Cage subsidence in lateral interbody fusion with transpsoas approach: intraoperative endplate injury or late-onset settling

Bone turnover markers are risk factors for endplate injuries during lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective case-control study

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative endplate injury (IEI) is a type of fracture and a potential complication during lumbar interbody fusion (LIF). Osteoporosis diagnosed by bone mineral density (BMD) is a well-known risk factor for fracture itself and IEI also. The bone turnover markers (BTMs) are parameters of bone qualities and have some correlations with fractures, but there is no study about the BTMs and intraoperative fractures especially IEI. This study aims to identify the correlation between IEI and BTMs, especially in misTLIF.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 184 patients (230 spine levels). The IEI was diagnosed as the breakage of the endplate observed on postoperative 1 mm thin-cut CT scans. All surgical and endogenous risk factors of IEI were also checked including the bone resorption marker (serum CTX) and bone formation marker (serum P1NP) of BTMs. Additionally, the ratio (P1NP/CTX) and the subtype groups of BTMs were analyzed.

RESULTS

The rate of total IEI was 38%. The sex, osteoporosis, spine BMD, femur BMD, CTX, P1NP/CTX, preoperative disc height, and the discrepancy between preoperative disc height and cage size were risk factors in multivariate logistic regression analyses. The subtypes according to BTMs showed a different rate of IEI, resulting in subtype 2 A (low CTX and P1NP and high P1NP/CTX ratio) having the lowest incidence and statistically significant odds ratios compared to other subtype groups.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that the IEI is related to BTMs regardless of BMD in misTLIF. In addition, the P1NP/CTX ratio or subtypes could be helpful in predicting the risk of IEI due to the parallel dynamics of BTMs.

Analysis of factors impacting inter-body fusion cage subsidence following an oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) stand-alone procedure

BACKGROUND

Lumbar oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF stand-alone) procedures have become a common treatment for various spinal conditions, including spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis. However, cage subsidence following OLIF stand-alone procedures is a significant concern that can compromise the surgical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the occurrence of cage subsidence following OLIF procedures and identify the relevant factors influencing cage subsidence.

METHOD

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 86 patients who underwent elective OLIF stand-alone procedures at the Affiliated People's Hospital of Qingdao University between 2019 and 2023. Patients were categorized into two groups based on disc height (DH) subsidence: cage non-subsidence group (< 2 mm) and cage subsidence group (> 2 mm). General and imaging data were collected pre-surgery, post-surgery, and at six months follow-up. Single-factor analysis identified factors influencing cage subsidence, followed by multi-factor regression analysis on these variables to determine their impact.

RESULTS

When the degree of DH subsidence in the last follow-up (M6) was evaluated, among the 86 patients (102 segments), 26 patients (25.49%) fulfilled the criteria for cage subsidence. Factors with clinical and statistical significance in the single-factor analysis were incorporated into the multi-factor analysis, and it was found that the mean CT value of the concerned segment, multifidus area, and severe multifidus atrophy were relevant risk factors for cage subsidence; the protective factors for cage subsidence were degree III zygapophyseal joint degeneration, posterior cage position, and end-plate inflammation sclerosis (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Surgeons should be cautious in preoperatively identifying patients at risk of cage subsidence, particularly those with a low mean CT value of the concerned segment or severe multifidus atrophy. During surgery, selecting a cage of adequate length to span the epiphyseal ring and align with the original DH can help protect paravertebral muscles from iatrogenic injury and reduce the risk of cage subsidence.

Lateral Fusion is a Unique Feature in Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

Limited clinical literature addresses potential differences in fusion features between Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). We observed that in OLIF, there are many cases with the appearance of extra-vertebral bone bridges (EVB), a phenomenon distinct from traditional TLIF fusion. This study aims to compare fusion rates, cage subsidence, and fusion features among OLIF stand-alone (OLIF-SA), OLIF with posterior pedicle screw fixation (OLIF-PS), and TLIF.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 198 patients (311 levels) undergoing OLIF-SA, OLIF-PS, or TLIF from July 2017 to June 2021. We assessed patient-reported outcomes, cage subsidence, fusion rate, and fusion features on CT scans.

RESULTS

The study included 64 OLIF-SA patients (102 levels), 60 OLIF-PS patients (99 levels), and 74 TLIF patients (110 levels). Cage settling rates were 33.3% (OLIF-SA), 17.2% (OLIF-PS), and 32.8% (TLIF), with significant differences between OLIF-PS and TLIF (P < 0.05). Cage subsidence rates showed no significant difference: 11.8% (OLIF-SA), 9.1% (OLIF-PS), and 12.7% (TLIF) (P > 0.05). Fusion rates were 100% (OLIF-SA), 97.0% (OLIF-PS), and 96.4% (TLIF) (P = 0.167). Lateral fusion rates significantly differed: 49.0% (OLIF-SA), 30.3% (OLIF-PS), and 10.9% (TLIF) (P < 0.001). Preoperative osteophytes strongly promote lateral fusion (P < 0.001). VAS and ODI scores improved significantly post-surgery (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

OLIF-SA, OLIF-PS, and TLIF surgeries show satisfactory results with comparable fusion rates. Notably, distinctive differences exist in fusion features between OLIF and TLIF surgeries, with lateral fusion more prevalent in OLIF, particularly in OLIF-SA surgeries.

Impact of Osteoporosis on Short-Term Surgical Outcomes in Lumbar Degenerative Disease Patients Undergoing Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Analysis

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective study assesses the influence of osteoporosis on the short-term clinical outcomes of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) surgery in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases (LDDs), focusing on complications, pain intensity, and quality of life (QOL) improvements. The primary aim of this study is to investigate the impact of osteoporosis on the short-term clinical outcomes following LLIF surgery in LDD patients, with a particular focus on the incidence of cage subsidence (CS) and overall patient well-being postoperatively.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on 73 patients who underwent LLIF for LDD. Patients were categorized into 2 groups based on osteoporosis status determined by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scans: those with osteoporosis (n = 20) and those without osteoporosis (n = 53). Data collection included demographics, surgical details, complications, magnetic resonance imaging analysis, pain intensity, and QOL (Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire).

RESULTS

The groups had no significant differences regarding operative time, estimated blood loss, and hospital stay duration. However, the incidence of CS was 40% in patients with osteoporosis, compared to 17% in nonosteoporotic patients. Despite this, significant improvements in spinal canal dimensions were observed in both groups. Both groups experienced significant reductions in pain intensity, with notable improvements in functional outcomes assessed by the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire, indicating the overall effectiveness of LLIF in enhancing patient well-being and functionality, irrespective of osteoporosis status.

CONCLUSIONS

Osteoporosis increases the risk of CS in LLIF surgery for LDD patients but does not affect short-term pain relief and QOL improvements.

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.

Evolution of Titanium Interbody Cages and Current Uses of 3D Printed Titanium in Spine Fusion Surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the history of titanium implants in spine fusion surgery and its evolution over time.

RECENT FINDINGS

Titanium interbody cages used in spine fusion surgery have evolved from solid metal blocks to porous structures with varying shapes and sizes in order to provide stability while minimizing adverse side effects. Advancements in technology, especially 3D printing, have allowed for the creation of highly customizable spinal implants to fit patient specific needs. Recent evidence suggests that customizing shape and density of the implants may improve patient outcomes compared to current industry standards. Future work is warranted to determine the practical feasibility and long-term clinical outcomes of patients using 3D printed spine fusion implants. Outcomes in spine fusion surgery have improved greatly due to technological advancements. 3D printed spinal implants, in particular, may improve outcomes in patients undergoing spine fusion surgery when compared to current industry standards. Long term follow up and direct comparison between implant characteristics is required for the adoption of 3D printed implants as the standard of care.

Treatment Concept and Technical Considerations of Biportal Endoscopic Spine Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Decompression is a major component of surgical procedures for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). In addition to sufficient decompression to guarantee the relief of neurological pain, compensating surgical instability after wider laminectomy and foraminotomy and instrumentation with caging and fusion with grafting are performed to secure or restore the foraminal dimension and correct coronal/sagittal imbalance for longer survival of the adjacent segment. Endoscopic spinal surgery (ESS) has been developed under the flag of successful decompression while preserving structural integrity as much as possible with the help of magnification and illumination. ESS provides a technical possibility and feasibility for solving LSS by decompression alone. Recently, many endoscopic trials have been conducted to overcome conventional surgical treatment that requires wider dissection, escape inevitable complications from surgical damage, and compensate for the fusion technique. However, biportal ESS has some technical limitations, including clinical difficulties in accessibility for more moderate to severe stenosis and challenges for complicated conditions with segmental ventral slip, isthmic defect, stenosis combined with foraminal stenosis or foraminal disk rupture, or degenerative segmental scoliosis with disk height collapsing and endplate fatigue fracture. Because decompression alone is a skill for eliminating pathologies, there is no function of preserving degenerative structure or stopping the recurrence of disk degeneration or subsidence. This review of clinical reports investigated the possibility of biportal ESS for treating degenerative lumbar disorders by sufficient decompression and adequate elimination of various pathologies and decreasing technical complications. The results of this study may help develop better innovative spinal surgical techniques in the near future.

Hybrid cortical bone trajectory and modified cortical bone trajectory techniques in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at L4-L5 segment: A finite element analysis

Background

The academia has increasingly acknowledged the superior biomechanical performance of the hybrid fixation technique in recent years. However, there is a lack of research on the hybrid fixation technique using BCS (Bilateral Cortical Screws) and BMCS (Bilateral Modified Cortical Screws). This study aims to investigate the biomechanical performance of the BCS and BMCS hybrid fixation technique in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) at the L4-L5 segment in a complete lumbar-sacral finite element model.

Methods

Three cadaver specimens are used to construct three lumbar-sacral finite element models. The biomechanical properties of various fixation technologies (BCS-BCS, BMCS-BMCS, BMCS-BCS, and BCS-BMCS) are evaluated at the L4-5 segment with a TLIF procedure conducted, including the range of motion (ROM) of the L4-5 segment, as well as the stress experienced by the cage, screws, and rods. The testing is conducted under specific loading conditions, including a compressive load of 400 N and a torque of 7.5Nm, subjecting the model to simulate flexion, extension, lateral bending, and rotation.

Results

No significant variations are seen in the ROM at the L4-5 segment when comparing the four fixation procedures during flexion and extension. However, when it comes to lateral bending and rotation, the ROM is ordered in descending order as BCS-BCS, BCS-BMCS, BMCS-BMCS, and BMCS-BCS. The maximum stress experienced by the cage is observed to be highest within the BMCS-BCS technique during movements including flexion, extension, and lateral bending. Conversely, the BMCS-BMCS technique exhibits the highest cage stress levels during rotational movements. The stress applies to the screws and rods order the sequence of BCS-BCS, BCS-BMCS, BMCS-BCS, and BMCS-BMCS throughout all four working conditions.

Conclusion

The BMCS-BCS technique shows better biomechanical performance with less ROM and lower stress on the internal fixation system compared to other fixation techniques. BMCS-BMCS technology has similar mechanical performance to BMCS-BCS but has more contact area between screws and cortical bone, making it better for patients with severe osteoporosis.

Risk Factors of Cage Subsidence Following Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the risk factors for cage subsidence (CS) after oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF).

METHODS

The cohort and case-control studies which reporting potential risk factors for CS following OLIF were searched in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from database inception to June 17, 2023. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of the literature according to the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. RevMan5.3 software was used for Meta analysis. χ2 statistics and I2 statistics were used to evaluate heterogeneity, and the analysis results were represented by forest plots.

RESULTS

A total of 8 studies with 280 cases of CS from 832 patients who underwent OLIF met the inclusion criteria. Elderly patients over 60 years old (odds ratio [OR] 2.44, 95% CI 1.38-4.31, P = 0.002), osteoporosis (OR 4.18, 95% CI 2.30-7.61, P = 0.002), end plate injury (OR 5.72, 95% CI 2.32-14.11, P = 0.0002), and overdistraction of intervertebral space (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.3 2-2.11, P < 0.0001) were potential risk factors, while Hounsfield units value of the vertebral body (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95-1.00, P = 0.02) is a protective factor. The number of operative segments did not increase the risk of CS.

CONCLUSIONS

Older age, osteoporosis, endplate injury, and overdistraction of the intervertebral space may increase the risk of CS after OLIF. Although the incidence rate of CS is low, implementing effective preventions is a priority for clinicians based on these risk factors.

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.

Predictors of Vertebral Endplate Fractures after Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Background

Cage subsidence after oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) induces restenosis and adversely affects patient outcomes. Many studies have investigated the causes of subsidence, one of which is endplate fracture (EF). This study aimed to identify predictors of EF after OLIF.

Methods

This retrospective study reviewed consecutive patients who underwent OLIF at a single institute between August 2019 and February 2022. A total of 104 patients were enrolled. The patients' demographic data and surgical details were collected through chart reviews. Radiographic variables were measured. Related variables were also analyzed using binomial logistic regression, dividing each group into those with versus without EF.

Results

EF occurred at 30 of 164 levels (18.3%), and the binary logistic analysis revealed that sex (odds ratio [OR], 11.07), inferior endplate concave depth (OR, 1.95), disc wedge angle (OR, 1.22), lumbar lordosis (OR, 1.09), pelvic incidence (OR, 1.07), sagittal vertical axis (OR, 1.02), sacral slope (OR, 0.9), L3-4 level (OR, 0.005), and L4-5 level (OR, 0.004) were significantly related to EF.

Conclusions

OLIF in older Asian patients should be performed carefully after recognizing the high possibility of EF and confirming the factors that should be considered preoperatively.

The Role of Hounsfield Unit in Intraoperative Endplate Violation and Delayed Cage Subsidence with Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective clinical case series.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the risk factors for intraoperative endplate violations and delayed cage subsidence after oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) surgery. Secondly, to examine whether low Hounsfield unit (HU) values at different regions of the endplate are associated with intraoperative endplate violation or delayed cage subsidence.

METHODS

61 patients (aged 65.1 ± 9.5 years; 107 segments) who underwent OLIF with or without posterior instrumentation from May 2015 to April 2019 were retrospectively studied. Intraoperative endplate violation was measured on sagittal reconstructed computerized tomography (CT) images immediate postoperatively, while delayed cage subsidence was evaluated using lateral radiographs and defined at 1-month follow-up or later. Demographic information and clinical parameters such as age, body mass index, bone mineral density, number of surgical levels, cage dimension, disc height restoration, visual analogue scale (VAS), and HU at different regions of the endplate were obtained.

RESULTS

Total postoperative cage subsidence was identified in 45 surgical levels (42.0%) in 26 patients (42.6%) up till postoperative 1-year follow-up. Low HU value at the ipsilateral epiphyseal ring was an independent risk factor for intraoperative endplate violation (P = .008) with a cut-off value of 326.21 HUs. Low HU values at the central endplate had a significant correlation with delayed cage subsidence in stand-alone cases (P = .013) with a cut-off value of 296.42 HUs. VAS scores were not different at 1 week postoperatively in cases with or without intraoperative endplate violation (3.12 ± .73 vs 2.89 ± .72, P = .166) and showed no difference at 1 year with or without delayed cage subsidence (1.95 ± .60 vs 2.26 ± .85, P = .173).

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative endplate violation and delayed cage subsidence are not uncommon with OLIF surgery. HUs of the endplate are good predictors for intraoperative endplate violation and cage subsidence since they can represent the regional bone quality of the endplate in contact with the implant. VAS improvements were not affected by intraoperative endplate violation or delayed cage subsidence at 1-year follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Subsidence of Interbody Cage Following Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion: An Analysis and Potential Risk Factors

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to report the incidence and potential risk factors of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage subsidence following oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) for lumbar degenerative diseases. We proposed also an algorithm to minimize subsidence following OLIF surgery.

METHODS

The study included a retrospective cohort of 107 consecutive patients (48 men and 59 women; mean age, 67.4 years) who had received either single- or multi-level OLIF between 2012 and 2019. Patients were classified into subsidence and non-subsidence groups. PEEK cage subsidence was defined as any violation of either endplate from the computed tomography scan in both sagittal and coronal views. Preoperative variables such as age, sex, body mass index, bone mineral density (BMD) measured by preoperative dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, smoking status, corticosteroid use, diagnosis, operative level, multifidus muscle cross-sectional area, and multifidus muscle fatty degeneration were collected. Age-related variables (height and length) were also documented. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to analyze the risk factors of subsidence.

RESULTS

Of the 107 patients (137 levels), 50 (46.7%) met the subsidence criteria. Higher PEEK cage height had the strongest association with subsidence (OR = 9.59, P < .001). Other factors significantly associated with cage subsistence included age >60 years (OR = 3.15, P = .018), BMD <-2.5 (OR = 2.78, P = .006), and severe multifidus muscle fatty degeneration (OR = 1.97, P = .023).

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factors for subsidence in OLIF were age >60 years, BMD < -2.5, higher cage height, and severe multifidus muscle fatty degeneration. Patients who had subsidence had worse early (3 months) postoperative back and leg pain.

The Impact of Cage and End plate-Related Factors on Cage Subsidence in Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVES

To identify cage and end plate factors of cage subsidence (CS) in patients who underwent oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) and their association with patient-reported outcomes.

METHODS

Sixty-one patients (43 women and 18 men), with a total of 69 segments (138 end plates) which underwent OLIF at a single academic institution between November 2018 and November 2020, were included. All the end plates were separated into CS and nonsubsidence groups. Cage-related parameters (cage height, cage width, cage insertion level, and cage position) and end plate-related parameters (position of end plate, Hounsfield unit value of the vertebra, end plate concave angle [ECA], end plate injury, and angular mismatch measured with cage/end plate angle [C/EA]) were compared and analyzed using logistic regression to predict CS. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine the cutoff points of the parameters.

RESULTS

Postoperative CS was identified in 50 of the 138 end plates (36.2%). The CS group had significantly lower mean Hounsfield unit values of the vertebra, higher rate of end plate injury, lower ECA, and higher C/EA than the nonsubsidence group. ECA and C/EA were identified as independent risk factors for developing CS. The optimal cutoff points for ECA and C/EA were 176.9° and 5.4°, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

An ECA greater than 176.9° and a cage/end plate angular mismatch greater than 5.4° were found to be independent risk factors of postoperative CS after the OLIF procedure. These findings aid in preoperative decision-making and intraoperative technical guidance.

Vertebral bone quality score to predict cage subsidence following oblique lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND

Current evidence suggests that the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based vertebral bone quality (VBQ) score is a good parameter for evaluating bone quality. We aimed to assess whether the VBQ score can predict the occurrence of postoperative cage subsidence after oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) surgery.

METHODS

Patients (n = 102) who had undergone single-level OLIF with a minimal follow-up for 1 year were reviewed in this study. Demographic and radiographic data of these patients were collected. Cage subsidence was defined as ≥ 2 mm of cage migration into the inferior endplate, superior endplate, or both. Further, the MRI-based VBQ score was measured on T1-weighted images. Moreover, univariable and multivariable binary logistic regression analyses were performed. Meanwhile, Pearson analysis was used to evaluate the correlation among the VBQ score, average lumbar dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) T-score, and degree of cage subsidence. Furthermore, ad-hoc analysis was used along with receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to assess the predictive ability of the VBQ score and average lumbar DEXA T-score.

RESULTS

Of 102 participants, cage subsidence was observed in 39 (38.24%) patients. According to the univariable analysis, patients with subsidence had older age, higher antiosteoporotic drug use, larger disk height change, a more concave morphology of inferior and superior endplates, higher VBQ score, and lower average lumbar DEXA T-score compared to patients without subsidence. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, a higher VBQ score was significantly associated with an increased risk of subsidence (OR = 23.158 ± 0.849, 95% CI 4.381-122.399, p < 0.001), and it was the only significant and independent predictor of subsidence after OLIF. Moreover, the VBQ score was moderately correlated with the average lumbar DEXA T-score (r = - 0.576, p < 0.001) and the amount of cage subsidence (r = 0.649, p < 0.001). Furthermore, this score significantly predicted cage subsidence with an accuracy of 83.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

The VBQ score can independently predict postoperative cage subsidence in patients undergoing OLIF surgery.

Retrospective Case Control Study: Clinical and Computer Tomographic Fusion and Subsidence Evaluation for Single Level Uniportal Endoscopic Posterolateral Approach Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Microscopic Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective comparative study.

OBJECTIVE

Assessment of difference in clinical and computer tomographic outcomes between the 2 cohorts.

METHODS

Computer tomographic evaluation by Bridwell's grade, Kim's stage, Kim's subsidence grade and clinical evaluation by VAS, ODI and McNab's criteria on both cohorts.

RESULTS

33 levels of Endo-TLIF and 22 levels of TLIF were included, with a mean follow up of 14.3 (10-24) and 22.9 (13-30) months respectively. Both Endo-TLIF and TLIF achieved significant improvement of pain and ODI at post-operative 4 week, 3 months and at final follow up with VAS 4.39 ± 0.92, 5.27 ± 1.16 and 5.73 ± 1.21in Endo-TLIF and 4.55 ± 1.16, 5.05 ± 1.11 and 5.50 ± 1.20 in TLIF respectively and ODI at post-operative 1 week, 3 months and final follow up were 43.15 ± 6.57, 49.27 ± 8.24 and 51.73 ± 9.09 in Endo-TLIF and 41.73 ± 7.98, 46.18± 8.46 and 49.09 ± 8.98 in TLIF respectively, P < 0.05. Compared to TLIF, Endo-TLIF achieved better VAS with 0.727 ± 0.235 at 3 months and 0.727 ± 0.252 at final follow up and better ODI with 3.88 ± 1.50 at 3months and 3.42 ± 1.63 at final follow up, P < 0.05. At 6 months radiological evaluation comparison of the Endo-TLIF and TLIF showed significant with more favorable fusion rate in Endo-TLIF of -0.61 ± 0.12 at 6 months and -0.49 ± 0.12 at 1 year in Bridwell's grading and 0.70 ± 0.15 at 6 months and 0.56 ± 0.14 at 1 year in Kim's stage.There is less subsidence of 0.606 ± 0.18 at 6 months and -0.561 ± 0.20 at 1 year of Kim's subsidence grade, P < 0.05.

CONCLUSION

Application of single level uniportal endoscopic posterolateral lumbar interbody fusion achieved better clinical outcomes and fusion rate with less subsidence than microscopic minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in mid-term evaluation for our cohorts of patients.

Vertebral Endplate Concavity in Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Tapered 3D-Printed Porous Titanium Cage versus Squared PEEK Cage

Background and Objectives: To prevent postoperative problems in extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF), it is critical that the vertebral endplate not be injured. Unintentional endplate injuries may depend on the cage. A novel porous titanium cage for XLIF has improved geometry with a tapered tip and smooth surface. We hypothesized that this new cage should lead to fewer endplate injuries. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 32 patients (mean 74.1 ± 6.7 years, 22 females) who underwent anterior and posterior combined surgery with XLIF for lumbar degenerative disease or adult spinal deformity from January 2018 to June 2022. A tapered 3D porous titanium cage (3DTi; 11 patients) and a squared PEEK cage (sPEEK; 21 patients) were used. Spinal alignment values were measured on X-ray images. Vertebral endplate concavity (VEC) was defined as concavity ≥ 1 mm of the endplate on computed tomography (CT) images, which were evaluated preoperatively and at 1 week and 3 months postoperatively. Results: There were no significant differences in the patient demographic data and preoperative and 3-month postoperative spinal alignments between the groups. A 3DTi was used for 25 levels and an sPEEK was used for 38 levels. Preoperative local lordotic angles were 4.3° for 3DTi vs. 4.7° for sPEEK (p = 0.90), which were corrected to 12.3° and 9.1° (p = 0.029), respectively. At 3 months postoperatively, the angles were 11.6° for 3DTi and 8.2° for sPEEK (p = 0.013). VEC was present in 2 levels (8.0%) for 3DTi vs. 17 levels (45%) for sPEEK (p = 0.002). After 3 months postoperatively, none of the 3DTi had VEC progression; however, eight (21%) levels in sPEEK showed VEC progression (p = 0.019). Conclusions: The novel 3DTi cage reduced endplate injuries by reducing the endplate load during cage insertion.

Static versus Expandable Interbody Fusion Devices: A Comparison of 1-Year Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE

To compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes of static versus expandable interbody cages in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using minimally invasive surgery (MIS-TLIF).

OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE

Expandable interbody cages may potentially improve radiographic and clinical outcomes following MIS-TLIF compared to static pages, but at a potentially higher cost and increased rates of subsidence.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of 1- and 2-level MIS-TLIFs performed from 2014 to 2020 was reviewed. Radiographic measurements were obtained preoperatively, 6 weeks postoperatively, and at final follow-up. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including the Oswestry Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) back, and VAS leg were evaluated. Multivariate linear regression analysis determined the effect of cage type on the change in PROMs, controlling for demographic characteristics. Alpha was set at 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 221 patients underwent MIS-TLIF including 136 static and 85 expandable cages. Expandable cages had significantly greater anterior (static: 11.41 mm vs. expandable: 13.11 mm, p <0.001) and posterior disk heights (static: 7.22 mm vs. expandable: 8.11 mm, p <0.001) at 1-year follow-up. Expandable cages offered similar improvements in segmental lordosis at 6 weeks (static: 1.69° vs. expandable: 2.81°, p =0.243), but segmental lordosis was better maintained with expandable cages leading to significant differences at 1-year follow-up (static: 0.86° vs. expandable: 2.45°, p =0.001). No significant differences were noted in total complication (static: 12.5% vs. expandable: 16.5%, p =0.191) or cage subsidence rates (static: 19.7% vs. expandable: 22.4%, p =0.502) groups at 1-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Expandable devices provide greater improvements in radiographic measurements including anterior disk height, posterior disk height, and segmental lordosis, but this did not lead to significant improvements in PROMs, complication rates, subsidence rates, or subsidence distance.

The predictive value of psoas and paraspinal muscle parameters measured on MRI for severe cage subsidence after standalone lateral lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The effect of psoas and paraspinal muscle parameters on cage subsidence after minimally invasive techniques, such as standalone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (SA-LLIF), is unknown.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine whether the functional cross-sectional area (FCSA) of psoas and lumbar spine extensor muscles (multifidus and erector spinae), and psoas FCSA normalized to the vertebral body area (FCSA/VBA) differ among levels with severe cage subsidence after SA-LLIF when compared to levels without severe cage subsidence.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective single center cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients who underwent SA-LLIF between 2008 and 2020 for degenerative conditions using exclusively polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages, had a lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan within 12 months, a lumbar computed tomography (CT) scan within 6 months prior to surgery, and a postoperative clinical and radiographic follow-up at a minimum of 6 months were included.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Severe cage subsidence.

METHODS

MRI measurements included psoas and combined multifidus and erector spinae (paraspinal) FCSA and FCSA/VBA at the L3-L5 pedicles. Following manual segmentation of muscles on axial T2-weighted images using ITK-SNAP (version 3.8.0), the FCSA was calculated using a custom written program on Matlab (version R2019a, The MathWorks, Inc.) that used an automated pixel intensity threshold method to differentiate between fat and muscle. Mean volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) at L1/2 was measured by quantitative CT. The primary endpoint was severe cage subsidence per level according to the classification by Marchi et al. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed using generalized linear mixed models. All analyses were stratified by biological sex.

RESULTS

95 patients (45.3% female) with a total of 188 operated levels were included in the analysis. The patient population was 92.6% Caucasian with a median age at surgery of 65 years. Overall subsidence (Grades 0-III) was 49.5% (53/107 levels) in men versus 58.0% (47/81 levels) in women (p=.302), and severe subsidence (Grades II-III) was 22.4% (24/107 levels) in men versus 25.9% (21/81 levels) in women (p=.608). In men, median psoas FCSA and psoas FCSA/VBA at L3 and L4 were significantly greater in the severe subsidence group when compared to the non-severe subsidence group. No such difference was observed in women. Paraspinal muscle parameters did not differ significantly between non-severe and severe subsidence groups for both sexes. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis with adjustments for vBMD and cage length, psoas FCSA at L3 (OR 1.002; p=.020) and psoas FCSA/VBA at L3 (OR 8.655; p=.029) and L4 (OR 4.273; p=.043) were found to be independent risk factors for severe cage subsidence in men.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrated that greater psoas FCSA at L3 and psoas FCSA/VBA at L3 and L4 were independent risk factors for severe cage subsidence in men after SA-LLIF with PEEK cages. The higher compressive forces the psoas exerts on lumbar segments as a potential stabilizer might explain these findings. Additional pedicle screw fixation might be warranted in these patients to avoid severe cage subsidence.

Forearm T-score as a predictor of cage subsidence in patients with degenerative lumbar spine disease following posterior single-segment lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND

Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) has become a classic treatment modality for lumbar degenerative diseases, with cage subsidence as a potentially fatal complication due to low bone mineral density (BMD), which can be measured by forearm T-score. Hounsfield units (HU) derived from computed tomography have been a reliable method for assessing BMD.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the accuracy of forearm T-score in predicting cage subsidence after PLIF compared with lumbar spine HU values.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 71 patients who underwent PLIF and divided them into cage subsidence group and nonsubsidence group. The differences in preoperative HU value and forearm T-score were compared between groups, and the correlation between cage subsidence and clinical efficacy was analyzed.

RESULTS

The subsidence rate for all 71 patients (31 men and 40 women) was 23.9%. There was no significant difference in age, sex ratio, body mass index, smoking status, follow-up time, spine BMD, and spine T-score between groups, except in the forearm T-score and lumbar spine HU values (P < 0.05). The forearm T-score (AUC, 0.840; 95% CI, 0.672-1.000) predicted cage subsidence more accurately than the mean global HU value (AUC, 0.744; 95% CI, 0.544-0.943). In logistic regression analysis, both forearm T-score and mean global HU value were found to be independent risk factors for cage subsidence (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Lower forearm T-scores and lower lumbar spine HU values were significantly associated with the occurrence of cage subsidence. Lower forearm T-scores indicated a higher risk of cage subsidence than lumbar spine HU values. Forearm T-score is more effective in predicting cage subsidence than spine T-score. Therefore, forearm dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry may be a fast, simple, and reliable method for predicting cage subsidence following PLIF. However, our results suggest that the degree of cage subsidence is not associated with clinical efficacy.

Preoperative dorsal disc height is a predictor of indirect decompression effect through oblique lateral interbody fusion in lumbar degenerative stenosis

The extent of indirect decompression after oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) is one of the most important factors in deciding the strategy. To assess the radiographical predictors of the effect of indirect decompression in patients with lumbar degenerative spondylosis by OLIF. Thirty-two consecutive patients who underwent OLIF at 58 lumbar disc levels were enrolled in this study. The radiographic measurements included central disc height (cDH), dorsal disc height (dDH), right/left foraminal height in sagittal plane computed tomography (CT), and cross-sectional dural sac antero-posterior diameter (CDSD) in axial plane CT. All patients were followed up for 1 year after surgery. All CT parameters (cDH, dDH, CDSD, right foraminal height [RFH], and left foraminal height [LFH]) significantly increased after OLIF (P < .0001). The mean raised height difference was 4.3, 3.4, 3.4, and 2.6 mm for cDH, dDH, RFH, and LFH, respectively. The mean CDSD increase was 1.4 mm. The median values of post/pre-operation (change rates) were 1.5 times in cDH, 1.9 times in dDH, and 1.2 times in CDSD, RFH, and LFH. RFH and LFH change rates were related with both cDH and dDH change rates, while the CDSD change rate was only associated with the dDH change rate (P = .0206*) but not with cDH (P = .2061). There was a significant negative relationship between the CDSD change rate and preoperative dDH (P = .0311*, R2 = 0.0817) but not with preoperative cDH (P = .4864). OLIF should be avoided for patients with preserved high dDH.

Pear-Shaped Disk as a Risk Factor for Intraoperative End Plate Injury in Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative end plate injury can result in late-onset cage subsidence in oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). This study aimed to identify risk factors for intraoperative end plate injury and investigate whether a pear-shaped disk correlated with intraoperative end plate injury in OLIF.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 102 levels in 82 patients (mean age 60.1 ± 10.0 years) who underwent OLIF for degenerative lumbar diseases. Intraoperative end plate injury was evaluated using midline sagittal computed tomography views at 3 days postoperatively and defined as cage breaching into an adjacent cortical end plate >2 mm. Patient demographics, surgical parameters, radiographic parameters, and cage-related parameters were recorded in all surgical levels. Evaluation of risk factors associated with intraoperative end plate injury was performed. Patient-reported outcome, fusion status, and late-onset cage subsidence were analyzed at a minimum of 1 year after the surgery.

RESULTS

Intraoperative end plate injury was observed in 26 levels (25.5%). Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified that bone mineral density (odds ratio [OR] = 0.978), preoperative segmental lordosis (OR = 0.790), and pear-shaped disk were risk factors (OR = 5.837) for intraoperative end plate injury. Intraoperative end plate injury occurred in 45.5% of levels with a pear-shaped disk compared with 16.0% of levels with no pear-shaped disk (P < 0.01). Late-onset cage subsidence was significantly more frequent in the injury group than the no-injury group. Patient-reported outcome and fusion status were unrelated to intraoperative end plate injury.

CONCLUSIONS

A pear-shaped disk is the greatest risk factor for intraoperative end plate injury following OLIF.

Successful Criteria for Indirect Decompression With Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVE

No consensus criteria have been established regarding ideal candidates for indirect decompression with lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), and contributing factors of indirect decompression failure were rarely reported. We aim to investigate the success rate of indirect decompression by LLIF with proposed selection criteria and identify risk factors associated with indirect decompression failure, defined as persistent pain requiring revision with direct decompression.

METHODS

Data from 191 patients undergoing LLIF were retrospectively reviewed. All the following criteria must be fulfilled: (1) dynamic clinical symptoms (pain relief in supine position), (2) presence of reducible disc height (recovered disc height in supine position), (3) no profound weakness, and (4) no static stenosis. The success rate of indirect decompression with LLIF and results after at least 1 year of follow-up were collected. Preoperative, procedure-related, and postoperative factors were assessed for their relationship with failure.

RESULTS

Of 191 patients,13 patients (6.8%) required additional direct decompression due to persistent pain, giving a criteria success rate of 93.2%. Factors associated with indirect decompression failure included low bone mineral density (T-score < 2.1), low reducible disc height (<13%), low postoperative disc height (< 10 mm), high-grade cage subsidence, and use of plate fixation.

CONCLUSION

We proposed patient selection criteria for indirect decompression with LLIF which had a satisfactory success rate and identified factors associated with the need for additional direct decompression. Our proposed criteria may assist selection of patients likely to achieve good results following indirect decompression with LLIF, and optimize selection based on risk factors of failure.

Predictors of subsidence after lateral lumbar interbody fusion

OBJECTIVE

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) facilitates the restoration of disc height and the indirect decompression of neural elements. However, these benefits are lost when the graft subsides into the adjacent endplates. The factors leading to subsidence after LLIF are poorly understood. This article presents a case series of patients who underwent LLIF and reports factors correlating with subsidence.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a consecutive, prospectively collected, single-institution database of patients who underwent LLIF over a 29-month period was performed. The degree of subsidence was measured on the basis of postoperative imaging. The timing of postoperative subsidence was determined, and intraoperative fluoroscopic images were reviewed to determine whether subsidence occurred as a result of endplate violation. The association of subsidence with age, sex, cage size and type, bone density, and posterior instrumentation was investigated.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-one patients underwent LLIF at a total of 204 levels. Subsidence was observed at 23 (11.3%) operated levels. True subsidence, attributable to postoperative cage settling, occurred for 12 (5.9%) of the levels; for the remaining 11 (5.4%) levels, subsidence was associated with intraoperative endplate violation noted on fluoroscopy during cage placement. All subsidence occurred within 12 weeks of surgery. Univariate analysis showed that the prevalence of true subsidence was significantly lower among patients with titanium implants (0 of 55; 0%) than among patients with polyetheretherketone cages (12 of 149; 8.1%) (p = 0.04). In addition, the mean ratio of graft area to inferior endplate area was significantly lower among the subsidence levels (0.34) than among the nonsubsidence levels (0.42) (p < 0.01). Finally, subsidence among levels with posterior fixation (4.4% [6/135]) was not significantly different than among those without posterior fixation (8.7% [6/69]) (p = 0.23). Multivariate analysis results showed that the ratio of cage to inferior endplate area was the only significant predictor of subsidence in this study (p < 0.01); increasing ratios were associated with a decreased likelihood of subsidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the prevalence of subsidence after LLIF was low in this clinical series. Titanium cages were associated with a lower prevalence of observed subsidence on univariate analysis; however, multivariate analysis demonstrated that this effect may be attributable to the increased surface area of these cages relative to the inferior endplate area.

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.

Whether Anterolateral Single Rod Can Maintain the Surgical Outcomes Following Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Double-Segment Disc Disease

Objective

To evaluate the outcomes of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) combined with anterolateral single‐rod screw fixation (AF) in treating two‐segment lumbar degenerative disc disease (LDDD) and to determine whether AF can maintain the surgical results.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on patients who underwent OLIF combined with AF (OLIF‐AF) for LDDD at the L3‐5 levels between October 2017 and May 2018. A total of 84 patients, including 44 males and 40 females, with a mean age of 62.8 ± 6.8 years, who completed the 12‐month follow‐up were eventually enrolled. Clinical outcomes, including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) score for the low back and leg, and radiographic parameters, including the cross‐sectional area (CSA) of the spinal canal, disc height (DH), foraminal height (FH), degree of upper vertebral slippage (DUVS), segmental lumbar lordosis (SL), fusion rate, and lumbar lordosis (LL), were recorded before surgery and 1 and 12 months after surgery. Surgical‐related complications, including cage subsidence (CS), were also evaluated. The local radiographic parameters were compared between L3‐4 and L4‐5. The clinical results and all radiographic parameters were compared between patients with and without CS.

Results

Significant improvements were observed in radiographic parameters 1 day postoperatively (p < 0.05). Local radiological parameters in L4‐5 had a significant decrease at 12 months postoperatively (p < 0.05), while they were well‐maintained at L3‐4 throughout the follow‐up period (p > 0.05). CS was observed in 26 segments (15.5%). Endplate injury was observed in four segments (2.4%). There was no significant difference in the fusion rate between the segments with and without CS (p = 0.355). The clinical results improved significantly after surgery (p < 0.05), and no significant difference was observed between the groups with and without CS (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Anterolateral fixation combined with OLIF provides sufficient stability to sustain most radiological improvements in treating double‐segment LDDD. Subsidence was the most common complication, which was prone to occur in L4‐5 compared to L3‐4, but did not impede the fusion process or diminish the surgical results.

Evolution of Bioactive Implants in Lateral Interbody Fusion

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is an advantageous approach for spinal arthrodesis for a wide range of spinal disorders including degenerative, genetic, and traumatic conditions. LLIF techniques have evolved over the past 15 years regarding surgical approach, with concomitant improvements in implant material design. Bioactive materials have been a focus in the development of novel methods, which reduce the risk of subsidence and pseudarthrosis. Historically, polyetheretherketone and titanium cages have been selected for their advantageous biomechanical properties; however, both have their limitations, regarding optimal modulus or osseointegrative properties. Recent modifications to these 2 materials have focused on devising bioactive implants, which may enhance the rate of bony fusion in spinal arthrodesis by addressing the shortcomings of each. Specific emphasis has been placed on developing improvements in surface coating, porosity, microroughness, and nanotopography of interbody cages. This has been coupled with advances in additive manufacturing to generate cages with ideal biomechanical properties. Three-dimensional-printed titanium cages may be particularly beneficial in spinal arthrodesis during LLIF and reduce the historical rates of subsidence and pseudarthrosis by combining a number of these putatively beneficial biomaterial properties.

Clinical and radiological evaluation of cage subsidence following oblique lumbar interbody fusion combined with anterolateral fixation

Background

Cage subsidence (CS) was previously reported as one of the most common complications following oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). We aimed to assess the impacts of CS on surgical results following OLIF combined with anterolateral fixation, and determine its radiological characteristics as well as related risk factors.

Methods

Two hundred and forty-two patients who underwent OLIF at L4-5 and with a minimum 12 months follow-up were reviewed. Patients were divided into three groups according to the extent of disk height (DH) decrease during follow-up: no CS (DH decrease ≤ 2 mm), mild CS (2 mm < DH decrease ≤ 4 mm) and severe CS (DH decrease > 4 mm). The clinical and radiological results were compared between groups to evaluate radiological features, clinical effects and risk factors of CS.

Results

CS was identified in 79 (32.6%) patients, including 48 (19.8%) with mild CS and 31 (11.8%) with severe CS. CS was mainly identified within 1 month postoperatively, it did not progress after 3 months postoperatively, and more noted in the caudal endplate (44, 55.7%). In terms of clinical results, patients in the mild CS group were significantly worse than those in the no CS group, and patients in the severe CS group were significantly worse than those in the mild CS group. There was no significant difference in fusion rate between no CS (92.6%, 151/163) and mild CS (83.3%, 40/48) groups. However, significant lower fusion rate was observed in severe CS group (64.5%, 20/31) compared to no CS group. CS related risk factors included osteoporosis (OR = 5.976), DH overdistraction (OR = 1.175), flat disk space (OR = 3.309) and endplate injury (OR = 6.135).

Conclusion

CS following OLIF was an early postoperative complication. Higher magnitudes of CS were associated with worse clinical improvements and lower intervertebral fusion. Osteoporosis and endplate injury were significant risk factors for CS. Additionally, flat disk space and DH over-distraction were also correlated with an increased probability of CS.

Comparative Study of Cage Subsidence in Single-Level Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion

We investigated the incidence and clinical features of cage subsidence after single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). We studied a retrospective cohort of 59 patients (34 males, 25 females; mean age, 68.9 years) who received single-level LLIF. Patients were classified into subsidence and no-subsidence groups. Cage subsidence was defined as any violation of either endplate, classified using radiographs and computed tomography (CT) images. After one year, we compared patient characteristics, surgical parameters, radiological findings, pain scores, and fusion status. We also compared the Hounsfield unit (HU) endplate value obtained on CT preoperatively. Twenty patients (33.9%) had radiographic evidence of interbody cage subsidence. There were significant differences between the subsidence and no-subsidence groups in sex, cage height, fusion rate, and average HU value of both endplates (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in age, height, weight, or body mass index. Moreover, there were no significant differences in global alignment and Numerical Rating Scale change in low back pain, leg pain, and numbness. Despite suggestions that patients with lower HU values might develop cage subsidence, our results showed that cage subsidence after single-level LLIF was not associated with low back pain, leg pain, or numbness one year post-operation.

Poor Bone Quality, Multilevel Surgery, and Narrow and Tall Cages Are Associated with Intraoperative Endplate Injuries and Late-onset Cage Subsidence in Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

A major complication of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is cage subsidence, which may lead to clinical problems, including loss of disc height correction, altered spinal alignment, recurrent pain, and vertebral body fracture. A thorough review of the current knowledge about the risk factors for the two types of cage subsidence after LLIF-intraoperative endplate injury and late-onset cage subsidence-could bring attention to well-established risk factors for clinical consideration while identifying any incompletely characterized factors that require further research to clarify.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We performed a systematic review to answer the following questions: (1) Are bone quality and surrogates for bone quality, such as patient age and sex, associated with an increased likelihood of cage subsidence? (2) Are implant-related factors associated with an increased likelihood of cage subsidence?

METHODS

Two independent reviewers comprehensively searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Web of Science from 1997 to 2020 to identify all potential risk factors for cage subsidence after LLIF. Discrepancies were settled through discussion during full-text screening. Search terms included "lateral" AND "interbody fusion" AND "subsidence" OR "settling" OR "endplate injury" OR "endplate violation" WITHOUT "cervical" OR "transforaminal" OR "biomechanical." Eligible studies were retrospective or prospective comparative studies, randomized controlled trials, and case series with sample sizes of 10 patients or more reporting risk factors for cage subsidence or endplate injury after LLIF. Studies that involved cervical interbody fusions and biomechanical and cadaveric experiments were excluded. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the studies' quality of evidence. The initial database review found 400 articles. Thirty-four articles with moderate- to very-low-quality evidence met the inclusion criteria for analysis. A total of 3233 patients (58% [1860] of whom were female) were included in this review. Two types of cage subsidence were reviewed: late-onset cage subsidence, which occurs gradually postoperatively, and intraoperative endplate injury, which is derived from iatrogenic endplate violation during endplate preparation or cage insertion. Among 20 studies with moderate quality of evidence according to the GRADE criteria, eight studies reported risk factors for cage subsidence related to bone mineral density and its surrogates and 12 studies focused on risk factors regarding implant factors, including cage dimension, cage material, construct length, and supplementary instrumentation.

RESULTS

Patients with a dual x-ray absorptiometry T-score of -1.0 or less, age older than 65 years, and female sex were considered to have a high risk of both types of cage subsidence. Regarding cage size, cage width ≥ 22 mm helped to avoid late-onset cage subsidence, and cage height ≤ 11 mm was recommended by some studies to avoid intraoperative endplate injuries. Studies recommended that multilevel LLIF should be conducted with extra caution because of a high risk of losing the effect of indirect decompression. Studies found that standalone LLIF might be sufficient for patients without osteoporosis or obesity, and supplementary instrumentation should be considered to maintain the postoperative disc height and prevent subsidence progression in patients with multiple risk factors. The effect of the bone graft, cage material, endplate condition, and supplementary instrumentation on cage subsidence remained vague or controversial.

CONCLUSION

Patients with poor bone density, patients who are older than 65 years, and female patients should be counseled about their high risk of developing cage subsidence. Surgeons should avoid narrow cages when performing LLIF to minimize the risk of late-onset cage subsidence, while being cautious of an aggressive attempt to restore disc height with a tall cage as it may lead to intraoperative endplate injury. For multilevel constructs, direct decompression approaches, such as posterior and transforaminal LIF, should be considered before LLIF, since the effect of indirect decompression may be difficult to maintain in multilevel LLIF because of high risks of cage subsidence. The effect of the cage material and supplementary instrumentation require stronger evidence from prospectively designed studies with larger sample size that randomly assign patients to polyetheretherketone (PEEK) or titanium cages and different fixation types. Future research on intraoperative endplate injuries should focus on the specific timing of when endplate violation occurs with the help of intraoperative imaging so that attempts can be made to minimize its occurrence.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

A biomechanical investigation of lumbar interbody fusion techniques

The anterior, posterior, transforaminal, and circumferential lumbar interbody fusions (ALIF, PLIF, TLIF, CLIF/360) are used to treat spondylolisthesis, trauma, and degenerative pathologies. This study aims to investigate the biomechanical effects of the lumbar interbody fusion techniques on the spine. A validated T12-sacrum lumbar spine finite-element model was used to simulate surgical fusion of L4-L5 segment using ALIF, PLIF with one and two cages, TLIF with unilateral and bilateral fixation, and CLIF/360. The models were simulated under pure-moment and combined (moment and compression) loadings to investigate the effect of different lumbar interbody fusion techniques on range of motion, forces transferred through the vertebral bodies, disc pressures, and endplate stresses. The range of motion of the lumbar spine was decreased the most for fusions with bilateral posterior instrumentations (TLIF, PLIF, and CLIF/360). The increase in forces transmitted through the vertebrae and increase in disc pressures were directly proportional to the range of motion. The discs superior to fusion were under higher pressure, which was attributed to adjacent segment degeneration in the superior discs. The increase in endplate stresses was directly proportional to the cross-sectional area and was greater in caudal endplates at the fusion level, which was attributed to cage subsidence. The response of the models was in line with overall clinical observations from the patients and can be further used for future studies, which aim to investigate the effect of geometrical and material variations in the spine. The model results will assist surgeons in making informed decisions when selecting fusion procedures based on biomechanical effects.

Prevalence and location of endplate fracture and subsidence after oblique lumbar interbody fusion for adult spinal deformity

BACKGROUND

Recently, Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) is commonly indicated to correct the sagittal and coronal alignment in adult spinal deformity (ASD). Endplate fracture during surgery is a major complication of OLIF, but the detailed location of fracture in vertebral endplate in ASD has not yet been determined. We sought to determine the incidence and location of endplate fracture and subsidence of the OLIF cage in ASD surgery, and its association with fusion status and alignment.

METHODS

We analyzed 75 levels in 27 patients were analyzed using multiplanar CT to detect the endplate fracture immediately after surgery and subsidence at 1 year postoperatively. The prevalence was compared between anterior and posterior, approach and non-approach sides, and concave and convex side. Their association with fusion status, local and global alignment, and complication was also investigated.

RESULTS

Endplate fracture was observed in 64 levels (85.3%) in all 27 patients, and the incidence was significantly higher in the posterior area compared with the anterior area (85.3 vs. 68.0%, p=0.02) of affected vertebra in the sagittal plane. In the coronal plane, there was no significant difference in incidence between left (approach) and right (non-approach) sides (77.3 and 81.3%, respectively), or concave and convex sides (69.4 and 79.6%) of wedged vertebra. By contrast, cage subsidence at 1 year postoperatively was noted in 14/75 levels (18.7%), but was not associated with endplate fracture. Fusion status, local and global alignment, and complications were not associated with endplate fracture or subsidence.

CONCLUSION

Endplate fracture during OLIF procedure in ASD cases is barely avoidable, possibly induced by the corrective maneuver with ideal rod counter and cantilever force, but is less associated with subsequent cage subsidence, fusion status, and sustainment of corrected alignment in long fusion surgery performed even for elderly patients.

Surgical Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Direct Lateral Corpectomy with Percutaneous Pedicle Screws for Osteoporotic Thoracolumbar Vertebral Collapse with Neurologic Deficits in the Thoracolumbar Spine Compared with Those After Posterior Spinal Fusion with Vertebroplasty

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective observational study of a cohort of consecutive patients.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare surgical invasion, mechanical complications, and clinical and radiological outcomes 2 years after surgery between minimally invasive corpectomy following percutaneous pedicle screw placements (X-core/PPS) and posterior fixation with vertebroplasty (VP) for treating osteoporotic vertebral fractures (OVFs), which failed conservative treatment due to neurological deficits.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Numerous studies have proposed surgical procedures to treat OVFs that fail conservative treatment. However, an optimal approach remains controversial because patients often have numerous comorbid medical complications, frequent instrumentation failure, and/or adjacent vertebral fracture (AVF). Recently, a minimally invasive lateral approach has attracted attention as an alternative procedure to the thoracolumbar junction for corpectomy and expandable cage replacement (X-Core Adjustable VBR System). However, its usefulness and validity is largely unknown.

METHODS

A cohort of 102 consecutive patients with OVF at T11-L1 who underwent surgery were followed up for >2 years after surgery. Ultimately 50 patients were included in the VP group and 45 in the X-core/PPS group. Surgical invasion, radiological examinations, and clinical outcomes between two procedures were compared.

RESULTS

Both X-core/PPS and VP procedures were safe and acceptable for neurological improvement and surgical invasion. The correction loss of local kyphotic angle (LKA) and occurrence of AVF were significantly less in the X-core/PPS group. Oswestry Disability Index in the X-core/PPS group at 2 years after surgery showed better recovery than that in the VP group, and no revision surgery was needed in the X-core/PPS group. Postoperative correction loss of LKA increased significantly when intraoperative endplate injury developed.

CONCLUSION

This next-generation minimally invasive anterior and posterior combined surgery was found to be a safe and useful procedure for OVF treatment to reduce correction loss, mechanical complication, and AVF, resulting in less postoperative low back pain.Level of Evidence: 3.

Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Expandable Cages: Increased Risk of Late Postoperative Subsidence Without a Real Improvement of Perioperative Outcomes: A Clinical Monocentric Study

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is one of several approaches to lumbar interbody fusion that has proven to be a safe and effective treatment for symptomatic lumbar degenerative disease The clinical outcomes of MIS-TLIF are generally favorable, but there is still controversy regarding its ability to restore sagittal alignment. For this reason, expandable transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cages have been developed and designed to improve ability to restore disc height and segmental lordosis. The use of expandable cages in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion has increased drastically; however, it is not clear how effective cage expansion is in regard to disc space lordosis, distraction, and long-term outcome.

METHODS

We reviewed a cohort of patients with symptomatic lumbar degenerative disc pathology who underwent MIS-TLIF at our institution. We compared clinical and radiographic outcomes of expandable versus nonexpandable cage use in MIS-TLIF focusing on mean changes in segmental lordosis, disc height, and postoperative complications. The results were compared with other studies reported in the international literature.

RESULTS

Mean change in segmental lordosis was not significantly different between the 2 groups. A significantly higher rate of postoperative subsidence was demonstrated in the expandable cage group.

CONCLUSION

This study established that expandable cage use in single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion did not reduce the rate of postoperative complications, but rather significantly increased a patient's risk of postoperative subsidence. Expandable cages do not presently demonstrate improved clinical outcomes or improved sagittal alignment compared with static cages.

[Advances in research on Cage subsidence following lumbar interbody fusion]

Objective

To summarize the advances in research on Cage subsidence following lumbar interbody fusion, and provide reference for its prevention.

Methods

The definition, development, clinical significance, and related risk factors of Cage subsidence following lumbar interbody fusion were throughout reviewed by referring to relevant domestic and doreign literature in recent years.

Results

At present, there is no consensus on the definition of Cage subsidence, and mostly accepted as the disk height reduction greater than 2 mm. Cage subsidence mainly occurs in the early postoperative stage, which weakens the radiological surgical outcome, and may further damage the effectiveness or even lead to surgical failure. Cage subsidence is closely related to the Cage size and its placement location, intraoperative endplate preparation, morphological matching of disk space to Cage, bone mineral density, body mass index, and so on.

Conclusion

The appropriate size and shape of the Cage usage, the posterolateral Cage placed, the gentle endplate operation to prevent injury, the active perioperative anti-osteoporosis treatment, and the education of patients to control body weight may help to prevent Cage subsidence and ensure good surgical results.

Intraoperative Radiographs in Single-level Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Can Predict Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes of Follow-up 2 Years After Surgery

MINI

Some of the improvements in DH, FH, and SLL achieved intraoperatively during lateral lumbar interbody fusion surgery were lost by the postoperative 1-week follow-up. An intraoperative radiograph can predict radiographic and clinical outcomes of the 2-year follow-up. The difference between preoperative DH and intraoperative DH should be >4.18 mm.

Expandable cages increase the risk of intraoperative subsidence but do not improve perioperative outcomes in single level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Expandable cages (EXP) are being more frequently utilized in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIF). EXP were designed to reduce complications related to neurological retraction, enable better lordosis restoration, and improve ease of insertion, particularly in the advent of minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques, however they are exponentially more expensive than the nonexpandable (NE) alternative.

PURPOSE

To investigate the clinical results of expandable cages in single level TLIF.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective review at a single institution.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Two hundred and fifty-two single level TLIFs from 2012 to 2018 were included.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinical characteristics, perioperative and neurologic complication rates, and radiographic measures.

METHODS

Patients ≥18 years of age who underwent single level TLIF with minimum 1 year follow-up were included.

OUTCOME MEASURES

clinical characteristics, perioperative and neurologic complications. Radiographic analysis included pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch, segmental lumbar lordosis (LL) mismatch, disc height restoration, and subsidence ≥2 mm. Statistical analysis included independent t tests and chi-square analysis. For nonparametric variables, Mann-Whitney U test and Spearman partial correlation were utilized. Multivariate regression was performed to assess relationships between surgical variables and recorded outcomes. For univariate analysis significance was set at p<.05. Due to the multiple comparisons being made, significance for regressions was set at p<.025 utilizing Bonferroni correction.

RESULTS

Two hundred and fifty-two TLIFs between 2012 and 2018 were included, with 152 NE (54.6% female, mean age 59.28±14.19, mean body mass index (BMI) 28.65±5.38, mean Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) 2.20±1.89) and 100 EXP (48% female, mean age 58.81±11.70, mean BMI 28.68±6.06, mean CCI 1.99±1.66) with no significant differences in demographics. Patients instrumented with EXP cages had a shorter length of stay (3.11±2.06 days EXP vs. 4.01±2.64 days NE; Z=-4.189, p<.001) and a lower estimated blood loss (201.31±189.41 mL EXP vs. 377.82±364.06 mL NE; Z=-6.449, p<.001). There were significantly more MIS-TLIF cases and bone morphogenic protein (BMP) use in the EXP group (88% MIS, p<.001 and 60% BMP, p<.001) as illustrated in Table 1. There were no significant differences between the EXP and NE groups in rates of radiculitis and neuropraxia. In multivariate regression analysis, EXP were not associated with a difference in perioperative outcomes or complications. Radiographic analyses demonstrated that the EXP group had a lower PI-LL mismatch than the NE cage group at baseline (3.75±13.81° EXP vs. 12.75±15.81° NE; p=.001) and at 1 year follow-up (3.81±12.84° EXP vs. 8.23±12.73° NE; p=.046), but change in regional and segmental alignment was not significantly different between groups. Multivariate regression demonstrated that EXP use was a risk factor for intraoperative subsidence (2.729[1.185-6.281]; p=.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Once technique was controlled for, TLIFs utilizing EXP do not have significantly improved neurologic or radiographic outcomes compared with NE. EXP increase risk of intraoperative subsidence. These results question the value of the EXP given the higher cost.

Factors Affecting Postoperative Sagittal Alignment after Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Adult Spinal Deformity: Posterior Osteotomy, Anterior Longitudinal Ligament Rupture, and Endplate Injury

Study Design

Prospective cohort study.

Purpose

To identify factors that affect sagittal alignment correction in lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) surgery for adult spinal deformity (ASD) and to investigate the degree of correction in each condition.

Overview of Literature

LIF is a useful procedure for ASD, but the degree of correction can be affected by posterior osteotomy, intraoperative endplate injury, or anterior longitudinal ligament (ALL) rupture.

Methods

Radiographical data for 30 patients who underwent LIF for ASD were examined prospectively. All underwent two-stage surgery (LIF followed by posterior fixation). Radiographical parameters were measured preoperatively, after LIF, and after posterior fixation; these included the segmental lordotic angle, lumbar lordosis (LL), and other sagittal alignment factors.

Results

LL was corrected from 16.5°±16.7° preoperatively to 33.4°±13.8° after LIF (p <0.001) and then to 52.1°±7.9° following posterior fixation (p <0.001). At levels where Schwab grade 2 osteotomy was performed, the acquired segmental lordotic angles from the preoperative value to after posterior fixation and from after LIF to after posterior fixation were 19.5°±9.2° and 9.9°±3.9°, respectively. On average, 12.4° more was added than in cases without osteotomy. Endplate injury was identified at 21 levels (19.4%) after LIF, with a mean loss of 3.4° in the acquired segmental lordotic angle (5.3°±8.4° and 1.9°±5.9° without and with endplate injury, respectively). ALL rupture was identified at seven levels (6.5%), and on average 19.3° more was added in these cases between the preoperative and postoperative values than in cases without ALL rupture.

Conclusions

LIF provides adequate sagittal alignment restoration for ASD, but the degree of correction is affected by grade 2 osteotomy, intraoperative endplate injury, and ALL rupture.