Comparative Effectiveness of Laterally Placed Expandable versus Static Interbody Spacers: A 1-Year Follow-Up Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes Study

Innovative Developments in Lumbar Interbody Cage Materials and Design: A Comprehensive Narrative Review

This review comprehensively examines the evolution and current state of interbody cage technology for lumbar interbody fusion (LIF). This review highlights the biomechanical and clinical implications of the transition from traditional static cage designs to advanced expandable variants for spinal surgery. The review begins by exploring the early developments in cage materials, highlighting the roles of titanium and polyetheretherketone in the advancement of LIF techniques. This review also discusses the strengths and limitations of these materials, leading to innovations in surface modifications and the introduction of novel materials, such as tantalum, as alternative materials. Advancements in three-dimensional printing and surface modification technologies form a significant part of this review, emphasizing the role of these technologies in enhancing the biomechanical compatibility and osseointegration of interbody cages. In addition, this review explores the increase in biodegradable and composite materials such as polylactic acid and polycaprolactone, addressing their potential to mitigate long-term implant-related complications. A critical evaluation of static and expandable cages is presented, including their respective clinical and radiological outcomes. While static cages have been a mainstay of LIF, expandable cages are noted for their adaptability to the patient's anatomy, reducing complications such as cage subsidence. However, this review highlights the ongoing debate and the lack of conclusive evidence regarding the superiority of either cage type in terms of clinical outcomes. Finally, this review proposes future directions for cage technology, focusing on the integration of bioactive substances and multifunctional coatings and the development of patient-specific implants. These advancements aim to further enhance the efficacy, safety, and personalized approach of spinal fusion surgeries. Moreover, this review offers a nuanced understanding of the evolving landscape of cage technology in LIF and provides insights into current practices and future possibilities in spinal surgery.

Short-Term Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Patients Treated With Expandable and Static Interbody Spacers Following Lumbar Lateral Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to evaluate, using computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), patients who underwent oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) using either expandable or static interbody spacers.

METHODS

Thirty-five patients with degenerative disc disease were surgically treated with one-level OLIF and were followed up for more than 6 months. The Static group consisted of 22 patients, and 13 patients were in the Expandable group. Intraoperative findings included operative time (min), blood loss (ml), and cage size. Low back pain, leg pain, and leg numbness were measured using the Japanese Orthopedic Association score, visual analogue score, and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. Radiologic evaluation using computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) allowed measurement of cage subsidence, cross-sectional area (CSA) of the dural sac, disc height, segmental lordosis, foraminal height, and foraminal CSA preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

The Expandable group had significantly larger cage height and lordosis than the Static group (P < 0.05). The Expandable group also had greater dural sac area expansion and enlargement of the intervertebral foramen, as well as better correction of vertebral body slip (P < 0.05). Cage subsidence was significantly lower in the Expandable group (P < 0.05). JOA and VAS scores for leg numbness were significantly better in the Expandable group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with static spacers, expandable spacers significantly enlarged the dural sac area, corrected vertebral body slippage, expanded the intervertebral foramen, and achieved good indirect decompression while reducing cage subsidence, resulting in improvement in clinical symptoms.

A Lateral Expandable Cage with Independently Adjustable Anterior and Posterior Heights Can Improve the Pressure Distribution at the Cage-Endplate Interface: A Biomechanics Study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate how the expansion trajectory of a lateral expandable cage affects pressure distribution at the cage-endplate interface under well-controlled biomechanical loading conditions.

METHODS

Three unique vertical height expansion trajectories used by clinically relevant lateral expandable cages were evaluated: craniocaudal, fixed-arc, and independently adjustable anterior and posterior height expansion. Two biomechanical loading scenarios were performed. The first scenario used custom bone foam test blocks to assess resultant pressure distribution at varying test block lordotic angles and expansion heights. The second scenario simulated expansion using synthetic spine units and compared the pressure distribution following expansion.

RESULTS

For an expandable cage with craniocaudal expansion, the pressure distribution at the cage-endplate interface was found to depend heavily on the lordotic angle of the test block (P < 0.001), but not expansion height (P = 0.634). The greatest maximum pressure occurred at higher test block lordotic angles. For an expandable cage with fixed-arc expansion, the pressure distribution shifted anteriorly throughout expansion. In the simulated expansion trials, an expandable cage with adjustable anterior and posterior height expansion was found to improve the pressure distribution at the cage-endplate interface, reducing the maximum pressure measurements by 22% and 14% in the craniocaudal and fixed-arc expansion, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Of the cage designs evaluated in this study, an expandable cage with independently adjustable anterior and posterior heights lowered the maximum pressure measured at the cage-endplate interface and alleviated the potential of cage edge loading, both of which are important considerations that are fundamental for a successful fusion procedure and the mitigation of implant subsidence risk.

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with an expandable interbody device: Two-year clinical and radiographic outcomes

Background

The use of interbody cages as an adjunct to lumbar spinal fusion remains an important technique to enhance segmental stability, promote solid arthrodesis, maintain neuroforaminal decompression, and preserve/improve segmental lordosis. Appropriate segmental lumbar lordosis and sagittal balance is well-known to be critical for long-term patient outcomes. This study sought to evaluate the radiographic and clinical results of TLIF in patients using an articulating, expandable cage. Primary endpoint was clinical and radiographic outcomes, including complications, at 12 and 24 months.

Methods

A total of 37 patients underwent open single-level or 2-level TLIF by a single surgeon using an expandable cage with concomitant bilateral pedicle screws and posterolateral arthrodesis. Clinical outcomes included ODI and VAS for back and legs. Radiographic outcomes included pelvic incidence and tilt, lumbar and segmental lordoses, and disc height at the operative level(s). All outcomes were collected at baseline, 2-weeks, 6-weeks, 3-months, 6-months, 12-months, and 24-months postop.

Results

A total of 28 patients were available for analysis. Nine patients failed to follow-up at 24 months. Mean ODI scores showed significant improvement, from pre-to-postoperative at 24 months (55%; p<.0001). VAS for back and legs was significantly lower at 24 months on average by 72 and 79%, respectively (p<.0001 for both). Both segmental and lumbar lordoses significantly improved by 5.3° and 4.2° (p<.0001 and p=.049), respectively. Average disc height improved by 49% or 6.1 mm (p<.001). No device-related complications nor instances of measured subsidence. One patient had a superficial infection, and another had an intraoperatively repaired incidental durotomy.

Conclusions

The use of an expandable cage contributed to improvement in both segmental and lumbar lordosis with no reported complications at 24-month follow-up. All clinical measures significantly improved as well. The expandable cage design represents an effective and safe option to increase cage size and allow significant segmental lordosis correction.

Utilization of Dual Expandable Cages in Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery

The aim of this study is to present a case series of adult patients with lumbar degenerative scoliosis who underwent focused minimally invasive spine (MIS) surgery utilizing a new dual expandable cage technology. The study investigates the effectiveness of this approach in reducing the symptoms and progression of lumbar degenerative scoliosis (LDS). Adult patients with lumbar degenerative scoliosis were selected for focused MIS using the newly introduced expandable cage technology. Patient demographics, preoperative evaluations, surgical details, and postoperative outcomes were recorded. The primary outcome measures included the restoration of disc space height, an improvement in clinical outcomes, and a reduction in surgical complications. Analysis of the case series reveals promising outcomes following focused MIS with the utilization of the new expandable cage technology. The technique demonstrated successful restoration of intervertebral disc space heights and improved clinical outcomes in patients with lumbar degenerative scoliosis. Furthermore, a notable reduction in surgical complications was observed. The findings from this case series suggest that MIS with the implementation of the new expandable cage technology holds promise for patients with lumbar degenerative scoliosis. This approach appears to have the potential to effectively restore disc space heights, improve clinical outcomes, and minimize surgical complications. Here, we want to emphasize and add details to the improved clinical outcomes of this technology; however, further research and larger prospective studies are warranted to validate these preliminary results and establish the long-term benefits and safety profile of this innovative technique.

Expandable Lateral Lumbar Cages With Integrated Fixation: A Viable Option for Rostral Adjacent Segment Disease

BACKGROUND

Adjacent segment disease (ASD) above a previous posterior lumbar instrumented fusion can be managed with minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion. Earlier procedures with stand-alone lateral cages risked nonunion, and lateral cages with separate lateral plates risked lumbar plexus injury and vertebral fracture. We investigated clinical and radiographic outcomes of an expandable lateral titanium interbody cage with an integrated lateral fixation (eLLIFp) device as a stand-alone treatment for symptomatic ASD above a previous posterior lumbar fusion and performed a comparative cost analysis of eLLIFp to alternative operations for ASD.

METHODS

In this prospective, observational study, patients with ASD above 1-, 2-, 3-, or 4-level instrumented posterior fusions underwent surgery with lateral expandable titanium cage(s) with an integrated lateral plate with single screws into each adjacent vertebra from August 2017 to August 2019. Multimodality intraoperative neural monitoring was performed. Patient-reported outcomes, computed tomography outcomes, and total costs were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 33 patients received 35 eLLIFp cages. All clinical outcomes improved significantly. The eLLIFp cages added 2.2° segmental lordosis and 2.7 mm posterior disc height. Interbody fusion rate was 94% at 12 months. There were 2 neurologic complications (6%): 1 patient reported transient anterior thigh numbness and 1 had mild persistent L4 radiculopathy. No cage subsidence, cage migration, screw loosening, or vertebral fracture occurred. No revision lateral surgery, posterior decompression, or supplemental posterior fixation was required. The total eLLIFp cost (AU$19,715) was lower than the cost for all other procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

eLLIFp provided a minimally invasive, low morbidity, cost-effective, and robust alternative to traditional posterior construct extension surgery for rostral lumbar ASD in selected patients with 1- to 2-level stenosis and minimal deformity.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Traditional ASD treatment involves substantial risks and expense. eLLIFp should be considered a safe, effective, and lower cost alternative to posterior construct extension surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2

Expandable vs Static Interbody Devices for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) has paved a way for minimally invasive surgical treatment of a wide variety of spine pathologies. Interbody devices are used to stabilize painful disc levels, provide indirect decompression of neural elements, correct deformity, restore lordosis, and provide a sound durable fusion. Through the years, new static and expandable interbody devices have been developed in an attempt to improve radiographic and clinical outcomes in lumbar spine surgery. The purpose of this article is to explore the advantages and disadvantages between static and expandable interbody devices when used in LLIF. Specifically, this article addresses the differences in subsidence, indirect decompression, restoration of lumbar lordosis, complications, patient-reported outcomes, and cost between static and expandable interbody devices.

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.