Functional Outcomes of Nerve Root Sparing Posterior Corpectomy in Lumbar Vertebral Burst Fractures

Novel Nerve-Sparing In Situ Assembly of an Expandable Titanium Cage to Maximize Endplate Coverage After Posterior Corpectomy for Comminuted Lumbar Burst Fractures

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The ability to maximize corpectomy cage endcap size and vertebral endplate coverage after corpectomy for lumbar burst fractures (L1-L5) is limited by the presence of lumbar nerve roots and the larger cross-sectional area of the lumbar endplates relative to the restrictive corridor for cage insertion. This work aims to provide details and clinical examples of a novel operative technique for 3-column reconstruction and stabilization of comminuted lumbar burst fractures.

METHODS

Through a standard posterior midline approach and following posterior instrumentation and lateral extracavitary corpectomy, an in-situ assembly of a modular corpectomy cage that respects adjacent neural structures, restores segmental alignment, and maximizes endplate coverage across a lordotic segment is completed.

RESULTS

Radiographic evidence of anatomic spinal reconstruction and stabilization with complete or near-complete endplate coverage without incurrence of new clinical deficit after this novel treatment of lumbar burst fractures.

CONCLUSION

The fixation approach described in this report may be a valuable modification to a long-standing technique used for treating comminuted lumbar burst fractures (L1-L5) from a posterior-only approach without incurring additional neurological deficits and by improving endplate and apophyseal ring coverage.

Technical nuances and approach-related morbidity of anterolateral and posterolateral lumbar corpectomy approaches-a systematic review of the literature

Purpose

Approaches for lumbar corpectomies can be roughly categorized into anterolateral (AL) and posterolateral (PL) approaches. It remains controversial to date whether one approach is superior to the other, and no comparative studies exist for the two approaches for lumbar corpectomies.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature was performed through a MEDLINE/PubMed search. Studies and case reports describing technique plus outcomes and possible complications were included. Thereafter, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of operation (LOO), utilized implants, neurological outcomes, complication rates, and reoperation rates were analyzed.

Results

A total of 64 articles reporting on 702 patients including 513 AL and 189 PL corpectomies were included in this paper. All patients in the PL group were instrumented via the same approach used for corpectomy, while in the AL group the majority (68.3%) of authors described the use of an additional approach for instrumentation. The EBL was higher in the AL group (1393 ± 1341 ml vs. 982 ± 567 ml). The LOO also was higher in the AL group (317 ± 178 min vs. 258 ± 93 min). The complication rate (20.5% vs. 29.1%, p = 0.048) and the revision rate (3.1% vs. 9.5%, p = 0.004) were higher in the PL group. Neurological improvement rates were 43.8% (AL) vs. 39.2% (PL), and deterioration was only noted in the AL group (6.0%), while 50.2% (AL) and 60.8% (PL) showed no change from initial presentation to the last follow-up.

Conclusion

While neurological outcomes of both approaches are comparable, the results of the present review demonstrated lower complication and revision rates in anterolateral corpectomies. Nevertheless, individual patient characteristics must be considered in decision-making.