Clinical effectiveness of reduction and fusion versus in situ fusion in the management of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical effectiveness of reduction and fusion with in situ fusion in the management of patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS).

METHODS

The systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. Relevant studies were identified from PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar. The inclusion criteria were: (1) comparative studies of reduction and fusion versus in situ fusion for DLS patients, (2) outcomes reported as VAS/NRS, ODI, JOA score, operating time, blood loss, complication rate, fusion rate, or reoperation rate, (3) randomized controlled trials and observational studies published in English from the inception of the databases to January 2023. The exclusion criteria included: (1) reviews, case series, case reports, letters, and conference reports, (2) in vitro biomechanical studies and computational modeling studies, (3) no report on study outcomes. The risk of bias 2 (RoB2) tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale was conducted to assess the risk of bias of RCTs and observational studies, respectively.

RESULTS

Five studies with a total of 704 patients were included (375 reduction and fusion, 329 in situ fusion). Operating time was significantly longer in the reduction and fusion group compared to in situ fusion group (weighted mean difference 7.20; 95% confidence interval 0.19, 14.21; P = 0.04). No additional significant intergroup differences were noted in terms of other outcomes analyzed.

CONCLUSION

While the reduction and fusion group demonstrated a statistically longer operating time compared to the in situ fusion group, the clinical significance of this difference was minimal. The findings suggest no substantial superiority of lumbar fusion with reduction over without reduction for the management of DLS.

Risk Factors for 30-day Unplanned Readmission following Surgery for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

Surgical procedures for lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD), which have emerged in the 21-century, are commonly practiced worldwide. Regarding financial burdens and health costs, readmissions within 30days following surgery are inconvenient. We performed a systematic review to integrate real-world evidence and report the current risk factors associated with 30-day readmission following surgery for LDD.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, Embase, and Medline electronic databases were searched from inception to April 2022 to identify relevant studies reporting risk factors for 30-day readmission following surgery for LDD.

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies were included in the review. Potential risk factors were identified in the included studies that reported multivariate analysis results, including age, race, obesity, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score, anemia, bleeding disorder, chronic pulmonary disease, heart failure, dependent status, depression, diabetes, frailty, malnutrition, chronic steroid use, surgeries with anterior approach, multilevel spinal surgeries, perioperative transfusion, presence of postoperative complications, prolonged operative time, and prolonged length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

There are several potential perioperative risk factors associated with unplanned readmission following surgery for LDD. Preoperatively identifying patients that are at increased risk of readmission is critical for achieving the best possible outcomes.

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.

Efficacy and safety of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic surgery (PTES) compared with MIS-TLIF for surgical treatment of lumbar degenerative disease in elderly patients: A retrospective cohort study

Objectives

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of PTES for surgical treatment of lumbar degenerative disease (LDD) including lumbar disc herniation, lateral recess stenosis, intervertebral foraminal stenosis and central spinal canal stenosis in elderly patients compared with MIS-TLIF.

Methods

From November 2016 to December 2018, 84 elderly patients (>70 years old) of single-level LDD with neurologic symptoms underwent the surgical treatment. 45 patients were treated using PTES under local anesthesia in group 1 and 39 patients treated using MIS-TLIF in group 2. Preoperative, postoperative back and leg pain were evaluated using Visual analog scale (VAS) and the results were determined with Oswestry disability index (ODI) at 2-year follow-up. All complications were recorded.

Results

PTES group shows significantly less operation time (55.6 ± 9.7 min vs. 97.2 ± 14.3 min, P < 0.001), less blood loss [11(2-32) ml vs. 70(35-300) ml, P < 0.001], shorter incision length (8.4 ± 1.4 mm vs. 40.6 ± 2.7 mm, P < 0.001), less fluoroscopy frequency [5(5-10) times vs. 7(6-11) times, P < 0.001] and shorter hospital stay[3(2-4) days vs. 7(5-18) days, P < 0.001] than MIS-TLIF group does. Although there was no statistical difference of leg VAS scores between two groups, back VAS scores in PTES group were significantly lower than those in MIS-TLIF group during follow-ups after surgery (P < 0.001). ODI of PTES group was also significantly lower than that of MIS-TLIF group at 2-year follow-up (12.3 ± 3.6% vs. 15.7 ± 4.8%, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Both PTES and MIS-TLIF show favorable clinical outcomes for LDD in elderly patients. Compared with MIS-TLIF, PTES has the advantages including less damage of paraspinal muscle and bone, less blood loss, faster recovery, lower complication rate, which can be performed under local anesthesia.

Best versus worst surgical outcomes after single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis

PURPOSE

Previous studies have shown conflicting results regarding the factors affecting the clinical outcome after fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis. However, no study has compared the best and worst clinical outcome groups using patient-reported outcome measures. We aimed to compare the characteristics of patients with best and worst outcomes following single-level lumbar fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis.

METHODS

200 patients underwent single-level interbody fusion with a minimum 2-years follow-up were included. We excluded patients with surgical complications already-known to be associated with poor postoperative outcomes, including pseudoarthrosis and postoperative infection. According to 2-year postoperative Oswestry disability index scores, patients were divided into two groups; Best and Worst. Demographic, clinical and radiographic variables were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Compared with patients in the Best group, those in the Worst group were older (59.5 and 67.0 years, respectively; p = 0.012; odds ratio [OR], 1.143; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.030-1.269) and had a longer duration of pain from onset (2.6 and 7.2 years, respectively; p = 0.041; OR, 1.021; 95% CI, 1.001-1.041). The cutoff value of pain duration from onset was measured as ≥3.5 years on Receiver operating characteristic analysis. Patients in the Worst group had a lower preoperative angular motion compared to those in the Best group (12.7° and 8.3°, respectively; p = 0.016; OR, 0.816; 95% CI, 0.691-0.963).

CONCLUSIONS

Degenerative spondylolisthesis patients of good clinical outcome after single-level lumbar interbody fusion were relatively young, had a short symptom duration before surgery, and a high preoperative instability compared with the patient having poor postoperative clinical outcome. Therefore, these findings should be considered preoperatively when deciding the appropriate individual treatment plan.

Age as a Predictor for Complications and Patient-reported Outcomes in Multilevel Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusions: Analyses From the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC)

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of a multi-institutional data registry.

OBJECTIVE

The authors sought to determine the association between age and complications & patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in patients undergoing multilevel transforaminal interbody lumbar fusion (MTLIF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Elderly patients undergoing MTLIF are considered high risk. However, data on complications and PRO are lacking. Additionally, safety of multilevel lumbar fusion in the elderly remains uncertain.

METHODS

Patients ≥50-year-old who underwent MTLIF for degenerative lumbar spine conditions were analyzed. Ninety-day complications and PROs (baseline, 90-d, 1-y, 2-y) were queried using the MSSIC database. PROs were measured by back & leg visual analog scale (VAS), Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), and North American Spine Society (NASS) Patient Satisfaction Index. Univariate analyses were used to compare among elderly and complication cohorts. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) was used to identify predictors of complications and PROs.

RESULTS

A total of 3120 patients analyzed with 961 (31%) ≥ 70-y-o and 2159 (69%) between 50-69. A higher proportion of elderly experienced postoperative complications (P = .003) including urinary retention (P = <.001) and urinary tract infection (P = .002). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that age was not independently associated with complications. Number of operative levels was associated with any (P = .001) and minor (P = .002) complication. Incurring a complication was independently associated with worse leg VAS and PROMIS scores (P = <.001). Preoperative independent ambulation was independently associated with improved PROMIS, and EQ5D (P = <.001). Within the elderly, preoperative independent ambulation and lower BMI were associated with improved PROMIS (P = <.001). Complications had no significant effect on PROs in the elderly.

CONCLUSIONS

Age was not associated with complications nor predictive of functional outcomes in patients who underwent MTLIF. Age alone, therefore, may not be an appropriate surrogate for risk. Furthermore, baseline preoperative independent ambulation was associated with better clinical outcomes and should be considered during preoperative surgical counseling.Level of Evidence: 3.

Degenerative cervical myelopathy - update and future directions

Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is the leading cause of spinal cord dysfunction in adults worldwide. DCM encompasses various acquired (age-related) and congenital pathologies related to degeneration of the cervical spinal column, including hypertrophy and/or calcification of the ligaments, intervertebral discs and osseous tissues. These pathologies narrow the spinal canal, leading to chronic spinal cord compression and disability. Owing to the ageing population, rates of DCM are increasing. Expeditious diagnosis and treatment of DCM are needed to avoid permanent disability. Over the past 10 years, advances in basic science and in translational and clinical research have improved our understanding of the pathophysiology of DCM and helped delineate evidence-based practices for diagnosis and treatment. Surgical decompression is recommended for moderate and severe DCM; the best strategy for mild myelopathy remains unclear. Next-generation quantitative microstructural MRI and neurophysiological recordings promise to enable quantification of spinal cord tissue damage and help predict clinical outcomes. Here, we provide a comprehensive, evidence-based review of DCM, including its definition, epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis and differential diagnosis, and non-operative and operative management. With this Review, we aim to equip physicians across broad disciplines with the knowledge necessary to make a timely diagnosis of DCM, recognize the clinical features that influence management and identify when urgent surgical intervention is warranted.