Long-Term Clinical and Radiologic Outcome Following Surgical Treatment of Lumbar Spondylodiscitis: A Retrospective Bicenter Study

The one-stop-shop approach: Navigating lumbar 360-degree instrumentation in a single position

Objective

Treatment strategies of patients suffering from pyogenic spondylodiscitis are a controverse topic. Percutaneous dorsal instrumentation followed by surgical debridement and fusion of the infectious vertebral disc spaces is a common approach for surgical treatment. Technical advances enable spinal navigation for dorsal and lateral instrumentation. This report investigates combined navigated dorsal and lateral instrumentation in a single surgery and positioning for lumbar spondylodiscitis in a pilot series.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with 1- or 2-level discitis were prospectively enrolled. To enable posterior navigated pedicle screw placement and lateral interbody fusion (LLIF) patients were positioned semi-prone in 45-degree fashion. For spinal referencing, a registration array was attached to the pelvic or spinal process. 3D scans were acquired intraoperatively for registration and implant control.

Results

27 patients suffering from 1- or 2-level spondylodiscitis with a median ASA of 3 (1–4) and a mean BMI of 27.9 ± 4.9 kg/m2 were included. Mean duration of surgery was 146 ± 49 min. Mean blood loss was 367 ± 307 ml. A median of 4 (4–8) pedicle screws were placed for dorsal percutaneous instrumentation with an intraoperative revision rate of 4.0%. LLIF was performed on 31 levels with an intraoperative cage revision rate of 9.7%.

Conclusions

Navigated lumbar dorsal and lateral instrumentation in a single operation and positioning is feasible and safe. It enables rapid 360-degree instrumentation in these critically ill patients and potentially reduces overall intraoperative radiation exposure for patient and staff. Compared to purely dorsal approaches it allows for optimal discectomy and fusion while overall incisions and wound size are minimized. Compared to prone LLIF procedures, semi-prone in 45-degree positioning allows for a steep learning curve due to minor changes of familiar anatomy.

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.