Cluster analysis to predict factors associated with sufficient indirect decompression immediately after single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion

The Role of Cage Placement Angle in Optimizing Short-Term Clinical Outcomes in Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVE

The purpose is to investigate the impact of cage angle on clinical outcomes and indirect decompression efficacy in patients undergoing lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF).

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on 87 patients with single-level lumbar degenerative disease who underwent LLIF. Patients were grouped based on the angle of cage placement: minimal (0°-5°), mild (>5° ≤ 15°), and severe (>15°). Clinical outcomes assessed included pain intensity, functional improvement, and complication rates. Magnetic resonance imaging evaluations included measurements of canal diameter and central canal area pre- and postoperatively. Patient-reported outcomes were also analyzed using the Japanese Orthopedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire.

RESULTS

Clinical and radiographic outcomes were significantly improved across all cage angle groups. Reductions in low back pain, leg pain, and numbness were significant in all groups, with no significant differences. Magnetic resonance imaging evaluations revealed significant increases in canal diameter and central canal area postoperatively, confirming effective indirect decompression. Japanese Orthopedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire scores showed significant improvements in all domains, including low back pain, lumbar function, walking ability, social life function, and mental health. However, the severe angle group had higher rates of delayed cage subsidence. Complications such as transient motor weakness, thigh pain, numbness, and the need for revision surgery were consistent across groups, with no significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

LLIF effectively treats LDD patients, providing significant short-term clinical and radiographic improvements regardless of cage angle. However, oblique cage placement increases the risk of cage subsidence, requiring careful surgical planning and postoperative following.

Impact of Osteoporosis on Short-Term Surgical Outcomes in Lumbar Degenerative Disease Patients Undergoing Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Analysis

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective study assesses the influence of osteoporosis on the short-term clinical outcomes of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) surgery in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases (LDDs), focusing on complications, pain intensity, and quality of life (QOL) improvements. The primary aim of this study is to investigate the impact of osteoporosis on the short-term clinical outcomes following LLIF surgery in LDD patients, with a particular focus on the incidence of cage subsidence (CS) and overall patient well-being postoperatively.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on 73 patients who underwent LLIF for LDD. Patients were categorized into 2 groups based on osteoporosis status determined by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scans: those with osteoporosis (n = 20) and those without osteoporosis (n = 53). Data collection included demographics, surgical details, complications, magnetic resonance imaging analysis, pain intensity, and QOL (Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire).

RESULTS

The groups had no significant differences regarding operative time, estimated blood loss, and hospital stay duration. However, the incidence of CS was 40% in patients with osteoporosis, compared to 17% in nonosteoporotic patients. Despite this, significant improvements in spinal canal dimensions were observed in both groups. Both groups experienced significant reductions in pain intensity, with notable improvements in functional outcomes assessed by the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire, indicating the overall effectiveness of LLIF in enhancing patient well-being and functionality, irrespective of osteoporosis status.

CONCLUSIONS

Osteoporosis increases the risk of CS in LLIF surgery for LDD patients but does not affect short-term pain relief and QOL improvements.

Short-Term Comparison Between Unilateral Versus Bilateral Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in Short-Level Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion-A Prospective Randomized Study

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES

No prospective studies have directly compared clinical and radiographic outcomes of unilateral vs bilateral instrumented lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) for lumbar degenerative disease (LDD). We compared the short-term radiographic, clinical outcomes, and some complications of the unilateral percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) (UPS) vs bilateral PPS (BPS) fixation in short-level spinal fusion with LLIF for LDD.

METHODS

This was a prospective randomized controlled study of 33 patients who underwent UPS or BPS fixation after LLIF for LDD; 18 patients were assigned to the UPS group and 15 patients to the BPS group. Clinical outcomes, complication rates, and fusion rates were assessed.

RESULTS

The two groups were similar in age, sex, preoperative diagnosis, and level of surgery. Blood loss, length of hospital stay, and numeric rating scale score one year after surgery did not differ between groups. The operative time was longer in the BPS than UPS group (120.2 vs 88.8 min, respectively; P = .029). Both groups showed improvement in disc height and dural sac in the immediate postoperative computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging, which did not differ significantly between groups. The subsidence grade and fusion rate did not differ, but cage subsidence was more severe in the UPS than BPS group.

CONCLUSION

Unilateral and bilateral PPS fixation after LLIF yielded similar short-term clinical and radiological outcomes. However, severe cage subsidence was more common in the UPS group, which suggests that BPS fixation after LLIF may be a better choice over the long term.

The analysis of segmental lordosis restored by oblique lumbar interbody fusion and related factors: building up preoperative predicting model

BACKGROUND

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) procedures have the potential to increase the segmental lordosis by inserting lordotic cages, however, the amount of segmental lordosis (SL) changes can vary and is likely influenced by several factors, such as patient characteristics, radiographic parameters, and surgical techniques. The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of related factors on the amount of SL changes in OLIF procedures and to build up predictive model for SL changes.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study involving prospectively enrolled patients. A total of 119 patients with 174 segments undergoing OLIF procedure were included and analyzed. The lordotic cages used in all cases had 6-degree angle. Radiographic parameters including preoperative and postoperative segmental disc angle (SDA, preSDA and postSDA), SDA changes on flexion-extension views (ΔSDA-FE), CageLocation and CageInclination were measured by two observers. Interobserver reliability of measurements were ensured by analysis of interclass correlation coefficient (ICC > 0.75). Pearson correlation coefficient analysis and multivariate linear regression were employed to identify factors related to SDA changes and to build up predictive model for SDA changes.

RESULTS

The average change of segmental disc angle (ΔSDA, postSDA-preSDA) was 3.9° ± 4.8° (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.1°-4.6°) with preSDA 5.3° ± 5.0°. ΔSDA was 10.8° ± 3.2° with negative preSDA (kyphotic), 5.0° ± 3.7° with preSDA ranging from 0° to 6°, and 1.0° ± 4.1° with preSDA> 6°. Correlation analysis revealed a significant negative correlation between ΔSDA and preSDA (r = - 0.713, P < 0.001), CageLocation (r = - 0.183, P = 0.016) and ΔSDA-FE (r = - 0.153, P = 0.044). In the multivariate linear regression, preSDA and CageLocation were included in the predictive model, resulting in minimal adjusted R2 change (0.017) by including CageLocation. Therefore, the recommended predictive model was ΔSDA = 7.9-0.8 × preSDA with acceptable fit. (adjusted R2 = 0.508, n = 174, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The restoration of segmental lordosis through OLIF largely depends on the preoperative segmental lordosis. The predictive model, which utilized preoperative segmental lordosis, facilitates preoperative planning for corrective surgery using the OLIF procedure.

Clinical significance of redundant nerve roots in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis undergoing oblique lumbar interbody fusion combined with percutaneous internal fixation

BACKGROUND

While there have been previous studies on the surgical efficacy of patients with redundant nerve roots (RNRs), a persistent issue is that some patients continue to experience redundancy even after surgery. Furthermore, the clinical significance of RNRs remains unclear. Notably, there is a lack of research regarding RNRs within the context of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) combined with percutaneous internal fixation. Therefore, the primary objective of this study is to investigate the correlation between RNRs and clinical outcomes following OLIF combined with percutaneous internal fixation.

METHODS

Eighty-seven patients diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) who underwent single-segment OLIF combined with percutaneous internal fixation were categorized into three groups. Group 1 comprised patients with positive RNRs both before and after the operation. Group 2 included patients with positive RNRs preoperatively but negative RNRs postoperatively. Group 3 consisted of patients with consistently negative RNRs before and after the operation. Comprehensive patient data were collected, including operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and any recorded complications. Radiographic parameters, both pre- and post-operative, were assessed, encompassing the number of stenosis segments, disc height (DH), lumbar lordotic angle, dural sac cross-sectional area, and the placement of the fusion cage. Furthermore, the Visual Analogue Scale was applied to gauge back and leg pain, while the Oswestry Disability Index was employed to appraise daily living activities. A comparative analysis was carried out among the three patient groups.

RESULTS

In this study, all 87 LSS patients successfully underwent surgery. Among them, 35 patients (40.2%) showed preoperative MRI assessment indicating positive RNRs. In the postoperative MRI assessment, 14 of these patients maintained positive RNRs status, and they were grouped into Group 1. The remaining 21 patients saw a transition to negative RNRs status and were included in Group 2. Among the 52 patients who had preoperative MRI assessments showing negative RNRs, their postoperative RNRs status remained negative, forming Group 3. All patients received follow-up, which ranged from 8 to 18 months, and no complications occurred during this period. In this study, the postoperative efficacy and parameters such as DH and Dural Sac CSA significantly improved compared to preoperative values for all 87 patients. Patients with preoperative RNRs had more stenosis segments, smaller dural sac CSA, and more severe symptoms. In all three groups, postoperative efficacy scores significantly improved compared to preoperative scores. Group 2 patients had their fusion cages placed more in the middle, while Group 1 patients had their fusion cages more anteriorly located. Group 2 patients exhibited greater recovery in dural sac CSA postoperatively compared to Group 1 patients. Additionally, Group 2 patients had better ODI efficacy scores compared to Group 1 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Irrespective of the presence or absence of RNRs, patients experienced improvement after undergoing OLIF combined with percutaneous internal fixation. Preoperative RNRs appear to be linked to multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis, a reduction in dural sac CSA, and symptom severity. Patients with negative postoperative RNRs demonstrated better treatment efficacy. Furthermore, the placement of the fusion cage appears to have a significant impact on postoperative efficacy and RNRs outcomes.

Comparison of Intraoperative Endplate Injury between Mini-Open Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion (LLIF) and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) and Analysis of Risk Factors: A Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to compare the incidence of intraoperative endplate injury in patients who underwent Transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) and mini-open lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) surgery. The independent risk factors related to endplate injury in LLIF procedure were analyzed.

METHODS

A total of 199 patients who underwent LLIF (n = 106) or TLIF (n = 93) surgery from June 2019 to September 2021 were reviewed. The endplate injury was assessed by postoperative sagittal CT scan. A binary logistic analysis model were used to identify independent risk factors related to LLIF endplate injury based on univariate analysis.

RESULTS

There was an obvious difference in the occurrence of intraoperative endplate injury between LLIF (42/106, 39.6%) and TLIF group (26/93, 28%), although it did not reach the significant level. L1 CT value (OR = 0.985, 95% CI = 0.972-0.998), cage position (OR = 3.881, 95% CI = 1.398-10.771) and height variance (OR = 1.263, 95% CI = 1.013-1.575) were independent risk factors for endplate injury in LLIF procedure. According to the cage settlement patterns, there 5 types of A to E. The severity of the facet joint degeneration was positively related to the occurrence of endplate injury.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of intraoperative endplate injury is higher in LLIF than in TLIF procedures. Low bone quantity, cage posterior position and larger height variance are risk factors to induce endplate injury in LLIF surgery. The facet joint degeneration may be related to severe endplate injuries and even fractures.

Oblique lateral internal fusion combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation in severe lumbar spinal stenosis: clinical and radiographic outcome

BACKGROUND

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) has been a popular technique for treating lumbar degenerative diseases. Previous studies have shown its efficiency in lumbar spinal stenosis; yet, only a few studies have investigated its application to severe lumbar spinal stenosis. Herein, we investigated the clinical and radiographic outcome of OLIF with percutaneous pedicle screws in the treatment of severe lumbar spinal stenosis.

METHODS

A total of 15 patients who underwent OLIF with percutaneous pedicle screws were retrospectively analysed. All patients were diagnosed with severe lumbar stenosis (Schizas grade C or D) through preoperative magnetic resonance image (MRI) and received OLIF combined with percutaneous pedicle screw surgery. Clinical outcomes, including visual analogue scale (VAS)-back and VAS-leg scores, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), as well as mean disc height (DH), mean foraminal height (FH), segmental lumbar lordosis (SLL) and cross-sectional area (CSA) of the spinal canal, were analysed before and after surgery and at the last follow-up. Intraoperative data, complications and fusion rate were also investigated.

RESULTS

OLIF combined with percutaneous pedicle screws was performed on 18 segments in 15 patients. Mean follow-up was 23.1 ± 4.6 months (range 15-29 months). VAS-back, VAS-leg, and ODI scores were significantly improved at the last follow-up. DH increased from 8.86 ± 3.06 mm before surgery to 13.31 ± 2.14 mm after; at the last follow-up, DH was 11.69 ± 1.87 mm. FH increased from 17.85 ± 2.26 mm before surgery to 22.09 ± 1.36 mm after; at the last follow-up, FH was 20.41 ± 0.99 mm. CSA of the spinal canal increased from 30.83 ± 21.15 mm2 before surgery to 74.99 ± 33.65 mm2 after the operation and 81.22 ± 35.53 mm2 at the last follow-up. The segmental LL before surgery, after surgery and at last follow-up was 20.27 ± 6.25 degrees, 20.83 ± 6.52 degrees and 19.75 ± 5.87 degrees, respectively. All patients have gained fusion at the last follow-up.

CONCLUSION

OLIF with percutaneous pedicle screws could achieve satisfactory clinical and radiographic effects through indirect compression by increasing DH, FH and CSA of the spinal canal in severe lumbar stenosis patients.

Assessing Procedural Accuracy in Lateral Spine Surgery: A Retrospective Analysis of Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement with Intraoperative CT Navigation

Percutaneous pedicle screws (PPSs) are commonly used in posterior spinal fusion to treat spine conditions such as trauma, tumors, and degenerative diseases. Precise PPS placement is essential in preventing neurological complications and improving patient outcomes. Recent studies have suggested that intraoperative computed tomography (CT) navigation can reduce the dependence on extensive surgical expertise for achieving accurate PPS placement. However, more comprehensive documentation is needed regarding the procedural accuracy of lateral spine surgery (LSS). In this retrospective study, we investigated patients who underwent posterior instrumentation with PPSs in the thoracic to lumbar spine, utilizing an intraoperative CT navigation system, between April 2019 and September 2023. The system's methodology involved real-time CT-based guidance during PPS placement, ensuring precision. Our study included 170 patients (151 undergoing LLIF procedures and 19 trauma patients), resulting in 836 PPS placements. The overall PPS deviation rate, assessed using the Ravi scale, was 2.5%, with a notably higher incidence of deviations observed in the thoracic spine (7.4%) compared to the lumbar spine (1.9%). Interestingly, we found no statistically significant difference in screw deviation rates between upside and downside PPS placements. Regarding perioperative complications, three patients experienced issues related to intraoperative CT navigation. The observed higher rate of inaccuracies in the thoracic spine suggests that various factors may contribute to these differences in accuracy, including screw size and anatomical variations. Further research is required to refine PPS insertion techniques, particularly in the context of LSS. In conclusion, this retrospective study sheds light on the challenges associated with achieving precise PPS placement in the lateral decubitus position, with a significantly higher deviation rate observed in the thoracic spine compared to the lumbar spine. This study emphasizes the need for ongoing research to improve PPS insertion techniques, leading to enhanced patient outcomes in spine surgery.

Minimally Invasive Approach for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: Lateral Single-Position Surgery with Intraoperative Computed Tomography Navigation and Fluoroscopy: A Technical Note

OBJECTIVE

Degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) is a prevalent condition that leads to low back pain and neurological symptoms. This technical note presents a novel surgical strategy for treating DS using lateral single-position surgery (SPS) in combination with intraoperative computed tomography navigation and fluoroscopy.

METHODS

Fifteen patients (5 males and 10 females, mean age 70.2 years) diagnosed with DS with a slip of 5 mm or more underwent lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) with percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) fixation using this technique. The procedure involved slip reduction using an upside PPS and rod fixation, followed by LLIF performed in the same lateral position. The term "upside PPS" refers to a PPS that is inserted on the ceiling side of the patient's surgical field. Preoperative and postoperative radiographic assessments were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the lateral SPS.

RESULTS

The results demonstrated significant improvements in various parameters, including spondylolisthesis reduction, segmental lordosis, disc height, and spinal canal dimensions. The lateral-SPS procedure exhibited several advantages over traditional flip LLIF approaches for slip reduction. Additionally, the technique provided accurate intraoperative navigation guidance through computed tomography imaging, ensuring precise implant placement and slip reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining LLIF and PPS fixation in a single procedure presents a precise, efficient approach for DS treatment, minimizing repositioning needs. This technique enables effective lumbar reconstruction, restoration of spinal stability, and improved patient outcomes. Although further investigation is warranted, lateral SPS surgery may hold promise as an innovative solution for managing DS by reducing surgical invasiveness and optimizing surgical efficiency.

Oblique lateral interbody fusion combined with unilateral versus bilateral posterior fixation in patients with osteoporosis

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical efficacy of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) combined with unilateral (UPSF) and bilateral pedicle screw internal fixation (BPSF) in patients with osteoporosis.

METHODS

Clinical data of 57 patients who underwent single-segment OLIF surgery with a clear diagnosis of osteoporosis from December 2018 to May 2021 were retrospectively analyzed, of which 27 patients underwent OLIF + UPSF and 30 patients underwent OLIF + BPSF. Surgical technique-related indexes were recorded, including operative time, operative blood loss and postoperative hospital stay; clinical outcome-related indexes included postoperative complications, Visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) at preoperative, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 12 months postoperative follow-up; and imaging outcome-related indexes included the measurement of preoperative and postoperative segmental lordosis (SL), and observation of the degree of cage subsidence and bone graft fusion.

RESULTS

The surgery was successfully performed in 57 patients, and there was no statistical difference in operative blood loss and postoperative hospital stay between UPSF group and BPSF group (P > 0.05). In terms of operative time, there was a significant difference (UPSF group: 92.30 ± 11.03 min, BPSF group: 119.67 ± 16.41, P < 0.05). Postoperative VAS and ODI scores exhibited significant improvement (P < 0.05). At the 12 months postoperative follow-up, the VAS and ODI scores in the BPSF group were significantly better than those in the UPS group (P < 0.05). Compared with the preoperative images, the SL was significantly improved in both groups after surgery (P < 0.05). At 6 months postoperatively, the fusion rate in the UPSF group was significantly lower than that in the BPSF group (P < 0.05). At 1 year postoperatively, the fusion rate in the UPSF group was not significantly different from that in the BPSF group (P > 0.05). At 1 year postoperatively, the rate and degree of cage subsidence was higher in the UPSF group than in the BPSF group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In the long term, OLIF combined with bilateral posterior fixation applied to the osteoporosis patients is superior to OLIF surgery combined with unilateral posterior fixation in terms of clinical and imaging outcomes. It is effective in improving pain relief and functional improvement, accelerating bone graft fusion, and reducing cage subsidence compared with UPSF.

Early Radiological Assessment of Static and Expandable Cages in Lateral Single Position for Indirect Decompression- Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the postoperative alignment of static and expandable cages in lateral single-position (LSP) for indirect decompression in lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF).

METHODS

We included sixty-seven patients who underwent LSP-LLIF for lumbar degenerative disease. We performed radiological assessments preoperatively and two weeks postoperatively using computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. We divided the patients into the expandable cage group (23 patients) and the static cage group (44 patients). We measured disc height (DH), segmental lordosis (SL), and foraminal area (FA) from computed tomography images and the area of the dural sac from magnetic resonance imaging. We recorded surgical outcomes and complications.

RESULTS

Both static and expandable cages demonstrated improvements in DH, SL, FA, and dural sac expansion. However, we found no statistically significant differences in the average change in DH (4.4 ± 2.1 mm vs. 4.2 ± 1.8 mm, P = 0.685), the average change in SL (1.0 ± 4.4° vs. 1.9 ± 3.6°, P = 0.310), or FA change (32.5 ± 31.7 mm2 vs. 34.9 ± 29.5 mm2, P = 0.966) between the expandable and static cage groups. We also found no statistically significant difference in dural sac enlargement between the two groups. We observed no significant differences in operation time, estimated blood loss, or length of hospital stay between the two groups. No severe adverse events or additional surgeries were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

In LSP-LLIF without facet joint resection or other posterior techniques, static and expandable cages showed comparable effectiveness in achieving increased DH, SL, FA, and indirect decompression.

Comprehensive Assessment of Indirect Decompression Through Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Japanese Orthopedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire-Based Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to comprehensively evaluate the clinical outcomes of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) as an indirect decompression technique for degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) and concomitant degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) patients. We utilized the Japanese Orthopedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) to assess treatment success and its impact on patient's quality of life (QOL).

METHODS

We included 124 patients who underwent LLIF. Pre- and postoperative JOABPEQ evaluations indicated treatment success. Subgroup analysis categorized patients' perceptions of surgery as beneficial or non-beneficial.

RESULTS

89% of patients (110/124) reported satisfaction with LLIF. Lateral lumbar interbody fusion achieved successful indirect decompression, increasing canal diameter and central canal area. Significant improvements occurred across all JOABPEQ domains, notably for low back pain, lumbar function, walking ability, social life function, and mental health. Patients who perceived the surgery as beneficial experienced fewer postoperative complications, lower numeric rating scale scores for pain relief, and greater functional outcome improvements compared to non-beneficial patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight the utility of JOABPEQ as a valuable and sensitive tool for assessing treatment effectiveness and patient-reported outcomes in DS and concomitant DLSS patients. Patients undergoing LLIF. The results affirm the favorable outcomes of LLIF as a surgical option for DLSS patients and emphasize the importance of considering patient perspectives when evaluating overall treatment success. The study provides valuable insights into the impact of indirect decompression on patients' QOL, supporting the effectiveness of LLIF as a minimally invasive technique for DLSS and DS management.

Oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) compared with unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a 2-year follow-up study

BACKGROUND

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) has been proven to be an effective method of indirect decompression for the treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis (DLS). However, its superiority over Unilateral biportal endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion (ULIF) has not been reported yet. The current study aimed to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of OLIF and ULIF in patients with DLS.

METHODS

A total of 107 patients were included in this study, divided into two groups according to the surgical methods with 45 patients treated by OLIF combined with anterolateral single screwrod fixation, and 62 patients treated by ULIF. To compare the perioperative parameters (blood loss, operation time, and postop hospitalization) and clinical (the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores of the low back pain and leg pain and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)) and radiological (disk height (DH), lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the spinal canal) results of the two surgical approaches to evaluate their efficacy.

RESULTS

Compared with the ULIF group, the blood loss and operation time in the OLIF-AF group were significantly reduced, and the Postop hospitalization was comparable. The VAS scores in both groups were significantly improved compared to preop; however, the VAS score of low back pain in the OLIF-AF group was superior to that in ULIF group throughout the follow-up period (P < 0.05). The improvements in DH, LL, and Segmental angle were significantly lower in the ULIF group, and the expansion rate of CSA in the OLIF-AF group was superior to that in the ULIF group, but the difference was not statistically significant. The fusion rate in OLIF-AF group was significantly higher than that in ULIF group within 6 mo postop, and there was no significant difference at the last follow-up. The incidence of complications was comparable between the two groups, and there was no statistical difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Both OLIF-AF and ULIF achieved good short-term results in the treatment of DLS, and both surgical approaches are desirable. However, OLIF-AF has advantages over ULIF in terms of postoperative restoration of lumbar sagittal parameters and earlier intervertebral fusion. Long-term follow-up and larger clinical studies are needed to confirm this result.

The Analysis of Preoperative Roussouly Classification on Pain Scores and Radiological Data in Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Patients with Lumbar Degenerative Disease

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE

The type of sagittal profile defined by Roussouly has affected spinal degeneration and surgical outcome. This study aimed to investigate the effect of preoperative Roussouly classification on pain intensity and radiological data of patients with lumbar degenerative disease who underwent indirect decompression with lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF).

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated 102 patients who underwent LLIF without direct decompression. Patients were subdivided into 4 groups according to the Roussouly classification determined from preoperative full-length and lateral spine X-rays, and classified according to Roussouly types I, II, and IV in the nonstandard group and Roussouly type III in the standard group.

RESULTS

The nonstandard group showed improved sagittal vertical axis and lumbar lordosis after LLIF surgery, but the midsagittal canal diameter and axial central canal area of the thecal sac using T2-weighted sagittal and axial magnetic resonance imaging were smaller than those in the standard group. On the other hand, each numeric rating scale score 1 year after surgery improved in all patients. Changes in numeric rating scale scores in low back pain, leg pain, and numbness were not statistically significant between Roussouly classification types.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that the nonstandard group may have less indirect decompression effect from LLIF than the standard group. In the short term, we show for the first time after LLIF surgery that preoperative sagittal spinal alignment and the pelvic position may not significantly impact pain improvement.

[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.

Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disease by Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Patients Under and Over 80 Years of Age

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to compare clinical and radiological results of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) for lumbar degenerative disease in patients under the age of 80 years with those over the age of 80 years.

METHODS

One hundred two patients who underwent LLIF without direct decompression were enrolled, including 92 patients who were less than 80 years (group A) and 10 over 80 years (group B). All patients were evaluated using numerical evaluation scale scores for low back pain, leg pain, and leg numbness, as well as demographic data, surgical data, and imaging data before and after LLIF surgery.

RESULTS

Patients over the age of 80 years were found to have longer hospital stays (P = 0.006) and more postoperative muscle weakness (P = 0.011) and endplate injuries (P = 0.038). In addition, each numerical evaluation scale score improved significantly from preoperative to postoperative (P < 0.001). However, the changes in scores between preoperative and postoperative for each numerical evaluation scale were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Statistically significant increases in lumbar lordosis preoperatively compared with postoperatively were observed in patients under 80 years but did not change in those over 80 years.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest a need for awareness of intraoperative endplate injury and postoperative motor weakness. Critically, indirect decompression with LLIF in lumbar degenerative disease in patients over age 80 as well as those under age 80 has shown satisfactory clinical and radiological results. This study shows that age alone should not prevent older people from undergoing LLIF.

Impact of cage position on biomechanical performance of stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a finite element analysis

Background

This study aimed to compare the biomechanical performance of various cage positions in stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion(SA LLIF).

Methods

An intact finite element model of the L3-L5 was reconstructed. The model was verified and analyzed. Through changing the position of the cage, SA LLIF was established in four directions: anterior placement(AP), middle placement(MP), posterior placement(PP), oblique placement(OP). A 400 N vertical axial pre-load was imposed on the superior surface of L3 and a 10 N/m moment was applied on the L3 superior surface along the radial direction to simulate movements of flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Various biomechanical parameters were evaluated for intact and implanted models in all loading conditions, including the range of motion (ROM) and maximum stress.

Results

In the SA LLIF models, the ROM of L4-5 was reduced by 84.21–89.03% in flexion, 72.64–82.26% in extension, 92.5-95.85% in right and left lateral bending, and 87.22–92.77% in right and left axial rotation, respectively. Meanwhile, ROM of L3-4 was mildly increased by an average of 9.6% in all motion directions. Almost all stress peaks were increased after SA LLIF, including adjacent disc, facet joints, and endplates. MP had lower stress peaks of cage and endplates in most motion modes. In terms of the stress on facet joints and disc of the cephalad segment, MP had the smallest increment.

Conclusion

In our study, SA LLIF risked accelerating the adjacent segment degeneration. The cage position had an influence on the distribution of endplate stress and the magnitude of facet joint stress. Compared with other positions, MP had the slightest effect on the stress in the adjacent facet joints. Meanwhile, MP seems to play an important role in reducing the risk of cage subsidence.

The Effect of Preoperative Neuropathic Pain and Nociceptive Pain on Postoperative Pain Intensity in Patients with the Lumbar Degenerative Disease Following Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to analyze whether the type of preoperative pain affects the improvement in postoperative pain intensity in patients with a lumbar degenerative disease (LDD).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 93 patients who underwent lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) without direct decompression. All patients were evaluated using Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) scores for low back pain (NRS_LBP), leg pain (NRS_LP), and leg numbness (NRS_LN) and imaging data before and after LLIF surgery. Based on the Japanese version of the painDETECT scores, patients were classified into 3 groups: a neuropathic pain (NeP) group, a nociceptive pain (NocP) group, and an intermediate mixed pain group.

RESULTS

The Japanese version of the painDETECT identified NeP in 20.4% of patients with LDD prior to LLIF. Preoperative NRS_LBP, NRS_LP, and NRS_LN scores were higher in the NeP group than those in the NocP group. All types of pain improved after LLIF surgery. The NRS_LBP score 12 months after surgery was higher in the NeP group (3.8 ± 2.8) than that in the NocP group (1.9 ± 2.2) (P = 0.008). Similar results were obtained with NRS_LP (NeP group = 3.1 ± 2.8, NocP group = 1.5 ± 2.0, P = 0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

Although LLIF was useful for relieving all types of preoperative pain in LDD patients, the NRS scores for preoperative pain were higher in the NeP group than those in the NocP group, and the postoperative NRS_LBP and NRS_LP score was significantly higher in the NeP group. Thus, controlling preoperative NeP may improve therapeutic efficacy.

Comparative Study of Cage Subsidence in Single-Level Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion

We investigated the incidence and clinical features of cage subsidence after single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). We studied a retrospective cohort of 59 patients (34 males, 25 females; mean age, 68.9 years) who received single-level LLIF. Patients were classified into subsidence and no-subsidence groups. Cage subsidence was defined as any violation of either endplate, classified using radiographs and computed tomography (CT) images. After one year, we compared patient characteristics, surgical parameters, radiological findings, pain scores, and fusion status. We also compared the Hounsfield unit (HU) endplate value obtained on CT preoperatively. Twenty patients (33.9%) had radiographic evidence of interbody cage subsidence. There were significant differences between the subsidence and no-subsidence groups in sex, cage height, fusion rate, and average HU value of both endplates (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in age, height, weight, or body mass index. Moreover, there were no significant differences in global alignment and Numerical Rating Scale change in low back pain, leg pain, and numbness. Despite suggestions that patients with lower HU values might develop cage subsidence, our results showed that cage subsidence after single-level LLIF was not associated with low back pain, leg pain, or numbness one year post-operation.

Effects of preoperative sagittal spinal imbalance on pain after lateral lumbar interbody fusion

Sagittal misalignment has been associated with negative quality of life (QOL). However, there is no report on whether differences in preoperative sagittal misalignment in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases affect postoperative results after lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). We investigated whether preoperative sagittal alignment influences the correction of alignment after surgery and whether the preoperative sagittal alignment affects the rating of low back pain, leg pain, and leg numbness. The subjects were 81 patients (48 male, 33 females, average age at surgery 70.2 years) who underwent anterior-posterior combined surgery with LLIF and percutaneous pedicle screws from May 2018 to July 2020. Cluster analysis was performed using the preoperative sagittal vertical axis (SVA) value, and patients were classified into two groups (group 1; n = 30, SVA = 129.0 ± 53.4 mm, group 2; n = 51, SVA = 30.8 ± 23.5 mm). Baseline demographics and treatment data were compared between groups. Sagittal and pelvic parameters and pain scores, such as low back pain, leg pain, and leg numbness, were also compared. Operative time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay did not differ significantly between groups. The changes (Δ) in SVA and lumbar lordosis (LL) for all patients from before to after surgery were not significant (ΔSVA; p = 0.218, ΔLL; p = 0.189, respectively). The SVA, LL, and PI - LL changed significantly after the surgery in group 1, but no marked improvement in sagittal imbalance was obtained after LLIF surgery. The improvement in each pain score from before to after the surgery did not differ significantly between groups. LLIF surgery has a limited chance of recovering sagittal imbalance. However, postoperative low back pain, leg pain, and leg numbness may be improved by LLIF surgery, regardless of the preoperative sagittal alignment.

Radiographic and clinical evaluation of single-level lateral interbody fusion in patients with severe stenosis analyzed using cluster analysis

This study was a retrospective review of patients treated in a single institution. We performed a cluster analysis of the degree of preoperative stenosis to investigate the effect of indirect neural decompression in single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). Surgery is generally indicated for patients with severe stenosis. On the other hand, severe lumbar spinal stenosis is a relative contraindication to LLIF and is excluded in most studies. If LLIF, which is less invasive to treatment, can be applied to severe stenosis patients, it may help treatment. Cluster analysis classified 80 patients into 3 groups based on preoperative central canal area (CCA), preoperative canal diameter (CD), and preoperative Schizas grade: group 1 with severe stenosis (n = 43); group 2 with moderate stenosis (n = 27); and group 3 with mild stenosis (n = 10). Preoperative and immediately postoperative CCA and CD in magnetic resonance imaging were compared between groups. Disc angle (DA) and anterior, posterior, and average disc heights (AvDH) (anterior disc height, posterior disc height, average disc height AvDH) were measured using standing lateral plain radiographs. For clinical analysis, a numeric rating scale was used to evaluate clinical outcomes. DA, anterior disc height, posterior disc height, and AvDH increased significantly after the operation in all groups, but the average changes in these factors did not differ. Mean midsagittal CD and axial CCA on MRI magnetic resonance imaging increased significantly in all groups, but as with DA and DH, the changes in axial CCA and midsagittal CD did not differ between groups. The numeric rating scale score did not differ between groups at any time. The cluster analysis results suggested that postoperative changes in indirect neural decompression for severe stenosis after LLIF similar for moderate and mild stenosis and that pain did not differ according to the severity of stenosis after surgery.

Intraoperative computed tomography-guided navigation versus fluoroscopy for single-position surgery after lateral lumbar interbody fusion

There are no reports comparing fluoroscopy and intraoperative computed tomography (CT) navigation in lateral single-position surgery (SPS) in terms of surgical outcomes or implant-related complications. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to use radiological evaluation to compare the incidence of instrument-related complications in SPS of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) using fluoroscopy with that using CT navigation techniques. We evaluated 99 patients who underwent lateral SPS. Twenty-six patients had a percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) inserted under fluoroscopy (SPS-C group), and 73 patients had a PPS inserted under intraoperative CT navigation (SPS-O group). Average operation time was shorter in the SPS-C group than in the SPS-O group (88.4 ± 24.4 min versus 111.9 ± 35.3 min, respectively, P = 0.003). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in postoperative thigh symptoms or reoperation rate. The screw insertion angle of the SPS-C group was smaller than that of the SPS-O group, but there was no significant difference in the rate of screw misplacement (4.6% versus 3.4%, respectively, P = 0.556). By contrast, facet joint violation (FJV) was significantly lower in the SPS-O group than in the SPS-C group (8.4% versus 21.3%, respectively, P < 0.001). While fluoroscopy was superior to intraoperative CT navigation in terms of mean surgery time, there was no significant difference in the accuracy of PPS insertion between fluoroscopy and intraoperative CT navigation. The advantage of intraoperative CT navigation over fluoroscopy is that it significantly decreases the occurrence of FJV in SPS.

Radiographs assessment of changes in the psoas muscle at L4-L5 level after single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion in patients with postoperative motor weakness

The purposes of this study were (1) to investigate postoperative changes in cross-sectional area (CSA) and signal intensity (SI) of the psoas muscle (PS) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and (2) to compare the CSA and SI of the PS between patients with and without motor weakness after single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) at level L4-L5. Sixty patients were divided into two groups-those with postoperative motor weakness and those without-and the two groups were compared. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics, such as operation time and blood loss, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications, were recorded. The CSA and SI of the PS were obtained from the MRI regions of interest defined by manual tracing. Patients who developed motor weakness after surgery were significantly older (p = 0.040). The operation time (p = 0.868), LLIF operative time (p = 0.476), and estimated bleeding loss (p = 0.168) did not differ significantly between groups. In both groups, the CSA and SI of the left and right PS increased after surgery. The change in the CSA of the left PS was significantly higher in patients with weakness (247.6 ± 155.2 mm²) than without weakness (152.2 ± 133.1 mm²) (p = 0.036). The change in SI of the left PS did not differ between the two groups (p = 0.530). To prevent postoperative motor weakness regardless of the operation time, surgeons should be aware of the potential for surgical invasive of the PS during LLIF in older people.