Expandable Versus Static Cages in Minimally Invasive Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Predictors of Subsidence and its Clinical Impact After Expandable Cage Insertion in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of prospectively collected multisurgeon data.

OBJECTIVE

Examine the rate, clinical impact, and predictors of subsidence after expandable minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) cage.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Expandable cage technology has been adopted in MI-TLIF to reduce the risks and optimize outcomes. Although subsidence is of particular concern when using expandable technology as the force required to expand the cage can weaken the endplates, its rates, predictors, and outcomes lack evidence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent 1 or 2-level MI-TLIF using expandable cages for degenerative lumbar conditions and had a follow-up of >1 year were included. Preoperative and immediate, early, and late postoperative radiographs were reviewed. Subsidence was determined if the average anterior/posterior disc height decreased by >25% compared with the immediate postoperative value. Patient-reported outcomes were collected and analyzed for differences at the early (<6 mo) and late (>6 mo) time points. Fusion was assessed by 1-year postoperative computed tomography.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-eight patients were included (mean age, 61 yr, 86% 1-level, 14% 2-level). Twenty-two (14.9%) demonstrated subsidence. Although statistically not significant, patients with subsidence were older, had lower bone mineral density, and had higher body mass index and comorbidity burden. Operative time was significantly higher ( P = 0.02) and implant width was lower ( P < 0.01) for subsided patients. Visual analog scale-leg was significantly lower for subsided patients compared with nonsubsided patients at a >6 months time point. Long-term (>6 mo) patient-acceptable symptom state achievement rate was lower for subsided patients (53% vs . 77%), although statistically not significant ( P = 0.065). No differences existed in complication, reoperation, or fusion rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Of the patients, 14.9% experienced subsidence predicted by narrower implants. Although subsidence did not have a significant impact on most patient-reported outcome measures and complication, reoperation, or fusion rates, patients had lower visual analog scale-leg and patient-acceptable symptom state achievement rates at the >6-month time point.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4.

Comparison of surgical outcomes between lumbar interbody fusions using expandable and static cages: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of static cages for lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) can cause complications such as end plate violation, graft subsidence, and nerve injury. Therefore, expandable cages that allow for in-situ expansion have been developed to overcome these problems. However, it remains uncertain whether expandable cages have better surgical outcomes than static cages do.

PURPOSE

We aimed to determine the effectiveness of expandable cages by analyzing studies that compared the surgical outcomes between the use of expandable cages and static cages.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to conduct this meta-analysis and systematic review. The primary outcomes of this study were anterior disc height, posterior disc height, segmental lordosis (SL), lumbar lordosis (LL), subsidence rate, numeric rating scale (NRS) scores for back and leg pain, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).

RESULTS

Thirteen studies with 1,700 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with static cages for LIFs, expandable cages significantly increased the anterior disc height (standardized mean difference 0.478, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.088-0.867, p=.0162) and segmental lordosis (sMD 0.307, 95% CI 0.159-0.454, p<.0001). There were no significant differences in the posterior disc height, lumbar lordosis, subsidence rate, back pain, leg pain, or ODI between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Expandable cages show no clear clinical benefit over static cages.

Predictors of Postoperative Segmental and Overall Lumbar Lordosis in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Consecutive Case Series

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Case-Series.

OBJECTIVES

Due to heterogeneity in previous studies, the effect of MI-TLIF on postoperative segmental lordosis (SL) and lumbar lordosis (LL) remains unclear. Therefore, we aim to identify radiographic factors associated with lordosis after surgery in a homogenous series of MI-TLIF patients.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective review identified consecutive patients who underwent single-level MI-TLIF for grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis from 2015-2020. All surgeries underwent unilateral facetectomies and a contralateral facet release with expandable interbody cages. PROs included the ODI and NRS-BP for low-back pain. Radiographic measures included SL, disc height, percent spondylolisthesis, cage positioning, LL, PI-LL mismatch, sacral-slope, and pelvic-tilt. Surgeries were considered "lordosing" if the change in postoperative SL was ≥ +4° and "kyphosing" if ≤ -4°. Predictors of change in SL/LL were evaluated using Pearson's correlation and multivariable regression.

RESULTS

A total of 73 patients with an average follow-up of 22.5 (range 12-61) months were included. Patients experienced significant improvements in ODI (29% ± 22% improvement, P < .001) and NRS-BP (3.3 ± 3 point improvement, P < .001). There was a significant increase in mean SL (Δ3.43° ± 4.37°, P < .001) while LL (Δ0.17° ± 6.98°, P > .05) remained stable. Thirty-eight (52%) patients experienced lordosing MI-TLIFs, compared to 4 (5%) kyphosing and 31 (43%) neutral MI-TLIFs. A lower preoperative SL and more anterior cage placement were associated with the greatest improvement in SL (β = -.45° P = .001, β = 15.06° P < .001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In our series, the majority of patients experienced lordosing or neutral MI-TLIFs (n = 69, 95%). Preoperative radiographic alignment and anterior cage placement were significantly associated with target SL following MI-TLIF.

Utility of Expandable Interbody Cages in Open Transforaminal Interbody Fusions: A Comparison With Static Cages

Background Expandable interbody cages, while popular in minimally invasive fusions due to their slim profile and increased ease of insertion, have not been widely explored in open surgery. The benefits of expandable cages may also extend to open fusions through their potential to achieve a greater restoration of lumbar lordosis while minimizing intraoperative complications. To highlight these benefits, we present a case series of adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients treated with an open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) using expandable cages and compare outcomes to those of patients treated with static cages from the literature. Methods A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent a deformity correction procedure and TLIF with expandable interbody cages at Brigham and Women's Hospital between 2018 and 2022 was conducted. Patient demographics, complications, and pre- and postoperative radiographic parameters of spinopelvic alignment were collected. A literature search was completed to identify studies employing static cages. T-tests were performed to compare postoperative changes in radiographic parameters by cage type. Results Forty-five patients (mean age of 62.6 years) with an average of 2.1 cages placed met the inclusion criteria. Patients experienced five intraoperative complications and 23 neurologic deficits (from minor to major), while nine patients required a revision operation. Lumbar lordosis increased by 9.8° ± 14.5° (p < 0.0001), the sagittal vertical axis (SVA) decreased by 25.5 mm ± 56.7 mm (p = 0.0048), and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch decreased by 13.3° ± 17.5° (p < 0.0001) with the use of expandable cages. Expandable cages yielded similar changes in lumbar lordosis to 15° and 8° cages but improved the lumbar lordosis generated from rectangular and 4° cages. When compared to static cages, expandable cages mildly reduced intraoperative complications. Conclusions Expandable interbody cages are an effective means of restoring spinopelvic alignment in ASD that have the potential to improve patient outcomes in open fusions compared to standard static cages. Especially when compared to rectangular and 4° static cages, expandable cages provide a clear benefit in the correction of lumbar lordosis. The impact of open spinal fusions with expandable cages on outcomes should continue to be explored in other cohorts.

Biomechanical and clinical studies on lumbar spine fusion surgery: a review

Low back pain is associated with degenerative disc diseases of the spine. Surgical treatment includes fusion and non-fusion types. The gold standard is fusion surgery, wherein the affected vertebral segment is fused. The common complication of fusion surgery is adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). The ASD often leads to revision surgery, calling for a further fusion of adjacent segments. The existing designs of nonfusion type implants are associated with clinical problems such as subsidence, difficulty in implantation, and the requirement of revision surgeries. Various surgical approaches have been adopted by the surgeons to insert the spinal implants into the affected segment. Over the years, extensive biomechanical investigations have been reported on various surgical approaches and prostheses to predict the outcomes of lumbar spine implantations. Computer models have been proven to be very effective in identifying the best prosthesis and surgical procedure. The objective of the study was to review the literature on biomechanical studies for the treatment of lumbar spinal degenerative diseases. A critical review of the clinical and biomechanical studies on fusion spine surgeries was undertaken. The important modeling parameters, challenges, and limitations of the current studies were identified, showing the future research directions.

An update of interbody cages for spine fusion surgeries: from shape design to materials

INTRODUCTION

Discectomy and interbody fusion are widely used in the treatment of intervertebral disc-related diseases. Among them, the interbody cage plays a significant role. However, the complications related to the interbody cage, such as nonunion or pseudoarthrosis, subsidence, loosening, and prolapse of the cage, cannot be ignored. By changing the design and material of the interbody fusion cage, a better fusion effect can be obtained, the incidence of appeal complications can be reduced, and the quality of life of patients after interbody fusion can be improved.

AREAS COVERED

This study reviewed the research progress of cage design and material and discussed the methods of cage design and material to promote intervertebral fusion.

EXPERT OPINION

Current treatment of cervical and lumbar degenerative disease requires interbody fusion to maintain decompression and to promote fusion and reduce the incidence of fusion failure through improvements in implant material, design, internal structure, and function. However, interbody fusion is not an optimal solution for treating vertebral instability.Abbreviations: ACDF, Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; ALIF, anterior lumbar interbody fusion; Axi-aLIF, axial lumbar interbody fusion; BAK fusion cage, Bagby and Kuslich fusion cage; CADR, cervical artificial disc replacement; DBM, decalcified bone matrix; HA, hydroxyapatite; LLIF/XLIF, lateral or extreme lateral interbody fusion; MIS-TLIF, minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion; OLIF/ATP, oblique lumbar interbody fusion/anterior to psoas; PEEK, Poly-ether-ether-ketone; PLIF, posterior lumbar interbody fusion; ROI-C, Zero-profile Anchored Spacer; ROM, range of motion; SLM, selective melting forming; TLIF, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion or.

Does the application of expandable cages in TLIF provide improved clinical and radiological results compared to static cages? A meta-analysis

Purpose

This study aimed to provide a direct meta-analysis of the evidence comparing outcomes between expandable cages and static cages in patients with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

Methods

A search of relevant materials from databases was performed from inception to March 7, 2022. Clinical and radiological outcomes were included.

Results

Ten studies (1,440 patients) were included. The anterior disc height and foraminal height for expandable cages were substantially higher than those for static cages at the final follow-up (P < 0.0001; P = 0.05). In comparison with static cages, although not statistically significant, expandable cages showed beneficial results, including an increase in posterior disc height and segmental lordosis. There were no statistically significant differences in segmental lordosis, lumbar lordosis, pelvic parameters, cage subsidence, or fusion rates (P > 0.05). Oswestry disability index scores for expandable cages were substantially lower than those for static cages at the final follow-up (P = 0.0007). Interestingly, although the preoperative visual analog scores for back and leg pain were significantly higher in the expandable group than in the static group (P < 0.0001; P = 0.008), there was no significant difference between the static and expandable groups during the final follow-up (P = 0.51; P = 0.85).

Conclusions

Expandable cages are associated with improved functional outcomes and restored postoperative disc and foraminal heights in patients with TLIF. In addition, no statistically significant differences were observed in segmental lordosis, lumbar lordosis, pelvic parameters, cage subsidence, or fusion rate.

Evolution of Complex Spine Surgery in Neurosurgery: From Big to Minimally Invasive Surgery for the Treatment of Spinal Deformity

Spinal instrumentation for adult spinal deformity dates back to the surgical correction of secondary complications from infectious processes, such as Pott's disease and poliomyelitis [1]. With the population aging at a longer life expectancy today, advanced degenerative spinal diseases and idiopathic scoliosis supersede as the most common causes of adult spinal deformity. Correction of the thoracolumbar malignment, specifically, has rapidly evolved with the burgeoning success of spinal instrumentation. The objective of this chapter is to review the metamorphosis of operative principles for adult thoracolumbar deformity, from aggressive osteotomies in the posterior bony elements to minimally invasive surgery (MIS) at the intervertebral disc space.