Clinical results and complications associated with oblique lumbar interbody fusion technique

Stand-Alone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Supplemental Posterior Instrumentation in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES

Compare the outcomes of stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and LLIF with supplemental posterior instrumentation in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease by a Meta-analysis.

METHODS

In this meta-analysis, we searched Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases from inception to Aug 2023. In this study, only study reporting stand-alone LLIF(stand-alone group) and LLIF with supplemental posterior instrumentation (posterior instrumentation group) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease and we excluded duplicate publications, research without full text, incomplete information or inability to conduct data extraction, animal experiments, reviews, and systematic reviews. STATA 15.1 software was used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Among the 15 included articles, the total number of patients was 1177, with 469 patients (638 fused segments) in the standalone group and 708 patients (1046 fused segments) in the posterior instrumentation group. The posterior instrumentation group was better than stand-alone group with significant differences in fusion rate, cage subsidence rate,the restoration of disc height and segmental lordosis, the improvement of ODI, and reoperation rate. While, comparing with posterior instrumentation group,the stand-alone group had less intraoperative blood loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Both stand-alone and instrumented LLIF were effective in improving the clinical outcomes of patients with lumbar degenerative disease. However, the stand-alone LLIF was associated with lower fusion rate, inferior maintenance of indirect decompression, and higher reoperation rate due to high-grade cage subsidence. For patients with risk factors of high-grade cage subsidence, the LLIF with posterior instrumentation may be a better choice.

Defining cage subsidence in anterior, oblique, and lateral lumbar spine fusion approaches: a systematic review of the literature

One of the most common complications of lumbar fusions is cage subsidence, which leads to collapse of disc height and reappearance of the presenting symptomology. However, definitions of cage subsidence are inconsistent, leading to a variety of subsidence calculation methodologies and thresholds. To review previously published literature on cage subsidence in order to present the most common methods for calculating and defining subsidence in the anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF), and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) approaches. A search was completed in PubMed and Embase with inclusion criteria focused on identifying any study that provided descriptions of the method, imaging modality, or subsidence threshold used to calculate the presence of cage subsidence. A total of 69 articles were included in the final analysis, of which 18 (26.1%) reported on the ALIF approach, 22 (31.9%) on the OLIF approach, and 31 (44.9%) on the LLIF approach, 2 of which reported on more than one approach. ALIF articles most commonly calculated the loss of disc height over time with a subsidence threshold of > 2 mm. Most OLIF articles calculated the total amount of cage migration into the vertebral bodies, with a threshold of > 2 mm. LLIF was the only approach in which most articles applied the same method for calculation, namely, a grading scale for classifying the loss of disc height over time. We recommend future articles adhere to the most common methodologies presented here to ensure accuracy and generalizability in reporting cage subsidence.

Can zoledronic acid reduce the risk of cage subsidence after oblique lumbar interbody fusion combined with bilateral pedicle screw fixation in the elderly population? A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential of zoledronic acid for reducing the incidence of cage subsidence and enhancing interbody fusion rates following oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) surgery, particularly as the first reported evidence of the role of zoledronic acid combined with OLIF.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on data from 108 elderly patients treated for degenerative lumbar diseases using OLIF combined with bilateral pedicle screw fixation from January 2018 to December 2021. Patients were divided into the zoledronic acid (ZOL) group (43 patients, 67 surgical segments) and the control group (65 patients, 86 surgical segments). A comparative analysis of the radiographic and clinical outcomes between the groups was performed, employing univariate and multivariate regression analyses to explore the relationships between cage subsidence and the independent variables.

RESULTS

Radiographic outcomes, including anterior height, posterior height, disc height, coronal disc angle, foraminal height, and lumbar lordosis, were not significantly different between the two groups. Similarly, no statistically significant differences were noted in the back visual analog scale (VAS) scores and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores between the groups. However, at the 1-year follow-up, the leg VAS score was lower in the ZOL group than in the control group (P = 0.028). The ZOL group demonstrated a notably lower cage subsidence rate (20.9%) than did the control group (43.0%) (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the interbody fusion rate between the ZOL group (93.0%) and the control group (90.8%). Non-use of zoledronic acid emerged as an independent risk factor for cage subsidence (OR = 6.047, P = 0.003), along with lower bone mineral density, lower postoperative anterior height, and concave endplate morphology. The model exhibited robust discriminative performance, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.872.

CONCLUSION

The administration of zoledronic acid mitigates the risk of cage subsidence following OLIF combined with bilateral pedicle screw fixation in elderly patients; however, it does not improve the interbody fusion rate.

Social Medical Insurances, Choices of Medical Institutions and the 'Siphon Effect' in the Health Service Market: Evidence from 2021 Yangtze River Delta Region of China

Purpose

The siphon effect in the health service market is notably pronounced in many countries. How to measure and identify the determinants contributing to the siphon effect presents a substantial challenge. This study aimed to analyse the effect of two different social medical insurances, the Basic Medical Insurance System for Urban Employees (BMISUE), and the Basic Medical Insurance System for Urban and Rural Residents (BMISURR), on the siphon effect in the health services market.

Methods

The data used in this study were from the 2021 Health Life Satisfaction Survey of Yangtze River Delta (HLSSYRD) conducted by Shanghai Jiao Tong University. The logistic model was used to evaluate the association between social medical insurances and individual choices of medical institutions, and the Propensity Score Matching method (PSM) was used to check the robustness of basic results.

Results

Residents covered by BMISUE were more likely to choose a general hospital when they first sought medical treatment (OR = 5.377, 95% CI: 4.887, 5.915) relative to those insured by BMISURR. Further analysis showed that BMISUE would accelerate the siphon effect of general hospitals, people insured by BMISUE were still more likely to choose general hospitals despite being close to primary hospitals compared to those insured by BMISURR (OR = 3.240, 95% CI: 2.945, 3.565). Heterogeneity analysis indicated BMISUE had a greater impact on residents aged 15-59 years and those with high income compared to older people and individuals with low income.

Conclusion

Different social medical insurances can substantially affect residents' first choice of medical institutions. BMISUE with higher benefits level could exacerbate the siphon effect in the health service market. More equitable medical security system should be strengthened to bridge the benefits gap between BMISUE and BMISURR.

Comparison of instrumented and stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Both instrumented and stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) have been widely used to treat lumbar degenerative disease. However, it remains controversial as whether posterior internal fixation is required when LLIF is performed. This meta-analysis aims to compare the radiographic and clinical results between instrumented and stand-alone LLIF.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Collaboration Library up to March 2023 were searched for studies that compared instrumented and stand-alone LLIF in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease. The following outcomes were extracted for comparison: interbody fusion rate, cage subsidence rate, reoperation rate, restoration of disc height, segmental lordosis, lumbar lordosis, visual analog scale (VAS) scores of low-back and leg pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores.

RESULTS

13 studies involving 1063 patients were included. The pooled results showed that instrumented LLIF had higher fusion rate (OR 2.09; 95% CI 1.16-3.75; P = 0.01), lower cage subsidence (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.37-0.68; P < 0.001) and reoperation rate (OR 0.28; 95% CI 0.10-0.79; P = 0.02), and more restoration of disc height (MD 0.85; 95% CI 0.18-1.53; P = 0.01) than stand-alone LLIF. The ODI and VAS scores were similar between instrumented and stand-alone LLIF at the last follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this meta-analysis, instrumented LLIF is associated with higher rate of fusion, lower rate of cage subsidence and reoperation, and more restoration of disc height than stand-alone LLIF. For patients with high risk factors of cage subsidence, instrumented LLIF should be applied to reduce postoperative complications.

Da Vinci Robotic Assistance for Anterolateral Lumbar Arthrodesis: Results of a French Multicentric Study

BACKGROUND

The da Vinci robot (DVR) is the most widely used robot in abdominal, urological, and gynecological surgery. Due to its minimally invasive approach, the DVR has demonstrated its effectiveness and improved safety in these different disciplines. The aim of our study was to report its use in an anterior approach of complex lumbar surgery.

METHODS

In a retrospective multicenter observational study, 10 robotic-assisted procedures were performed from March 2021 to May 2022. Six oblique lumbar interbody fusion procedures and 4 lumbar corpectomies were performed by anterolateral approach assisted by the DVR. The characteristics of the patients and the intraoperative and postoperative data were recorded.

RESULTS

Six men and 4 women underwent surgery (mean age 50.5 years; body mass index 28.6 kg/m2). No vascular injuries were reported, and no procedures required conversion to open surgery. Mean surgical time were 219 minutes for 1-level oblique lumbar interbody fusion (3 patients), 286 minutes for 2-level oblique lumbar interbody fusion (3 patients), and 390 minutes for corpectomy (4 patients). Four patients experienced nonserious adverse events due to lumbar plexus nerve damage. One patient had a vertebral body plate fracture requiring posterior revision surgery, and 1 patient had a psoas hematoma requiring transfusion. No abdominal wall complications or surgical site infection were found. Seven patients were reviewed at 12 months, none had complications, and all showed radiological evidence of fusion.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the DVR in lumbar surgery allows a safe minimally invasive transperitoneal approach, but to date, only hybrid procedures have been performed.

Towards a More Realistic Appraisal of Complications Following Staged Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Single Institution Series

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

With steadily increasing implementation of far lateral approaches in spine surgery, surgeons can utilize the advantages of different approaches synergistically to ensure an optimal patient outcome. Our single institution study aimed to assess the complication rates of patients who underwent a lateral interbody fusion as the index procedure and additional anterior or posterior instrumentation as part of a planned staged surgical reconstruction effort.

METHODS

This study was approved by our institutional review board (STUDY2021000113). We included 576 patients who received a lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) as the index procedure followed by transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) or anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) between 2016 and 2020. Primary outcomes were complications identified during the initial inpatient stay, which were categorized into approach-related and secondary complications. Secondary outcomes tracked up to 6 years post-surgery.

RESULTS

The overall complication rate was 19.2% (10.5% approach related, 8.7% secondary complications). Significant intraoperative hemorrhage (mean 659.3 mL vs 131.4 mL, P < .01) was the most common approach related complication with an incidence of 4%, followed by temporary hip flexor weakness in 2.6%. A permanent (femoral) nerve damage was verified in 1 patient. The most common secondary complication was impaired wound healing in 12 patients (2.1%). We identified a 7.1% (41 of 576 patients) rate of revision surgery, on average after 372 days (±34 days).

CONCLUSIONS

We recorded an overall complication rate of 19.2% for staged adult deformity corrective surgeries utilizing far lateral interbody fusions at several lumbar levels followed by a more comprehensive posterior surgical reconstruction.

Biomechanical differences between two different shapes of oblique lumbar interbody fusion cages on whether to add posterior internal fixation system: a finite element analysis

BACKGROUND

Oblique lateral lumbar fusion (OLIF) is widely used in spinal degeneration, deformity and other diseases. The purpose of this study was to investigate the biomechanical differences between two different shapes of OLIF cages on whether to add posterior internal fixation system, using finite element analysis.

METHODS

A complete three-dimensional finite element model is established and verified for L3-L5. Surgical simulation was performed on the verified model, and the L4-L5 was the surgical segment. A total of the stand-alone group (Model A1, Model B1) and the BPSF group (Model A2, Model B2) were constructed. The four OLIF surgical models were: A1. Stand-alone OLIF with a kidney-shaped Cage; B1. Stand-alone OLIF with a straight cage; A2. OLIF with a kidney-shaped cage + BPSF; B2. Stand-alone OLIF with a straight cage + BPSF, respectively. The differences in the range of motion of the surgical segment (ROM), equivalent stress peak of the cage (ESPC), the maximum equivalent stress of the endplate (MESE) and the maximum stress of the internal fixation (MSIF) were compared between different models.

RESULTS

All OLIF surgical models showed that ROM declines between 74.87 and 96.77% at L4-L5 operative levels. The decreasing order of ROM was Model A2 > Model B2 > Model A1 > Model A2. In addition, the ESPC and MESE of Model A2 are smaller than those of other OLIF models. Except for the left-bending position, the MSIF of Model B2 increased by 1.51-16.69% compared with Model A2 in each position. The maximum value of MESE was 124.4 Mpa for Model B1 in the backward extension position, and the minimum value was 7.91 Mpa for Model A2 in the right rotation. Stand-alone group showed significantly higher ROMs and ESPCs than the BPSF group, with maximum values of 66.66% and 70.59%. For MESE, the BPSF group model can be reduced by 89.88% compared to the stand-alone group model.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the traditional straight OLIF cage, the kidney-shaped OLIF cage can further improve the stability of the surgical segment, reduce ESPC, MESE and MSIF, and help to reduce the risk of cage subsidence.

Should a Narrow Corridor Be a Contraindication for Performing Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion Procedure or Not?

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the effect of corridor width on the postoperative outcomes of patients who underwent the OLIF procedure.

METHODS

Patients who underwent OLIF surgery, which included L4-5, between 2015 and 2021 were retrospectively studied. The patients were divided into three groups by the width of the corridor: not more than 10 mm, between 10 and 20 mm, and 20 mm or more. We compared clinical and radiographic outcomes and complications between these groups.

RESULTS

A total of 81 patients were included. There were no significant differences in VAS leg and back pain scores, ODI scores, or complications between each group. The radiographic findings, including cage position, anterior and posterior disc height, segmental Cobb angle, and foraminal height, also showed no significant differences between each group. The only radiographic finding that showed a significant difference between each group was the angle of the cage. We found significantly less degree of angle in the wider than 20 mm group when compared to the other two groups. (P-value = .01). There was no recorded incidence of major vascular complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The width of oblique corridor does not affect clinical outcomes, complications, or radiographic findings, including position of the cage, anterior and posterior disc height, segmental angle, and foraminal height after OLIF procedure, including L4-5 level. Thus, the OLIF procedure can be performed safely even in patients with limited oblique corridors, especially at L4-5.

Antepsoas Approaches to the Lumbar Spine

Lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) is a well-established approach in treating spinal deformity and degenerative conditions of the spine. Since its inception in the 20th century, LIF has continued to evolve, allowing for minimally invasive approaches, high fusion rates, and improving disability scores with favorable complication rates. The anterior to the psoas (ATP) approach utilizes a retroperitoneal pathway medial to the psoas muscle to access the L1-S1intervertebral disc spaces. In contrast to the transpsoas arppoach, its primary advantage is avoiding transgressing the psoas muscle and the contained lumbar plexus, which potentially decreases the risk of injury to the lumbar plexus. Avoiding transgression of the psoas may minimize the risk of transient or permanent neurological deficits secondary to lumbar plexus injury. Indications for ATP approaches may expand as it is shown to be a safe and effective method of achieving spinal arthrodesis.

Efficacy of OLIF combined with pedicle screw internal fixation for lumbar spinal stenosis on spinal canal changes before and after surgery

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of OLIF combined with pedicle screw internal fixation in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis by assessing the changes in spinal canal before and after surgery.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we included sixteen patients who underwent a combination of single-segment OLIF and pedicle screw internal fixation for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis at the Affiliated Hospital of Jiangxi University of Chinese Medicine between February 2018 and August 2022. The patients' pre- and post-operative data were compared. Intraoperative bleeding, duration of surgery, visual analogue score (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), disc height (DH), cross-sectional area of vertebral canal (CSAVC), cross-sectional area of dural sac (CSADS), cross-sectional area of intervertebral foramen (CSAIF), spinal canal volume (SCV), spinal canal volume expansion rate, lumbar lordosis, and sagittal vertical axis were observed and recorded. The efficacy of OLIF combined with pedicle screw internal fixation for lumbar spinal stenosis on spinal canal changes before and after surgery was summarized.

RESULTS

The results showed that OLIF combined with pedicle screw internal fixation effectively restored disc height and increased the cross-sectional area of the spinal canal. It also had an indirect decompression effect. The intraoperative bleeding and duration of surgery were within acceptable ranges. The VAS and ODI scores significantly improved after surgery, indicating a reduction in pain and improvement in functional disability. The CSAVC, CSADS, CSAIF, SCV, and spinal canal volume expansion rate were all increased postoperatively. Additionally, there was improvement in lumbar lordosis and sagittal vertical axis. We conducted a follow-up of all patients at 1 year after the surgery. The results revealed that the parameter values at 1 year post-surgery showed varying degrees of decrease or increase compared to the immediate postoperative values. However, these values remained statistically significant when compared to the preoperative parameter values (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

OLIF combined with pedicle screw internal fixation effectively restores disc height and increases the cross-sectional area of the vertebral canal in patients with LSS, reflecting the indirect decompression effect. Measuring parameters such as DH, CSAVC, CSADS, CSAIF, SCV, and SCV expansion rate before and after surgery provides valuable information for evaluating the efficacy and functional recovery of the lumbar spine in LSS patients treated with OLIF surgery.

Advances in Hounsfield units value for predicting cage subsidence on spinal interbody fusion surgery

PURPOSE

A growing number of studies have demonstrated that Hounsfield units (HU) value can effectively assess bone quality and predict cage subsidence (CS) after spinal surgery. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the utility of the HU value for predicting CS after spinal surgery and to raise some of the unresolved questions in this field.

METHODS

We searched on PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library for studies correlating HU value to CS.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies were included in this review. We found that HU value can predicted the risk of CS effectively after spinal surgery. Moreover, the HU value of the cancellous vertebral body and the cortical endplate were used for predicting CS, in comparison, the measurement method of HU value in the cancellous vertebral body was more standardized, but which region is more important to CS remains unknown. Different cutoff thresholds of HU value have been established in different surgical procedures for predicting CS. The HU value may be superior to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) for CS prediction; however, the usage standard of HU value has not been well established.

CONCLUSIONS

The HU value shows great potential for predicting CS and constitutes an advantage over DEXA. However, general consensuses about how CS is defined and HU is measured, which part of HU value is more important, and the appropriate cutoff threshold of the HU value for osteoporosis and CS still require exploration.

Perioperative Clinical Features and Long-term Prognosis After Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion (OLIF), OLIF With Anterolateral Screw Fixation, or OLIF With Percutaneous Pedicle Fixation: A Comprehensive Treatment Strategy for Patients With Lumbar Degenerative Disease

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF), OLIF combined with anterolateral screw fixation (OLIF-AF), and OLIF combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (OLIF-PF) in the treatment of single-level or 2-level degenerative lumbar disease.

METHODS

Between January 2017 and 2021, 71 patients were treated with OLIF and combined OLIF. The demographic data, clinical outcomes, radiographic outcomes, and complications were compared among the 3 groups.

RESULTS

The operative time and intraoperative blood loss in the OLIF (p<0.05) and OLIF-AF (p<0.05) groups were lower than in the OLIF-PF group. Posterior disk height improvement in the OLIF-PF group was better than in the OLIF (p<0.05) and OLIF-AF (p<0.05) groups. In terms of foraminal height (FH), the OLIF-PF group was significantly better than the OLIF group (p<0.05), but there was no significant difference between the OLIF-PF and OLIF-AF groups (p>0.05) or between the OLIF and OLIF-AF groups (p>0.05). There were no significant differences in fusion rates, the incidence of complications, lumbar lordosis, anterior disc height, and cross-sectional area among the 3 groups (p>0.05). The OLIF-PF group had significantly lower rates of subsidence than the OLIF group (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

OLIF remains a viable option with similar patient-reported outcomes and fusion rates compared with surgeries that include lateral and posterior internal fixation while greatly reducing the financial burden, intraoperative time, and intraoperative blood loss. OLIF has a higher subsidence rate than lateral and posterior internal fixation, but most subsidence is mild and has no adverse effect on clinical and radiographic outcomes.

Different Moro Zones of Psoas Major Affect the Clinical Outcomes after Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Study of 94 Patients

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) has been driven to the maturity stage in recent years. However, postoperative symptoms such as thigh paresthesia resulting from intraoperative retraction of the psoas major (PM) have sometimes occurred. The aim of this study was to assess the different positions and morphology of PM muscles and their relationship with clinical outcomes after OLIF by introducing the Moro zones. Patients who underwent L4-5 OLIF at our institution between April 2019 and June 2021 were reviewed and all data were recorded. All patients were grouped by Moro zones into a Moro A cohort and a Moro I and II cohort based on the front edges of their left PM muscles. A total of 94 patients were recruited, including 57 in the Moro A group and 37 in the Moro I and II group. Postoperative thigh pain or numbness occurred in 12 (21.1%) and 2 (5.4%) patients in the Moro A group and the Moro I and II group, respectively. There was no difference in the psoas major transverse diameter (PMTD) between groups preoperatively, while longer PMTD was revealed postoperatively in the Moro A group. The operating window (OW) and psoas major sagittal diameter (PMSD) showed significant differences within and between groups. Thirteen patients had teardrop-shaped PM muscles, with 92.3% in the Moro A group showing significantly worse clinical scores at 1-week follow-up. The Moro zones of the PM affected the short-term outcomes after OLIF. Preoperative measurements and analysis of OW, PMSD and PM morphology should be performed as necessary to predict short-term outcomes.

Spontaneous facet joint fusion in patients following oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion combined with lateral single screw-rod fixation: prevalence, characteristics and significance

PURPOSE

To explore the characteristics of spontaneous facet joint fusion (SFJF) in patients after oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion combined with lateral single screw-rod fixation (OLIF-LSRF).

METHODS

We randomly selected 300 patients from 723 patients treated with OLIF-LSRF into a cross-sectional study based on the pilot study results. A novel fusion classification system was designed to evaluate the fusion status of the facet joints at three time points. Ultimately, the prevalence, characteristics, and significance of SFJF were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 265 (333 levels) qualified cases were included in our study. The novel classification for SFJF has excellent reliability (kappa > 0.75). The rate of SFJF was 15.20% (45/296 levels) at 3 months postoperatively, 31.34% (89/284 levels) at 6 months postoperatively, and 33.63% (112/333 levels) at the last follow-up. The circumferential fusion rate was 31.53% (105/333 levels) at the last follow-up. The location of SFJF was mostly on the right facet joint (P < 0.001), and the rate of SFJF increased significantly from 3 to 6 months after the operation (P < 0.001). The average age of patients with SFJF was older than that of patients without SFJF (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in Visual Analog Scale or Oswestry Disability Index scores between patients with and without SFJF.

CONCLUSION

In the OLIF-LSRF procedure, SFJF occurs mostly at 3-6 months postoperatively, especially in elderly patients and at the right facet joint. OLIF-LSRF has the potential for circumferential fusion.

Clinical evaluation of the efficacy of a new bone cement-injectable cannulated pedicle screw in the treatment of spondylolysis-type lumbar spondylolisthesis with osteoporosis: a retrospective study

Purpose

To investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of a bone cement-injectable cannulated pedicle screw (CICPS) in the treatment of spondylolysis-type lumbar spondylolisthesis with osteoporosis.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted on 37 patients (Dual-energy X-ray bone density detection showed different degrees of osteoporosis) with spondylolysis-type lumbar spondylolisthesis who underwent lumbar spondylolisthesis reduction and fusion using a new type of injectable bone cement screw from May 2011 to March 2015. Postoperative clinical efficacy was evaluated by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Imaging indexes were used to evaluate the stability of internal fixation of the devices 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery and annually thereafter. The safety of the CICPS was assessed by the prevalence of intraoperative and postoperative complications.

Results

A total of 124 CICPS were implanted intraoperatively. Bone cement leakage occurred in 3 screws (2.42%), and no clinical discomfort was found in any patients. All 37 patients were followed up with an average follow-up time of 26.6 ± 13.4 months (12–58 months). In the evaluation of the clinical effects of the operation, the average postoperative VAS score of the patients decreased from 4.30 ± 1.58 before surgery to 0.30 ± 0.70 after surgery (P < 0.001), and the ODI decreased from 47.27% ± 16.97% before surgery to 3.36% ± 5.70% after surgery (P < 0.001). No screw was loose, broken or pulled out.

Conclusion

CICPS is safe and effective in the treatment of spondylolysis-type lumbar spondylolisthesis complicated by osteoporosis.

Complication rates following stand-alone lateral interbody fusion: a single institution series after 10 years of experience

PURPOSE

This retrospective single institution study's goal was to analyze and report the complications from stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusions (LLIF).

METHODS

This research was approved by the institutional review board (STUDY2021000113). We retrospectively reviewed the database of patients with adult degenerative spine deformity treated via LLIF at our institution between January 2016 and December 2020.

RESULTS

Stand-alone LLIF was performed in 158 patients (145 XLIF, 13 OLIF; mean age 65 y.; 88 f., 70 m.). Mean surgical time was 85 min (± 24 min). Mean follow-up was 14 months (± 5 m). Surgical blood loss averaged 120 mL (± 187 mL) and the mean number of fused levels was 1.2 (± 0.4 levels). Overall complication rate was 19.6% (31 total; 23 approach-related, 8 secondary complications).

CONCLUSION

Lateral interbody fusion appears to be a safe surgical intervention with relatively low complication- and revision rates.

Characteristics and hotspots of the 50 most cited articles in the field of pre-psoas oblique lumbar interbody fusion

PURPOSE

In the past decade, the field of pre-psoas oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) has developed rapidly, and with it, the literature on OLIF has grown considerably. This study was designed to analyze the top 50 articles in terms of the number of citations through bibliometric research to demonstrate the research characteristics and hotspots of OLIF.

METHOD

Searching the Web of Science database yielded the 50 most cited publications in the OLIF field as of July 10, 2022. The publications were ranked according to the number of citations. The following sources were evaluated: the year of publications, the number of citations, authors, countries, institutions, journals, research topics, and keyword hotspots.

RESULTS

The most productive period was from 2017 to 2020, with 41 articles. The number of citations varied from 10 to 140, with an average of 35.52, and 1,776 citations were found. World Neurosurgery published the most articles (12), China produced the most articles (16), and the Catholic University of Korea produced the most studies (6). The corresponding author who produced the most articles was J.S. Kim (5), and the first author who produced the most publications was S. Orita (3). The main research topics were anatomical morphology, surgical techniques, indications, outcomes, and complications. The top 10 most cited keywords were "complications," "decompression," "spine," "surgery," "outcomes," "transpsoas approach," "spondylolisthesis," "anterior," "disease," and "injury."

CONCLUSIONS

Certain articles can be distinguished from others using citation analysis as an accurate representation of their impact due to their long-term effectiveness and peer recognition. With these publications, researchers are provided with research priorities and hotspots through influential literature in the field of OLIF.

Influence of coronal-morphology of endplate and intervertebral space to cage subsidence and fusion following oblique lumbar interbody fusion

Background

Endplate morphology is considered to be one of the influencing factors of cage subsidence after lumbar interbody fusion (LIF). Previous radiographic evaluations on the endplate mostly used sagittal X-ray or MRI. However, there are few studies on the CT evaluation of the endplate and intervertebral space (IVS), especially the evaluation of coronal morphology and its influence on subsidence and fusion after LIF. We aimed to measure and classify the shapes of the endplate and IVS using coronal CT imaging and evaluate the radiographic and clinical outcomes of different shapes of the endplate/IVS following oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF).

Methods

A total of 137 patients (average age 59.1 years, including 75 males and 62 females) who underwent L4-5 OLIF combined with anterolateral fixation from June 2018 to June 2020 were included. The endplate concavity depth (ECD) was measured on the preoperative coronal CT image. According to ECD, the endplate was classified as flat (< 2 mm), shallow (2–4 mm), or deep (> 4 mm). The L4-5 IVS was further classified according to endplate type. The disc height (DH), DH changes, subsidence rate, fusion rate, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) in different endplate/IVS shapes were evaluated during 1-year follow up.

Results

The ECD of L4 inferior endplate (IEP) was significantly deeper than that of L5 superior endplate (SEP) (4.2 ± 1.1 vs 1.6 ± 0.8, P < 0.01). Four types of L4-5 IVS were identified: shallow-shallow (16, 11.7%), shallow-flat (45, 32.9%), deep-shallow (32, 23.4%), and deep-flat (44, 32.1%). A total of 45 (32.9%) cases of cage subsidence were observed. Only one (6.3%) subsidence event occurred in the shallow-shallow group, which was significantly lower than in the other three groups (19 shallow-flat, 6 deep-shallow, and 19 deep-flat) (P < 0.05). Meanwhile, the shallow-shallow group had the highest fusion rate (15, 93.8%) and the highest rate of reach minimal clinically important difference (MCID) ODI among the four types. For a single endplate, the shape of L4 IEP is the main influencing factor of the final interbody fusion rate, and the shallow shape L4 IEP facilitates fusion ( OR = 2.85, p = 0.03). On the other hand, the flat shape L5 SEP was the main risk factor to cage subsidence (OR = 4.36, p < 0.01).

Conclusion

The L4-5 IVS is asymmetrical on coronal CT view and tends to be fornix-above and flat-down. The shallow-shallow IVS has the lowest subsidence rate and best fusion result, which is possibly because it has a relatively good degree in matching either the upper or lower interface of the cage and endplates. These findings provide a basis for the further improvements in the design of OLIF cages.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-022-05584-3.

Pearls and Pitfalls of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion: A Comprehensive Narrative Review

Lumbar degenerative disease is a common problem in an aging society. Oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) is a minimally invasive surgical (MIS) technique that utilizes a retroperitoneal antepsoas corridor to treat lumbar degenerative disease. OLIF has theoretical advantages over other lumbar fusion techniques, such as a lower risk of lumbar plexus injury than direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF). Previous studies have reported favorable clinical and radiological outcomes of OLIF in various lumbar degenerative diseases. The use of OLIF is increasing, and evidence on OLIF is growing in the literature. The indications for OLIF are also expanding with the help of recent technical developments, including stereotactic navigation systems and robotics. In this review, we present current evidence on OLIF for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease, focusing on the expansion of surgical indications and recent advancements in the OLIF procedure.

Incidence of major and minor vascular injuries during lateral access lumbar interbody fusion procedures: a retrospective comparative study and systematic literature review

During lateral lumbar fusion, the trajectory of implant insertion approaches the great vessels anteriorly and the segmental arteries posteriorly, which carries the risk of vascular complications. We aimed to analyze vascular injuries for potential differences between oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) procedures at our institution. This was coupled with a systematic literature review of vascular complications associated with lateral lumbar fusions. A retrospective chart review was completed to identify consecutive patients who underwent lateral access fusions. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used for the systematic review with the search terms "vascular injury" and "lateral lumbar surgery." Of 260 procedures performed at our institution, 211 (81.2%) patients underwent an LLIF and 49 (18.8%) underwent an OLIF. There were no major vascular complications in either group in this comparative study, but there were four (1.5%) minor vascular injuries (2 LLIF, 0.95%; 2 OLIF, 4.1%). Patients who experienced vascular injury experienced a greater amount of blood loss than those who did not (227.5 ± 147.28 vs. 59.32 ± 68.30 ml) (p = 0.11). In our systematic review of 63 articles, major vascular injury occurred in 0-15.4% and minor vascular injury occurred in 0-6% of lateral lumbar fusions. The systematic review and comparative study demonstrate an increased rate of vascular injury in OLIF when compared to LLIF. However, vascular injuries in either procedure are rare, and this study aids previous literature to support the safety of both approaches.

Is instrumented lateral lumbar interbody fusion superior to stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease? A meta-analysis

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the fusion rate and outcomes directly between patients who underwent stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and LLIF with supplemental posterior instrumentation. A comprehensive literature search was performed for relevant studies using PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. The stand-alone and instrumented LLIF were compared by the fusion rate, the radiographic parameters, the cage subsidence rate, the clinical outcomes, the complication rate, and the reoperation rate. A total of 13 studies comprising 1090 patients with lumbar degenerative disease (LDD) were included. There was no significant statistical difference in the complication rate, and there was no significant clinical difference in the improvement of clinical outcomes at the last follow-up between patients who underwent stand-alone and instrumented LLIF. Nevertheless, lower fusion rate (RR, 0.92; 95% CI 0.87 to 0.98, P = 0.006), inferior restoration of disk height (WMD, -0.68; 95% CI -1.04 to -0.32, P < 0.001) and segmental lordosis (WMD, -1.28; 95% CI -2.30 to -0.27, P = 0.013), higher cage subsidence rate (RR, 1.68; 95% CI 1.36 to 2.07, P < 0.001), and higher reoperation rate (RR, 2.12; 95% CI 1.02 to 4.43, P = 0.045) were observed in the stand-alone group. Both stand-alone and instrumented LLIF were effective in improving the clinical outcomes of patients with LDD. However, the stand-alone LLIF was associated with lower fusion rate, inferior maintenance of indirect decompression, and higher reoperation rate due to high-grade cage subsidence. For patients with risk factors of high-grade cage subsidence, the LLIF with posterior instrumentation may be the better choice.