Cadaveric biomechanical analysis of multilevel lateral lumbar interbody fusion with and without supplemental instrumentation

Finite element analysis of biomechanical investigation on diverse internal fixation techniques in oblique lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND

To establish a three-dimensional finite element model of the lumbar spine and investigate the impact of different fixation techniques on the biomechanical characteristics of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF).

METHODS

The study aimed to establish and validate a comprehensive three-dimensional model of the lower lumbar spine (L3-S1) using the finite element method. L4-L5 was selected as the surgical segment, and four distinct OLIF surgical models were constructed: Stand-alone (SA), unilateral cortical bone trajectory screw (UCBT), bilateral cortical bone trajectory screw (BCBT), and bilateral pedicle screw (BPS). The models were underwent a pure moment of 10N·m to simulate lumbar extension, flexion, left bending, right bending, left and right rotation movements. Subsequently, the range of motion (ROM), cage stress, and fixation stress were calculated.

RESULTS

In the L3-L5 segment, the BCBT group showed the most limited range of motion (ROM) under exercise load, indicating superior stability within this group. The ROM and cage stress values were found to be highest in the SA group. In contrast, the cage and internal fixation stress in the BPS group were observed to be lowest (9.91 ~ 53.83MPa, 44.93 ~ 84.85 MPa). With the exception of right bending and right rotation, the UCBT group demonstrated higher levels of internal fixation stress (102.20 ~ 164.62 MPa).

CONCLUSIONS

The study found that OLIF-assisted internal fixation improved segmental stability and reduced cage stress. The BPS group had advantages over the CBT group in preventing endplate damage and reducing the risk of cage subsidence. However, BCBT group has distinct merits in maintaining surgical segment stability, distributing stress load on the spinal motor unit, and reducing the likelihood of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD).

Biomechanical Comparison of Unilateral and Bilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation after Multilevel Lumbar Lateral Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Human Cadaveric Biomechanical Study.

OBJECTIVES

Lumbar Lateral Interbody Fusion (LLIF) utilizing a wide cage has been reported as having favorable biomechanical characteristics. We examine the biomechanical stability of unilateral pedicle screw and rod fixation after multilevel LLIF utilizing 26 mm wide cages compared to bilateral fixation.

METHODS

Eight human cadaveric specimens of L1-L5 were included. Specimens were attached to a universal testing machine (MTS 30/G). Three-dimensional specimen range of motion (ROM) was recorded using an optical motion-tracking device. Specimens were tested in 3 conditions: 1) intact, 2) L1-L5 LLIF (4 levels) with unilateral rod, 3) L1-L5 LLIF with bilateral rods.

RESULTS

From the intact condition, LLIF with unilateral rod decreased flexion-extension by 77%, lateral bending by 53%, and axial rotation by 26%. In LLIF with bilateral rods, flexion-extension decreased by 83%, lateral bending by 64%, and axial rotation by 34%. Comparing unilateral and bilateral fixation, LLIF with bilateral rods reduced ROM by a further 23% in flexion-extension, 25% in lateral bending, and 11% in axial rotation. The difference was statistically significant in flexion-extension and lateral bending (P < .005).

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable decreases in ROM were observed after multilevel (4-level) LLIF utilizing 26 mm cages supplemented with both unilateral and bilateral pedicle screws and rods. The addition of bilateral fixation provides a 10-25% additional decrease in ROM. These results can inform surgeons of the incremental biomechanical benefit when considering unilateral or bilateral posterior fixation after multilevel LLIF.

Long-Term Durability of Stand-Alone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion

BACKGROUND

The long-term durability of stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) remains unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether early patient-reported outcome measures after stand-alone LLIF are sustained on long-term follow-up.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-six patients who underwent stand-alone LLIF between 2009 and 2017 were included in this study. Patient-reported outcome measures included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQOL-5D (EQ-5D), and visual analog score (VAS) scores. Durable outcomes were defined as scores showing a significant improvement between preoperative and 6-week scores without demonstrating any significant decline at future time points. A repeated measures analysis was conducted using generalized estimating equations (model) to assess the outcome across different postoperative time points, including 6 weeks, 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years.

RESULTS

ODI scores showed durable improvement at 5-year follow-up, with scores improving from 46.9 to 38.5 ( P = .001). Improvements in EQ-5D showed similar durability up to 5 years, improving from 0.48 to 0.65 ( P = .03). VAS scores also demonstrated significant improvements postoperatively that were durable at 2-year follow-up, improving from 7.0 to 4.6 ( P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing stand-alone LLIF were found to have significant improvements in ODI and EQ-5D at 6-week follow-up that remained durable up to 5 years postoperatively. VAS scores were found to be significantly improved at 6 weeks and up to 2 years postoperatively but failed to reach significance at 5 years. These findings demonstrate that patients undergoing stand-alone LLIF show significant improvement in overall disability after surgery that remains durable at long-term follow-up.

Biomechanical Comparison of Multilevel Stand-Alone Lumbar Lateral Interbody Fusion With Posterior Pedicle Screws: An In Vitro Study

OBJECTIVE

Lumbar lateral interbody fusion (LLIF) allows placement of large interbody cages while preserving ligamentous structures important for stability. Multiple clinical and biomechanical studies have demonstrated the feasibility of stand-alone LLIF in single-level fusion. We sought to compare the stability of 4-level stand-alone LLIF utilizing wide (26 mm) cages with bilateral pedicle screw and rod fixation.

METHODS

Eight human cadaveric specimens of L1-5 were included. Specimens were attached to a universal testing machine (MTS 30/G). Flexion, extension, and lateral bending were attained by applying a 200 N load at a rate of 2 mm/sec. Axial rotation of ± 8° of the specimen was performed at 2°/sec. Three-dimensional specimen motion was recorded using an optical motion-tracking device. Specimens were tested in 4 conditions: (1) intact, (2) bilateral pedicle screws and rods, (3) 26-mm stand-alone LLIF, (4) 26-mm LLIF with bilateral pedicle screws and rods.

RESULTS

Compared to the stand-alone LLIF, bilateral pedicle screws and rods had 47% less range of motion in flexion-extension (p < 0.001), 21% less in lateral bending (p < 0.05), and 20% less in axial rotation (p = 0.1). The addition of bilateral posterior instrumentation to the stand-alone LLIF resulted in decreases of all 3 planes of motion: 61% in flexion-extension ( p < 0.001), 57% in lateral bending (p < 0.001), 22% in axial rotation (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Despite the biomechanical advantages associated with the lateral approach and 26 mm wide cages, stand-alone LLIF for 4-level fusion is not equivalent to pedicle screws and rods.

Comparison of staged LLIF combined with posterior instrumented fusion with posterior instrumented fusion alone for the treatment of adult degenerative lumbar scoliosis with sagittal imbalance

BACKGROUND

To retrospectively compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of staged lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) combined with posterior instrumented fusion(PIF)with PIF alone for the treatment of adult degenerative lumbar scoliosis (ADLS) with sagittal imbalance.

METHODS

ADLS patients with sagittal imbalance underwent corrective surgery were included and divided into staged group (underwent multilevel LLIF in the first-stage and PIF in the second-stage) and control group (PIF alone). The clinical and radiological outcomes were evaluated and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients with an average age of 69.7±6.3 years were enrolled, including 25 in the staged group and 20 in the control group. Compared with preoperative values, patients in both groups achieved significant improvement in terms of ODI, VAS back, VAS leg and spinopelvic parameters after surgery, which were maintained well during the follow-up period. Compared with control group, total operative time in the staged group was longer, but the amounts of blood loss and blood transfusion were reduced. The average posterior fixation segments were 6.20±1.78 in the staged group and 8.25±1.16 in the control group (P<0.01), respectively. Posterior column osteotomy (PCO) was performed in 9 patients (36%) in the staged group, while PCO and/or pedicle subtraction osteotomy were performed in 15 patients (75%) in the control group (P<0.01). There was no difference in complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Both surgical strategies were effective for the treatment of ADLS with sagittal imbalance. However, staged treatment was less invasive, which reduced the number of posterior fixation segments and osteotomy requirement.

Biomechanical and clinical studies on lumbar spine fusion surgery: a review

Low back pain is associated with degenerative disc diseases of the spine. Surgical treatment includes fusion and non-fusion types. The gold standard is fusion surgery, wherein the affected vertebral segment is fused. The common complication of fusion surgery is adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). The ASD often leads to revision surgery, calling for a further fusion of adjacent segments. The existing designs of nonfusion type implants are associated with clinical problems such as subsidence, difficulty in implantation, and the requirement of revision surgeries. Various surgical approaches have been adopted by the surgeons to insert the spinal implants into the affected segment. Over the years, extensive biomechanical investigations have been reported on various surgical approaches and prostheses to predict the outcomes of lumbar spine implantations. Computer models have been proven to be very effective in identifying the best prosthesis and surgical procedure. The objective of the study was to review the literature on biomechanical studies for the treatment of lumbar spinal degenerative diseases. A critical review of the clinical and biomechanical studies on fusion spine surgeries was undertaken. The important modeling parameters, challenges, and limitations of the current studies were identified, showing the future research directions.

Biomechanical study of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) augmented with different types of instrumentation: a finite element analysis

Background

To explore the biomechanical differences in oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) augmented by different types of instrumentation.

Methods

A three-dimensional nonlinear finite element (FE) model of an intact L3-S1 lumbar spine was built and validated. The intact model was modified to develop five OLIF surgery models (Stand-alone OLIF; OLIF with lateral plate fixation [OLIF + LPF]; OLIF with unilateral pedicle screws fixation [OLIF + UPSF]; OLIF with bilateral pedicle screws fixation [OLIF + BPSF]; OLIF with translaminar facet joint fixation + unilateral pedicle screws fixation [OLIF + TFJF + UPSF]) in which the surgical segment was L4–L5. Under a follower load of 500 N, a 7.5-Nm moment was applied to all lumbar spine models to calculate the range of motion (ROM), equivalent stress peak of fixation instruments (ESPFI), equivalent stress peak of cage (ESPC), equivalent stress peak of cortical endplate (ESPCE), and equivalent stress average value of cancellous bone (ESAVCB).

Results

Compared with the intact model, the ROM of the L4–L5 segment in each OLIF surgery model decreased by > 80%. The ROM values of adjacent segments were not significantly different. The ESPFI, ESPC, and ESPCE values of the OLIF + BPSF model were smaller than those of the other OLIF surgery models. The ESAVCB value of the normal lumbar model was less than the ESAVCB values of all OLIF surgical models. In most postures, the ESPFI, ESPCE, and ESAVCB values of the OLIF + LPF model were the largest. The ESPC was higher in the Stand-alone OLIF model than in the other OLIF models. The stresses of several important components of the OLIF + UPSF and OLIF + TFJF + UPSF models were between those of the OLIF + LPF and OLIF + BPSF models.

Conclusions

Our biomechanical FE analysis indicated the greater ability of OLIF + BPSF to retain lumbar stability, resist cage subsidence, and maintain disc height. Therefore, in the augmentation of OLIF, bilateral pedicle screws fixation may be the best approach.

Effects of thigh extension on the position of the femoral nerve: application to prone lateral transpsoas approaches to the lumbar spine

Some authors have suggested that thigh extension during the prone lateral transpsoas approach to the lumbar spine provides the theoretical advantage of providing posterior shift of the psoas muscle and plexus and is responsible for its lower rates of nerve injury. We aimed to elucidate the effects of surgical positioning on the femoral nerve within the psoas muscle via a cadaveric study. In the supine position, 10 fresh frozen adult cadavers had a metal wire secured to the pelvic segment of the femoral nerve and then extended proximally along with its L2 contribution. Fluoroscopy was then used to identify the wires on the femoral nerves in a neutral position and with the thigh extended and flexed by 25 and 45°. Additionally, a lateral incision was made in the anterolateral abdominal wall to mimic a lateral transpsoas approach to the lumbar spine, and measurements were made of the amount of movement in the vertical plane of the femoral nerve from neutral to then 25 and 45° of thigh flexion and extension. On fluoroscopy, the femoral nerves moved posteriorly at a mean of 10.1 mm with thigh extension. Femoral nerve movement could not be detected at any degree of this range of flexion of the thigh. Extension of the thigh to about 30° can move the femoral nerve farther away from the dissection plane by approximately one centimeter. This hip extension not only places the femoral nerve in a more advantageous position for lateral lumbar interbody fusion procedures but also helps to promote accentuation of lumbar lordosis.

Oblique lateral interbody fusion combined with lateral plate fixation for the treatment of degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine: A retrospective study

Oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) is a minimally invasive decompression technique used in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases (LDDs). It is usually combined with posterior pedicle screw fixation to decrease perioperative complications. Few studies have reported the efficacy of OLIF combined with lateral plate instrumentation (OLIF-LP) for the treatment of LDDs.The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of OLIF combined with lateral plate instrumentation for the treatment of LDDs.From May 2020 to September 2020, the clinical data of 52 patients who underwent OLIF-LP were analyzed. The operation time, blood loss, and complications were recorded. The radiological parameters, visual analog scale score, and Oswestry Disability Index were evaluated.The average operation time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay were 75.41 ± 11.53 minutes, 39.57 ± 9.22 mL, and 7.22 ± 1.85 days, respectively. The visual analog scale score and Oswestry Disability Index both improved significantly after surgery (7.23 ± 1.26 vs 2.15 ± 0.87; 60.27 ± 7.91 vs 21.80 ± 6.32, P < .01). The postoperative disk height was 13.02 ± 8.83 mm, which was much greater than the preoperative value. The postoperative foraminal height improved significantly (16.18 ± 3.49 vs 21.54 ± 2.12 mm, P < .01), and the cross-sectional area improved from 88.95 ± 14.79 to 126.53 ± 8.83 mm2 (P < .001). The radiological fusion rate was 88% at the last follow-up. No major complications, such as ureteral injury, vascular injury, or vertebral body fracture, occurred.Use of the OLIF-LP technique can help avoid lumbar posterior surgery and minimize the operative time and blood loss. OLIF-LP can achieve 1-stage intervertebral fusion and instrumentation through a single small incision.

Comparison of Hybrid Posterior Fixation and Conventional Open Posterior Fixation Combined with Multilevel Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Adult Spinal Deformity

We compared radiological and clinical outcomes between multilevel lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) + hybrid posterior fixation (PF) and multilevel LLIF + conventional open PF in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD). Patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery for ASD in a single institution between 2014 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Fifty-six patients (hybrid PF, 30; open PF, 26) who underwent ASD correction surgery were enrolled between 2014 and 2018. We evaluated patients’ demographics, clinical outcomes, and radiographical parameters in each group. There was significantly less estimated blood loss in the hybrid PF group (662.8 mL vs. 1088.8 mL; p = 0.012). The CRP level 7 days after surgery was significantly lower in the hybrid PF group (2.9 mg/dL vs. 4.3 mg/dL; p = 0.035). There was no significant difference between the two groups in other demographic variables, visual analog scores for back pain and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index, coronal Cobb angle, lumbar lordosis, pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence–lumbar lordosis mismatch, and sagittal vertical axis. There was a significantly higher percentage of major complications in the open PF group (42.3% vs. 13.3%; p = 0.039). Thus, LLIF + hybrid PF for ASD corrective surgery may be comparable to LLIF + open PF in terms of clinical and radiographic outcomes.

Evaluation of the Stability of a Novel Lateral Plate Internal Fixation: An In Vitro Biomechanical Study

BACKGROUND

This study aims to evaluate the biomechanical stability of a novel lateral plate (NLP) that can be used in oblique lateral lumbar fusion (OLIF).

METHODS

In vitro biomechanical tests were performed on 6 fresh calf lumbar vertebrae specimens. The surgical segment was set at L3-L4. Each specimen was tested in the following order: intact state (INT); OLIF cage only/stand-alone (SA); cage supplemented with lateral screw-rod (LSR); cage supplemented with novel lateral plate (NLP); and cage supplemented with unilateral or bilateral pedicle screw-rod (UPS or BPS). A pure moment of ±7.5 Nm was applied to the specimen to produce 6 different motion directions, including flexion and extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation, and the range of motion (ROM) of L3-L4 in each direction was recorded.

RESULTS

In addition to flexion-extension, NLP reduced the ROM of SA (P < 0.05). In flexion-extension, the ROM of NLP was similar to those of SA and LSR (P > 0.05); compared to pedicle screw-rod (PSD), the ROM of NLP was higher (P < 0.05). In lateral bending, the ROM of NLP was close to that of LSR and PSD (P > 0.05). In axial rotation, the ROM of NLP was higher than that of PSD (P < 0.05), and close to that of LSR (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

NLP can enhance surgical segment stability in all directions of motion, similar to LSR, but weaker than UPS and BPS in flexion-extension and rotation.