAs were analyzed using R language (limma package). The expressions of miR-34c-5p, miR-199a-5p, miR-324-5p, miR-361-5p, RUNX2, OCN and Bcl-2 were determined by qRT-PCR and Western blot. ELISA, Alizarin red staining and CCK-8 were used to detect the ALP content, calcium deposition and proliferation of BMSCs. The targeted binding sites between miR-34c-5p and Bcl-2 were predicted by the Target database and verified using dual-luciferase reporter assay. MiR-34c-5p expression was higher in rabbit lumbar fusion model and differentiated BMSCs than normal rabbit or BMSCs. The content of ALP and the deposition of calcium increased with the osteogenic differentiation of BMSCs. Upregulation of miR-34c-5p reduced cell proliferation and promoted ALP content, calcium deposition, RUNX2 and OCN expression compared with the control group. The effects of miR-34c-5p inhibitor were the opposite. In addition, miR-34c-5p negatively correlated with Bcl-2. Upregulation of Bcl-2 reversed the effects of miR-34c-5p on ALP content, calcium deposition, and the expressions of RUNX2 and OCN.

Conclusions

miR-34c-5p could promote osteogenic differentiation and suppress proliferation of BMSCs by inhibiting Bcl-2.

Expert Consensus on Clinical Application of Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Results From a Modified Delphi Study

STUDY DESIGN

Modified Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to establish expert consensus on the application of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) by using the modified Delphi study.

METHODS

From June 2019 to March 2020, Members of the Chinese Study Group for Lateral Lumbar Spine Surgery were selected to collect expert feedback using the modified Delphi method where 65 spine surgeons from all over China agreed to participate. Four rounds were performed: 1 face-to-face meeting and 3 subsequent survey rounds. The consensus was achieved with ≥a 70.0% agreement for each question. The recommendation of grade A was defined as ≥90.0% of the agreement for each question. The recommendation of grade B was defined as 80.0-89.9% of the agreement for each question. The recommendation of grade C was defined as 70.0-79.9% of the agreement for each question.

RESULTS

A total of 65 experts formed a panelist group, and the number of questionnaires collected was 63, 59, and 62 in the 3 rounds. In total, 5 sections, 71 questions, and 382 items achieved consensus after the Delphi rounds including summary; preoperative evaluation; application at the lumbar spinal stenosis, lumbar disc herniation, lumbar spondylolisthesis, adult degenerative scoliosis, postoperative adjacent segmental degeneration, and revision surgery; complications; and postoperative follow-up evaluation of LLIF.

CONCLUSION

The modified Delphi method was utilized to ascertain an expert consensus from the Chinese Study Group for Lateral Lumbar Spine Surgery to inform clinical decision-making in the application of LLIF. The salient grade A recommendations of the survey are enumerated.

[Smoking as a risk factor of advanced heterotopic ossification in patients after lumbar total disk arthroplasty]

Smoking is an obvious risk factor of adverse events in early and long-term postoperative period after spine surgery including lumbar total disk arthroplasty. Objective. To study the effect of smoking on clinical and radiological outcomes after lumbar total disk arthroplasty.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A single-center retrospective observational cohort study was performed. We have analyzed medical records of patients who underwent single-level lumbar total disk arthroplasty for degenerative disease.

RESULTS

The study included 57 medical records of respondents. The examined medical records were divided into two groups - smokers (n=26) and non-smokers (n=31). There were no significant between-group differences in clinical outcomes. Incidence of adverse events was similar too. Kaplan-Meier event-free survival was similar in both groups. There were no significant between-group differences in X-ray data. Development of heterotopic ossification after lumbar total disk arthroplasty was more active in smokers.

CONCLUSION

Smoking has no significant effect on clinical and radiological outcomes in patients after single-level after lumbar total disk arthroplasty. On the other hand, smoking significantly increases formation of heterotopic ossification after lumbar total disk arthroplasty.

Technique for Exposing Lumbar Discs in Anterior Approach Using Steinmann Wires: Arthroplasties or Arthrodesis

BACKGROUND

Due to increasing longevity, the incidence of degenerative lumbar disc diseases has increased, and surgical treatment is often necessary. In this context, the anterior approach becomes an important technique. However, one of the main limitations of this method is the need for dedicated retractors, which requires larger incisions for its positioning and increases the cost of the procedure. The objective of the present study was to describe a technique for retracting abdominal structures by anterior approaches to the lumbar spine using Steinmann wires.

METHODS

This manuscript consists of a technique description of anterior approach for lumbar spine.

RESULTS

Surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spine disease is often necessary when the patients have symptoms refractory to conservative treatments. Many of them will be candidates for surgical treatment with anterior approach, either for arthrodesis/anterior lumbar interbody fusion or arthroplasty. Small incisions are performed for positioning the modified Langenbeck retractors and the Steinmann wires. These retractors are easily positioned and provide good exposure of the lumbar discs making it possible to implant appropriate cages for restoring the necessary height, lordosis, and sagittal balance.

CONCLUSIONS

The technique described is safe, inexpensive, and reproducible. Simple and easily accessible instruments are required in most hospital complexes.

A comprehensive review of the treatment and management of Charcot spine

Charcot spine arthropathy (CSA), a result of reduced afferent innervation, is an occurrence of Charcot joint, a progressive, degenerative disorder in vertebral joints, related mostly to spinal cord injury. The repeated microtrauma is a result of a lack of muscle protection and destroys cartilage, ligaments, and disc spaces, leading to vertebrae destruction, joint instability, subluxation, and dislocation. Joint destruction compresses nerve roots, resulting in pain, paresthesia, sensory loss, dysautonomia, and spasticity. CSA presents with back pain, spinal deformity and instability, and audible spine noises during movement. Autonomic dysfunction includes bowel and bladder dysfunction. It is slowly progressive and usually diagnosed at a late stage, usually, on average, 20 years after the first initial insult. Diagnosis is rarely clinical related to the nature of nonspecific symptoms and requires imaging with computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Conservative management focuses on the prevention of fractures and the progression of deformities. This includes bed rest, orthoses, and braces. These could be useful in elderly or frail patients who are not candidates for surgical treatment, or in minimally symptomatic patients, such as patients with spontaneous fusion leading to a stable spine. Symptomatic treatment is offered for autonomic dysfunction, such as anticholinergics for bladder control. Most patients require surgical treatment. Spinal fusion is achieved with open, minimally-open (MOA) or minimally-invasive (MIS) approaches. The gold standard is open circumferential fusion; data is lacking to determine the superiority of open or MIS approaches. Patients usually improve after surgery; however, the rarity of the condition makes it difficult to estimate outcomes. This is a review of the latest and seminal literature about the treatment and chronic management of Charcot spine. The review includes the background of the syndrome, clinical presentation, and diagnosis, and compares the different treatment options that are currently available.

Midline lumbar interbody fusion (MIDLIF) with cortical screws: initial experience and learning curve

BACKGROUND

A variety of surgical techniques can be used to achieve lumbar spinal fusion for management of degenerative conditions. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is the most popular technique; however, midline lumbar interbody fusion (MIDLIF) is a valid alternative to the more traditional pedicle screw trajectory with potential advantages. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical outcomes from a cohort of patients submitted to MIDLIF in a single hospital during the surgical team's initial learning period.

METHODS

The first 30 consecutive patients who underwent single- or two-level MIDLIF surgery for lumbar degenerative disease were included in this retrospective study. Patients' demographics, surgical data, length of hospitalisation, and perioperative complications were analysed. Preoperative and postoperative radiographic parameters were obtained. Validated questionnaires, Core Outcome Measure Index for the back, Euro-QoL 5-Dimensional Questionnaire, and Oswestry Disability Index, were used for clinical assessment.

RESULTS

Mean surgery time was 278.53 ± 82.16 min and mean hospitalisation time was 6.17 ± 3.51 days. Six patients experienced complications, four of which being dural tears with no consequences, and two required reoperations during the mean follow-up of 25.23 ± 9.74 months. Preoperative and postoperative radiological parameters did not demonstrate significant differences. All clinical parameters significantly improved after surgery (p < 0.001). A complexity score was developed to more accurately compare the different procedures, and it strongly correlated with surgery duration (r = 0.719, p < 0.001). Furthermore, a moderate correlation was found between a developed Duration Index and the patient's order number (r = - 0.539, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

In our initial experience, MIDLIF showed to be effective in significantly improving the patients' functional status, pain scores, and quality of life. The technique seems safe, with an acceptably low complication rate. Hence, MIDLIF can be considered as a promising alternative to more traditional TLIF and PLIF techniques even at the beginning of the learning curve.