Early Fusion Status After Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Cortical Bone Trajectory Screw Fixation or Traditional Trajectory Screw Fixation: A Comparison Between the Titanium-coated Polyetheretherketone Cage and the Same Shape Polyetheretherketone Cage

Accelerated fusion dynamics by recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, particularly in osteoporotic conditions

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Early fusion is crucial in interbody procedures to minimize mechanical complications resulting from delayed union, especially for patients with osteoporosis. Bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) are used in spinal fusion procedures; however, limited evaluation exists regarding time-to-fusion for BMP use, particularly in patients with osteoporosis.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the difference in time-to-fusion after single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgery between recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) usage and nonusage groups according to bone density.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective single-center cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

This study enrolled 132 patients (mean age, 65.25±8.66; male patients, 40.9%) who underwent single-level TLIF for degenerative disorders between February 2012 and December 2021, with pre and postoperative computed tomography (CT).

OUTCOME MEASURE

The interbody fusion mass and bone graft status on postoperative CT scans was obtained annually, and time-to-fusion was recorded for each patient.

METHODS

The patients were divided into 2 groups based on rhBMP-2 use during the interbody fusion procedure. Patients were further divided into osteoporosis, osteopenia, and normal groups based on preoperative L1 vertebral body attenuation values, using cutoffs of 90 and 120 Hounsfield units. It was strictly defined that fusion is considered complete when a trabecular bone bridge was formed, and therefore, the time-to-fusion was measured in years. Time-to-fusion was statistically compared between BMP group and non-BMP groups, followed by further comparison according to bone density.

RESULTS

The time-to-fusion differed significantly between BMP and non-BMP groups, with half of the patients achieving fusion within 2.5 years in the BMP group compared with 4 years in the non-BMP group (p<.001). The fusion rate varied based on bone density, with the maximum difference observed in the osteoporosis group, when half of the patients achieved fusion within 3 years in the BMP group compared to 5 years in the non-BMP group (p<.001). Subgroup analysis was conducted, revealing no significant associations between time-to-fusion and factors known to influence the fusion process, including age, gender, medical history, smoking and alcohol use, and medication history, except for rh-BMP2 use and bone density.

CONCLUSIONS

RhBMP-2 usage significantly reduced time-to-fusion in single-level TLIF, especially in patients with osteoporosis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

First clinical experience with posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a thermal-sprayed silver-containing hydroxyapatite-coated cage

BACKGROUND

To investigate the possibility of silver (Ag)-induced adverse events and the degree of bone fusion in posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery using an Ag-containing hydroxyapatite (HA) lumbar interbody cage.

METHODS

An Ag-HA cage consisting of highly osteoconductive HA interfused with Ag was developed, and we applied it clinically at three university-affiliated hospitals from April 2020 to December 2020. During the 12-month postoperative observation period, Ag-related adverse events, neuropathy, and postoperative complications were investigated as indicators of safety, while clinical improvement and the fusion status were investigated as indicators of efficacy. Clinical improvement was defined as improvement beyond the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in the numerical rating scale (NRS; 1.6) for low back and lower limb pain and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI; 12.8).

RESULTS

We performed lumbar interbody fusion using an Ag-HA cage for 48 patients (female, n = 25; mean age, 67.5 years). The mean preoperative NRS was 6.4 (standard deviation, 1.9), while the mean preoperative ODI was 44 [12]. No adverse effects (i.e., argyria) were identified during the 12-month observation period. Surgical site infection occurred in one case, although the implant was preserved via immediate debridement. In total, 39 (81%) participants showed clinical improvement beyond MCID for both NRS and ODI. Bone fusion was achieved at 45 levels (88%) at 6 months and 48 levels (91%) at 12 months postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that Ag-HA cages can be safely used in spinal fusion procedures and have the potential to prevent postoperative infections, prevent deterioration of the quality of life, and result in favorable outcomes. Larger-scale and longer-term follow-up studies will be required to corroborate these conclusions. Trial registration UMIN 000039964 (date: April 01, 2020).

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.