Sagittal spinopelvic alignment after spinal fusion in degenerative lumbar scoliosis: a meta-analysis

Sagittal Alignment in the Degenerative Lumbar Spine: Surgical Planning

➤ Sagittal alignment of the spine has gained attention in the field of spinal deformity surgery for decades. However, emerging data support the importance of restoring segmental lumbar lordosis and lumbar spinal shape according to the pelvic morphology when surgically addressing degenerative lumbar pathologies such as degenerative disc disease and spondylolisthesis.➤ The distribution of caudal lordosis (L4-S1) and cranial lordosis (L1-L4) as a percentage of global lordosis varies by pelvic incidence (PI), with cephalad lordosis increasing its contribution to total lordosis as PI increases.➤ Spinal fusion may lead to iatrogenic deformity if performed without attention to lordosis magnitude and location in the lumbar spine.➤ A solid foundation of knowledge with regard to optimal spinal sagittal alignment is beneficial when performing lumbar spinal surgery, and thoughtful planning and execution of lumbar fusions with a focus on alignment may improve patient outcomes.

Risk Factors of Postoperative Coronal Balance Transition in Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective radiographic study.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the potential risk factors influencing the transition of postoperative coronal balance in degenerative lumbar scoliosis (DLS) patients.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

As time passes after surgery, the spinal sequence of DLS patients may dynamically shift from coronal balance to imbalance, causing clinical symptoms. However, the transition of postoperative coronal balance and its risk factors have not been effectively investigated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We included 156 DLS patients. The cohort was divided into immediate postoperative coronal balance with follow-up balance (N=73) and follow-up imbalance (N=21), immediate postoperative coronal imbalance (CIB) with follow-up balance (N=23), and follow-up imbalance (N=39). Parameters included age, sex, classification of coronal balance, coronal balance distance, fusion of L5 or S1, location of apical vertebra, apical vertebral translation (AVT), Cobb angle of the main curve and lumbar-sacral curve, tilt and direction of L4/5, tilt and direction of upper instrumented vertebra (UIV), and Cobb angle of T1-UIV. Statistical testing was performed using chi-square/Fisher exact test, t tests or nonparametric tests, correlation testing, and stepwise logistic regression.

RESULTS

We identified a significant difference in preoperative AVT, preoperative Cobb angle, and immediate postoperative UIV tilt between patients with and without follow-up balance. Logistic regression analysis demonstrated factors associated with follow-up CIB included preoperative AVT ( P =0.015), preoperative Cobb angle ( P =0.002), and tilt of immediate postoperative UIV ( P =0.018). Factors associated with immediate postoperative CIB in patients with follow-up coronal balance were sex, correction ratio of the main curve, and direction of L4. Logistic regression analysis further identified a correction ratio of main curve ≤0.7 ( P =0.009) as an important predictive factor.

CONCLUSION

Patients with immediate postoperative coronal balance and higher preoperative AVT, preoperative Cobb angle, and tilt of immediate postoperative UIV were more likely to experience follow-up CIB. A correction ratio of the main curve ≤0.7 was an independent predictor of follow-up CIB.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Emerging Technologies within Spine Surgery

New innovations within spine surgery continue to propel the field forward. These technologies improve surgeons' understanding of their patients and allow them to optimize treatment planning both in the operating room and clinic. Additionally, changes in the implants and surgeon practice habits continue to evolve secondary to emerging biomaterials and device design. With ongoing advancements, patients can expect enhanced preoperative decision-making, improved patient outcomes, and better intraoperative execution. Additionally, these changes may decrease many of the most common complications following spine surgery in order to reduce morbidity, mortality, and the need for reoperation. This article reviews some of these technological advancements and how they are projected to impact the field. As the field continues to advance, it is vital that practitioners remain knowledgeable of these changes in order to provide the most effective treatment possible.

Treatment of degenerative lumbar scoliosis using transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion based on the concept of intervertebral correction

PURPOSE

The study aimed to examine the outcomes of posterior approach transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in the treatment of degenerative lumbar scoliosis (DLS) based on the concept of intervertebral correction.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 76 surgical patients (36 males and 40 females) who underwent posterior TLIF and internal fixation based on the concept of intervertebral correction in Shenzhen Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital from February 2014 to March 2021.The operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, incision length, and complications were recorded. Clinical efficacy was evaluated preoperatively and postoperative time points through the visual analog scale (VAS) and the Oswestry disability index (ODI). The changes in the coronal scoliosis curve (Cobb angle), coronal balance distance (CBD), the sagittal vertical axis (SVA), lumbar lordosis (LL), and pelvic tilt angle (PT) were assessed perioperatively at the last follow-up.

RESULTS

All patients successfully underwent the operation. The average operation duration was 243.81 ± 35.35 (220 - 350) min; the average intraoperative blood loss was 836.27 ± 50.28 (700 - 2500) mL; the average incision length was 8.30 ± 2.33 (8 - 15) cm. The total complication rate was 18.42% (14/76). The VAS score of low back pain, lower extremity pain, and ODI score of patients at the last follow-up was significantly improved compared with those before the operation (P < 0.05). At the last follow-up, the Cobb Angle, CBD, SVA, and PT of patients were significantly lower than those before the operation (P < 0.05), and LL was higher than those before the operation (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

TLIF based on the concept of intervertebral correction for the treatment of DLS may provide favourable clinical outcomes.

Lumbar interbody fusion using oblique (OLIF) and lateral (LLIF) approaches for degenerative spine disorders: a meta-analysis of the comparative studies

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

Historically, posterior approaches to the lumbar spine have allowed surgeons to manage degenerative conditions affecting the lumbar spine. However, spinal muscles injury, post-surgical vertebral instability, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage, and failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) represent severe complications that may occur after these surgeries. Lumbar interbody fusion using anterior (ALIF), oblique (OLIF), or lateral (LLIF) approaches may represent valuable surgical alternatives, in case fusion is indicated on single or multiple levels.

METHODS

The present study is a systematic review, conducted according to the PRISMA statement, of comparative studies on OLIF, and LLIF for degenerative spine disorders, and a meta-analysis of their clinical-radiological outcomes and complications.

RESULTS

After screening 1472 papers on PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library, only 3 papers were included in the present study. 318 patients were included for data meta-analysis, 128 in OLIF group, and 190 in LLIF group. There were no significative differences in terms of surgical (intraoperative blood loss and surgical duration) and clinical (VAS-back, VAS-leg, and ODI scores) outcomes, or fusion rates at last follow-up (> 2 years). Significantly higher rates of abdominal complications, system failure, and vascular injuries were recorded in the OLIF group. Conversely, postoperative neurological symptoms and psoas weakness were significatively more common in LLIF group.

CONCLUSIONS

The meta-analysis suggests that OLIF and LLIF are both effective for lumbar degenerative disorders, although each of them presents specific complications and this should represent a relevant element in the surgical planning.

Comparison of endoscopic spine surgery and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar disease: A meta-analysis

This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of endoscopic spinal surgery (ESS) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) for degenerative lumbar disease (DLD) through meta-analysis. The Medline (via PubMed), Cochrane, Scopus, and Embase databases were searched for studies that evaluated the outcomes of ESS and MIS-TLIF in DLD, including visual analog scale (VAS) score for low back pain, VAS score for leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and complications published between January 2000 and August 2020. Two authors extracted the data independently. Any discrepancies were resolved by a consensus. Four comparative studies were identified. No significant differences were found between the ESS and MIS-TLIF groups in terms of VAS score for back pain, VAS score for leg pain, and ODI, except for complication rate. The complication rate was higher in the ESS than in the MIS-TLIF group. A literature review identified four comparative studies reporting the clinical outcomes of ESS and MIS-TLIF for DLD. Despite the heterogeneity, a limited number of meta-analyses showed that the clinical outcomes between the two groups were not significantly different except for complication rate. Hence, further large-scale multicenter studies are required to validate our results.