Could the Topping-Off Technique Be the Preventive Strategy against Adjacent Segment Disease after Pedicle Screw-Based Fusion in Lumbar Degenerative Diseases? A Systematic Review

The effect of interlaminar Coflex stabilization in the topping-off procedure on local and global spinal sagittal alignment

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of interlaminar Coflex stabilization (ICS) at various segments in the topping-off procedure on local and global spinal sagittal alignment.

METHODS

Eighty-nine consecutive patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) who underwent ICS and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) were retrospectively reviewed. They were divided into Group A (L4-L5 ICS + L5-S1 TLIF), Group B (L3-L4 ICS + L4-S1 TLIF), and Group C (L2-L3 ICS + L3-S1 TLIF) according to their fusion levels. The measured local sagittal parameters included the implanted segmental angle (ISA), intervertebral disc angle (IDA), intervertebral foreman height (IFH), and disc height. The assessed global sagittal parameters included thoracic kyphosis, lumbar lordosis (LL), the fused segment angle (FSA), the sacral slope, the pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, and the sagittal vertical axis. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scales (VAS) were recorded to evaluate the clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Regarding the local alignment parameters, the ISA and IDA decreased immediately after surgery in Groups A and B, followed by an increase at the last follow-up (all, P < 0.05). Conversely, the IFH of Groups A and B first increased after surgery and then decreased to approximately the original value (all, P < 0.05). No significant differences were evident between the local sagittal parameters at different time points in Group C. Regarding the global sagittal profiles, the LL and FSA exhibited a significant postoperative increase (both at P < 0.05) in all the groups. All three groups displayed significant improvements in the ODI, VAS-back pain, and VAS-leg pain. Furthermore, 4.5% (4/89) of the patients exhibited radiographic adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) at the last follow-up.

CONCLUSION

ICS during topping-off surgery led to a temporary loss of local lordosis, especially in the lower lumbar segment, while the intervertebral space realigned after middle-term follow-up. The topping-off procedure with ICS is a feasible and promising surgical option of DLSS since it reduces fusion levels and prevents ASD development.

Dynamic Rod Constructs as the Preventive Strategy against Adjacent Segment Disease in Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Disorders: A Retrospective Comparative Cohort Study

Objectives

Adjacent segment degeneration (ASDe) and adjacent segment disease (ASDi) are potential long-term complications after lumbar fusion with rigid instrumentation. Dynamic fixation techniques (Topping-off) adjacent to the fused segments have been developed to curtail the risk of ASDe and ASDi. The current study sought to investigate whether the addition of dynamic rod constructs (DRC) in patients with preoperative degeneration in the adjacent disc was effective in reducing the risk of ASDi.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on clinical data of 207 patients with degenerative lumbar disorders (DLD) from January 2012 to January 2019, who underwent posterior transpedicular lumbar fusion (without Topping-off, NoT/O), and posterior dynamic instrumentation with DRC. Clinical and radiological outcomes were evaluated using Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and lumbar radiographs one, three, and 12 months postoperatively and annually. ASDe was defined as disc height collapse > 20% and disc wedging > 5. Patients with confirmed ASDe and aggravation of ODI > 20 or VAS score > 5 at final follow-up were diagnosed as ASDi. The Kaplan-Meier hazard method was used to estimate the cumulative probability of ASDi within 63 months of surgery.

Results

Over three years of follow-up, 65 patients in the NoT/O (59.6%) and 52 cases (53.1%) in the DRC groups met the diagnostic criteria for ASDe. Furthermore, 27 (24.8%) patients in the NoT/O group showed ASDi during the follow-up, compared to 14 (14.3%) cases in the DRC group (P=0.059). Revision surgery was performed on 19 individuals in the NoT/O and 8 cases in the DRC groups (P=0.048). The Cox regression model identified a significantly decreased risk of ASDi if DRC was used (Hazard ratio: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.13-0.6).

Conclusion

Dynamic fixation adjacent to the fused segment is an effective strategy for preventing ASDi in carefully selected individuals with preoperative degenerative changes at the adjacent level.

Biomechanical assessment of the effect of sublaminar band tensioning on lumbar motion

OBJECTIVE

Adjacent-segment disease (ASD) proximal to lumbosacral fusion is assumed to result from increased stress and motion that extends above or below the fusion construct. Sublaminar bands (SBs) have been shown to potentially mitigate stresses in deformity constructs. A similar application of SBs in lumbar fusions is not well described yet may potentially mitigate against ASD.

METHODS

Eight fresh-frozen human cadaveric spine specimens were instrumented with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) cages at L3-4 and L4-5, and pedicle screws from L3 to S1. Bilateral SBs were applied at L2 and tightened around the rods extending above the L3 pedicle screws. After being mounted on a testing frame, the spines were loaded at L1 to 6 Nm in all 3 planes, i.e., flexion/extension, right and left lateral bending, and right and left axial rotation. Motion and intradiscal pressures (IDPs) at L2-3 were measured for 5 conditions: intact, instrumentation (L3-S1), band tension (BT) 30%, BT 50%, and BT 100%.

RESULTS

There was significant increase in motion at L2-3 with L3-S1 instrumentation compared with the intact spine in flexion/extension (median 8.78°, range 4.07°-10.81°, vs median 7.27°, range 1.63°-9.66°; p = 0.016). When compared with instrumentation, BT 100% reduced motion at L2-3 in flexion/extension (median 8.78°, range 4.07°-10.81°, vs median 3.61°, range 1.11°-9.39°; p < 0.001) and lateral bending (median 6.58°, range 3.67°-8.59°, vs median 5.62°, range 3.28°-6.74°; p = 0.001). BT 50% reduced motion at L2-3 only in flexion/extension when compared with instrumentation (median 8.78°, range 4.07°-10.81°, vs median 5.91°, range 2.54°-10.59°; p = 0.027). There was no significant increase of motion at L1-2 with banding when compared with instrumentation, although an increase was seen from the intact spine with BT 100% in flexion/extension (median 5.14°, range 2.47°-9.73°, vs median 7.34°, range 4.22°-9.89°; p = 0.005). BT 100% significantly reduced IDP at L2-3 from 25.07 psi (range 2.41-48.08 psi) before tensioning to 19.46 psi (range -2.35 to 29.55 psi) after tensioning (p = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

In this model, the addition of L2 SBs reduced motion and IDP at L2-3 after the L3-S1 instrumentation. There was no significant increase in motion at L1-2 in response to band tensioning compared with instrumentation alone. The application of SBs may have a clinical application in reducing the incidence of ASD.

Biomechanical analysis of lumbar nonfusion dynamic stabilization using a pedicle screw-based dynamic stabilizer or an interspinous process spacer

This study aimed to investigate and compare the effects of two widely used nonfusion posterior dynamic stabilization (NPDS) devices, pedicle screw-based dynamic stabilizer (PSDS) and interspinous process spacer (IPS), on biomechanics of the implanted lumbar spine under static and vibration loadings. The finite element model of healthy human lumbosacral segment was modified to incorporate NPDS device insertion at L4-L5 segment. Bioflex and DIAM were used as PSDS-based and IPS-based NPDS devices, respectively. As a comparison, lumbar interbody fusion with rigid stabilization was also simulated at L4-L5. For static loading, segmental range of motion (ROM) of the models under moments of four physiological motions was computed using hybrid testing protocol. For vibration loading, resonant modes and dynamic stress of the models under vertical excitation were extracted through random response analysis. The results showed that compared with the rigid fusion model, ROM of the nonfusion models was higher at L4-L5 level but lower at adjacent levels (L1- L2, L2-L3, L3-L4, L5-S1). Compared with the Bioflex model, the DIAM model produced higher ROM at L4-L5 level but lower ROM at adjacent levels, especially under lateral bending and axial rotation; resonant frequency of the DIAM model was slightly lower; dynamic response of nucleus stress at L4-L5 level was slightly higher for the DIAM model, and the dynamic stress at adjacent levels was no obvious difference between the nonfusion models. This study reveals biomechanical differences between the Bioflex and DIAM systems, which may provide references for selecting surgical approaches in clinical practice.

Mobility-Maintaining Facet Arthroplasty of the Lumbar Spine With the Second-Generation TOPS System: A Case Series

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal stenosis results from spinal canal narrowing and can lead to pain and dysfunction. Until recently, surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis requiring an extensive decompression, with or without spondylolisthesis, had to balance pain relief with the long-term risks of spinal instability after decompression and adjacent segment disease (ASD) after spinal fusion. Spinal motion-preserving devices aim to reduce the incidence of ASD after posterolateral fusion and consequent need for revision surgery.

OBJECTIVE

To present a single-center experience with a facet replacement implant (TOPS System [TOtal Posterior Spine System], Premia Spine) designed to stabilize the spine and prevent further degeneration while maintaining a normal range of motion (ROM).

METHODS

Seventeen patients received the implant after a laminotomy. Clinical assessments included surgery duration, complication rates, and visual analog score for back pain. Radiographs were used to measure ROM changes from flexion to extension and assess for any repositioning of a degenerative spondylolisthesis and segment lordosis.

RESULTS

The average operative time was 102 minutes. The average visual analog score reduction was 7.5 at 3 months, 6.8 at 12 months, and 6.7 at the longest follow-up (average: 51 months, range: 26-77), demonstrating an average improvement of 81%. The preoperative and postoperative average ROMs were 8.2° and 7.4°, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This series shows that the TOPS System has the potential to relieve back pain and maintain close-to-normal ROM over longer time periods without inducing ASD. The TOPS System is the first to allow the patient to settle into physiological lordosis adjustment thus presenting new treatment possibilities with mobility-maintaining dorsal instrumentation.

Hybrid surgery with PEEK rods for lumbar degenerative diseases: a 2-year follow-up study

Background

Finite element analyses and biomechanical tests have shown that PEEK rods promote fusion and prevent adjacent segment degeneration. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects and complications of hybrid surgery with PEEK rods in lumbar degenerative diseases.

Methods

From January 2015-December 2017, 28 patients who underwent lumbar posterior hybrid surgery with PEEK rods were included in the study. The patients were diagnosed with lumbar disc herniation, lumbar spinal stenosis, or degenerative grade I spondylolisthesis. Before the operation and at the last follow-up, the patients completed lumbar anteroposterior and lateral X-ray, dynamic X-ray, MRI examinations. In addition, at the last follow-up the patients also completed lumbar CT examinations. The radiographic parameters, clinical visual analog scale (VAS) score and Oswestry disability index (ODI) score were compared.

Results

The average age of the patients was 44.8 ± 12.6 years, and the average follow-up duration was 26.4 ± 3.6 months. The VAS score improved from 6.3 ± 1.6 to 1.0 ± 0.9, and the ODI score decreased from 38.4 ± 10.8 to 6.8 ± 4.6. The fusion rate of the fused segment was 100%. There were no significant changes in the modified Pfirrmann classifications or disc height index for the nonfused segments and the upper adjacent segments from pre- to postoperatively. No cases of screw loosening, broken screws, broken rods or other mechanical complications were found.

Conclusion

Hybrid surgery with PEEK rods for lumbar degenerative diseases can yield good clinical results and effectively reduce the incidence of complications such as adjacent segment diseases.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04895-1.

Biomechanical Investigation of Lumbar Interbody Fusion Supplemented with Topping-off Instrumentation Using Different Dynamic Stabilization Devices

STUDY DESIGN

A biomechanical comparison study using finite element method.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate effects of different dynamic stabilization devices, including pedicle-based dynamic stabilization system (PBDSS) and interspinous process spacer (ISP), used for topping-off implants on biomechanical responses of human spine after lumbar interbody fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Topping-off stabilization technique has been proposed to prevent adjacent segment degeneration following lumbar spine fusion. PBDSS and ISP are the most used dynamic stabilizers for topping-off instrumentation. However, biomechanical differences between them still remain unclear.

METHODS

A validated, normal FE model of human lumbosacral spine was employed. Based on this model, rigid fusion at L4-L5 and moderately disc degeneration at L3-L4 were simulated and used as a comparison baseline. Subsequently, Bioflex and DIAM systems were instrumented at L3-L4 segment to construct PBDSS-based and ISP-based topping-off models. Biomechanical responses of the models to bending moments and vertical vibrational excitation were computed using FE static and random response analyses, respectively.

RESULTS

Results from static analysis showed that at L3-L4, the response parameters including annulus stress and range of motion were decreased by 41.6% to 85.2% for PBDSS-based model and by 6.3% to 67% for ISP-based model compared with rigid fusion model. At L2-L3, these parameters were lower in ISP-based model than in PBDSS-based model. Results from random response analysis showed that topping-off instrumentation increased resonant frequency of spine system but decreased dynamic response of annulus stress at L3-L4. PBDSS-based model generated lower dynamic stress than ISP-based model at L3-L4, but the dynamic stress was higher at L2-L3 for PBDSSbased model.

CONCLUSION

Under static and vibration loadings, the PBDSSbased topping-off device (Bioflex) provided a better protection for transition segment, and likelihood of degeneration of supraadjacent segment might be relatively lower when using the ISPbased topping-off device (DIAM).Level of Evidence: 5.

Biomechanical investigation of topping-off technique using an interspinous process device following lumbar interbody fusion under vibration loading

Topping-off technique has been proposed to prevent adjacent-segment degeneration/disease following spine fusion surgery. Nevertheless, few studies have investigated biomechanics of the fusion surgery with topping-off device under whole-body vibration (WBV). This biomechanical study aimed to investigate the vibration characteristics of human lumbar spine after topping-off surgery, and also to evaluate the effect of bony fusion on spine biomechanics. Based on a healthy finite-element model of lumbosacral spine (L1-sacrum), the models of topping-off surgery before and after bony fusion were developed. The simulated surgical procedures consisted of interbody fusion with rigid stabilizer at L4-L5 segment (rigid fusion) and dynamic stabilizer at degenerated L3-L4 segment. An interspinous implant, Device for Intervertebral Assisted Motion (DIAM, Medtronic Inc., Minnesota, USA), was used as the dynamic stabilizer. The stress responses of spine segments and implants under a vertical cyclic load were calculated and analyzed. The results showed that compared with rigid fusion alone, the topping-off technique significantly decreased disc stress at transition segment (L3-L4) as expected, and resulted in a slight increase in disc stress at its supra-adjacent segment (L2-L3). It indicated that the topping-off stabilization using DIAM might provide a good tradeoff between protection of transition segment and deterioration of its supra-adjacent segment during WBV. Also, it was found that bony fusion decreased stress in L4 inferior endplate and rigid stabilizer but had nearly no effect on stress in DIAM and L3-L4 disc, which was helpful to determine the biomechanical differences before and after bony fusion.

The Efficacy of Lumbar Hybrid Fusion for the Prevention of Adjacent Segment Disease: Fact or Artifact? A Meta-analysis

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare hybrid constructs with traditional fusion-only constructs for the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg) and clinical outcomes in patients with degenerative lumbar diseases.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Spinal fusion is a standard surgery for various pathologies of the lumbar spine, which results in changes to the biomechanics of the spine, potentially leading to ASDeg. Although ASDeg can occur slowly as a natural course, early-onset ASDeg is regarded to be related to fusion surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search was conducted to identify studies that match the purpose. Included studies were compared using the incidence of ASDeg, Oswestry Disability Index, Visual Analog Score, and perioperative outcomes. We calculated the Peto odds ratio and mean difference (MD) for the continuous variables, respectively. In the hybrid group, subgroup analysis was also performed among devices.

RESULTS

Among 10 papers involving 767 patients, 372 patients underwent hybrid fusion and 395 patients underwent fusion-only. ASDeg occurred in 10.2% in the hybrid and 21.5% in the fusion-only group [Peto odds ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.23-0.64]. The MD for Visual Analog Score were 0.45 (95% CI, 0.05-0.85) between 2 groups, which was statistically significant but was too small to have clinical significance. The MD for Oswestry Disability Index was 0.93 (95% CI, -1.016 to 2.872), which was not statistically different between 2 groups. The hybrid is superior for 18 minutes (95% CI, 5.78-30.72) shorter than typical surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Hybrid lumbar surgery decreased the incidence of early-onset ASDeg for about 2 years of follow-up. Among the hybrid constructs, the interspinous devices group accomplished favorable results with a lower risk. Adjacent segment disease was not as statistically significant as ASDeg, but adjacent segment disease may show a substantial difference for >2-year follow-up.

Dynamic Fixation Techniques for the Prevention of Adjacent Segment Disease: A Retrospective Controlled Study

Study Design

Retrospective, controlled study.

Purpose

Dynamic fixation (topping-off technique) adjacent to a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) level was developed to reduce the risk of adjacent segment disease (ASDi). This study was designed to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes between patients who underwent circumferential lumbar fusion (CLF) without the topping-off technique, CLF with dynamic rod constructs (DRC), and CLF with interspinous device (ISD).

Overview of Literature

Lumbar fusion can result in the re-distribution of stress, increased mobility, and increased intradiscal pressure at adjacent levels, ultimately leading to adjacent segment degeneration (ASDe) and ASDi. Dynamic fixation techniques (topping-off techniques) adjacent to vertebral fusion have been developed to reduce the risk of ASDe and ASDi because they provide a transitional zone between a caudal rigid fused segment and cephalad-mobile unfused levels.

Methods

A single-center, retrospective, controlled study was designed, including all patients who underwent CLF due to degenerative lumbar spinal disease in Hospital Clinic of Barcelona between 2012 and 2018. Three groups of patients were evaluated as per the type of topping-off technique used: CLF alone group, DRC group, and ISD group. Clinical and radiological outcomes were evaluated.

Results

A total of 117 patients were enrolled in the study. Sixty patients (51.3%) underwent CLF without dynamic stabilization, 24 (20.5%) were treated with DRC as topping-off technique, and 33 (28.5%) were treated with an ISD. A total of 12 patients (20.0%) in the CLF alone group showed ASDi at the final follow-up, compared to 1 (4.2%) in the DRC group (p=0.097) and 2 (6.1%) in the ISD group (p=0.127). The Cox regression model identified a significantly decreased risk of ASDi when a topping-off technique (DRC or ISD) was used (hazard ratio, 0.154; 95% confidence interval, 0.31–0.77).

Conclusions

Dynamic fixation adjacent to CLF was a safe and efficient procedure associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients with lumbar spine degenerative disease.

Treatment of adjacent segment disease with percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy: Early experience and results

PURPOSE

Adjacent segment disease (ASD) constitutes a long-term complication of instrumented spinal fusion. Aim of this study is to analyze the utilization of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) for the treatment of symptomatic ASD, emphasizing basically in the postoperative course.

METHODS

A prospective study with 35 patients was designed. Patients enrolled in our study were distributed in two different groups. Group A constituted of 15 patients featuring ASD as a complication of a previously conducted lumbar spinal fusion. Group B was composed of 20 patients, presenting simple lumbar disc herniation (LDH). All patients were subjected to successful PTED for LDH. Patients were evaluated at regular intervals in 6-week and 3-, 6-, and 12-month postoperatively. Visual analog scale was utilized for leg (VAS-LP) and low back pain (VAS-BP) evaluation. Health-related quality of life was assessed with short-form 36 health survey questionnaire (SF-36).

RESULTS

VAS-BP scores were statistically significantly differentiated between the two groups in all intervals of follow-up. In contrast, VAS-LP scores demonstrated statistically significant differentiation in none of follow-up intervals, indicating similar results between the two groups. Maximal improvement was in both cases for all patients observed in 6-week postoperatively, with subsequent stabilization. SF-36 preoperative evaluation denoted a statistically significant differentiation in bodily pain and role emotional parameters, which was continually until the end of follow-up observed. The other SF-36 parameters featured similar values between the two groups preoperatively as well as during the follow-up intervals.

CONCLUSION

PTED is capable of successfully dealing with LDH and furthermore with complications of fusion as ASD.

Does Osteoporosis Affect the Adjacent Segments Following Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion? A Finite Element Study

BACKGROUND

Adjacent segment degeneration is a common complication following anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). Osteoporosis is becoming increasingly prevalent in the elderly population and thus patients undergoing ALIF may experience osteoporosis with age. However, the influence of osteoporosis on adjacent segment degeneration after ALIF remains unclear.

METHODS

Three finite element models of the L3-S1 segment, including a healthy model, an ALIF model, and an ALIF with osteoporosis model, were used for analysis. ALIF was simulated at the L4-L5 segment. Based on a hybrid test method, the models were imposed with a preload of 400 N and an adjusted moment in flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial torsion. Intradiscal pressure, shear stress on anulus fibrosus, and range of motion at L3-L4 and L5-S1 were calculated and compared.

RESULTS

In each direction, the maximal values of intradiscal pressure and shear stress on anulus fibrosus at L3-L4 and L5-S1 were found in the ALIF model, and the minimal values were found in the healthy model. At L3-L4 and L5-S1, the maximal values of range of motion in most directions were found in the ALIF model followed by the ALIF with osteoporosis model, and the minimal values were found in the healthy model. However, the maximal value of range of motion at L5-S1 in axial torsion was found in the ALIF with osteoporosis model.

CONCLUSIONS

Osteoporosis may mitigate the adverse influence of ALIF on adjacent segments.

Dynamic Stabilization Adjacent to Fusion versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Meta-Analysis

This study evaluated differences in outcome variables between dynamic stabilization adjacent to fusion (DATF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease. A systematic review of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane was performed. The variables of interest included clinical adjacent segment pathologies (CASPs), radiological adjacent segment pathologies (RASPs), lumbar lordosis (LL), visual analogue scale (VAS) of back (VAS-B) and leg (VAS-L), Oswestry disability index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, duration of surgery (DS), estimated blood loss (EBL), complications, and reoperation rate. Nine articles identified as meeting all of the inclusion criteria. DATF was better than PLIF in proximal RASP, CASP, and ODI during 3 months follow-up, VAS-L. However, no significant difference between DATF and PLIF was found in distal RASP, LL, JOA score, VAS-B, ODI after 3 months follow-up, complication rates, and reoperation rate. These further confirmed that DATF could decrease the proximal ASP both symptomatically and radiographically as compared to fusion group; however, the influence of DATF on functional outcome was similar with PLIF. The differences between hybrid surgery and topping-off technique were located in DS and EBL in comparison with PLIF. Our study confirmed that DATF could decrease the proximal ASP both symptomatically and radiographically as compared to the fusion group; however, the influence of DATF on functional outcome was similar with PLIF. The difference between hybrid surgery and topping-off technique was not significant in treatment outcomes.

Mobility-Preserving Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: WFNS Spine Committee Recommendations

Background

Although decompression is the basis of surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), under various circumstances instrumented fusion is performed as well. The rationale for mobility-preserving operations for LSS is preventing adjacent segment disease (ASD). We review the rationale for mobility preservation in ASD and discuss related topics such as indications for fusion and the evolving role of minimally invasive approaches to lumbar spine decompression. Our focus is on systematic review and consensus discussion of mobility-preserving surgical methods as related to surgery for LSS.

Methods

Groups of spinal surgeons (members of the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies Spine Committee) performed systematic reviews of dynamic fixation systems, including hybrid constructs, and of interspinous process devices; consensus statements were generated based on the reviews at 2 voting sessions by the committee several months apart. Additional review of background data was performed, and the results summarized in this review.

Results

Decompression is the basis of surgical treatment of LSS. Fusion is an option, especially when spondylolisthesis or instability are present, but indications remain controversial. ASD incidence reports show high variability. ASD may represent the natural progression of degenerative disease in many cases. Older age, poor sagittal balance, and multilevel fusion may be associated with more ASD. Dynamic fixation constructs are treatment options that may help prevent ASD.

Topping-Off Technology versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Meta-Analysis

The treatment effects of topping-off technique were still controversial. This study compared all available data on postoperative clinical and radiographic outcomes of topping-off technique and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane were systematically reviewed. Variations included radiographical adjacent segment disease (RASD), clinical adjacent segment disease (CASD), global lumbar lordosis (GLL), visual analogue scale (VAS) of back (VAS-B) and leg (VAS-L), Oswestry disability index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, duration of surgery, estimated blood loss (EBL), reoperation rates, and complication rates. Sixteen studies, including 1372 cases, were selected for the analysis. Rates of proximal RASD (P=0.0004), distal RASD (P=0.03), postoperative VAS-B (P=0.0001), postoperative VAS-L (P=0.02), EBL (P=0.007), and duration of surgery (P=0.02) were significantly lower in topping-off group than those in PLIF group. Postoperative ODI after 3 years (P=0.04) in the topping-off group was significantly less than that in the PLIF group. There was no significant difference in the rates of CASD (P=0.06), postoperative GLL (P=0.14), postoperative ODI within 3 years (P=0.24), and postoperative JOA (P=0.70) and in reoperation rates (P=0.32) and complication rates (P=0.27) between topping-off group and PLIF. The results confirmed that topping-off technique could effectively prevent ASDs after lumbar internal fixation. However, this effect is effective in preventing RASD. Topping-off technique is more effective in improving the subjective feelings of patients rather than objective motor functions compared with PLIF. With the development of surgical techniques, both topping-off technique and PLIF are safe.

Comparison between topping-off technology and posterior lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of chronic low back pain: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The difference between topping-off technique and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in postoperative outcomes is still controversial. The aim of this study is to compare all available data on outcomes of topping-off technique and PLIF in the treatment of chronic low back pain.

METHODS

Articles in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane were reviewed. Parameters included radiographical adjacent segment disease (RASD), clinical adjacent segment disease, range of motion (ROM), global lumbar lordosis (GLL), visual analog scale (VAS), visual analog scale of back, (VAS-B) and visual analog scale leg (VAS-L), Oswestry disability index, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, duration of surgery, estimated blood loss (EBL), reoperation rates, complication rates.

RESULTS

Rates of proximal RASD (P = .001) and CASD (P = .03), postoperative VAS-B (P = .0001) were significantly lower in topping-off group than that in PLIF group. There was no significant difference in distal RASD (P = .07), postoperative GLL (P = .71), postoperative upper intervertebral ROM (P = .19), postoperative VAS-L (P = .08), DOI (P = .30), postoperative JOA (P = .18), EBL (P = .21) and duration of surgery (P = .49), reoperation rate (P = .16), complication rates (P = .31) between topping-off group and PLIF.

CONCLUSIONS

Topping-off can effectively prevent the adjacent segment disease from progressing after lumbar internal fixation, which is be more effective in proximal segments. Topping-off technique was more effective in improving subjective feelings of patents rather than objective motor functions. However, no significant difference between topping-off technique and PLIF can be found in the rates of complications.

Topping-off surgery vs posterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar disease: a finite element analysis

BACKGROUND

Adjacent segment disease (ASD) is a common complication after posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Recently, a topping-off surgery (non-fusion with Coflex) has been developed to reduce the risk of ASD, yet whether and how the topping-off surgery can relieve ASD remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to explore the biomechanical effect of PLIF and Coflex on the adjacent segments via finite element (FE) analysis and discuss the efficacy of Coflex in preventing ASD.

METHODS

A FE model of L3-L5 segments was generated based on the CT of a healthy volunteer via three commercially available software. Coflex and PLIF devices were modeled and implanted together with the segment model in the FE software. In the FE model, a pre-compressive load of 500 N, equal to two-thirds of the human body mass, was applied on the top surface of the L3. In addition, four types of moments (anteflexion, rear protraction, bending, and axial rotation) set as 10 Nm were successively applied to the FE model combined with this pre-compressive load. Then, the range of motion (ROM), the torsional rigidity, and the maximum von Mises equivalent stress on the L3-L4 intervertebral disc and the implant were analyzed.

RESULTS

Both Coflex and PLIF reduced ROM. However, no significant difference was found in the maximum von Mises equivalent stress of adjacent segment disc between the two devices. Interestingly enough, both systems increased the torsional rigidity at the adjacent lumbar segment, and PLIF had a more significant increase. The Coflex implant had a larger maximum von Mises equivalent stress.

CONCLUSIONS

Both Coflex and PLIF reduced ROM at L3-L4, and thus improved the lumbar stability. Under the same load, both devices had almost the same maximum von Mises equivalent stress as the normal model on the adjacent intervertebral disc. But it is worthy to notice the torsional rigidity of PLIF was higher than that of Coflex, indicating that the lumbar treated with PLIF undertook a larger load to reach ROM of Coflex. Therefore, we presumed that ADS was related to a higher torsional rigidity.

Minimally invasive options for surgical management of adjacent segment disease of the lumbar spine

Background

The incidence of adjacent segment disease (ASD) after lumbar spine surgery is a condition that has become increasingly common as the rate of lumbar spine surgery continues to rise. Minimally invasive techniques continue to be refined and offer an opportunity to treat ASD with minimal tissue disruption, lower blood loss, a shorter hospital stay, and decreased morbidity. The aim of this report is to describe the various minimally invasive options for ASD with a comprehensive review of the existing literature.

Materials and Methods

A retrospective chart review of patients undergoing minimally invasive spine surgery (MIS) for ASD of the lumbar spine was conducted. Four basic techniques and their modifications were identified to address ASD. Illustrative cases, surgical techniques, and post-surgical outcomes are described.

Results

Four MIS techniques were identified as common surgical methods to correct ASD. (1) Non-instrumented discectomy, foraminotomy, or decompression, (2) anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), (3) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), and (4) lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) were found to be MIS techniques that address ASD. ALIF and LLIF provide indirect decompression of the neural foramina, while TLIF provides direct decompression. The addition and removal of screws and rods can be combined with any of these techniques.

Conclusions

MIS techniques provide decompression of the neural elements, stabilization, and, potentially, fusion for patients with ASD. These illustrated cases and the review of MIS surgical techniques can provide a comprehensive framework for addressing ASD.