Examining risk factors for posterior migration of fusion cages following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a possible limitation of unilateral pedicle screw fixation

Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

The minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) that adopts paramedian incisions and tubular retractors to perform the decompression and interbody fusion has been widely used in the surgery for lumber degenerative disease (LDD). Bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BPSF) and unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UPSF) are the primary fixing techniques in MIS-TLIF. We conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety between UPSF and BPSF in patients undergoing MIS-TLIF surgery for LDD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for potential RCTs till June 2023. The effects of the fixation methods on clinical outcomes were estimated using the odd ratio (RR), risk difference (RD), and mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) and a random-effects model.

RESULTS

We obtained six RCTs. There was no significant difference between UPSF and BPSF in fusion rate, hospitalization day, low back pain, leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index, and SF-36 for physical functioning at 3-6 months and ≥ 6 months after surgery. Neither the total complication nor the individual complications showed differences between the two methods. However, UPSF significantly decreased operation time (MD = - 39.05; 95% CI: - 53.50 to - 24.67) and estimated blood loss (MD = - 60.41; 95% CI: - 79.09 to - 41.73) compared with BPSF.

CONCLUSION

UPSF is better than BPSF when operation time and estimated blood loss are considered. BPSF may be considered for patients with single-level LDD without high-grade spondylolisthesis.

Risk factors influencing cage retropulsion following lumbar interbody fusion in treating degenerative lumbar diseases: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Degenerative lumbar diseases (DLDs) often have significant impacts on patients' quality of life, particularly when cage retropulsion (CR) occurs following lumbar interbody fusion (LIF). In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the risk factors associated with CR after LIF.

METHODS

We retrieved literatures analyzing the risk factors associated with CR following LIF from seven databases. We examined baseline characteristics, diagnosis, comorbidity, fusion level, surgical status, imaging assessment, and cage status to identify potential risk factors.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies involving 8059 patients (251 in the CR group and 7808 in the Non-CR group) were included in the final analysis. The incidence of CR was 3.15 %. Results revealed that older age (mean difference [MD]: 2.35 [0.44, 4.26]), more fusion levels (MD: 0.64 [0.03, 1.25]), comorbidity-osteoarthritis (risk ratio [RR]: 2.02 [1.37, 2.98]), comorbidity-heart disease (RR: 2.95 [1.21, 7.21]), comorbidity-existing vertebral fracture (RR: 5.12 [2.52, 10.39]), endplate injury (RR: 2.93 [1.71, 5.02]), screw loosening (RR: 6.03 [1.90, 19.12]), pear-shaped disc (PSD, RR: 3.14 [1.46, 6.74]), greater mean disc height (MDH, MD: 1.65 [0.58, 2.72]), larger cobb angle (MD: 0.68 [0.10, 1.27] degrees), larger cage height (MD: 0.31 [0.01, 0.61]), and cage type-carbon (RR: 1.62 [1.16, 2.27]) were identified as risk factors for CR following LIF. The incidence of CR decreased with an increase in fusion level.

CONCLUSIONS

Older age, endplate injury, PSD, and nine other factors are identified as risk factors for CR following LIF. Patients with these factors should undergo close monitoring during follow-up to prevent serious complications, such as significant cage displacement.

Can unilateral-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion replace the traditional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion procedure for lumbar degenerative disc diseases?: a single center matched case-control mid-term outcome study

STUDY DESIGN

Matched case-control study.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the midterm outcomes of unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UPSF) versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BPSF) in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedure, ascertain efficacy of UPSF in adequately decompressing contralateral foramen+spinal canal and reducing rate of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) at 4-8-year follow-up (FU).

OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE

Previous meta-analyses found no significant differences between UPSF and BPSF regarding fusion rates, clinical and radiological outcomes; however, few studies have reported higher rates of cage migration/subsidence and pseudoarthrosis in the UPSF. No study has evaluated the impact of UPSF on indirect decompression and ASD.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 319 patients treated with UPSF vs. 331 patients treated with BPSF between 2012 to 2020. Clinical and radiological outcomes were evaluated at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 4 years postoperatively. X-rays were used to assess fusion+ASD and computed tomography scans in doubtful cases. Magnetic resonance imaging was used at last FU to determine cross-sectional area of cord (CSA), foraminal height (FH), and width (FW) restoration.

RESULTS

The mean FU duration was 50 months (range, 44-140 months). In UPSF, CSA increased by 2.3 times from preoperative values; FH and FW increased by 25% and 17.5%, respectively, at last FU (p<0.001); fusion rate was 94.3%, comparable to BPSF (similar CSA, FW, FH, 96.4% fusion rate). In UPSF, adjacent disc height remained stable, from preoperative 11.39±2.03 to 10.97±1.93 postoperatively at 4 years and 10.03±1.88 at 8 years. BPSF showed ASD in 14 (4.47%) vs. three patients (1.06%) in UPSF (p<0.04). Complication rates were similar (6.58% UPSF vs. 6.04% BPSF, p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

UPSF-TLIF is comparable to BPSF in terms of patient-reported clinical outcomes, fusion rates, and complication rates while being superior in terms of lesser ASD. UPSF enables radiologically and clinically significant contralateral indirect neural foraminal decompression and canal decompression without disturbing the contralateral side anatomy, unlike BPSF.

Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Double Banana Cages: Clinical Evaluations and Finite Element Model Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Clinical and basic study.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate whether transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) using 2 banana-shaped cages leads to good clinical outcomes.

METHODS

First, we conducted a clinical study to compare outcomes among patients who underwent TLIF using different types or numbers of cages. Propensity matched patients in each group were reviewed. Thirty-four patients who underwent surgery with 2 bullet-shaped cages (group A), 34 with a banana-shaped cage (group B), and 34 with 2 banana-shaped cages (group C) were compared. Twelve months after the surgery, bony fusion and cage subsidence were evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean amount of cage subsidence was 14.9% in group A, 19.9% in group B, and 11.8% in group C. Subsidence in group B was significantly greater than that in group C (P < .01). Radiological bony fusion was not achieved in 2 cases in group B. Second, we performed a finite element model (FEM) analysis to determine the biomechanical stress of the vertebral endplate by comparing the single-banana cage construct with a double banana-shaped cage construct. FEM analysis showed that the maximum stress of the endplate in the single-cage model was 1.72-times greater than the maximum stress in the double-cage model. Furthermore, the maximal stress in the single-cage model was significantly higher than in the double-cage model during lumbar extension and side bending.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that TLIF with double banana-shaped cages led to good clinical outcomes with less cage subsidence, probably because of decreased mechanical stress on the vertebral endplate.

Transdural retrieval of retropulsed transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cages

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIFs) are performed for various lumbar spine pathologies. Posterior migration of an interbody cage is a complication that may result in neurologic injury and require reoperation. Sparse information exists regarding the safety and efficacy of a transdural approach for cage retrieval. We describe a surgical technique, in which centrally retropulsed cages were safely retrieved transdurally. A patient with prior L3-S1 posterior lumbar fusion and L4-S1 TLIFs presented with radiculopathy and weakness in dorsiflexion. Imaging revealed posterior central migration of TLIF cages causing compression of the traversing L5 nerve root. Cages were removed transdurally; the correction was performed with an all-posterior T10-pelvis fusion. Aside from temporary weakness in right-sided dorsiflexion, the patient experienced complete resolution in their radiculopathy and strength returned to its presurgical state by 3 months. The transdural approach for interbody removal can be safely performed and should be a tool in the spine surgeon's armamentarium.

Development of End-to-End Artificial Intelligence Models for Surgical Planning in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is a commonly used technique for treating lumbar degenerative diseases. In this study, we developed a fully computer-supported pipeline to predict both the cage height and the degree of lumbar lordosis subtraction from the pelvic incidence (PI-LL) after TLIF surgery, utilizing preoperative X-ray images. The automated pipeline comprised two primary stages. First, the pretrained BiLuNet deep learning model was employed to extract essential features from X-ray images. Subsequently, five machine learning algorithms were trained using a five-fold cross-validation technique on a dataset of 311 patients to identify the optimal models to predict interbody cage height and postoperative PI-LL. LASSO regression and support vector regression demonstrated superior performance in predicting interbody cage height and postoperative PI-LL, respectively. For cage height prediction, the root mean square error (RMSE) was calculated as 1.01, and the model achieved the highest accuracy at a height of 12 mm, with exact prediction achieved in 54.43% (43/79) of cases. In most of the remaining cases, the prediction error of the model was within 1 mm. Additionally, the model demonstrated satisfactory performance in predicting PI-LL, with an RMSE of 5.19 and an accuracy of 0.81 for PI-LL stratification. In conclusion, our results indicate that machine learning models can reliably predict interbody cage height and postoperative PI-LL.

Risk Factors for Cage Migration Following Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Combined With Posterior Instrumentation: A Multicenter Retrospective Study of 983 Cases

STUDY DESIGN

A multicenter retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to elucidate the incidence and risk factors of lateral cage migration (LCM) after lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) combined with posterior instrumentation.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

LLIF has recently become a widely accepted procedure for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. Although LLIF complications include vascular, nerve, and abdominal organ injuries, few studies have identified specific risk factors for LCM after LLIF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 2015 and December 2020, 983 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases or osteoporotic vertebral fractures underwent LLIF combined with posterior instrumentation. The fusion sites were located within the lumbosacral lesions. LCM was defined as a change of >3 mm in the movement of the radiopaque marker on radiographs. The patients were classified into LCM and non-LCM groups. Medical records and preoperative radiographs were also reviewed. The 1:5 nearest-neighbor propensity score matching technique was used to compare both groups, and radiologic parameters, including preoperative disk height (DH), preoperative sagittal disk angle, disk geometry, height variance (cage height minus DH), and endplate injury, were analyzed to identify the factors influencing LCM incidence.

RESULTS

There were 16 patients (1.6%) with LCM (10 men and 6 women; mean age 70.1 yr). The Cochran-Armitage trend test showed a linear trend toward an increased rating of LCM with an increasing number of fused segments ( P =0.003), and LCM occurred at the terminal cage-inserted disk level in all patients in the LCM group. After propensity-matched analysis, we identified high DH ( P <0.001), large sagittal disk angle ( P =0.009), round-type disk ( P =0.008), and undersized cage selection ( P <0.001) as risk factors for LCM.

CONCLUSION

We identified risk factors for LCM after LLIF combined with posterior instrumentation. To avoid this complication, it is important to select the appropriate cage sizes and enhance posterior fixation for at-risk patients.

Postoperative cage migration and subsidence following TLIF surgery is not associated with bony fusion

Pseudarthrosis following transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) is not infrequent. Although cage migration and subsidence are commonly regarded as evidence of the absence of solid fusion, there is still no evidence of the influence of cage migration and subsidence on fusion. This study aimed to evaluate cage migration and subsidence using computed tomography (CT) DICOM data following lumbar interbody fusion. The effects of cage migration and subsidence on fusion and clinical outcomes were also assessed. A postoperative CT data set of 67 patients treated with monosegmental TLIF was analyzed in terms of cage position. To assess the effects of cage migration and subsidence on fusion, 12-month postoperative CT scans were used to assess fusion status. Clinical evaluation included the visual analog scale for pain and the Oswestry Disability Index. Postoperative cage migration occurred in 85.1% of all patients, and cage subsidence was observed in 58.2%. Radiological signs of pseudarthrosis was observed in 7.5% of the patients Neither cage migration nor subsidence affected the clinical or radiographic outcomes. No correlation was found between clinical and radiographic outcomes. The incidence of cage migration was considerable. However, as cage migration and subsidence were not associated with bony fusion, their clinical significance was considered limited.

Clinical and Radiographic Comparison of Oblique Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Patients with L4/5 grade-1 Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

OBJECTIVES

To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in patients with grade-1 L4/5 degenerative spondylolisthesis.

METHODS

Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the comparative analysis included consecutive patients with grade-1 degenerative spondylolisthesis who underwent oblique LIF (OLIF, n = 36) or minimally invasive transforaminal LIF (MI-TLIF, n = 45) at the Department of Spine Surgery, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital from January 2016 to August 2017. Patient satisfaction Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), radiographic outcomes including anterior/posterior disc heights (ADH/PDH), foraminal height (FH), foraminal width (FW), cage subsidence, cage retropulsion, and fusion rate were assessed during a 2-year follow-up. Continuous data are presented as mean ± standard deviation and were compared between groups using the independent sample t-test. Categorical data are presented as n (%) and were compared between groups using the Pearson chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test. Repetitive measurement and analysis of variance was employed in the analysis of ODI, back pain VAS score, and leg pain VAS score. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The OLIF and MI-TLIF groups comprised 36 patients (age, 52.1 ± 7.2 years; 27 women) and 45 patients (age, 48.4 ± 14.4 years; 24 women), respectively. Satisfaction rates at 2 years post procedure exceeded 90% in both groups. The OLIF group had less intraoperative blood loss (140 ± 36 vs 233 ± 62 mL), lower back pain VAS score (2.42 ± 0.81 vs 3.38 ± 0.47), and ODI score (20.47 ± 2.53 vs 27.31 ± 3.71) at 3 months follow-up (with trends toward lower values at 2 years follow-up), but higher leg pain VAS scores at all postoperative time points than the MI-TLIF group (all p < 0.001). ADH, PDH, FD, and FW improved in both groups post-surgery. At the 2 year follow-up, the OLIF group had a higher rate of Bridwell grade-I fusion (100% vs 88.9%, p = 0.046) and lower incidences of cage subsidence (8.33% vs 46.67%, p < 0.001) and retropulsion (0% vs 6.67%, p = 0.046) than the MI-TLIF group.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with grade-I spondylolisthesis, OLIF was associated with lower blood loss and greater improvements in VAS for back pain and ODI and radiologic outcomes than MI-TLIF. The OLIF is more suitable for these patients with low back pain as the main symptoms are accompanied by mild or no leg symptoms before operation.

[Research progress of effect of cage height on outcomes of lumbar interbody fusion surgery]

Objective

To summarize the effect of cage height on outcomes of lumbar interbody fusion surgery and the importance of the cage height selection.

Methods

The related literature was widely reviewed to summarize the research progress on the complications caused by inappropriate height of the cage and the methods of selecting cage height.

Results

Inappropriate height of the cage can lead to endplate injury, cage subsidence, internal fixation failure, adjacent segmental degeneration, over-distraction related pain, insufficient indirect decompression, instability of operation segment, poor interbody fusion, poor sequence of spine, and cage displacement. At present, the selection of the cage height is based on the results of the intraoperative model test, which is reliable but high requirements for surgical experience and hard to standardize.

Conclusion

The inappropriate height of the cage may have an adverse impact on the postoperative outcome of patients. It is important to develop a selection standard of the cage height by screening the related influential factors.

Novel MRI-based vertebral bone quality score as a predictor of cage subsidence following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

OBJECTIVE

Decreased bone mineral density as measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) has been reported to be associated with cage subsidence following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). However, DEXA is not often available or routinely performed before surgery. A novel MRI-based vertebral bone quality (VBQ) score has been developed and reported to be correlated with DEXA T-scores. The authors investigated the ability of the VBQ score to predict cage subsidence and other risk factors associated with this complication.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, the authors reviewed the records of patients who had undergone single-level TLIF from March 2014 to October 2015 and had a follow-up of more than 2 years. Cage subsidence was measured as postoperative disc height loss and was graded according to the system proposed by Marchi et al. The MRI-based VBQ score was measured on T1-weighted images. Univariable analysis and multivariable binary logistic regression analysis were performed. Ad hoc analysis with receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed to assess the predictive ability of the significant continuous variables. Additional analyses were used to determine the correlations between the VBQ score and T-scores and between the significant continuous variables and the amount of cage subsidence.

RESULTS

Among 242 patients eligible for study inclusion, 111 (45.87%) had cage subsidence after the index operation. Multivariable logistic regression analyses demonstrated that an increased VBQ score (OR 14.615 ± 0.377, p < 0.001), decreased depth ratio (OR 0.011 ± 1.796, p = 0.013), and the use of kidney-shaped cages instead of bullet-shaped cages (OR 2.766 ± 0.358, p = 0.008) were associated with increased cage subsidence. The VBQ score was shown to significantly predict cage subsidence with an accuracy of 85.6%. The VBQ score was found to be moderately correlated with DEXA T-scores of the total hip (r = -0.540, p < 0.001) and the lumbar spine (r = -0.546, p < 0.001). The amount of cage subsidence was moderately correlated with the VBQ score (r = 0.512, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Increased VBQ scores, posteriorly placed cages, and kidney-shaped cages were risk factors for cage subsidence. The VBQ score was shown to be a good predictor of cage subsidence, was moderately correlated with DEXA T-scores for the total hip and lumbar spine, and also had a moderate correlation with the amount of cage subsidence.

Safety and efficacy of unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation for lumbar degenerative diseases by transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of unilateral vs. bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BPSF) for lumbar degenerative diseases.

Methods

Electronic databases including PubMed, Web of science, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBSCO were searched by computer. The deadline was set for June 1, 2022. This study included all high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective clinical controlled studies (PRO), and retrospective studies (Retro) that compared unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. Revman5.3 software was used for meta-analysis after two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the study.

Results

Fourteen studies with a total of 1,086 patients were included. Compared with BPSF, unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UPSF) has shorter operation time and hospital time, and less blood loss and operation cost, operation time [SMD = −1.75, 95% CI (−2.46 to −1.03), P < 0.00001], hospital time [SMD = −1.10, 95% CI (−1.97 to −0.22), P = 0.01], Blood loss [SMD = −1.62, 95% CI (−2.42 to −0.82), P < 0.0001], operation cost [SMD = −14.03, 95% CI (−20.08 to −7.98), P < 0.00001], the ODI after bilateral pedicle screw fixation was lower, and the degree of lumbar dysfunction was lighter, [SMD = 0.19, 95% CI (0.05–0.33), P = 0.007], better fusion effect, fusion rate [RR=0.95, 95% CI (0.91–1.00), P = 0.04]. VAS-Low back pain [SMD = 0.07, 95% CI (−0.07–0.20), P = 0.35], VAS-Leg pain [SMD = 0.18, 95% CI (−0.00–0.36), P = 0.05], SF-36 [SMD = 0.00, 95% CI (−0.30–0.30), P = 1.00], complications rate [RR = 0.94, 95% CI (0.9154–1.63), P = 0.82], the overall difference was not statistically significant.

Conclusions

Currently limited evidence suggests that UPSF significantly reduces blood loss, significantly shortens the operative time and hospital stay, and reduces blood loss and costs. After BPSF, the ODI was lower, the degree of lumbar spine dysfunction was lower, and the fusion rate was significantly higher. The VAS, SF-36, and complications scores of the two groups were comparable, and there was no significant clinical difference.

Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of lumbar foraminal stenosis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BPSF) is an effective treatment for lumbar foraminal stenosis (LFS). However, the effects of TLIF with unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UPSF) on LFS treatment have not been clearly elucidated.

PURPOSE

We conducted this study to compare clinical outcomes and radiographic results of TLIF with UPSF and BPSF 2 years after the surgical treatment.

DESIGN

Prospective randomized study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

This study included 23 patients undergoing TLIF with UPSF and 25 patients undergoing TLIF with BPSF.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinical outcomes were evaluated by visual analog scale (VAS) for low back pain and leg pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score. Radiographic outcomes included foraminal height, disc space height, segmental lordosis, and final fusion rates.

METHODS

The clinical and radiographic outcomes were compared between the UPSF and BPSF group. The postoperative improvements were evaluated in either group. Intraoperative data such as duration of operation and estimated blood loss were collected. This study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov.

RESULTS

Analysis of the VAS and ODI scores showed significant improvements in clinical outcomes within each group. No significant differences between the 2 groups were noted in the improvements of the VAS and ODI scores. The mean operative duration and blood loss were significantly greater in the BPSF group than in the UPSF group. There were significant improvements in the height of the foramen and intervertebral space and segmental lordosis in both groups, while there was no significant difference between the groups in amount of the improvements. No significant difference was found in the final fusion rates.

CONCLUSIONS

TLIF is an appropriate procedure for LFS treatment. With balanced intervertebral support using a cage, UPSF could achieve similar and satisfactory effects on lumbar segmental stability and fusion compared to BPSF. The unilateral approach appears to be associated with slightly shorter operative time and less blood loss.

Intraoperative Endplate Injury Following Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the incidence, distribution characteristics, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of intraoperative endplate injury following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

METHODS

Patients who underwent single-level TLIF from January 2018 to December 2020 were included. The patients were separated into endplate injury group (EI group) and no endplate injury group (non-EI group) by postoperative computed tomography scanning immediately. All patients' demographic, clinical, and radiographic parameters were analysed. Clinical outcomes were evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS) for low back pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).

RESULTS

576 patients were enrolled in this study. The rates of endplate injury were 19.6% (113 of 576) of patients and 9.9% (114 of 1152) of endplates. The rate of superior endplate injury was significantly higher than that of inferior endplate injury. The results illustrated that older age, lower disc height index (DHI), and taller cage height were independent risk factors for intraoperative endplate injury. The postoperative drain output, total blood loss, postoperative duration of drainage tube, and postoperative hospital stay in EI group were significantly more than those in non-EI group. There were no statistical differences in ODI and VAS scores at the same time point between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The rates of endplate injury were 19.6% of patients and 9.9% of endplates. The superior endplates are more susceptible to injury than inferior endplates. Older age, lower DHI, and taller cage height were independent risk factors for intraoperative endplate injury. Clinical outcomes were not affected by intraoperative endplate injury during early postoperative follow-up.

Ultrasound-based navigated pedicle screw insertion without intraoperative radiation: feasibility study on porcine cadavers

BACKGROUND

Navigation systems for spinal fusion surgery rely on intraoperative computed tomography (CT) or fluoroscopy imaging. Both expose patient, surgeons and operating room staff to significant amounts of radiation. Alternative methods involving intraoperative ultrasound (iUS) imaging have recently shown promise for image-to-patient registration. Yet, the feasibility and safety of iUS navigation in spinal fusion have not been demonstrated.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the accuracy of pedicle screw insertion in lumbar and thoracolumbar spinal fusion using a fully automated iUS navigation system.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective porcine cadaver study.

METHODS

Five porcine cadavers were used to instrument the lumbar and thoracolumbar spine using posterior open surgery. During the procedure, iUS images were acquired and used to establish automatic registration between the anatomy and preoperative CT images. Navigation was performed with the preoperative CT using tracked instruments. The accuracy of the system was measured as the distance of manually collected points to the preoperative CT vertebral surface and compared against fiducial-based registration. A postoperative CT was acquired, and screw placements were manually verified. We report breach rates, as well as axial and sagittal screw deviations.

RESULTS

A total of 56 screws were inserted (5.50 mm diameter n=50, and 6.50 mm diameter n=6). Fifty-two screws were inserted safely without breach. Four screws (7.14%) presented a medial breach with an average deviation of 1.35±0.37 mm (all <2 mm). Two breaches were caused by 6.50 mm diameter screws, and two by 5.50 mm screws. For vertebrae instrumented with 5.50 mm screws, the average axial diameter of the pedicle was 9.29 mm leaving a 1.89 mm margin in the left and right pedicle. For vertebrae instrumented with 6.50 mm screws, the average axial diameter of the pedicle was 8.99 mm leaving a 1.24 mm error margin in the left and right pedicle. The average distance to the vertebral surface was 0.96 mm using iUS registration and 0.97 mm using fiducial-based registration.

CONCLUSIONS

We successfully implanted all pedicle screws in the thoracolumbar spine using the ultrasound-based navigation system. All breaches recorded were minor (<2 mm) and the breach rate (7.14%) was comparable to existing literature. More investigation is needed to evaluate consistency, reproducibility, and performance in surgical context.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Intraoperative US-based navigation is feasible and practical for pedicle screw insertion in a porcine model. It might be used as a low-cost and radiation-free alternative to intraoperative CT and fluoroscopy in the future.

Intradural migration of fusion cage in an isthmic listhesis patient treated with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): A case report

Lumbar listhesis, is defined as a disorder that causes a vertebral body to slip over the one below it. Several surgical decompression and augmented fusion techniques are available for treatment. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is a commonly used surgical technique for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis in cases in which conservative care fails to achieve satisfactory spinal fusion. Although TLIF is widely accepted because it is easy to perform and is very safe, cage migration is an important complication, and posterior migration is a serious one. Cage migration can be classified as posterior, anterior, or sagittal forms according to migration direction. An increasing number of the surgeons have encountered cage migration; however, consensus on its cause is lacking. In this report, a case of intradural cage migration with left leg pain is presented, and this complication is discussed in light of related studies.

Revision for cage migration after transforaminal/posterior lumbar interbody fusion: how to perform revision surgery?

Background

Symptomatic pseudarthrosis and cage migration/protrusion are difficult complications of transforaminal or posterior lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF/PLIF). If the patient experiences severe radicular symptoms due to cage protrusion, removal of the migrated cage is necessary. However, this procedure is sometimes very challenging because epidural adhesions and fibrous union can be present between the cage and vertebrae. We describe a novel classification and technique utilizing a navigated osteotome and the oblique lumbar interbody fusion at L5/S1 (OLIF51) technique to address this problem.

Methods

This retrospective study investigated consecutive patients with degenerative lumbar diseases who underwent TLIF/PLIF. Symptomatic cage migration was evaluated by direct examination, radiography, and/or computed tomography (CT) at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months of follow-up. Cage migration/protrusion was defined as symptomatic cage protrusion > 5 mm from the posterior border of the over and underlying vertebral body compared with initial CT. We evaluated patient characteristics including body mass index, smoking history, fusion level, and cage type. A total of 113 patients underwent PLIF/TLIF (PLIF n = 30, TLIF n = 83), with a mean age of 71.1 years (range, 28–87 years). Mean duration of follow-up was 25 months (range, 12–47 months).

Results

Cage migration was identified in 5 of 113 patients (4.4%). All cases of symptomatic cage migration involved the L5/S1 level and the TLIF procedure. Risk factors for cage protrusion were age (younger), sex (male), and level (L5/S1). The mean duration to onset of cage protrusion was 3.2 months (range, 2–6 months). We applied a new classification for cage protrusion: type 1, only low back pain without new radicular symptoms; type 2, low back pain with minor radicular symptoms; or type 3, cauda equina syndrome and/or severe radicular symptoms. According to our classification, one patient was in type 1, three patients were in type 2, and one patient was in type 3. For all cases of cage migration, revision surgery was performed using a navigated high-speed burr and osteotome, and the patient in group 1 underwent additional PLIF without removal of the protruding cage. Three revision surgeries (group 2) involved removal of the protruding cage and PLIF, and one revision surgery (group 3) involved anterior removal of the cage and OLIF51 fusion.

Conclusions

The navigated high-speed burr, navigated osteotome, and OLIF51 technique appear very useful for removing a cage with fibrous union from the disc in patients with pseudarthrosis. This new technique makes revision surgery after cage migration much safer, and more effective. This technique also reduces the need for fluoroscopy.

Influence of the geometric and material properties of lumbar endplate on lumbar interbody fusion failure: a systematic review

Background

Lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) is an established surgical intervention for patients with leg and back pain secondary to disc herniation or degeneration. Interbody fusion involves removal of the herniated or degenerated disc and insertion of interbody devices with bone grafts into the remaining cavity. Extensive research has been conducted on operative complications such as a failure of fusion or non-union of the vertebral bodies. Multiple factors including surgical, implant, and patient factors influencing the rate of complications have been identified. Patient factors include age, sex, osteoporosis, and patient anatomy. Complications can also be influenced by the interbody cage design. The geometry of the bony endplates as well as their corresponding material properties guides the design of interbody cages, which vary considerably across patients with spinal disorders. However, studies on the effects of such variations on the rate of complications are limited. Therefore, this study aimed to perform a systematic review of lumbar endplate geometry and material property factors in LIF failure.

Methods

Search keywords included ‘factor/cause for spinal fusion failure/cage subsidence/cage migration/non-union’, ‘lumbar’, and ‘interbody’ in electronic databases PubMed and Scopus with no limits on year of publication.

Results

In total, 1341 articles were reviewed, and 29 articles were deemed suitable for inclusion. Adverse events after LIF, such as cage subsidence, cage migration, and non-union, resulted in fusion failure; hence, risk factors for adverse events after LIF, notably those associated with lumbar endplate geometry and material properties, were also associated with fusion failure. Those risk factors were associated with shape, concavity, bone mineral density and stiffness of endplate, segmental disc angle, and intervertebral disc height.

Conclusions

This review demonstrated that decreased contact areas between the cage and endplate, thin and weak bony endplate as well as spinal diseases such as spondylolisthesis and osteoporosis are important causes of adverse events after LIF. These findings will facilitate the selection and design of LIF cages, including customised implants based on patient endplate properties.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13018-022-03091-8.

Oblique lateral interbody fusion combined with different internal fixations for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine disease: a finite element analysis

Background

Little is known about the biomechanical performance of different internal fixations in oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). Here, finite element (FE) analysis was used to describe the biomechanics of various internal fixations and compare and explore the stability of each fixation.

Methods

CT scans of a patient with lumbar degenerative disease were performed, and the l3-S1 model was constructed using relevant software. The other five FE models were constructed by simulating the model operation and adding different related implants, including (1) an intact model, (2) a stand-alone (SA) model with no instrument, (3) a unilateral pedicle screw model (UPS), (4) a unilateral pedicle screw contralateral translaminar facet screw model (UPS-CTFS), (5) a bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) model, and (6) a cortical bone trajectory screw model (CBT). Various motion loads were set by FE software to simulate lumbar vertebral activity. The software was also used to extract the range of motion (ROM) of the surgical segment, CAGE and fixation stress in the different models.

Results

The SA group had the greatest ROM and CAGE stress. The ROM of the BPS and UPS-CTFS was not significantly different among motion loadings. Compared with the other three models, the BPS model had lower internal fixation stress among loading conditions, and the CBT screw internal fixation had the highest stress among loads.

Conclusions

The BPS model provided the best biomechanical stability for OLIF. The SA model was relatively less stable. The UPS-CTFS group had reduced ROM in the fusion segments, but the stresses on the internal fixation and CAGE were relatively higher in the than in the BPS group; the CBT group had a lower flexion and extension ROM and higher rotation and lateral flexion ROM than the BPS group. The stability of the CBT group was poorer than that of the BPS and LPS-CTFS groups. The CAGE and internal fixation stress was greater in the CBT group.

CT Hounsfield Units as a predictor of reoperation and graft subsidence following standalone and multi-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion

INTRODUCTION

Standalone single and multi-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) are increasingly being applied to treat degenerative spinal conditions in a less invasive fashion. Graft subsidence following LLIF is a known complication and has been associated with poor bone mineral density (BMD). Previous research has demonstrated the utility of CT Hounsfield Units (HU) as a surrogate for BMD. This study aims to investigate the relationship between CT HU and subsidence and reoperation after standalone and multi-level LLIF.

METHODS

A prospectively-maintained single-institution database was retrospectively reviewed for LLIF patients from 2017-2020 including single and multi-level standalone cases with or without supplemental posterior fixation. Data on demographics, graft parameters, BMD on DEXA, preoperative mean segmental CT HU, and postoperative subsidence and reoperation, were collected. Three-foot standing radiographs were used to measure preoperative global sagittal alignment and disc height, and subsidence at last follow-up. Subsidence was classified using the Marchi grading system corresponding to disc height loss: Grade 0: 0-24%; I: 25-49%; II: 50-74%; III: 75-100%.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine LLIF patients met study criteria, with mean follow-up 19.9 ± 13.9 months. Among the 54 patients who underwent single-level LLIF, mean segmental HU was 152.0 ± 8.7 in 39 patients with Grade 0 subsidence, 136.7 ± 10.4 in nine with Grade I subsidence, 133.9 ± 23.1 in three with Grade II subsidence, and 119.9 ± 30.9 in three with Grade III subsidence (p=0.032). In the 96 instrumented levels in 35 patients who underwent multi-level LLIF, 85 had Grade 0 subsidence, 9 Grade I, 1 Grade II, and 1 Grade III, with no differences in HU. In multivariate logistic regression, increased CT HU was independently associated with a decreased risk of reoperation in both single-level and multi-level LLIF (OR:0.98, 95%CI:0.97-0.99, p=0.044; and OR:0.97, 95%CI: 0.94-0.99, p=0.017, respectively). Overall BMD on DEXA was not associated with graft subsidence nor reoperation. Using a receiver-operating-characteristic curve to establish separation between patients requiring reoperation and those that did not, the determined threshold HU for single-level LLIF was 131.4 (sensitivity 0.62, specificity 0.65), and for multi-level was 131.0 (sensitivity 0.67, specificity 0.63).

CONCLUSIONS

Lower CT HU are independently associated with an increased risk of graft subsidence following single-level LLIF. In addition, lower CT HU significantly increased the risk of reoperation in both single and multi-level LLIF with a critical threshold of 131 HU. Preoperative CT HU may provide a more robust gauge of local bone quality and the likelihood of graft subsidence requiring reoperation following LLIF, than overall BMD.

Laterally Placed Expandable Interbody Spacers With and Without Adjustable Lordosis Improve Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes: A Two-Year Follow-Up Study

Introduction

Interbody spacers are necessary for achieving disc height restoration when surgical intervention is used for the treatment of severe degenerative disc disease. Minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion (MIS LLIF) is a popular surgical approach that historically uses large static interbody spacers through a lateral approach. However, static spacers have been associated with iatrogenic distraction and excessive impaction forces, which may increase the risk of subsidence and loss of lordosis, compromising stability. Expandable interbody spacers with or without adjustable lordosis may help address these concerns by maximizing segmental lordosis and aiding in sagittal balance correction. This study describes the clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients treated with expandable interbody spacers with or without adjustable lordosis, for MIS LLIF.

Materials and methods

This is retrospective, single-surgeon Institutional Review Board-exempt chart review was of 103 consecutive patients who had undergone MIS LLIF at one to two contiguous level(s) utilizing expandable interbody spacers with or without adjustable lordosis (66/103 patients had adjustable lordosis spacers). Collection of clinical and radiographic functional outcomes occurred at preoperative and postoperative time points through 24 months.

Results

One-hundred and three consecutive patients were evaluated-average age, 58.2 ± 12.1 years; 42.1% (45/107) were female. There were 78.6% (81/103) one-level cases and 21.4% (22/103) two-level cases for a total of 125 levels; 44.8% (56/125) were performed at L4-5 and 34.4% (43/125) at L3-4. The average estimated blood loss was 24.6 ± 12.3cc. Mean operative time was 61.0 ± 19.1 min, and mean fluoroscopic time was 28.2 ± 14.6 sec. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) back and leg pain scores decreased significantly by an average of 7.1 ± 1.0 points at 24 months (p<0.001). Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores significantly decreased by a mean of 67.4 ± 8.9 points at 24 months (p<0.001). Lumbar lordosis significantly improved by a mean of 3.1 ± 8.8° at 24 months (p=0.001). Anterior, middle, and posterior disc height significantly increased at 24 months by averages of 4.7 ± 3.1, 4.0 ± 3.0, and 2.1 ± 2.2mm, respectively (p<0.001). Neuroforaminal height had significantly increased at 24 months by a mean of 3.0 ± 3.6mm (p<0.001). Segmental lordosis significantly improved by 3.7 ± 2.9° at 24 months (p<0.001). There were 51 patients with abnormal preoperative Pelvic Incidence-Lumbar Lordosis (PI-LL) measurements that significantly improved by 9.1 ± 4.9° (p<0.001) and 52 patients with normal preoperative PI-LL measurements that improved by 0.2 ± 4.6° (p=0.748) at 24 months. One-hundred percent fusion occurred at all levels, and no findings of radiolucency were observed. One case of subsidence (1/125, 0.8%) was reported at 24 months. No implanted-related complications were reported, with 0% pseudoarthrosis and no secondary surgery required at the operative levels.

Conclusion

Indirect decompression and sagittal correction were achieved and maintained through a 24-month follow-up. Functional clinical outcomes significantly improved based on decreased VAS pain and ODI scores at 24 months. This study resulted in positive clinical and radiographic outcomes for patients who underwent MIS LLIF with expandable interbody spacers with or without adjustable lordosis.

Comparison of Outcomes Between Cage Materials Used for Patients Undergoing Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion with Standalone Cages: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Interbody cages are currently being used to address diseases of the vertebra requiring surgical stabilization. Titanium cages were first introduced in 1988. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages are used frequently as one of the alternatives to titanium cages in current practice. This study aimed to compare available cage materials by reviewing the surgical and radiographic outcomes following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of several electronic databases was conducted following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Baseline characteristics, operative outcomes, arthrodesis rates, subsidence rates, and complications were collected from included studies. Collected outcomes were further stratified according to the procedure type, the number of levels operated, and graft used to compare cage materials.

RESULTS

Following the screening for inclusion criteria, a total of 37 studies with 2363 patients were included. The median age was 49.5 years and the median follow-up was 26 months. Overall, no significant differences were found between PEEK and titanium cages regarding fusion, neurologic deficit, subsidence rates, or "good and excellent" outcome according to Odom criteria. However, the standalone comparison between PEEK, titanium, and poly-methyl-methacrylate (PMMA) cages showed a significantly lower fusion rate for PMMA (PEEK: 94%, PMMA: 56%, titanium: 95%, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In the present systematic review and meta-analysis, a comparison of the long-term patient-reported and the radiographic outcomes associated with the use of titanium and PEEK, intervertebral body cages showed similar findings. However, there were significantly lower fusion rates for PMMA cages when using a standalone cage without graft material.

Expandable Versus Static Cages in Minimally Invasive Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Expandable cages for interbody fusion allow for in situ expansion optimizing fit while mitigating endplate damage. Studies comparing outcomes after using expandable or static cages have been conflicting.

METHODS

This was a meta-analysis A systematic search was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines identifying studies reporting outcomes among patients who underwent minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-LIF).

RESULTS

Fourteen articles with 1129 patients met inclusion criteria. Compared with MIS-LIFs performed with static cages, those with expandable cages had a significantly lower incidence of graft subsidence (expandable: incidence 0.03, I² 22.50%; static: incidence 0.27, I² 51.03%, P interaction <0.001), length of hospital stay (expandable: mean difference [MD] 3.55 days, I² 97%; static: MD 7.1 days, I² 97%, P interaction <0.01), and a greater increase in disc height (expandable: MD -4.41 mm, I² 99.56%; static: MD -0.79 mm, I² 99.17%, P interaction = 0.02). There was no statistically significant difference among Oswestry Disability Index (expandable: MD -22.75, I² 98.17%; static: MD -17.11, I² 95.26%, P interaction = 0.15), fusion rate (expandable: incidence 0.94, I² 0%; static incidence 0.92, I² 0%, P interaction = 0.44), overall change in lumbar lordosis (expandable: MD 3.48 degrees, I² 59.29%; static: MD 3.67 degrees, I² 0.00%, P interaction 0.88), blood loss (expandable: MD 228.9 mL, I² 100%; static: MD 261.1 mL, I² 94%, P interaction = 0.69) and operative time (expandable: MD 184 minutes, I² 95.32%; static: MD 150.4 minutes, I² 91%, P interaction = 0.56).

CONCLUSIONS

Expandable interbody cages in MIS-LIF were associated with a decrease in subsidence rate, operative time and greater in increase in disc height.

Risk Factors and Scoring System of Cage Retropulsion after Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Observational Study

Objective

To investigate risk factors of cage retropulsion after posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in China and to establish a scoring system of cage retropulsion.

Methods

The retrospective analysis was based on two hospital databases. The medical data records of posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cage retropulsion were selected from August 2009 to August 2019. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were set in advance. Risk factors including patients' baseline demographics (age, gender, operation diagnosis time difference), preoperative neurological symptoms, whether the fusion involves single or double segments, screw type, intraoperative compression, preoperative bone mineral density, whether there are neurological symptoms before surgery, whether there is urine dysfunction before surgery, disease type, complete removal of the endplate, and patient's education level. The research endpoint was the retropulsion of fusion cages. The Kaplan–Meier (K‐M) method was used to analyze potential risk factors, and multivariate Cox regression was used to identify independent risk factors (P < 0.05). The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (version 22.0; SPSS, IBM, Chicago, IL, USA) software was used for statistical analysis, and univariate analysis was used to screen out the factors related to cage retropulsion. All independent risk factors were included to predict the survival time of the retropulsion of cage.

Results

This study included a total of 32 patients with PLIF between 2009 to 2019. All patients were residents of China. Univariate analysis showed that there were 13 patients over 60 years old and 19 patients under 60 years old. There were 20 male patients and 12 female patients. The surgical diagnosis time was seven patients within 1 month, 17 patients within 1 to 3 months, and eight patients over 3 months. The disease type was 18 cases of lumbar disc herniation, 10 cases of lumbar spinal stenosis, four cases of lumbar spondylolisthesis. The fusion segment was 18 cases of single segment, 14 cases of double segment. The intraoperative compression was seven cases of compression, 25 cases of no compression. The preoperative bone mineral density was 10 cases of low density, 18 cases of normal, four cases of osteoporosis. The screw type was 27 cases of universal screw, five cases of one‐way screw. Preoperative neurological symptoms were found in 25 cases and not in seven cases. Preoperative urination dysfunction occurred in 8 cases, whereas 24 cases did not have this dysfunction. The endplate was completely removed in 10 cases and not in 22 cases. Education level was nine cases of primary school education, 10 cases of secondary school, 13 cases of university level. Cox regression analysis showed that intraoperative pressure (hazard ratio [HR] = 4.604, P = 0.015) and complete removal of the endplate (HR = 0.205, P = 0.027) are associated with the time of cage retropulsion. According to the HR of each factor, the scoring rules were formulated, and the patients were divided into the low‐risk group, moderate‐risk group, and high‐risk group according to the final score. The three median survival times of the three groups were 66 days in the low‐risk group, 55 days in the moderate‐risk group, and 45 days in the high‐risk group, with statistical significance (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Intraoperative pressure and complete removal of the intraoperative endplate can be helpful to evaluating the expected time of cage retropulsion in patients with PLIF, and this clinical model guided the selection of postoperative prevention and follow‐up treatment.

Design of Customize Interbody Fusion Cages of Ti64ELI with Gradient Porosity by Selective Laser Melting Process

Intervertebral fusion surgery for spinal trauma, degeneration, and deformity correction is a major vertebral reconstruction operation. For most cages, the stiffness of the cage is high enough to cause stress concentration, leading to a stress shielding effect between the vertebral bones and the cages. The stress shielding effect affects the outcome after the reconstruction surgery, easily causing damage and leading to a higher risk of reoperation. A porous structure for the spinal fusion cage can effectively reduce the stiffness to obtain more comparative strength for the surrounding tissue. In this study, an intervertebral cage with a porous gradation structure was designed for Ti64ELI alloy powders bonded by the selective laser melting (SLM) process. The medical imaging software InVesalius and 3D surface reconstruction software Geomagic Studio 12 (Raindrop Geomagic Inc., Morrisville, NC, USA) were utilized to establish the vertebra model, and ANSYS Workbench 16 (Ansys Inc., Canonsburg, PA, USA) simulation software was used to simulate the stress and strain of the motions including vertical body-weighted compression, flexion, extension, lateral bending, and rotation. The intervertebral cage with a hollow cylinder had porosity values of 80–70–60–70–80% (from center to both top side and bottom side) and had porosity values of 60–70–80 (from outside to inside). In addition, according to the contact areas between the vertebras and cages, the shape of the cages can be custom-designed. The cages underwent fatigue tests by following ASTM F2077-17. Then, mechanical property simulations of the cages were conducted for a comparison with the commercially available cages from three companies: Zimmer (Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc., Warsaw, IN, USA), Ulrich (Germany), and B. Braun (Germany). The results show that the stress and strain distribution of the cages are consistent with the ones of human bone, and show a uniform stress distribution, which can reduce stress concentration.

Endplate injury as a risk factor for cage retropulsion following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: An analysis of 1052 cases

Although transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is a widely accepted procedure, major complications such as cage retropulsion (CR) can cause poor clinical outcomes. Endplate injury (EI) was recently identified as a risk factor for CR, present in most levels developing CR. However, most EIs occurred in non-CR levels, and the features of EIs in CR levels remain unknown.The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for CR following TLIF; in particular, to investigate the relationship between EIs and CR, and to explore the features of EIs in CR.Between October 2010 and December 2016, 1052 patients with various degenerative lumbar spinal diseases underwent bilateral instrumented TLIF. Their medical records, radiological factors, and surgical factors were reviewed and factors affecting the incidence of CR were analyzed.Twenty-one patients developed CR. Nine had back pain or leg pain, of which six required revision surgery. A pear-shaped disc, posterior cage positioning and EI were significantly correlated with CR (P < .001, P = .001, and P < .001, respectively). Computed tomography (CT) scans revealed the characteristics of EIs in levels with and without CR. The majority of CR levels with EIs exhibited apparent compression damage in the posterior part of cranial endplate on the decompressed side (17/18), accompanied by caudal EIs isolated in the central portion. However, in the control group, the cranial EIs involving the posterior part was only found in four of the total 148 levels (P < .001). Most of the injuries were confined to the central portion of the cranial or caudal endplate or both endplates (35 in 148 levels, 23.6%). Additionally, beyond cage breaching into the cortical endplate on lateral radiographs, a characteristic appearance of coronal cage misalignment was found on AP radiographs in CR levels with EIs.A pear-shaped disc, posterior cage positioning and EI were identified as risk factors for CR. EI involving the posterior epiphyseal rim had influence on the development of CR. Targeted protection of the posterior margin of adjacent endplates, careful evaluation of intraoperative radiographs, and timely remedial measures may help to reduce the risks of CR.

Predicting the Failure Risk of Internal Fixation Devices in Chinese Patients Undergoing Spinal Internal Fixation Surgery: Development and Assessment of a New Predictive Nomogram

The current study is aimed at developing and validating a nomogram of the risk of failure of internal fixation devices in Chinese patients undergoing spinal internal fixation. We collected data from a total of 1139 patients admitted for spinal internal fixation surgery at the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University from May 2012 to February 2019. Of these, 1050 patients were included in the spinal internal fixation group and 89 patients in the spinal internal fixation device failure group. Patients were divided into training and validation tests. The risk assessment of the failure of the spinal internal fixation device used 14 characteristics. In the training test, the feature selection of the failure model of the spinal internal fixation device was optimized using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression model. Based on the characteristics selected in the LASSO regression model, multivariate logistic regression analysis was used for constructing the model. Identification, calibration, and clinical usefulness of predictive models were assessed using C-index, calibration curve, and decision curve analysis. A validation test was used to validate the constructed model. In the training test, the risk prediction nomogram included gender, age, presence or absence of scoliosis, and unilateral or bilateral fixation. The model demonstrated moderate predictive power with a C-index of 0.722 (95% confidence interval: 0.644-0.800) and the area under the curve (AUC) of 0.722. Decision curve analysis depicted that the failure risk nomogram was clinically useful when the probability threshold for internal fixation device failure was 3%. The C-index of the validation test was 0.761. This novel nomogram of failure risk for spinal instrumentation includes gender, age, presence or absence of scoliosis, and unilateral or bilateral fixation. It can be used for evaluating the risk of instrumentation failure in patients undergoing spinal instrumentation surgery.

Transforaminal Endoscopic Surgical Treatment for Posterior Migration of Polyetheretherketone Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cage: Case Series

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to report the clinical outcome of treating lumbar radiculopathy in the setting of retropulsed polyetheretherketone (PEEK) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) cages with transforaminal endoscopic spine surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 8 patients with lumbar radiculopathy in the setting of a retropulsed PEEK TLIF cage were included from January 2014 to January 2019. The inclusion criteria were 1) lumbar radiculopathy in the setting of a retropulsed PEEK TLIF cage causing nerve compression and 2) follow-up at least 1 year. Patients were asked to complete the following questionnaires for outcome evaluation: visual analog scales (VAS) for leg pain and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).

RESULTS

Eight patients underwent transforaminal endoscopic surgery for treatment of radiculopathy in the setting of a retropulsed PEEK TLIF cage in the 5-year period evaluated. One year after surgery, the VAS and ODI scores showed a significant decrease: average preoperative VAS and ODI scores were 6.9 ± 1.2 and 50.5 ± 10.9, and 1-year postoperative VAS and ODI scores were 2.3 ± 1.3 and 17.3 ± 5.1.

CONCLUSIONS

Transforaminal endoscopic spine surgery for the treatment of a retropulsed PEEK TLIF cage is a safe and effective approach with low morbidity and acceptable complication rates for patients with radiculopathy secondary to a retropulsed PEEK TLIF cage. Compared with a more invasive approach to removing or drilling the PEEK TLIF cage, endoscopic spine surgery could achieve a similar improvement in the patient-reported outcomes with possibly fewer complications.

Risk Factors Affecting Cage Retropulsion into the Spinal Canal Following Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Association with Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis

Study Design

This was a retrospective observational study.

Purpose

We identify risk factors, including physical and surgical factors, and comorbidities affecting cage retropulsion following posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF).

Overview of Literature

Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) is considered a risk factor for reoperation after PLIF. We evaluated the effect of DISH on cage retropulsion into the spinal canal, which may require surgical revision for severe neurological disorders.

Methods

A total of 400 patients (175 men, 225 women) who underwent PLIF were observed for >1 year. Factors investigated included the frequency of cage retropulsion and surgical revision. In addition, physical (age, sex, disease), surgical (fusion and PLIF levels, cage number, grade 2 osteotomy), and comorbid (DISH, existing vertebral fracture) factors were compared between patients with and without cage retropulsion. Factors related to surgical revision during the observation period were also considered.

Results

Cage retropulsion occurred in 15 patients and surgical revision was performed in 11. Revisions included the replacement of pedicle screws (PSs) with larger screws in all patients and supplementary implants in 10. Among the patients with cage retropulsion, the average PLIF level was 2.7, with DISH present in nine patients and existing vertebral fractures in six. Factors affecting cage retropulsion were diagnoses of osteoporotic vertebral fracture, multilevel fusion, single-cage insertion, grade 2 osteotomy, presence of DISH, and existing vertebral fracture. Multivariable analysis indicated that retropulsion of a fusion cage occurred significantly more frequently in patients with DISH and multilevel PLIF.

Conclusions

DISH and multilevel PLIF were significant risk factors affecting cage retropulsion. Revision surgery for cage retropulsion revealed PS loosening, suggesting that implant replacement was necessary to prevent repeat cage retropulsion after revision.

Influence of Modic Changes on Cage Subsidence and Intervertebral Fusion after Single-Level Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion

OBJECTIVES

This retrospective study aimed to determine the impact of Modic changes (MCs) on cage subsidence (CS) and intervertebral fusion after anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF).

METHODS

This study enrolled 61 patients with MCs who underwent single-level ACCF between January 2010 and December 2015 at our institution. The control group included 63 age-matched patients without MCs treated during the same period. The results from clinical and radiological assessments were reviewed, and radiographic CS was defined by an intervertebral height at the final follow-up that was less than the postoperative intervertebral height.

RESULTS

No significant differences in gender, age, operative time, blood loss, or follow-up results were observed between the MCs and control groups. Significantly more patients experienced CS in the MCs group than in the control group (41.0% vs. 15.9%; p = 0.003). The frequencies of CS among patients with type I MCs (40.0%, 8/20) and type II MCs (41.5%, 17/41) were significantly higher than that in the control group (15.9%, 10/63; p < 0.05). Both groups showed significant improvements in clinical assessment scores after surgery and at final follow-up compared with preoperative values (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In summary, all 61 patients with MCs who underwent ACCF achieved good fusion results. MCs in the surgical segment had no significant effect on intervertebral fusion, but both type 1 and type 2 MCs may increase the risk of CS.

Risk factors for cage retropulsion after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in older patients

Background

To investigate the incidence of cage retropulsion (CR) following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and the associated risk factors in older patients with lumbar disorders.

Methods

Between January 2015 and December 2017, 1,880 older patients (aged >60 years) who underwent open TLIF were preliminarily enrolled in this retrospective study. The patients' medical records were reviewed, and the risk factors potentially associated with CR were analyzed.

Results

A total of 1,662 patients (692 males and 970 females, with an average age of 68.7±5.2 years) who met the eligibility criteria were finally enrolled in this study. Following TLIF, 29 older patients (1.74%) developed CR including 12 patients with spinal stenosis, 7 patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis, 5 patients had degenerative disc diseases, 3 patients had surgical history, and 2 patients suffered isthmic spondylolisthesis. Of the 29 patients, 21 patients suffered lower back pain and/or sciatica (72.4%), while 8 patients were asymptomatic (27.6%). In multivariate analysis, screw loosening [odds ratio (OR) =7.315; 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.4-15.7] and endplate injury (OR =4.947; 95% CI: 2.3-10.6) were found to be independently associated with CR in older patients after TLIF.

Conclusions

The incidence of CR following TLIF in older patients is 1.74%. Screw loosening and endplate injury are risk factors for CR in older patients with TLIF.

Two-Year Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Expandable Interbody Spacers Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

The advantages of minimally invasive surgery for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) are well documented and include decreased blood loss, shorter length of hospital stay, and reduced perioperative costs. Clinical evidence for the use of expandable interbody spacers in conjunction with MIS TLIF, however, is scarce. This study sought to examine the clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients undergoing MIS TLIF with an expandable spacer.

METHODS

Forty patients from 4 institutions who underwent MIS TLIF with an expandable spacer were included in this study and followed for 24 months. Investigator assessment of the surgical technique was reported. Patient self-reported outcomes included Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Short Form 36 (SF-36) physical and mental component scores. Disc height, foraminal height, segmental and lumbar lordosis, and fusion were also assessed.

RESULTS

Investigators reported that intraoperative insertion, impaction, number of passes through the neural structures, and fit were better with an expandable spacer than a static spacer. Significant improvements in VAS, ODI, and SF-36 were reported as early as 6 weeks postoperatively and maintained through 24 months. Mean intervertebral and foraminal heights improved significantly from the preoperative time interval to as early as 6 weeks postoperatively and maintained through 24 months. There were no cases of spacer migration, subsidence, or collapse.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of an expandable interbody spacer in combination with MIS TLIF resulted in positive investigator assessments, immediate and progressive symptom relief, significant radiographic improvements, and no spacer-related complications.

How Safe Is Unilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation in Lumbar Fusion Surgery for Management of 2-Level Lumbar Degenerative Disorders Compared with Bilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation? Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

We performed this meta-analysis to compare the safety of unilateral with bilateral instrumented fusion in 2-level degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine.

METHODS

We conducted an independent and a duplicate electronic database search including PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library until January 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing unilateral pedicle screw fixation with bilateral pedicle screw fixation for multilevel lumbar degenerative disorders. Fusion and complication rates were the primary outcomes analyzed. Analysis was performed in R platform using OpenMeta[Analyst] software.

RESULTS

Five RCTs including 215 patients (Unilateral/Bilateral = 106/109) were included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups regarding fusion rate, complication rate, blood loss, duration of hospital stay, functional outcome scores like Visual Analog Scale, Oswestry Disability Index, and Short-Form 36 health survey at the final follow-up. Unilateral pedicle screw fixation was associated with a significant reduction in operation time (P < 0.001). Compared with the open approach, the minimally invasive approach showed a significant difference in terms of factors like operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, Visual Analog Scale, and Oswestry Disability Index (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis establishes the immediate safety and significant lesser operative period of unilateral pedicle screw fixation in lumbar fusion. However, due to lack of evidence on complications like cage subsidence and adjacent segment disease, unilateral pedicle screw fixation cannot be recommended as an alternative to bilateral pedicle screw fixation for 2-level degenerative spinal disease. Our analysis established the lacunae in literature for high-quality evidence on the subject; hence we recommend further large multicenter studies with longer follow-up to arrive at a conclusion.

Outcomes of Expandable Interbody Devices in Lumbar Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

STUDY DESIGN

This was a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to review radiographic, clinical, and surgical outcomes of expandable interbody device implantation following lumbar fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Few studies have evaluated postsurgical outcomes of expandable implants following lumbar interbody fusion.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed to identify studies investigating expandable intervertebral body devices in lumbar fusion. Radiographic parameters, fusion assessments, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), complications, and revision data were recorded. A comparison of expandable and static devices was performed using a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eleven articles were included. Postoperative improvements for each radiographic parameters for expandable versus static device implantation ranged from: lumbar lordosis, +2.0 to +5.0 degrees (expandable) versus +1.0 to +4.4 degrees (static); segmental lordosis, +1.0 to +5.2 degrees (expandable) versus+1.1 to +2.3 degrees (static); disk height, +0.82 to +4.8 mm (expandable) versus +0.26 to +6.9 mm (static); foraminal height, +0.13 to +2.8 mm (expandable) versus and +0.05 to +3.0 mm (static). Fusion rates ranged from 72.1% at 6 months to 100% at terminal follow-up. Preoperative to final follow-up improvement for the various PROs assessed were: Oswestry Disability Index, -15.4 to -56.3 (expandable) versus -13.6 to -26.3 (static); Visual Analog Scale (VAS) Back, -3.2 to -6.0 (expandable) versus -3.1 to -4.1 (static); and VAS Leg, -2.9 to -7.1 (expandable) -3.0 versus -4.8 (static). Static cages had a reported complication rate ranging from 6.0% to 16.1% and a subsidence rate of 6.0%. Expandable cages had a reported complication rate that ranged from 0.0.% to 10.0% and a subsidence rate of 5.5%-10.0%. A meta-analysis demonstrated a statistically significant difference in the PRO Oswestry Disability Index, but not VAS Back, VAS Leg, or radiographic outcomes (disk height or foraminal height).

CONCLUSION

There is no clear evidence for the use of expandable interbody devices over static devices.

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

Study Design

Retrospective chart review.

Purpose

This study compared the clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients treated with expandable and static interbody spacers following minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-LLIF) with 12-month follow-up.

Overview of Literature

A common surgical option for the treatment of degenerative disk disease (DDD) is MIS-LLIF using static or expandable spacers to restore disk height (DH), neuroforaminal height (NH), and segmental lordosis. Static spacers may require excessive trialing and aggressive impaction, potentially leading to endplate disruption and subsidence. Expandable spacers allow for in situ expansion to help address complications associated with static spacers.

Methods

This is an Institutional Review Board-exempt review of 69 patients (static, n=32; expandable, n=37) diagnosed with DDD who underwent MIS-LLIF at 1–2 contiguous level(s) using static or expandable spacers. Radiographic and clinical outcomes were collected and compared at pre- and postoperative time points up to 12 months.

Results

The expandable group had a significantly higher mean change in Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months vs. static (∆VAS at 12 months: expandable, 6.7±1.3; static, 5.1±2.6). Mean improvement of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores at 3, 6, and 12 months were significantly better for the expandable group vs. static (∆ODI at 12 months: expandable, 63.2±13.2; static, 29.8±23.4). Mean DH and NH significantly increased at final follow-up for both groups, with no significant difference in DH improvement between groups. The expandable mean NH improvement at 6 weeks and 6 months was significantly greater vs. static. Segmental lordosis significantly improved in the expandable group at all time intervals vs static. Subsidence rate at 12 months was significantly lower in the expandable group (1/46, 2.2%) vs. static (12/37, 32.4%).

Conclusions

Expandable spacers resulted in a significantly lower subsidence rate, improve segmental lordosis, and VAS and ODI outcomes at 12 months vs. static.

Evaluation of lumbar fusion using the anterior to psoas approach for the treatment of L5/S1 spondylolisthesis

To date, no studies have evaluated the outcomes of lumbar interbody fusion using the anterior to psoas (ATP) approach in patients with spondylolisthesis at L5/S1. We; therefore, aimed to evaluate short-term surgical outcomes of interbody fusion using the ATP approach combined with posterior fixation in these patients.We performed a retrospective analysis of 9 patients with grade I spondylolisthesis at L5/S1 who were treated with fusion and posterior fixation using the ATP approach at our hospital from April to July 2018. The recorded parameters included operation time, intraoperative blood loss, complications, intervertebral fusion rate, radiological intervertebral height, intervertebral foramen height, intervertebral foramen width, pain, visual analog scale, and Oswestry disability index.Four men and 5 women at an average age of 57.8 years (range: 46-71 years) were enrolled in the study. The average operation time was 152.8 ± 22.9 minutes, and the average blood loss during surgery was 165 ± 27.5 mL. All patients confirmed the relief of their low back pain, and there were no serious complications. The follow-up time was more than 6 months. The visual analog scale and Oswestry disability index scores 3 days postoperatively and at the last follow-up were significantly lower than those before surgery (P < .05). At the last follow-up, the intervertebral space of the surgical segment showed bony fusion in all patients, and the intervertebral height and intervertebral foramen height and width were significantly increased compared with those before surgery (P < .05).The ATP approach was safe and effective for the treatment of spondylolisthesis at L5/S1. It showed low vascular injury and cage shift rates and was technically easy to perform. We recommended that surgeons identify the vessels in the surgical field preoperatively so that they can be secured or safely ligated during surgery.

Stability Evaluation of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Constructs with Various Fixation Options: A Finite Element Analysis Based on Three-Dimensional Scanning Models

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the biomechanical performance of various fixation constructs after oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). This study aimed to explore the stability of various fixation options for OLIF by using finite element analysis based on three-dimensional scanning models.

METHODS

Six validated finite element models of the L3-L5 segment were reconstructed via computed tomography images, including (1) intact model, (2) stand-alone model with no instrument, (3) lateral rod-screw model, (4) lateral rod-screw plus contralateral translaminar facet screw (LRS-CTLFS) model, (5) unilateral pedicle screw model, and (6) bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) model. Models of the OLIF cage and pedicle screw were created with three-dimensional scanning to improve the accuracy of finite element analysis. Range of motion, stress of the cage, and stress of fixation were evaluated in the different models.

RESULTS

Range of motion increased from least to greatest as follows: BPS, LRS-CTLFS, unilateral pedicle screw, lateral rod-screw, stand-alone. Differences in range of motion between BPS and LRS-CTLFS were not significant for all loading cases. Compared with the other 3 models, the stress of the cage was found to be lower in BPS and LRS-CTLFS under all loading conditions, especially in BPS. Stress exerted on the fixation was the greatest in LRS-CTLFS, and the stress experienced by the translaminar facet screw was concentrated in part of the facet joint.

CONCLUSIONS

The BPS model provided the best biomechanical stability for OLIF; the stand-alone model could not provide sufficient stability. The LRS-CTLFS procedure increases the approximate stability and reduces stress at the cage-endplate interface; however, it causes an increase in screw stress.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Cage migration after unilateral instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and associated risk factors: a modified measurement method

Objective

In this retrospective study, a modified measurement method was used to analyze cage migration during follow-up after unilateral instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and identify associated factors.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated 75 patients who had been treated with unilateral instrumented TLIF. Cage migration was quantitatively defined as anterior–posterior or lateral displacement of the cage.

Results

Five patients had significant cage migration (6.7%), but none developed severe neural symptoms during follow-up or underwent reoperation. The cages tended to migrate posteriorly or toward the side of surgery. The initial cage position and patient age were strongly associated with migration. Migration was less frequent when the cages were initially placed closer to the side of surgery. Patients of advanced age were more likely to develop anterior–posterior migration than were young patients.

Conclusion

Cage migration is related to the initial position of the cage. Particular attention is required when performing unilateral instrumented TLIF in patients of advanced age because they are most likely to develop cage migration. Quantification of cage migration is an effective method of exploring the associated factors.

Cage positioning as a risk factor for posterior cage migration following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion - an analysis of 953 cases

Background

The risk of posterior cage migration (PCM) exists when a fusion cage is used for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). This complication is influenced by contact pressure between the endplate and the cage. Previous reports demonstrated that anteriorly located cages bore more load and had greater strain than posteriorly located cages. However, there have been no detailed reports on the correlation between cage positioning and PCM.

Methods

From March 2014 to October 2015, we reviewed 953 patients receiving open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and bilateral pedicle screw instrumentation. One hundred patients without PCM were randomly sampled as the control group. Postoperative sagittal and coronal cage positions in the disc space were evaluated with the ‘depth ratio’ and the ‘coronal ratio’. The demographic data of patients with and without PCM were compared to detect patient-related factors. Radiographic and cage related parameters, including cage position, preoperative disc height, preoperative spine stability, cage geometry, cage size, and height variance (= cage height – preoperative disc height) were compared between the PCM group and the control group. Univariate analyses and a multivariate logistic model were used to identify risk factors of PCM.

Results

Posterior cage migration occurred in 24 (2.52%) of 953 patients. The univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that those with a decreased depth ratio (OR, 9.78E-4; 95% CI, 9.69E-4 – 9.87E-4; p < 0.001) and height variance (OR, 0.757, 95% CI, 0.575–0997, p = 0.048) had a significantly higher risk of developing PCM.

Conclusions

Our results verified that posteriorly located cages and undersized cages are more prone to developing PCM, which may aid surgeons in making optimal decisions during TLIF procedures.

[Effectiveness of nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide-66 Cage in interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis]

Objective

To explore the effectiveness of nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide-66 (n-HA/PA66) Cage in interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was designed and conducted for 43 patients, who underwent posterior decompression and n-HA/PA66 Cage interbody fusion with correction of deformity between January 2013 and June 2016. Eighteen cases were single-level fusion (single-level group) and 25 cases were double-level fusion (double-level group). There was no significant difference in gender, age, body mass index, direction of convex, degree of apical rotation, fusion level, the number of osteoporotic patients, pre-operative intervertebral height of fusion segments, coronal Cobb angle, visual analogue score (VAS), and modified Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) between 2 groups ( P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, hospital stay, and complications of the operation were recorded. Modified ODI, VAS score, and MacNab criteria were adopted to assess clinical outcomes. Radiographic indexes, including intervertebral height of fusion segments, coronal Cobb angle, disc insertion depth, and the bone graft fusion rate, were also evaluated.

Results

There was no significant difference in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, and hospital stay between 2 groups ( P>0.05). All patients were followed up 18-62 months (mean, 30.9 months). Wound complications, postoperative delirium, and Cage retropulsion occurred in 4 cases (2 cases in single-level group, 2 cases in double-level group), 1 case of single-level group, and 1 case of double-level group, respectively. The intervertebral height of fusion segments after operation significantly improved compared with preoperative ones in both groups ( P<0.05). At last follow-up, the intervertebral height in double-level group was superior to which in single-level group ( P<0.05). The coronal Cobb angles after operation significantly improved compared with preoperative ones ( P<0.05), and no significant difference was found between 2 groups at each time point ( P>0.05). The disc insertion depth showed no significant difference between different time points after operation in 2 groups ( P>0.05) and between 2 groups at each time point after operation ( P>0.05). Bony fusion was obtained in all patients at last follow-up. The VAS score and modified ODI after operation in both groups were superior to those before operation ( P<0.05). The VAS score in double-level group was higher than that in single-level group ( P<0.05) at last follow-up, and no significant difference was found in VAS score and modified ODI between 2 groups at other time points ( P>0.05). According to the MacNab criteria, the excellent and good rates at last follow-up were 94.4% and 84.0% in single-level group and double-level group, respectively.

Conclusion

The n-HA/PA66 Cage can effectively restore and maintain the disc height of fusion segment, normal sequence, and biomechanical stability of the spine, and gain favorable effectivenss for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. And double-level fusion is superior to single-level fusion in maintaining disc height of fusion segment.

Risk factors for cage migration and cage retropulsion following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is a widely accepted surgical procedure, but cage migration (CM) and cage retropulsion (CR) are associated with poor outcomes.

PURPOSE

This study seeks to identify risk factors associated with these serious events.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective observational longitudinal study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Over a 5-year period, 881 lumbar levels in 784 patients were treated using TLIF at three spinal surgery centers.

OUTCOME MEASURES

We evaluated the odds ratio of the risk factors for CM with and without subsidence and CR in multivariate analysis.

METHODS

Our study classified CM into two subgroups: CM without subsidence and CM with subsidence. Cases of spinal canal and/or foramen intrusion of the cage was defined separately as CR. Patient records, operative notes, and radiographs were analyzed for factors potentially related to CM with subsidence, CM without subsidence, and CR.

RESULTS

Of 881 lumbar levels treated with TLIFs, CM without subsidence was observed in 20 (2.3%) and CM with subsidence was observed in 36 (4.1%) patients. Among the CM cases, CR was observed in 17 (17/56, 30.4%). The risk factors of CM without subsidence were osteoporosis (OR 8.73, p < .001) and use of a unilateral single cage (OR 3.57, p < .001). Osteoporosis (OR 5.77, p < .001) and endplate injury (OR 26.87, p < .001) were found to be significant risk factors for CM with subsidence. Risk factors of CR were osteoporosis (OR 7.86, p < .001), pear-shaped disc (OR 8.28, p = .001), endplate injury (OR 18.70, p < .001), unilateral single cage use (OR 4.40, p = .03), and posterior cage position (OR 6.45, p = .04). A difference in overall fusion rates was identified, with a rate of 97.1% (801 of 825) for no CM, 55.0% (11 of 20) for CM without subsidence, 41.7% (15 of 36) for CM with subsidence, and 17.6% (3 of 17) for CR at 1.5 years postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that osteoporosis is a significant risk factor for both CM and CR. In addition, a pear-shaped disc, posterior positioning of the cage, the presence of endplate injury and the use of a single cage were correlated with the CM with and without subsidence and CR.

Comparison of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using the Boomerang-Shaped Cage with Traditional Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to compare the clinical and radiological results of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with a boomerang-shaped cage and traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) according to fused level and elucidate whether TLIF could replace PLIF at all lumbar levels.

METHODS

The study investigated 128 patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis who underwent a single-level TLIF or traditional PLIF. Intraoperative blood loss, operative time, and recovery rate were analyzed. Percent slip, disc height, and local lordosis at the fused level were measured using X-ray images from preoperation to the final follow-up.

RESULTS

No significant differences in recovery rate were observed at any level. The operative time and intraoperative blood loss were significantly less in the TLIF group at the L4/5 and L5/S1 levels. There were no significant differences in disc height or local lordosis at the L3/4 and L4/5 levels, and a satisfactory level of maintenance after the operation was achieved in both groups. However, at the L5/S1 level, postoperative maintenance after TLIF could not be achieved, and the obtained disc height and local lordosis in TLIF significantly decreased.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with traditional PLIF, TLIF was a less invasive procedure with a shorter operative time and lesser blood loss. TLIF could obtain similar local lordosis and disc height as PLIF at the L3/4 and L4/5 levels. At the L5/S1 level, the postoperative maintenance of local lordosis and disc height after TLIF was inferior to that after PLIF. On the basis of our results, we do not recommend performing TLIF at only the L5/S1 level.