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

Comparing OLIF Combined with Lateral Screw Fixation versus Minimally Invasive TLIF for Treating Single-Level Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

 The present study aimed to compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) combined with lateral screw fixation and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Mis-TLIF) for the treatment of single-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS).

METHODS

 Data regarding clinical and radiologic outcomes for single-level DLS treated using OLIF combined with lateral screw fixation or Mis-TLIF between November 2017 and June 2020 were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

 Seventy-five patients with single-level DLS (≥2 years' follow-up) were included and divided into two groups according to the surgical method used: OLIF (n = 33) and Mis-TLIF (n = 42). Operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay were significantly lower in the OLIF group than that in the Mis-TLIF group. There were no significant differences in preoperative low back pain (LBP), leg pain (LP), visual analog scale (VAS) scores, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) between the two groups, although the OLIF group had significantly lower LBP VAS scores at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. Additionally, the LP VAS score was significantly lower in the Mis-TLIF group than that in the OLIF group at 1 month postoperatively, and the ODI of the OLIF group at 3 months postoperatively was significantly lower than that of the Mis-TLIF group. There was no significant difference in the preoperative and postoperative lumbar lordosis angles between the two groups, whereas the postoperative surgical segmental lordosis angle and disk height (at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months) in the OLIF group were significantly higher than those in the Mis-TLIF group. Additionally, there was no significant difference in complication rates between the two groups (18.2% in the OLIF group vs. 11.9% in the Mis-TLIF group; p = 0.520).

CONCLUSION

 OLIF combined with lateral screw fixation yielded better clinical and radiologic outcomes than Mis-TLIF in patients with single-level DLS.

Improved intervertebral fusion in LLIF rabbit model with a novel titanium cage

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

There is no established small animal approach model for the strict simulation of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) surgery.

PURPOSE

This study aims to establish a reliable LLIF rabbit model that strictly simulates the procedure and to preliminarily evaluate the differences in fusion outcomes with different graft materials.

STUDY DESIGN

A controlled laboratory.

METHODS

Fifty-four 4-month-old white New Zealand female and male rabbits were selected and divided into five groups: Group A (dissection group) consisted of 9 rabbits, Group B (normal approach group) consisted of 9 rabbits, Group C (autogenous iliac bone group) consisted of 12 rabbits, Group D (BMP-2 carrier material group) consisted of 12 rabbits, and Group E (allograft bone group) consisted of 12 rabbits. Based on data from Group A, a novel titanium metal fusion device was designed. Postoperatively, at the 12-week mark, manual palpation was employed to compare the interbody fusion status among Groups B, C, D, and E. Specimens from Groups C, D, and E were subjected to Micro-CT scanning to compare various parameters such as trabecular bone volume (BV), bone volume fraction (BV/TV, BVF), and bone surface area (BS). Furthermore, a tissue histopathological examination was performed to observe the structure and morphology of newly formed bone within the fusion mass as well as the remodeling of the graft in each group.

RESULTS

Based on the measurements obtained from the dissection group, we designed a U-shaped interbody fusion device with dimensions of 10 mm in length, 2.5 mm in width, and 1.3 mm in height. In Group B, 9 cases exhibited intervertebral mobility. In Group C, 1 case showed nonfusion. In Group D, all cases achieved fusion. In Group E, 4 cases did not achieve fusion. Additionally, the Micro-CT results showed that the interbody fusion index scores were 4.64±0.50 in Group C, 4.33±0.65 in Group D, and 3.36±0.81 in Group E. There was no statistically significant difference in fusion index scores between Groups C and D (p=.853). Notably, Groups C and D had higher scores than Group E (p<.001). The trabecular bone volume (BV) in Groups C and D also showed no significant difference but was significantly higher than in Group E (p<.001). Furthermore, the histopathological results revealed that the specimens from Group E had less newly formed cartilage and bone compared to Groups C and D.

CONCLUSIONS

This study successfully established a strict simulation of the clinical LLIF procedure in a rabbit model. Moreso, we conducted a preliminary validation indicating that the BMP-2 carrier material achieved interbody fusion outcomes similar to autogenous iliac bone.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The findings of this investigation from animal models provide a theoretical basis for the clinical use of BMP-2 to promote early spinal fusion in LLIF procedures. Importantly, the study provides a small animal model foundation for research related to LLIF surgery.

Do modic changes affect the fusion rate in spinal interbody fusion surgery? A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the fusion rates of spinal interbody fusion in patients with modic changes (MCs).

METHODS

This meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO, and the project number was CRD42024538023. This network meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA 2020 statement. The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, ClinicalTrials.gov and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to March 28, 2024 for potential studies. STATA 13.0 and Review Manager 5.3 were used to perform the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Seven studies with a total of 1162 patients or segments assigned to four groups according to MCs grade were identified. The fusion rate in the non-modic changes (NMCs) was significantly greater than that in the MCs at the 3-month (p = 0.0001) and 6-month (p = 0.002) follow-ups. No significant difference was detected in the fusion rate at 12-month (p = 0.34) and final follow-ups (p = 0.41). No significant difference was found in cervical fusion (p = 0.88) or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) (p = 0.51). The fusion rate of NMCs was significantly greater than that of MCs in posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) (p < 0.00001). No significant differences were identified among the four groups in the overall comparison, cervical fusion or TLIF subgroups. The fusion rate in the NMCs was significantly greater than that in the MCs-2 and MCs-3 in the PLIF.

CONCLUSION

MCs decreased the fusion rate at the 3- and 6-month follow-ups. MCs-2 and MCs-3 decrease the fusion rate in PLIF.

Comparison of Lumbar Interbody Fusion with 3D-Printed Porous Titanium Cage Versus Polyetheretherketone Cage in Treating Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and radiological effectiveness of lumbar interbody fusion with a 3D-printed porous titanium (3D-PPT) cage versus a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease.

METHODS

This study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023461511). We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases for related studies from inception to September 3, 2023. Review Manager 5.3 was used to conduct this meta-analysis. The reoperation rate, complication rate, fusion rate, and subsidence rate were assessed using relative risk and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Ten articles reporting 9 studies comparing lumbar interbody fusion with 3D-PPT cages versus PEEK cages for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease were included. The subsidence rate at the 1-year follow-up in the 3D-PPT cage was significantly lower than that in the PEEK cage. The fusion rate in the 3D-PPT cage was significantly higher than that in the PEEK cage at the 6-month follow-up. No significant difference was identified between the 2 groups at the 12-month follow-up. No significant difference was identified between the 2 groups in terms of the complication rate and reoperation rate. There was a trend toward a lower complication rate and reoperation rate with the 3D-PPT cage.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the PEEK cage, the 3D-PPT cage may be a safer implant. The 3D-PPT cage was associated with a higher fusion rate and lower subsidence rate. The 3D-PPT cage may accelerate the intervertebral fusion process, improve the quality of fusion and prevent the occurrence of subsidence.

Fusion Assessment of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Demineralized Bone Matrix: A 2-Year Prospective Study

OBJECTIVE

Although several studies have reported successful fusion rates after oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) using allografts or dimerized bone matrix (DBM) instead of autografts, whether OLIF can achieve satisfactory solid fusion without the use of autografts remains unclear. This study investigated the real fusion rates after OLIF using allografts and DBM, which were evaluated using both dynamic radiographs and computed tomography scans.

METHODS

We enrolled 79 consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive OLIF followed by percutaneous pedicle screw fixation. All patients were treated with OLIF between L2 and L5 and underwent radiographic and clinical follow-ups at 12, 18, and 24 months after surgery. Radiographic assessment of fusion was performed using the modified BrantigaSteffee-Fraser (mBSF) scale, which was categorized as follows: grades I (radiographic pseudoarthrosis), II (indeterminate fusion), and III (solid radiographic fusion). Other radiologic and clinical outcomes were evaluated using the following parameters: vertebral slippage distance, disc height, subsidence, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and visual analogue scale (VAS).

RESULTS

Clinical outcomes demonstrated significant improvements in the VAS scores for back pain, leg pain, and ODI after surgery. Subsidence was present in 34 cases (35.4%) at 12 months postoperatively, which increased to 47.9% and reached 50.0% at 1.5 years and 2 years after surgery, respectively. The solid fusion rate after OLIF was 32.3% at 1 year, increased to 58.3% at 1.5 years, and reached 72.9% at 2 years. Radiographic pseudoarthrosis was 24.0% at 1 year, which decreased to 6.3% at 1.5 years and 3.1% at 2 years.

CONCLUSION

OLIF is a safe and effective surgical procedure for the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases. The mBSF scale, which simultaneously evaluates both dynamic angles and bone bridge formation, offers great reliability for the radiological assessment of fusion. Moreover, OLIF using allografts and DBM, which is performed on one or 2 levels at L2-5, can achieve satisfactory fusion rates within 2 years after surgery.