A meta-analysis of unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion

Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation with anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a comparison of postoperative outcomes

PURPOSE

To determine of the impact of ALIF with minimally invasive unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UPSF) versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BPSF) on perioperative outcomes, radiographic outcomes, and the rates of fusion, subsidence, and adjacent segment stenosis.

METHODS

All adult patients who underwent one-level ALIF with UPSF or BPSF at an academic institution between 2015 and 2022 were retrospectively identified. Postoperative outcomes including length of hospital stay (LOS), wound complications, readmissions, and revisions were determined. The rates of fusion, screw loosening, adjacent segment stenosis, and subsidence were assessed on one-year postoperative CT. Lumbar alignment including lumbar lordosis, L4-S1 lordosis, regional lordosis, pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, and sacral slope were assessed on standing x-rays at preoperative, immediate postoperative, and final postoperative follow-up. Univariate and multivariate analysis compared outcomes across posterior fixation groups.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients were included (27 UPSF, 33 BPSF). Patients with UPSF were significantly younger (p = 0.011). Operative time was significantly greater in the BPSF group in univariate (p < 0.001) and multivariate analysis (ß=104.1, p < 0.001). Intraoperative blood loss, LOS, lordosis, pelvic parameters, fusion rate, subsidence, screw loosening, adjacent segment stenosis, and revision rate did not differ significantly between fixation groups. Though sacral slope (p = 0.037) was significantly greater in the BPSF group, fixation type was not a significant predictor on regression.

CONCLUSIONS

ALIF with UPSF relative to BPSF predicted decreased operative time but was not a significant predictor of postoperative outcomes. ALIF with UPSF can be considered to increase operative efficiency without compromising construct stability.

MRI Assessment of the Early Disc Degeneration Two Levels above Fused Lumbar Spine Segment: A Comparison after Unilateral and Bilateral Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) Procedure

Background: Adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) has become a great concern as a late complication in patients following fusion spine surgery with a potential need for revision surgery. Segments above the fused spine have higher mobility and they are especially prone to accelerated disc degeneration. The purpose of our study is to investigate early disc degenerative changes two levels above a surgically fused lumbar spine segment and to compare MRI analyses after unilateral and bilateral TLIF procedures. Methods: A total of 117 patients were included in this cross-sectional retrospective single center study (after bilateral TLIF surgery: n = 91, and after unilateral TLIF: n = 26). In both groups, the average patient age was similar: 62.84 years (SD = 12.53) in the unilateral TLIF group and 60.67 years (SD = 11.89) in the bilateral TLIF group. On average, MRI was performed 2.5 years after surgery (SD = 2.09). The modified eight-level Pfirrmann grading system was used for the assessment of disc degeneration severity. Descriptive statistics and the Mann–Whitney test were used to show differences in the Pfirrmann grades regarding the after-surgery period and the patient age. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test results were used to display differences in the Pfirrmann grades before and after surgery. Results: The comparison of mean values, regardless of the type of surgery, shows that this mean value is on average higher in the first segment adjacent to the fused spine segment. The assessment of the intervertebral disc structure in BIL TLIF is higher in both the first and the second segment. Early disc degeneration progression is subtle yet detectable (UNI TLIF 9.28% vs. BIL TLIF 16.74%). The assessment of the intervertebral disc structure is on average lower in patients aged less than 50 years at time of surgery compared with patients aged more than 50 years in UNI TLIF, and higher in the BIL TLIF group, for both the first and the second segment. Conclusion: Patients who had undergone unilateral TLIF fusion surgery have a lower rate of early disc degenerative changes. Considering a significantly higher rate of progressive disc degenerative changes in the elderly with bilateral fusion surgery, extra caution is required in the selection of appropriate surgical technique.

Management of recurrent unilateral lumbar disc herniation in a single level: unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screws fixation with interbody fusion

Background

Lumbar interbody fusion procedure is a recognized surgical technique in management of a variety of lumbar pathologies including recurrent lumbar disc prolapse. Interbody fusion augmented by pedicle screw fixation has been considered to improve fusion rates and clinical outcomes. Interbody fusion is commonly associated with better fusion potentials through applying the bone graft in the load bearing, vascular position of the anterior, and middle spinal columns. However, it still remains unknown whether interbody fusion with unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UPSF) is superior to that with bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BPSF).

Aim of the work

The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation associated with interbody fusion for the management of single level unilateral recurrent lumbar disc prolapse as regard the clinical and biomechanical results, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative stay.

Material and methods

This observational prospective comparative study of the two groups who were operated either unilateral (group A /15 patients) or bilateral (group B/15 patients) pedicle screw fixation with interbody fusion was done. Patients were followed up for 1, 6, ad 12 months.

Results

Significant improvement in functional outcome of the two groups was noted compared to preoperatively, except in early postoperative period where the back VAS and ODI in the unilateral group was better than bilateral group. However, on further follow up, no significant difference was noticed. There was no significant difference comparing fusion rate, complication rate, and duration of hospital stay between the two groups at postoperative follow-up. There was significantly less blood loss, and significantly shorter operation time in the unilateral PS fixation group as compared with the bilateral PS fixation group in our study.

Conclusion

Our study suggested that TLIF with unilateral PS fixation was as safe and effective as that with bilateral PS fixation for the management of recurrent single level lumbar disc prolapse; it showed better clinical outcome scores of ODI and back VAS, and a significant reduction of the intraoperative blood loss as well as the operation time, without significant differences considering fusion rate, complication rate, and duration of hospital stay between the two groups at postoperative follow-up. However, BPSF with TLIF likely causes more degeneration at the cranial adjacent segment compared with UPSF techniques. Nevertheless, the long-term follow up is required to demonstrate the impact of these findings.

Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in lumbar fusion: A systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses

OBJECTIVES

To carry out a systematic review on the basis of overlapping meta-analyses that compare unilateral with bilateral pedicle screw fixation (PSF) in lumbar fusion to identify which study represents the current best evidence, and to provide recommendations of treatment on this topic.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases was conducted to identify meta-analyses that compare unilateral with bilateral PSF in lumbar fusion. Only meta-analyses exclusively covering randomized controlled trials were included. Study quality was evaluated using the Oxford Levels of Evidence and Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) instrument. Then, the Jadad decision algorithm was applied to select the highest-quality study to represent the current best evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 9 studies with Level II of evidence fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included. The scores of AMSTAR criteria for them varied from 5 to 9 (mean 7.78). The current best evidence detected no significant differences between unilateral and bilateral PSF for short-segment lumbar fusion in the functional scores, length of hospital stay, fusion rate, and complication rate. However, unilateral PSF involved a remarkable decrease in operative time and blood loss but increase of cage migration when compared with bilateral PSF.

CONCLUSIONS

According to this systematic review, unilateral PSF is an effective method of fixation for short-segment lumbar fusion, has the advantages of reduced operative time and blood loss over bilateral PSF, but increases the risk of cage migration.

Unilateral Versus Bilateral Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVE

To compare clinical and radiologic outcomes of unilateral pedicle screw (UPS) and bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) fixations after single-level oblique lateral interbody fusion procedures.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 74 patients receiving single-level oblique lateral interbody fusion at L3-4 or L4-5 (June 2014 to June 2017). These patients were divided into BPS (n = 36) and UPS (n = 38) groups. Perioperative outcomes included operative time, blood loss, medical expenses, and complication rates. Radiologic outcomes included fusion rates and cage subsidence rates. Clinical outcomes included disability measured by the Oswestry Disability Index and pain measured by the visual analog scale.

RESULTS

The operative time was significantly shorter in the UPS group (76.2 ± 4.4 minutes) compared with the BPS group (127.0 ± 5.6 minutes, P < 0.001). There was a significant between-group difference in medical expenses ($11,044.8 ± $470.7 in UPS group vs. $15,018.4 ± $547.1 in BPS, P < 0.001). Blood loss and hospital stay did not differ between groups. Oswestry Disability Index and visual analog scale scores significantly decreased in both groups at different time points postoperatively compared with preoperatively. The UPS group had lower Oswestry Disability Index and visual analog scale scores than the BPS group at 7 days postoperatively, but no between-group difference was found after 1-month follow-up. Fusion rate was 86.8% in UPS group and 91.7% in BPS group (P > 0.05). Cage subsidence rates did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Oblique lateral interbody fusion with UPS fixation is an effective and reliable option for single-level lumbar diseases. Compared with BPS fixation, it resulted in less blood loss, required less operative time, and had comparable effects on radiologic and clinical outcomes.

Does the Cage Position in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Determine Unilateral versus Bilateral Screw Placement?: A Review of the Literature

This literature review examines the relative placement of the interbody cage with respect to the unilateral screw construct to address the need for bilateral screw placement versus unilateral screw placement. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has become a widely used technique for correcting lumbar intervertebral pathologies. This review addresses the necessity for further study on the effects of the relative position of intervertebral cage placement on the outcome of lumbar spine surgery after TLIF with unilateral pedicle screw fixation. Previous studies have addressed various factors, including posterior screw fixation, cage size, cage shape, and number of levels fused, that impact the biomechanics of the lumbar spine following TLIF. A simple survey of the literature was conducted. A search of the English literature was conducted using the keywords ‘TLIF,’ ‘transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion,’ ‘graft placement,’ ‘graft position,’ ‘cage position,’ ‘cage placement,’ ‘unilateral pedicle screw,’ ‘unilateral TLIF cage placement,’ ‘lumbar biomechanics,’ ‘lumbar stability,’ ‘lumbar fusion,’ and ‘lumbar intervertebral cage’ with various combinations of the operators ‘AND’ and ‘OR’ and no date restrictions. Seventeen articles in the English literature that were most relevant to this research question were identified. To the best of our knowledge, there are no published data addressing the effects of cage placement relative to the unilateral screw on lumbar stability in TLIF with unilateral pedicle screw fixation. Investigation of the effects of cage placement is, thus, warranted to achieve optimal clinical outcomes in patients undergoing TLIF with unilateral pedicle screw fixation.

Unilateral Versus Bilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Monocentric Study of 215 Patients With a Minimum of 4-Year Follow-up

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective clinical study.

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to retrospectively compare the mid-term to long-term outcomes between unilateral pedicle screw (UPS) and bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) augmented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in lumbar degenerative diseases.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Recently, UPS fixation has been applied in TLIF, for its satisfactory clinical outcome, less implants and less invasiveness. However, only short-term outcome has been reported, the mid-term to long-term outcome has not been well characterized.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From June 2007 to February 2011, 215 of 348 consecutive patients suffering from lumbar degenerative diseases were operated in our hospital and accomplished a minimum of 4-year follow-up. These patients were divided into 2 groups according to the operative techniques: UPS group (n=109), and bilateral pedicle screw group (n=106). Operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, hospital bill, fusion status, and complications were recorded and analyzed statistically. Visual analog scale, Oswestry disability index, and Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores were used to assess the preoperative and postoperative pain and functional outcome.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up duration was 52.2 months. A significant decrease occurred in operative time, blood loss, and hospital bill in unilateral group, compared with bilateral group (P<0.05). The average postoperative visual analog scale, Oswestry disability index, and Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores improved significantly in each group than the preoperative counterparts (P<0.05); however, there were no significant difference between groups at any follow-up time point (P>0.05). No statistically difference was detected regarding fusion rate and complication rate between the 2 groups (P>0.05), except the cage migration rate (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

UPS fixation could achieve satisfactory clinical outcome similar to bilateral fixation in TLIF at a mid-term to long-term follow-up. To avoid cage migration, bullet-shaped cages should not be used in the unilateral group.

Percutaneous thoracolumbar decompression combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation and fusion: a method for treating spinal degenerative pain in a biplane angiography suite with the avoidance of general anesthesia

BACKGROUND

Spondylytic degeneration of the axial lumbar spine is a major cause of pain and disability. Recent advances in spinal surgical instrumentation, including percutaneous access and fusion techniques, have made possible the performance of instrumented fusion through small incisions. By blending strategies of interventional pain management, neuroradiology, and conventional spine surgery, it is now feasible to treat spinal axial pain using permanent fixation techniques and local anesthesia in the setting of a fluoroscopy suite using mild sedation and local anesthesia.

METHODS

The author presents a series of percutaneous thoracolumbar fusion procedures performed in a biplane neuroangiographic suite and without general anesthesia for the treatment of spondylytic pain. All procedures utilized pedicle screw fixation, harvesting of local bone autograft, and application of bone fusion material.

RESULTS

In this series of 13 patients, a statistically significant reduction of pain was seen at both the 2-week post-operative timepoint, as well as at the time of longest follow-up (mean 40 weeks).

DISCUSSION

The advanced and rapid imaging capabilities afforded by a neuroangiographic suite can be safely combined with percutaneous fusion techniques so as to allow for fusion therapies to be applied to patients where the avoidance of general anesthesia is desirable.

Finite Element Analysis of a New Pedicle Screw-Plate System for Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

PURPOSE

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) is increasingly popular for the surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar disc diseases. The constructs intended for segmental stability are varied in MI-TLIF. We adopted finite element (FE) analysis to compare the stability after different construct fixations using interbody cage with posterior pedicle screw-rod or pedicle screw-plate instrumentation system.

METHODS

A L3-S1 FE model was modified to simulate decompression and fusion at L4-L5 segment. Fixation modes included unilateral plate (UP), unilateral rod (UR), bilateral plate (BP), bilateral rod (BR) and UP+UR fixation. The inferior surface of the S1 vertebra remained immobilized throughout the load simulation, and a bending moment of 7.5 Nm with 400N pre-load was applied on the L3 vertebra to recreate flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Range of motion (ROM) and Von Mises stress were evaluated for intact and instrumentation models in all loading planes.

RESULTS

All reconstructive conditions displayed decreased motion at L4-L5. The pedicle screw-plate system offered equal ROM to pedicle screw-rod system in unilateral or bilateral fixation modes respectively. Pedicle screw stresses for plate system were 2.2 times greater than those for rod system in left lateral bending under unilateral fixation. Stresses for plate were 3.1 times greater than those for rod in right axial rotation under bilateral fixation. Stresses on intervertebral graft for plate system were similar to rod system in unilateral and bilateral fixation modes respectively. Increased ROM and posterior instrumentation stresses were observed in all loading modes with unilateral fixation compared with bilateral fixation in both systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion augmentation with pedicle screw-plate system fixation increases fusion construct stability equally to the pedicle screw-rod system. Increased posterior instrumentation stresses are observed in all loading modes with plate fixation, and bilateral fixation could reduce stress concentration.

Minimally Invasive Unilateral vs. Bilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation and Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Treatment of Multi-Segment Lumbar Degenerative Disorders

Background

The choice for instrumentation with minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in treatment of degenerative lumbar disorders (DLD) remains controversial. The goal of this study was to investigate clinical outcomes in consecutive patients with multi-segment DLD treated with unilateral pedicle screw (UPS) vs. bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) instrumented TLIF.

Material/Methods

Eighty-four consecutive patients who had multi-level MIS-TLIF were retrospectively reviewed. All data were collected to compare the clinical outcomes between the 2 groups.

Results

Both groups showed similar clinical function scores in VAS and ODI. The two groups differed significantly in operative time (P<0.001), blood loss (P<0.001), and fusion rate (P=0.043), respectively.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated similar clinical outcomes between UPS fixation and BPS procedure after MIS-TLIF for multi-level DLD. Moreover, UPS technique was superior in operative time and blood loss, but represented lower fusion rate than the BPS construct did.

Acetyl-L-carnitine in the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objective

Acetyl-L-carnitine (ALC), a constructive molecule in fatty acid metabolism, is an agent potentially effective for treating peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP). Its effect, however, remains uncertain. We aimed to access the efficacy and safety of ALC for the treatment of patients with PNP.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE (1996–2014), EMBase (1974–2014), and CENTRAL (May 2014) up to June 27, 2014 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ALC with placebo or other active medications in diabetic and non-diabetic PNP patients that reported the change of pain using visual analogue scale (VAS). Mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used for pooling continuous data.

Results

Four RCTs comparing ALC with placebo and reporting in three articles (n = 523) were included. Compared with placebo, ALC significantly reduced VAS scores of PNP patients (MD of VAS, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.68-1.72, P <0.00001). In the subgroup analysis, the effect of ALC on VAS was similar in different administration routes (intramuscular-oral sequential subgroup: MD, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.34-2.04, P = 0.006; oral only subgroup: pooled MD, 1.15; 95%CI, 0.33-1.96, P = 0.006), and ALC appeared more effective in diabetic PNP patients than non-diabetic PNP patients (diabetic subgroup: MD, 1.47; 95%CI, 1.06-1.87, P <0.00001; non-diabetic subgroup: MD, 0.71; 95% CI, -0.01-1.43, P = 0.05). No severe adverse events were reported related to ALC. The common adverse events were pain, headache, paraesthesia, hyperesthesia, retching, biliary colic, and gastrointestinal disorders. The rates of total adverse events were similar in ALC and control group.

Conclusion

The current evidence suggests that ALC has a moderate effect in reducing pain measured on VAS in PNP patients with acceptable safety. Larger trials with longer follow-up, however, are warranted to establish the effects.