Does Spanning a Lateral Lumbar Interbody Cage Across the Vertebral Ring Apophysis Increase Loads Required for Failure and Mitigate Endplate Violation

Defining cage subsidence in anterior, oblique, and lateral lumbar spine fusion approaches: a systematic review of the literature

One of the most common complications of lumbar fusions is cage subsidence, which leads to collapse of disc height and reappearance of the presenting symptomology. However, definitions of cage subsidence are inconsistent, leading to a variety of subsidence calculation methodologies and thresholds. To review previously published literature on cage subsidence in order to present the most common methods for calculating and defining subsidence in the anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF), and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) approaches. A search was completed in PubMed and Embase with inclusion criteria focused on identifying any study that provided descriptions of the method, imaging modality, or subsidence threshold used to calculate the presence of cage subsidence. A total of 69 articles were included in the final analysis, of which 18 (26.1%) reported on the ALIF approach, 22 (31.9%) on the OLIF approach, and 31 (44.9%) on the LLIF approach, 2 of which reported on more than one approach. ALIF articles most commonly calculated the loss of disc height over time with a subsidence threshold of > 2 mm. Most OLIF articles calculated the total amount of cage migration into the vertebral bodies, with a threshold of > 2 mm. LLIF was the only approach in which most articles applied the same method for calculation, namely, a grading scale for classifying the loss of disc height over time. We recommend future articles adhere to the most common methodologies presented here to ensure accuracy and generalizability in reporting cage subsidence.

Risk Factors for Subsidence Following Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

OBJECTIVE

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) may be complicated by subsidence, which can lead to significant morbidity including pain, disc space collapse, neural compression, segmental kyphosis, instability, and vertebral body fracture. This study sought to identify patient and procedural risk factors for subsidence in patients undergoing ALIF.

METHODS

This study analyzed consecutive patients who underwent ALIF at a single institution with a minimum of 2 years follow-up. Patients were grouped as either Non-Subsidence (NS-ALIF) or Cage Subsidence (CS-ALIF) based on the final postoperative radiograph. Demographic variables, operative characteristics, and radiographic outcomes were evaluated to identify significant predictors on univariate and multivariate statistics.

RESULTS

144 patients (170 levels) were included with an average follow-up of 50.70 ± 28.44 months (4.23 years). The incidence of subsidence was 22.94% (39/170 levels). On univariate statistics, the CS-ALIF group was significantly older (P = .020), had higher BMI (P = .048), worse ASA (P = .001), higher prevalence of comorbid osteoporosis (P < .001), and a more anteriorly placed interbody device (P = .005). On multivariate analysis, anterior cage placement remained the only significant predictor (OR: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.03-1.14; P = .003). There was a significantly higher rate of subsequent adjacent segment surgery among the CS-ALIF group (P = .035).

CONCLUSION

Factors contributing to subsidence in ALIF included older age, higher BMI, severe ASA, and osteoporosis, while anterior cage placement remained the only independent predictor on multivariate analysis. Subsidence was associated with a higher rate of subsequent adjacent segment surgery. Surgical technique should optimize placement of the interbody cage and avoid overstuffing the disc space.

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.

The Role of Hounsfield Unit in Intraoperative Endplate Violation and Delayed Cage Subsidence with Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective clinical case series.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the risk factors for intraoperative endplate violations and delayed cage subsidence after oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) surgery. Secondly, to examine whether low Hounsfield unit (HU) values at different regions of the endplate are associated with intraoperative endplate violation or delayed cage subsidence.

METHODS

61 patients (aged 65.1 ± 9.5 years; 107 segments) who underwent OLIF with or without posterior instrumentation from May 2015 to April 2019 were retrospectively studied. Intraoperative endplate violation was measured on sagittal reconstructed computerized tomography (CT) images immediate postoperatively, while delayed cage subsidence was evaluated using lateral radiographs and defined at 1-month follow-up or later. Demographic information and clinical parameters such as age, body mass index, bone mineral density, number of surgical levels, cage dimension, disc height restoration, visual analogue scale (VAS), and HU at different regions of the endplate were obtained.

RESULTS

Total postoperative cage subsidence was identified in 45 surgical levels (42.0%) in 26 patients (42.6%) up till postoperative 1-year follow-up. Low HU value at the ipsilateral epiphyseal ring was an independent risk factor for intraoperative endplate violation (P = .008) with a cut-off value of 326.21 HUs. Low HU values at the central endplate had a significant correlation with delayed cage subsidence in stand-alone cases (P = .013) with a cut-off value of 296.42 HUs. VAS scores were not different at 1 week postoperatively in cases with or without intraoperative endplate violation (3.12 ± .73 vs 2.89 ± .72, P = .166) and showed no difference at 1 year with or without delayed cage subsidence (1.95 ± .60 vs 2.26 ± .85, P = .173).

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative endplate violation and delayed cage subsidence are not uncommon with OLIF surgery. HUs of the endplate are good predictors for intraoperative endplate violation and cage subsidence since they can represent the regional bone quality of the endplate in contact with the implant. VAS improvements were not affected by intraoperative endplate violation or delayed cage subsidence at 1-year follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Biomechanical properties of lumbar vertebral ring apophysis cage under endplate injury: a finite element analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the biomechanical properties of lumbar interbody fusion involving two types of cages. The study evaluated the effectiveness of the cage spanning the ring apophysis, regardless of the endplate's integrity.

METHODS

A finite element model of the normal spine was established and validated in this study. The validated model was then utilized to simulate Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion (LLIF) with posterior pedicle screw fixation without posterior osteotomy. Two models of interbody fusion cage were placed at the L4/5 level, and the destruction of the bony endplate caused by curetting the cartilaginous endplate during surgery was simulated. Four models were established, including Model 1 with an intact endplate and long cage spanning the ring apophysis, Model 2 with endplate decortication and long cage spanning the ring apophysis, Model 3 with an intact endplate and short cage, and Model 4 with endplate decortication and short cage. Analyzed were the ROM of the fixed and adjacent segments, screw rod system stress, interface stress between cage and L5 endplate, trabecular bone stress on the upper surface of L5, and intervertebral disc pressure (IDP) of adjacent segments.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in ROM and IDP between adjacent segments in each postoperative model. In the short cage model, the range of motion (ROM), contact pressure between the cage and endplate, stress in L5 cancellous bone, and stress in the screw-rod system all exhibited an increase ranging from 0.4% to 79.9%, 252.9% to 526.9%, 27.3% to 133.3%, and 11.4% to 107%, respectively. This trend was further amplified when the endplate was damaged, resulting in a maximum increase of 88.6%, 676.1%, 516.6%, and 109.3%, respectively. Regardless of the integrity of the endplate, the long cage provided greater support strength compared to the short cage.

CONCLUSIONS

Caution should be exercised during endplate preparation and cage placement to maintain the endplate's integrity. Based on preoperative X-ray evaluation, the selection of a cage that exceeds the width of the pedicle by at least 5 mm (ensuring complete coverage of the vertebral ring) has demonstrated remarkable biomechanical performance in lateral lumbar interbody fusion procedures. By opting for such a cage, we expect a reduced occurrence of complications, including cage subsidence, internal fixation system failure, and rod fracture.

The Impact of Cage and End plate-Related Factors on Cage Subsidence in Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVES

To identify cage and end plate factors of cage subsidence (CS) in patients who underwent oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) and their association with patient-reported outcomes.

METHODS

Sixty-one patients (43 women and 18 men), with a total of 69 segments (138 end plates) which underwent OLIF at a single academic institution between November 2018 and November 2020, were included. All the end plates were separated into CS and nonsubsidence groups. Cage-related parameters (cage height, cage width, cage insertion level, and cage position) and end plate-related parameters (position of end plate, Hounsfield unit value of the vertebra, end plate concave angle [ECA], end plate injury, and angular mismatch measured with cage/end plate angle [C/EA]) were compared and analyzed using logistic regression to predict CS. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine the cutoff points of the parameters.

RESULTS

Postoperative CS was identified in 50 of the 138 end plates (36.2%). The CS group had significantly lower mean Hounsfield unit values of the vertebra, higher rate of end plate injury, lower ECA, and higher C/EA than the nonsubsidence group. ECA and C/EA were identified as independent risk factors for developing CS. The optimal cutoff points for ECA and C/EA were 176.9° and 5.4°, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

An ECA greater than 176.9° and a cage/end plate angular mismatch greater than 5.4° were found to be independent risk factors of postoperative CS after the OLIF procedure. These findings aid in preoperative decision-making and intraoperative technical guidance.

Bionate® nucleus disc replacement: bench testing comparing two different designs

BACKGROUND

Intervertebral disc nucleus degeneration initiates a degenerative cascade and can induce chronic low back pain. Nucleus replacement aims to replace the nucleus while the annulus is still intact. Over time, several designs have been introduced, but the definitive solution continues to be elusive. Therefore, we aimed to create a new nucleus replacement that replicates intact intervertebral disc biomechanics, and thus has the potential for clinical applications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two implants with an outer ring and one (D2) with an additional midline strut were compared. Static and fatigue tests were performed with an INSTRON 8874 following the American Society for Testing and Materials F2267-04, F2346-05, 2077-03, D2990-01, and WK4863. Implant stiffness was analyzed at 0-300 N, 500-2000 N, and 2000-6000 N and implant compression at 300 N, 1000 N, 2000 N, and 6000 N. Wear tests were performed following ISO 18192-1:2008 and 18192-2:2010. GNU Octave software was used to calculate movement angles and parameters. The statistical analysis package R was used with the Deducer user interface. Statistically significant differences between the two designs were analyzed with ANOVA, followed by a post hoc analysis.

RESULTS

D1 had better behavior in unconfined compression tests, while D2 showed a "jump." D2 deformed 1 mm more than D1. Sterilized implants were more rigid and deformed less. Both designs showed similar behavior under confined compression and when adding shear. A silicone annulus minimized differences between the designs. Wear under compression fatigue was negligible for D1 but permanent for D2. D1 suffered permanent height deformation but kept its width. D2 suffered less height loss than D1 but underwent a permanent width deformation. Both designs showed excellent responses to compression fatigue with no breaks, cracks, or delamination. At 10 million cycles, D2 showed 3-times higher wear than D1. D1 had better and more homogeneous behavior, and its wear was relatively low. It showed good mechanical endurance under dynamic loading conditions, with excellent response to axial compression fatigue loading without functional failure after long-term testing.

CONCLUSION

D1 performed better than D2. Further studies in cadaveric specimens, and eventually in a clinical setting, are recommended. Level of evidence 2c.

The Influence of Endplate Morphology on Cage Subsidence in Patients With Stand-Alone Oblique Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF)

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study of prospectively collected radiographic and clinical data.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the relationship between endplate morphology parameters and the incidence of cage subsidence in patients with mini-open single-level oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF).

METHODS

We included 119 inpatients who underwent OLIF from February 2015 to December 2017. A total of 119 patients with single treatment level of OLIF were included. Plain anteroposterior and lateral radiograph were taken preoperatively, postoperatively, and during follow-up. The correlation between disc height, endplate concave angle/depth, cage position and cage subsidence were investigated. Functional rating index (Visual Analogue Scale for pain, and Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire) were employed to assess clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Cage subsidence was more commonly seen at the superior endplates (42/119, 35.29%) than at the inferior endplates (6/119, 5.04%) (p < 0.01). More importantly, cage subsidence was significantly less in patients with superior endplates that were without concave angle (3/20, 15%) than with concave angle (37/99, 37.37%) (p < 0.05). Cage subsidence correlated negatively with preoperative anterior disc height (r = -0.21, p < 0.05), but positively with disc distraction rate (r = 0.27, p < 0.01). Lastly, the distance of cage to the anterior edges of the vertebral body showed a positive correlation (r = 0.26, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This study for the first time demonstrated that endplate morphology correlates with cage subsidence after OLIF. Since relatively flat endplates with smaller concave angle significantly diminish the incidence of subsidence, the morphology of cage surface should be taken into consideration when designing the next generation of cage. In addition, precise measurement of the disc height to avoid over-distraction, and more anteriorly placement of the cage is suggested to reduce subsidence.

Effects of the cage height and positioning on clinical and radiographic outcome of lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The proper cage positioning and height in lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). This study evaluated their effects on clinical and radiographic outcome measures in patients undergoing LLIF.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study analyzed the characteristics and perioperative data of patients who underwent LLIF between January 2019 and December 2020. Radiographic (lumbar lordosis [LL], foraminal height, disc height [DH], segmental angle [SA], cross-sectional area [CSA] of thecal sac) and clinical (Oswestry Disability Index and Visual Analog Scale) outcomes were assessed preoperatively, postoperatively, and at the last follow-up. The effects of cage height and positioning on these parameters were also investigated.

RESULTS

With a mean follow-up of 12.8 months, 47 patients with 70 operated level were analyzed. Data demonstrated that postsurgical clinical and radiographic outcome measures were significantly better than before surgery(P < 0.05). Cage height and positioning showed no significant difference with regarding to clinical outcome(P > 0.05). Subgroup analysis of the cage positioning showed that DH and SA were better restored by the final follow-up in patients with anteriorly placed cages than those with posteriorly placed cages (P < 0.05). Cages of posterior position showed significantly upgrading cage subsidence (P = 0.047). Cage height subgroup analysis showed that the preoperative forminal height, DH, and SA in the 11-mm cage group were significantly lower than in the 13-mm cage group; however, these parameters were comparable in the two groups postoperatively and at the final follow-up (P > 0.05). Furthermore, the postoperative and final follow-up degrees of DH, SA, and LL have improved in the 11-mm cage group more than the 13-mm cage group. The preoperative, postoperative, and final follow-up LL values in the 11-mm cage group were lower than in the 13-mm cage group(P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Cage height and positioning did not affect the clinical outcomes in the present study. Cages in anterior position showed better restoration in DH, SA and decreased the incidence of cage subsidence. A comparable radiographic outcome can be achieved by inserting an appropriate cage height based on preoperative radiography.

Vertical split fracture of the vertebral body following oblique lumbar interbody fusion: A case report

RATIONALE

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) is an effective and safe surgical technique widely used for treating spondylolisthesis; however, its use is controversial because of several associated complications, including endplate injury. We report a rare vertebral body fracture following OLIF in a patient with poor bone quality.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 72-year-old male patient visited our clinic for 2 years with lower back pain, leg radiating pain, and intermittent neurogenic claudication.

DIAGNOSES

Lumbar magnetic resonance imaging revealed L4-5 stenosis.

INTERVENTION

We performed OLIF with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation and L4 subtotal decompressive laminectomy. We resected the anterior longitudinal ligament partially for anterior column release and inserted a huge cage to maximize segmental lordosis. No complications during and after the operation were observed. Further, the radiating pain and back pain improved, and the patient was discharged. Two weeks after the operation, the patient visited the outpatient department complaining of sudden recurred pain, which occurred while going to the bathroom. Radiography and computed tomography revealed a split fracture of the L5 body and an anterior cage displacement. In revision of OLIF, we removed the dislocated cage and filled the bone cement between the anterior longitudinal ligament and empty disc space. Further, we performed posterior lumbar interbody fusion L4-5, and the screw was extended to S1.

OUTCOMES

After the second surgery, back pain and radiating pain in the left leg improved, and he was discharged without complications.

LESSON

In this case, owing to insufficient intervertebral space during L4-5 OLIF, a huge cage was used to achieve sufficient segmental lordosis after anterior column release, but a vertebral body coronal fracture occurred. In patients with poor bone quality and less flexibility, a huge cage and over-distraction could cause a vertebral fracture; hence, selecting an appropriate cage or considering a posterior approach is recommended.

Incidence and risk factors of lateral cage migration occurred after the first-stage lateral lumbar interbody fusion surgery

BACKGROUND

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is a novel, minimally invasive technique for the surgical treatment of lumbar diseases. The aim of this study was to identify the incidence and risk factors of lateral cage migration (LCM) occurred after the first-stage LLIF.

HYPOTHESIS

The hypothesis was that LCM occurred after the first-stage LLIF was associated with some demographic characteristics, surgical variables and radiographic parameters.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between June 2016 and August 2020, 335 patients (901 levels) underwent staged LLIF were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were classified into LCM and non-LCM group based on the experience of LCM before the second-stage posterior instrumentation. 100 patients in non-LCM were randomly sampled as a control group. Incidence of LCM was determined; demographic characteristics, surgical variables and radiographic parameters associated with LCM were compared between the LCM and control group. Univariate analyses and multivariable logistic regression analysis were used to identify the risk factors.

RESULTS

LCM occurred after the first-stage LLIF was found in 19 (5.7%) patients. Bony endplate injury (OR, 106.255; 95% CI, 1.265-8924.765; p=0.039) and greater preoperative range of motion (ROM) (OR, 2.083, 95% CI, 1.068-4.066, p=0.031) were high risk factors for LCM. LCM occurred mainly 3 days later after the first-stage LLIF, while 4 cases experienced severe neural symptoms, intolerable low back pain and finally underwent reoperation.

DISCUSSION

LCM occurred after the first-stage LLIF was significantly associated with bony endplate injury and greater preoperative ROM. Second-stage posterior fixation should be performed as soon as possible or a supplement lateral fixation/self-locking cage should be used in high-risk patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Regional distribution of computed tomography attenuation across the lumbar endplate

The vertebral endplate forms a structural boundary between intervertebral disc and the trabecular bone of the vertebral body. As a mechanical interface between the stiff bone and resilient disc, the endplate is the weakest portion of the vertebral-disc complex and is predisposed to mechanical failure. However, the literature concerning the bone mineral density (BMD) distribution within the spinal endplate is comparatively sparse. The objective of this study is to investigate the three-dimensional (3D) distribution of computed tomography (CT) attenuation across the lumbosacral endplate measured in Hounsfield Units (HU). A total of 308 endplates from 28 cadaveric fresh-frozen lumbosacral spines were used in this study. Each spine was CT-scanned and the resulting DICOM data was used to obtain HU values of the bone endplate. Each individual endplate surface was subdivided into five clinically-relevant topographic zones. Attenuation was analyzed by spinal levels, sites (superior or inferior endplate) and endplate region. The highest HU values were found at the S1 endplate. Comparisons between the superior and inferior endplates showed the HU values in inferior endplates were significantly higher than those in the superior endplates within the same vertebra and the HU values in endplates cranial to the disc were significantly higher than those in the endplates caudal to the disc within the same disc. Attenuation in the peripheral region was significantly higher than in the central region by 32.5%. Regional comparison within the peripheral region showed the HU values in the posterior region were significantly higher than those in the anterior region and the HU values in the left region were significantly higher than those in the right region. This study provided detailed data on the regional HU distribution across the lumbosacral endplate, which can be useful to understand causes of some endplate lesions, such as fracture, and also to design interbody instrumentation.

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.

Do the positioning variables of the cage contribute to adjacent facet joint degeneration? Radiological and clinical analysis following intervertebral fusion

Background

Compared to other risk factors, adjacent facet joint degeneration (AFD) is the main contributor to adjacent segment disease (ASD). The interbody cage may be a potential indirect risk of AFD. This study investigated the correlations among the lumbar sagittal balance parameters, the inter-body cage's intraoperative positioning variables, and adjacent facet joint degeneration following the transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) technique.

Methods

Patients who accepted single-level TLIF for symptomatic lumbar degenerative disease and were followed up for at least six months were enrolled in this study. According to the inclusive and exclusive criteria, 93 patients were included (44 males and 49 females). X-ray and computed tomography (CT) images were obtained before and six months after surgery. The vertebral contour and the center of the marker mass in the cage were calculated using a geometric algorithm. Orthopedic surgeons measured the disc height, lordosis angle, and facet joint degeneration. Patient-reported outcomes, including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the visual analog scale (VAS), were used to assess the clinical outcomes. The Student’s t-test, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and Chi-square test were used for the statistical analyses.

Results

The average age was 53.7 years old (range, 27–84 years). The average functional disability outcome assessed by the ODI was 61.2, and the average back and leg pain assessed by the VAS was 6.2 and 6.9, respectively. The patients were categorized into a normal group and an abnormal (AFD) group according to whether the facet joint degeneration was aggravated. The abnormal group had a higher back pain VAS score (P=0.031) and lower sagittal vertical position (P=0.027). The other parameters were similar at baseline (P>0.05). The cage’s sagittal vertical position decreased significantly with AFD aggravation (OR, 0.737; 95% CI, 0.561–0.969).

Conclusions

In patients with AFD aggravation, the preoperative VAS and postoperative ODI scores were significantly higher. The cage position parameters were related to AFD. A lower cage center was associated with a greater incidence of AFD.

Lumbar Intervertebral Spacer With Cement Augmentation of Endplates and Integrated Screws as a Fixation Device in an Osteoporotic Model: An In Vitro Kinematic and Load-to-Failure Study

BACKGROUND

Integrated lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) devices have been shown to successfully stabilize the spine and avoid complications related to posterior fixation. However, LLIF has increased subsidence risk in osteoporotic patients. Cement augmentation through cannulated pedicle screws enhances pedicle fixation and cage-endplate interface yet involves a posterior approach. Lateral application of cement with integrated LLIF fixation has been introduced and requires characterization. The present study set out to evaluate kinematic and load-to-failure properties of a novel cement augmentation technique with an integrated LLIF device, alone and with unilateral pedicle fixation, compared with bilateral pedicle screws and nonintegrated LLIF (BPS + S).

METHODS

Twelve specimens (L3-S1) underwent discectomy at L4-L5. Specimens were separated into 3 groups: (1) BPS + S; (2) polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) augmentation, integrated LLIF, and unilateral pedicle screws (PMMA + UPS + iS); and (3) PMMA and integrated LLIF (PMMA + iSA) without posterior fixation. Flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation were applied. A compressive load was applied to L4-L5 segments until failure. An analysis was performed (P < .05).

RESULTS

Operative constructs significantly reduced motion relative to intact specimens in all motion planes (P < .05). BPS + S provided the most stability, reducing motion by 71.6%-86.4%, followed by PMMA + UPS + iS (68.1%-79.4%) and PMMA + iSA (62.9%-81.9%); no significant differences were found (P > .05). PMMA + UPS + iS provided the greatest resistance to failure (2290 N), followed by PMMA + iSA (1970 N) and BPS + S (1390 N); no significant differences were observed (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Cement augmentation of vertebral endplates via the lateral approach with integrated LLIF moderately improved cage-endplate strength compared to BPS + S in an osteoporotic model; unilateral pedicle fixation further improved failure load. Reconstruction before and after application of unilateral pedicle screws and rods was biomechanically equivalent to anteroposterior reconstruction. Overall, initial results suggest that integrated LLIF with cement augmentation may be a viable alternative in the presence of osteoporosis.

Importance of the epiphyseal ring in OLIF stand-alone surgery: a biomechanical study on cadaveric spines

PURPOSES

To explore the function of endplate epiphyseal ring in OLIF stand-alone surgery using a biomechanical model to reduce the complications of endplate collapse and cage subsidence.

METHODS

In total, 24 human cadaveric lumbar function units (L1-2 and L3-4 segments) were randomly assigned to two groups. The first group was implanted with long fusion cages which engaged with both inner and outer regions of epiphyseal ring (Complete Span-Epiphyseal Ring, CSER). Those engaged with only the inner half of epiphyseal ring were the second group (Half Span-Epiphyseal Ring, HSER). Each group was divided into two subgroups [higher cage-height (HH) and normal cage-height (NH)]. Specimens were fixed in testing cups and compressed at approximately 2.5 mm/s, until the first sign of structural failure. Trabecular structural damage was analyzed by Micro-CT, as well as the difference of bone volume fraction (BV/TV), trabecular thickness (Tb.Th) et al. in different regions.

RESULTS

Endplate collapse was mainly evident in the inner region of epiphyseal ring, where trabecular injury of sub-endplate bone was most concentrated. Endplate collapse incidence was significantly higher in HSER than CSER specimens (P = 0.017). A structural failure occurred at a lower force in HSER (1.41 ± 0.34 KN) compared with CSER (2.44 ± 0.59 KN). HH subgroups failed at a lower average force than NH subgroups. Micro-CT results showed a more extensive trabecular fracture in HSER specimens compared to CSER specimens, especially in HH subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

Endplate collapse is more likely to occur with short half span cages than complete span cages, and taller cages compared with normal height cages. During OLIF surgery, we should choose cages matching intervertebral disc space height and place the cages spanning over the whole epiphyseal ring to improve support strength.

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.

Risk Factors of Cage Subsidence in Patients Received Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the risk factors of cage subsidence in patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) and its correlation with patient-reported outcomes.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Cage subsidence is among the cage-related complications after TLIF and may lead to poor outcomes. Few studies have addressed the incidence of cage subsidence in MI-TLIF.

METHODS

This retrospective study of a prospectively collected database was conducted from October 2015 to October 2017. All patients received MI-TLIF with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. All levels were separated into the cage subsidence (CS group) and no cage subsidence (non-CS group) groups. Cage subsidence was evaluated using lateral radiographs and defined as more than 2 mm migration of the cage into the endplate of adjacent vertebral body. Patient demographics, perioperative details, and radiographic parameters were recorded. Cage-related parameters were cage height, cage insertion level, and cage position. Cage position was recorded using central point ration (CPR). Patient-reported outcome was analyzed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) questionnaire and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients (126 levels) were included. Mean age was 66.5 years with an average follow-up of 36.9 months. Overall incidence of cage subsidence was 34.1%. The CS group had significantly higher body mass index, less bone mineral density (BMD), shorter disc height, and higher CPR than the non-CS group. BMD, disc height, and CPR were significantly negatively correlated with depth of cage subsidence. ODI improvement was significantly lesser in the CS group than in the non-CS group. Fusion rate and complications were unrelated to cage subsidence.

CONCLUSION

The BMD, disc height, and cage position were the most significant risk factors that were negatively correlated with depth of cage subsidence. Placing a TLIF cage anteriorly if possible may reduce the risk of cage subsidence.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Effect of Cage in Radiological Differences between Direct and Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion Techniques

Objective

Few studies have reported direct comparative data of lumbar spine angles between direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF) and oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF). The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical and radiological outcomes of DLIF and OLIF, and determine influential factors.

Methods

The same surgeon performed DLIF from May 2011 to August 2014 (n=201) and OLIF from September 2014 to September 2016 (n=142). Radiological parameters, cage height, cage angle (CA), cage width (CW), and cage location were assessed. We checked the cage location as the distance (mm) from the anterior margin of the disc space to the anterior metallic indicator of the cage in lateral images.

Results

There were significant differences in intervertebral foramen height (FH; 22.0±2.4 vs. 21.0±2.1 mm, p<0.001) and sagittal disc angle (SDA; 8.7±3.3 vs. 11.3±3.2˚, p<0.001) between the DLIF and OLIF groups at 7 days postoperatively. CA (9.6±3.0 vs. 8.1±2.9˚, p<0.001) and CW (21.2±1.6 vs. 19.2±1.9 mm, p<0.001) were significantly larger in the OLIF group compared to the DLIF group. The cage location of the OLIF group was significantly more anterior than the DLIF group (6.7±3.0 vs. 9.1±3.6 mm, p<0.001). Cage subsidence at 1 year postoperatively was significantly worse in the DLIF group compared to the OLIF group (1.0±1.5 vs. 0.4±1.1 mm, p=0.001). Cage location was significantly correlated with postoperative FH (β=0.273, p<0.001) and postoperative SDA (β=-0.358, p<0.001). CA was significantly correlated with postoperative FH (β=-0.139, p=0.044) and postoperative SDA (β=0.236, p=0.001). Cage location (β=0.293, p<0.001) and CW (β=-0.225, p<0.001) were significantly correlated with cage subsidence.

Conclusion

The cage location, CA, and CW seem to be important factors which result in the different-radiological outcomes between DLIF and OLIF.

The Effects of Bone Microstructure on Subsidence Risk for ALIF, LLIF, PLIF, and TLIF Spine Cages

Several approaches (anterior, posterior, lateral, and transforaminal) are used in lumbar fusion surgery. However, it is unclear whether one of these approaches has the greatest subsidence risk as published clinical rates of cage subsidence vary widely (7–70%). Specifically, there is limited data on how a patient's endplate morphometry and trabecular bone quality influences cage subsidence risk. Therefore, this study compared subsidence (stiffness, maximum force, and work) between anterior (ALIF), lateral (LLIF), posterior (PLIF), and transforaminal (TLIF) lumbar interbody fusion cage designs to understand the impact of endplate and trabecular bone quality on subsidence. Forty-eight lumbar vertebrae were imaged with micro-ct to assess trabecular microarchitecture. micro-ct images of each vertebra were then imported into image processing software to measure endplate thickness (ET) and maximum endplate concavity depth (ECD). Generic ALIF, LLIF, PLIF, and TLIF cages made of polyether ether ketone were implanted on the superior endplates of all vertebrae and subsidence testing was performed. The results indicated that TLIF cages had significantly lower (p < 0.01) subsidence stiffness and maximum subsidence force compared to ALIF and LLIF cages. For all cage groups, trabecular bone volume fraction was better correlated with maximum subsidence force compared to ET and concavity depth. These findings highlight the importance of cage design (e.g., surface area), placement on the endplate, and trabecular bone quality on subsidence. These results may help surgeons during cage selection for lumbar fusion procedures to mitigate adverse events such as cage subsidence.