The effect of interbody fusion cage design on the stability of the instrumented spine in response to cyclic loading: an experimental study

A Comparison of 2 Cage Sizes in Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the fusion and subsidence rate and clinical outcomes when using different-sized static PEEK cages in BE-TLIF.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Biportal endoscopic techniques for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (BE-TLIF) have been shown to have similar clinical and fusion outcomes with faster clinical recovery in comparison to tubular surgery. Subsidence of the interbody, however, could be a complication.

METHODS

Patients who underwent 1 or 2 level BE-TLIF for degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis between January 2019 and January 2022 were included. A 32×10 mm cage (group A) and a 40×15 mm cage (group B) were compared. The visual analog scale (VAS) for back and leg symptoms, and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were collected. Plain radiographs and computed tomography assessed fusion and subsidence at a minimum of 12 months.

RESULTS

Of the 69 enrolled patients, 39 group A patients (51 levels) and 30 group B patients (32 levels) were compared. The operation time per level was 123 ± 15.8 and 138 ± 10.5 minutes per fusion level in groups A and B, respectively (P < 0.05). ODI improved from 64.8 ± 6.2 to 15.7 ± 7.1 in group A and from 65.3 ± 5.6 to 15.1 ± 6.3 in group B at the final follow-up (P < 0.05). VAS leg and back score improvement between the groups did not differ; however, the 3-month postoperative VAS back improvement was significantly higher in group B. The final fusion rate at the final follow-up did not significantly differ; however, the fusion ratio at 1 year was higher in group B (P < 0.05). Subsidence occurred in 5 cases (9.8%) in group A and none in group B (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

BE-TLIF using a larger cage can be performed safely with similar patient-reported outcome measures with a faster fusion rate with less subsidence risk.

LEVEL OF STUDY

III.

Comparison of Outcomes Between Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Patients With Single-Level Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF).

METHODS

This retrospective study included 110 patients with single-level lumbar degenerative disease who underwent Endo-TLIF or MIS-TLIF between January 2019 and December 2021. Patients were divided into Endo-TLIF (n = 55) and MIS-TLIF groups (n = 55). Perioperative, clinical, and radiological outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

The Endo-TLIF group had significantly lower blood loss and shorter hospital stay. However, the operation time was significantly longer and there was more x-ray exposure than in the MIS-TLIF group. There were no significant differences in complications between the groups. The Endo-TLIF group showed significantly lower creatine kinase levels than the MIS-TLIF group at 3 days postoperatively (P < 0.05), but not at 7 days postoperatively (P > 0.05). Oswestry Disability Index and visual analog scale scores were significantly reduced in both groups at different time points postoperation compared to preoperation. The visual analog scale score in the Endo-TLIF group was lower than that in the MIS-TLIF group at 3 days postoperatively. Moreover, no significant differences were found in fusion rates, lumbar lordosis, and lumbar segmental lordosis between the 2 groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Endo-TLIF might be considered as an effective and reliable treatment option for single-level lumbar degeneration. It results in less trauma and faster postoperative recovery, but a longer operative time and more x-ray exposure than MIS-TLIF. Endo-TLIF has effects on clinical and radiological outcomes that are comparable to those of MIS-TLIF.

Influence of Placement of Lumbar Interbody Cage on Subsidence Risk: Biomechanical Study

OBJECTIVE

Lumbar spinal fusion is a common surgical procedure that can be done with a variety of different instrumentation and techniques. Despite numerous research studies investigating subsidence risk factors, the impact of cage placement on subsidence is not fully elucidated. This study aims to determine whether placement of an expandable transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage at the center end plate or at the anterior apophyseal ring affects cage subsidence.

METHODS

A transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage was placed centrally or peripherally between 2 synthetic vertebral models of L3 and L4. A compression plate attached to a 10 KN load cell was used to uniaxially compress the assembly. The ultimate force required for the assembly to fail and subsidence stiffness were analyzed. Computed tomography scans of each L3 and L4 were obtained, and maximum end plate subsidence was measured in the frontal plane.

RESULTS

Anterior apophyseal cage placement resulted in higher stiffness of the vertebrae-cage assembly (Ks, 962.89 N/mm) and a higher subsidence stiffness (Kb,987.21 N/mm) compared with central placement (P < 0.05). Ultimate compressive load of the vertebrae-cage assembly did not increase. Moreover, the maximum subsidence depth did not significantly vary between placements.

CONCLUSIONS

The subsidence stiffness increased with anterior apophyseal cage placement. Periphery end plate cortical bone architecture may play a role in resisting the impact of cage subsidence. To fully understand the effect of cage placement on cage subsidence, future studies should investigate its implications on native and diseased spine.

A comparative analysis of using cage acrossing the vertebral ring apophysis in normal and osteoporotic models under endplate injury: a finite element analysis

Background: Lateral lumbar fusion is an advanced, minimally invasive treatment for degenerative lumbar diseases. It involves different cage designs, primarily varying in size. This study aims to investigate the biomechanics of the long cage spanning the ring apophysis in both normal and osteoporotic models, considering endplate damage, using finite element analysis. Methods: Model 1 was an intact endplate with a long cage spanning the ring apophysis. Model 2 was an endplate decortication with a long cage spanning the ring apophysis. Model 3 was an intact endplate with a short cage. Model 4 was an endplate decortication with a short cage. On the basis of the four original models, further osteoporosis models were created, yielding a total of eight finite element models. The provided passage delineates a study that elucidates the utilization of finite element analysis as a methodology to simulate and analyze the biomechanical repercussions ensuing from the adoption of two distinct types of intervertebral fusion devices (cages) within the physiological framework of a human body. Results: The investigation found no appreciable changes between Models 1 and 2 in the range of motion at the fixed and neighboring segments, the L3-4 IDP, screw-rod stress, endplate stress, or stress on the trabecular bone of the L5. Increases in these stresses were seen in models 3 and 4 in the ranges of 0.4%-676.1%, 252.9%-526.9%, 27.3%-516.6%, and 11.4%-109.3%, respectively. The osteoporotic models for scenarios 3 and 4 exhibit a similar trend to their respective normal bone density models, but these osteoporotic models consistently have higher numerical values. In particular, except for L3-4 IDP, the maximum values of these parameters in osteoporotic Models 3 and 4 were much higher than those in normal bone quality Models 1 and 2, rising by 385.3%, 116%, 435.1%, 758.3%, and 786.1%, respectively. Conclusion: Regardless of endplate injury or osteoporosis, it is advised to utilize a long cage that is 5 mm longer on each side than the bilateral pedicles because it has good biomechanical features and may lower the likelihood of problems after surgery. Additionally, using Long cages in individuals with osteoporosis may help avoid adjacent segment disease.

Fusion's Location and Quality within the Fixated Segment Following Transforaminal Interbody Fusion (TLIF)

Transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) has gained increased popularity over recent decades and is being employed as an established surgical treatment for several lumbar spine pathologies, including degenerative spondylosis, spondylolisthesis, infection, tumor and some cases of recurrent disc herniation. Despite the seemingly acceptable fusion rates after TLIF (up to 94%), the literature is still limited regarding the specific location and quality of fusion inside the fixated segment. In this single-institution, retrospective population-based study, we evaluated all post-operative computed tomography (CT) of patients who underwent TLIF surgery at a medium-sized medical center between 2010 and 2020. All CT studies were performed at a minimum of 1 year following the surgery, with a median of 2 years. Each CT study was evaluated for post-operative fusion, specifically in the posterolateral and intervertebral body areas. The fusion's quality was determined and classified in each area according to Lee's criteria, as follows: (1) definitive fusion: definitive bony trabecular bridging across the graft host interface; (2) probable fusion: no definitive bony trabecular crossing but with no gap at the graft host interface; (3) possible arthrosis: no bony trabecular crossing with identifiable gap at the graft host interface; (4) definite pseudarthrosis: no traversing trabecular bone with definitive gap. A total of 48 patients were included in this study. The median age was 55.6 years (SD ± 15.4). The median time from surgery to post-operative CT was 2 years (range: 1-10). Full definitive fusion in both posterolateral and intervertebral areas was observed in 48% of patients, and 92% showed definitive fusion in at least one area (either posterolateral or intervertebral body area). When comparing the posterolateral and the intervertebral area fusion rates, a significantly higher definitive fusion rate was observed in the posterolateral area as compared to the intervertebral body area in the long term follow-up (92% vs. 52%, p < 0.001). In the multivariable analysis, accounting for several confounding factors, including the number of fixated segments and cage size, the results remained statistically significant (p = 0.048). In conclusion, a significantly higher definitive fusion rate at the posterolateral area compared to the intervertebral body area following TLIF surgery was found. Surgeons are encouraged to employ bone augmentation material in the posterolateral area (as the primary site of fusion) when performing TLIF surgery.

Postoperative cage migration and subsidence following TLIF surgery is not associated with bony fusion

Pseudarthrosis following transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) is not infrequent. Although cage migration and subsidence are commonly regarded as evidence of the absence of solid fusion, there is still no evidence of the influence of cage migration and subsidence on fusion. This study aimed to evaluate cage migration and subsidence using computed tomography (CT) DICOM data following lumbar interbody fusion. The effects of cage migration and subsidence on fusion and clinical outcomes were also assessed. A postoperative CT data set of 67 patients treated with monosegmental TLIF was analyzed in terms of cage position. To assess the effects of cage migration and subsidence on fusion, 12-month postoperative CT scans were used to assess fusion status. Clinical evaluation included the visual analog scale for pain and the Oswestry Disability Index. Postoperative cage migration occurred in 85.1% of all patients, and cage subsidence was observed in 58.2%. Radiological signs of pseudarthrosis was observed in 7.5% of the patients Neither cage migration nor subsidence affected the clinical or radiographic outcomes. No correlation was found between clinical and radiographic outcomes. The incidence of cage migration was considerable. However, as cage migration and subsidence were not associated with bony fusion, their clinical significance was considered limited.

Surgical sequence in anterior column realignment with posterior osteotomy is important for degree of adult spinal deformity correction: advantages and indications for posterior to anterior sequence

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized that posterior osteotomy prior to ACR (Anterior column realignment) through P-A-P surgical sequence would permit a greater correction for deformity corrective surgery than the traditional A-P sequence without posterior osteotomy. This study aimed to determine the impact of the P-A-P sequence on the restoration of lumbar lordosis (LL) compared to the A-P sequence in deformity corrective surgery for adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients and to identify the characteristics of patients who require this sequence.  METHODS: Between 2017 and 2019, 260 ASD patients who had undergone combined corrective surgery were reviewed retrospectively. This study included 178 patients who underwent posterior osteotomy before the ACR (P-A group) and 82 patients who underwent the A-P sequence (A-P group). Sagittal spinopelvic parameters were determined from pre- and postoperative whole-spine radiographs and compared between the groups. To find better indications for the P-A-P sequence, we conducted additional analysis on postoperative outcomes of patients in the A-P group.  RESULTS: The P-A group showed a significantly higher change in LL (53.7° vs. 44.3°, p < 0.001), C7 sagittal vertical axis (C7 SVA: 197.4 mm vs. 146.1 mm, p = 0.021), segmental lordosis (SL) L2/3 (16.2° vs. 14.4°, p = 0.043), SL L3/4 (16.2° vs. 13.8°, p = 0.004), and SL L4/5 (15.1° vs. 11.3°, p = 0.001) compared to the A-P group. At the final follow-up, pelvic incidence (PI) minus LL mismatch (PI - LL mismatch) was significantly higher in the A-P group (13.4° vs. 2.9°, p < 0.001). Stepwise logistic regression analysis showed that age ≥ 75 years (odds ratio [OR] = 2.151; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.414-3.272; p < 0.001), severe osteoporosis (OR = 2.824; 95% CI, 1.481-5.381; p = 0.002), rigid lumbar curve with dynamic changes in LL < 10° (OR = 5.150; 95% CI, 2.296-11.548; p < 0.001), and severe facet joint osteoarthritis (OR = 4.513; 95% CI, 1.958-10.402; p < 0.001) were independent risk factors for PI - LL mismatch ≥ 10° after A-P surgery.

CONCLUSION

P-A-P sequence for deformity corrective surgery in ASD offers greater LL correction than the A-P sequence. Indications for the procedure include patients aged ≥ 75 years, severe osteoporosis, rigid lumbar curve with dynamic change in LL < 10°, or more than four facet joints of Pathria grade 3 in the lumbar region.

Biomechanical comparison of subsidence performance among three modern porous lateral cage designs

BACKGROUND

Cage subsidence remains a major complication after spinal surgery. The goal of this study was to compare the subsidence performance of three modern porous cage designs.

METHODS

Three porous cages were evaluated: a porous titanium cage, a porous polyetheretherketone cage and a truss titanium cage. Mechanical testing was performed for each cage per the American Society for Testing and Materials F2077 and F2267 standards to evaluate cage stiffness and block stiffness, and per a novel clinically relevant dynamic subsidence testing method simulating cyclic spine loading during 3-months postoperatively to evaluate the subsidence displacement.

FINDINGS

The porous polyetheretherketone cage demonstrated the lowest cage stiffness (21.0 ± 1.1 kN/mm), less than half of both titanium cages (truss titanium cage, 49.1 kN/mm; porous titanium cage, 43.6 kN/mm). The block stiffness was greatest for the porous titanium cage (2867.7 ± 105.3 N/mm), followed by the porous polyetheretherketone (2563.4 ± 72.9 N/mm) and truss titanium cages (2213.7 ± 21.8 N/mm). The dynamic subsidence displacement was greatest for the truss titanium cage, which was 1.5 and 2.5 times the subsidence displacement as the porous polyetheretherketone and porous titanium cages respectively.

INTERPRETATIONS

Specific porous cage design plays a crucial role in the cage subsidence performance, to a greater degree than the selection of cage materials. A porous titanium cage with body lattice and microporous endplates significantly outperformed a truss titanium cage with a similar cage stiffness in subsidence performance, and a porous polyetheretherketone cage with half of its stiffness.

Subsidence and fusion performance of a 3D-printed porous interbody cage with stress-optimized body lattice and microporous endplates - a comprehensive mechanical and biological analysis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Cage subsidence remains a serious complication after spinal fusion surgery. Novel porous designs in the cage body or endplate offer attractive options to improve subsidence and osseointegration performance.

PURPOSE

To elucidate the relative contribution of a porous design in each of the two major domains (body and endplates) to cage stiffness and subsidence performance, using standardized mechanical testing methods, and to analyze the fusion progression via an established ovine interbody fusion model to support the mechanical testing findings.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

A comparative preclinical study using standardized mechanical testing and established animal model.

METHODS

To isolate the subsidence performance contributed by each porous cage design feature, namely the stress-optimized body lattice (vs. a solid body) and microporous endplates (vs. smooth endplates), four groups of cages (two-by-two combination of these two features) were tested in: (1) static axial compression of the cage (per ASTM F2077) and (2) static subsidence (per ASTM F2267). To evaluate the progression of fusion, titanium cages were created with a microporous endplate and internal lattice architecture analogous to commercial implants used in subsidence testing and implanted in an endplate-sparing, ovine intervertebral body fusion model.

RESULTS

The cage stiffness was reduced by 16.7% by the porous body lattice, and by 16.6% by the microporous endplates. The porous titanium cage with both porous features showed the lowest stiffness with a value of 40.4±0.3 kN/mm (Mean±SEM) and a block stiffness of 1976.8±27.4 N/mm for subsidence. The body lattice showed no significant impact on the block stiffness (1.4% reduction), while the microporous endplates decreased the block stiffness significantly by 24.9% (p<.0001). All segments implanted with porous titanium cages were deemed rigidly fused by manual palpation, except one at 12 weeks, consistent with robotic ROM testing and radiographic and histologic observations. A reduction in ROM was noted from 12 to 26 weeks (4.1±1.6° to 2.2±1.4° in lateral bending, p<.05; 2.1±0.6° to 1.5±0.3° in axial rotation, p<.05); and 3.3±1.6° to 1.9±1.2° in flexion extension, p=.07). Bone in the available void improved with time in the central aperture (54±35% to 83±13%, p<.05) and porous cage structure (19±26% to 37±21%, p=.15).

CONCLUSIONS

Body lattice and microporous endplates features can effectively reduce the cage stiffness, therefore reducing the risk of stress shielding and promoting early fusion. While body lattice showed no impact on block stiffness and the microporous endplates reduced the block stiffness, a titanium cage with microporous endplates and internal lattice supported bone ingrowth and segmental mechanical stability as early as 12 weeks in ovine interbody fusion.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Porous titanium cage architecture can offer an attractive solution to increase the available space for bone ingrowth and bridging to support successful spinal fusion while mitigating risks of increased subsidence.

Choice of Spinal Interbody Fusion Cage Material and Design Influences Subsidence and Osseointegration Performance

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to quantify the effect of cage material (titanium-alloy vs. polyetheretherketone or PEEK) and design (porous vs. solid) on subsidence and osseointegration.

METHODS

Three lateral cages (solid PEEK, solid titanium, and 3-dimension-printed porous titanium cages) were evaluated for cage stiffness, subsidence compression stiffness, and dynamic subsidence displacement under simulated postoperative spine loading. Dowel-shaped implants made of grit-blasted solid titanium alloy (solid titanium) and porous titanium were fabricated using commercially available processes. Samples were processed for mechanical push-out testing and polymethylmethacrylate histology following an established ovine bone implantation model.

RESULTS

The solid titanium cage exhibited the greatest stiffness (57.1 ± 0.6 kN/mm), followed by the porous titanium cage (40.4 ± 0.3 kN/mm) and the solid PEEK cage (37.1 ± 1.2 kN/mm). In the clinically relevant dynamic subsidence, the porous titanium cage showed the least amount of subsidence displacement (0.195 ± 0.012 mm), significantly less than that of the solid PEEK cage (0.328 ± 0.020 mm) and the solid titanium cage (0.538 ± 0.027 mm). Bony on-growth was noted histologically on all implant materials; however, only the porous titanium supported bony ingrowth with marked quantities of bone formed within the interconnected pores through 12 weeks. Functional differences in osseointegration were noted between groups during push-out testing. The porous titanium showed the highest maximum shear stress at 12 weeks and was the only group that demonstrated significant improvement (4-12 weeks).

CONCLUSIONS

The choice of material and design is critical to cage mechanical and biological performances. A porous titanium cage can reduce subsidence risk and generate biological stability through bone on-growth and ingrowth.

Whether Anterolateral Single Rod Can Maintain the Surgical Outcomes Following Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Double-Segment Disc Disease

Objective

To evaluate the outcomes of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) combined with anterolateral single‐rod screw fixation (AF) in treating two‐segment lumbar degenerative disc disease (LDDD) and to determine whether AF can maintain the surgical results.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on patients who underwent OLIF combined with AF (OLIF‐AF) for LDDD at the L3‐5 levels between October 2017 and May 2018. A total of 84 patients, including 44 males and 40 females, with a mean age of 62.8 ± 6.8 years, who completed the 12‐month follow‐up were eventually enrolled. Clinical outcomes, including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) score for the low back and leg, and radiographic parameters, including the cross‐sectional area (CSA) of the spinal canal, disc height (DH), foraminal height (FH), degree of upper vertebral slippage (DUVS), segmental lumbar lordosis (SL), fusion rate, and lumbar lordosis (LL), were recorded before surgery and 1 and 12 months after surgery. Surgical‐related complications, including cage subsidence (CS), were also evaluated. The local radiographic parameters were compared between L3‐4 and L4‐5. The clinical results and all radiographic parameters were compared between patients with and without CS.

Results

Significant improvements were observed in radiographic parameters 1 day postoperatively (p < 0.05). Local radiological parameters in L4‐5 had a significant decrease at 12 months postoperatively (p < 0.05), while they were well‐maintained at L3‐4 throughout the follow‐up period (p > 0.05). CS was observed in 26 segments (15.5%). Endplate injury was observed in four segments (2.4%). There was no significant difference in the fusion rate between the segments with and without CS (p = 0.355). The clinical results improved significantly after surgery (p < 0.05), and no significant difference was observed between the groups with and without CS (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Anterolateral fixation combined with OLIF provides sufficient stability to sustain most radiological improvements in treating double‐segment LDDD. Subsidence was the most common complication, which was prone to occur in L4‐5 compared to L3‐4, but did not impede the fusion process or diminish the surgical results.

Influence of the geometric and material properties of lumbar endplate on lumbar interbody fusion failure: a systematic review

Background

Lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) is an established surgical intervention for patients with leg and back pain secondary to disc herniation or degeneration. Interbody fusion involves removal of the herniated or degenerated disc and insertion of interbody devices with bone grafts into the remaining cavity. Extensive research has been conducted on operative complications such as a failure of fusion or non-union of the vertebral bodies. Multiple factors including surgical, implant, and patient factors influencing the rate of complications have been identified. Patient factors include age, sex, osteoporosis, and patient anatomy. Complications can also be influenced by the interbody cage design. The geometry of the bony endplates as well as their corresponding material properties guides the design of interbody cages, which vary considerably across patients with spinal disorders. However, studies on the effects of such variations on the rate of complications are limited. Therefore, this study aimed to perform a systematic review of lumbar endplate geometry and material property factors in LIF failure.

Methods

Search keywords included ‘factor/cause for spinal fusion failure/cage subsidence/cage migration/non-union’, ‘lumbar’, and ‘interbody’ in electronic databases PubMed and Scopus with no limits on year of publication.

Results

In total, 1341 articles were reviewed, and 29 articles were deemed suitable for inclusion. Adverse events after LIF, such as cage subsidence, cage migration, and non-union, resulted in fusion failure; hence, risk factors for adverse events after LIF, notably those associated with lumbar endplate geometry and material properties, were also associated with fusion failure. Those risk factors were associated with shape, concavity, bone mineral density and stiffness of endplate, segmental disc angle, and intervertebral disc height.

Conclusions

This review demonstrated that decreased contact areas between the cage and endplate, thin and weak bony endplate as well as spinal diseases such as spondylolisthesis and osteoporosis are important causes of adverse events after LIF. These findings will facilitate the selection and design of LIF cages, including customised implants based on patient endplate properties.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13018-022-03091-8.

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.

Risk factors for intraoperative endplate injury during minimally-invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion

During lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), unintended intraoperative endplate injury (IEPI) can occur and thereafter lead cage subsidence. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of IEPI during LLIF, and its predisposing factors. A retrospective review was conducted on consecutive patients (n = 186; mean age, 70.0 ± 7.6 years) who underwent LLIF at 372 levels. Patient’s demographic and surgical data were compared between patients with and without IEPI. Also, the radiographic data of each level were compared between intact and IEPI segments. IEPI was identified at 76 levels (20.4%) in 65 patients. The incidences of IEPI at every 100 consecutive segments were not different. When 372 segments were analyzed independently, sagittal disc angle (DA) in the extended position (4.3° ± 3.6° at IEPI segments vs. 6.4° ± 4.0° at intact segments), the difference between sagittal DA in the extended position and cage angle (− 2.2° ± 4.0° vs. 0.0° ± 3.9°), and the difference between preoperative disc height and cage height (− 5.4 mm ± 2.4 mm vs. − 4.7 mm ± 2.0 mm) were different significantly. Also, endplate sclerosis was more common at intact segments than IEPI segments (33.2% vs. 17.3%). Multivariate analysis showed that male sex (odds ratio [OR] 0.160; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.036–0.704), endplate sclerosis (OR 3.307; 95% CI 1.450–8.480), and sagittal DA in the extended position (OR 0.674; 95% CI 0.541–0.840) were significant associated factors for IEPI. IEPI was correlated not with surgeon’s experience, but with patient factors, such as sex, preoperative disc angle, and endplate sclerosis. Careful surgical procedures should be employed for patients with these predisposing factors.

Load Sharing and Endplate Pressure Distribution in Anterior Interbody Fusion Influenced by Graft Choice

BACKGROUND

Cage subsidence is a known complication of spinal fusion. Various aspects of cage design have been investigated for their influence on cage subsidence, whereas the potential contribution of graft material to load sharing is often overlooked. We aimed to determine whether graft in the aperture affects endplate pressure distribution.

METHODS

The pressure distributions of a polyetheretherketone interbody cage with 3 different aperture graft conditions were evaluated: empty, demineralized bone matrix, and supercritical CO₂-treated allograft bone crunch (SCCO₂).

RESULTS

Graft materials contributed as much as half the load transmission for SCCO₂, whereas demineralized bone matrix contributed one third. Endplate areas in contact with the cage demonstrated decreased areas within the highest-pressure spectrum with SCCO₂ graft materials compared with empty cages.

CONCLUSIONS

Graft choice plays a role in reducing peak endplate pressures. This finding is relevant to implant subsidence, as well as graft loading and remodeling.

A comparison of experimental compressive axial loading testing with a numerical simulation of topologically optimized cervical implants made by selective laser melting

In recent years, the number of cervical interventions has increased. The stress shielding effect is a serious complication in cervical spine interventions. Topological optimization is based on finite element method structural analysis and numerical simulations. The generated design of cervical implants is made from Ti6Al4V powder by selective laser melting while the optimized cage is numerically tested for compressive axial loading and the results are compared with experimental measurement. Additive manufacturing technologies and new software possibilities in the field of structural analysis, which use the finite element method tools, help to execute implant topological optimization that is useful for clinical practice. The inner structures of the implant would be impossible to make by conventional manufacturing technologies. The resulting implant design, after modification, must fulfill strict application criteria for the area of cervical spine with respect to its material and biomechanical properties. The aim of this work was to alter the mechanical properties of the cervical intervertebral cage to address the clinical concern of the stress shielding effect by topological optimization. A methodology of cervical implant compressive axial loading numerical simulation was created, and subsequent experimental testing was done to obtain real material properties after a selective laser melting process. The weight of the optimized implant was reduced by 28.92 %. Results of the experimental testing and numerical simulation of topologically optimized design showed 10-times lower stiffness compared to the solid cage design, and the real yield strength of the optimized structure is 843.8 MPa based on experimental results.