Biomechanical evaluation of lateral lumbar interbody fusion with secondary augmentation

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Biomechanical Comparison of Unilateral and Bilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation after Multilevel Lumbar Lateral Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Human Cadaveric Biomechanical Study.

OBJECTIVES

Lumbar Lateral Interbody Fusion (LLIF) utilizing a wide cage has been reported as having favorable biomechanical characteristics. We examine the biomechanical stability of unilateral pedicle screw and rod fixation after multilevel LLIF utilizing 26 mm wide cages compared to bilateral fixation.

METHODS

Eight human cadaveric specimens of L1-L5 were included. Specimens were attached to a universal testing machine (MTS 30/G). Three-dimensional specimen range of motion (ROM) was recorded using an optical motion-tracking device. Specimens were tested in 3 conditions: 1) intact, 2) L1-L5 LLIF (4 levels) with unilateral rod, 3) L1-L5 LLIF with bilateral rods.

RESULTS

From the intact condition, LLIF with unilateral rod decreased flexion-extension by 77%, lateral bending by 53%, and axial rotation by 26%. In LLIF with bilateral rods, flexion-extension decreased by 83%, lateral bending by 64%, and axial rotation by 34%. Comparing unilateral and bilateral fixation, LLIF with bilateral rods reduced ROM by a further 23% in flexion-extension, 25% in lateral bending, and 11% in axial rotation. The difference was statistically significant in flexion-extension and lateral bending (P < .005).

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable decreases in ROM were observed after multilevel (4-level) LLIF utilizing 26 mm cages supplemented with both unilateral and bilateral pedicle screws and rods. The addition of bilateral fixation provides a 10-25% additional decrease in ROM. These results can inform surgeons of the incremental biomechanical benefit when considering unilateral or bilateral posterior fixation after multilevel LLIF.

Automated machine learning-based model for the prediction of pedicle screw loosening after degenerative lumbar fusion surgery

The adequacy of screw anchorage is a critical factor in achieving successful spinal fusion. This study aimed to use machine learning algorithms to identify critical variables and predict pedicle screw loosening after degenerative lumbar fusion surgery. A total of 552 patients who underwent primary transpedicular lumbar fixation for lumbar degenerative disease were included. The LASSO method identified key features associated with pedicle screw loosening. Patient clinical characteristics, intraoperative variables, and radiographic parameters were collected and used to construct eight machine learning models, including a training set (80% of participants) and a test set (20% of participants). The XGBoost model exhibited the best performance, with an AUC of 0.884 (95% CI: 0.825-0.944) in the test set, along with the lowest Brier score. Ten crucial variables, including age, disease diagnosis: degenerative scoliosis, number of fused levels, fixation to S1, HU value, preoperative PT, preoperative PI-LL, postoperative LL, postoperative PT, and postoperative PI-LL were selected. In the prospective cohort, the XGBoost model demonstrated substantial performance with an accuracy of 83.32%. This study identified crucial variables associated with pedicle screw loosening after degenerative lumbar fusion surgery and successfully developed a machine learning model to predict pedicle screw loosening. The findings of this study may provide valuable information for clinical decision-making.

Oblique lateral interbody fusion with internal fixations in the treatment for cross-segment degenerative lumbar spine disease (L2-3 and L4-5) finite element analysis

Multi-segmental lumbar degenerative disease, including intersegmental disc degeneration, is found in clinical practice. Controversy still exists regarding the treatment for cross-segment degeneration. Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion (OLIF) with several internal fixations was used to treat cross-segment lumbar degenerative disease. A whole lumbar spine model was extracted from CT images of the whole lumbar spine of patients with lumbar degeneration. The L2-3 and L4-5 intervertebral spaces were fused with OLIF using modeling software, the Pedicle screws were performed on L2-3 and L4-5, and different internal fixations were performed on L3-4 in Finite Element (FE) software. Among the six 10 Nm moments of different directions, the L3-4 no surgery (NS) group had the relatively largest Range of Motion (ROM) in the whole lumbar spine, while the L2-5 Long segmental fixation (LSF)group had the smallest ROM and the other groups had similar ROM. The ROM in the L1-2 and L5-S1 was relatively close in the six group models, and the articular cartilage stress and disc stress on the L1-2 and L5-S1 were relatively close. In contrast, the L3-4 ROM differed relatively greatly, with the LSF ROM the smallest and the NS ROM the largest, and the L3-4 Coflex (Coflex) group more active than the L3-4 Bacfuse (Bacfuse) group and the L3-4 translaminar facet screw fixation (TFSF) group. The stress on the articular cartilage and disc at L3-4 was relatively greater in the NS disc and articular cartilage, and greater in the Coflex group than in the Bacfuse and TFSF groups, with the greatest stress on the internal fixation in the TFSF group, followed by the Coflex group, and relatively similar stress in the Bacfuse, LSF, and NS groups. In the TFSF group, the stress on the internal fixation was greater than the yield strength among different directional moments of 10 Nm, which means it is unsuitable to be an internal fixation. The LSF group had the greatest overall ROM, which may lead to postoperative low back discomfort. The NS group has the greatest overall ROM, but its increased stress on the L3-4 disc and articular cartilage may lead to accelerated degeneration of the L3-4 disc and articular cartilage. The Coflex and Bacfuse groups had a reduced L3-4 ROM but a greater stress on disc compared to the LSF group, which may lead to disc degeneration in the long term. However, their stress on the articular cartilage was relatively low. Coflex and Bacfuse can still be considered better surgical options.

Simultaneous Single-Position Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery and Unilateral Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation for Spondylolisthesis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical and radiological efficacy of a combine of lateral single screw-rod and unilateral percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (LSUP) for lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) in the treatment of spondylolisthesis.

METHODS

Sixty-two consecutive patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis who underwent minimally invasive (MIS)-TLIF with bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) or LLIF-LSUP were retrospectively studied. Segmental lordosis angle (SLA), lumbar lordosis angle (LLA), disc height (DH), slipping percentage, the cross-sectional areas (CSA) of the thecal sac, screw placement accuracy, fusion rate and foraminal height (FH) were used to evaluate radiographic changes postoperatively. Visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used to evaluate the clinical efficacy.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent LLIF-LSUP showed shorter operating time, less length of hospital stay and lower blood loss than MIS-TLIF. No statistical difference was found between the 2 groups in screw placement accuracy, overall complications, VAS, and ODI. Compared with MIS-TLIF-BPS, LLIF-LSUP had a significant improvement in sagittal parameters including DH, FH, LLA, and SLA. The CSA of MIS-TLIF-BPS was significantly increased than that of LLIF-LSUP. The fusion rate of LLIF-LSUP was significantly higher than that of MIS-TLIF-BPS at the follow-up of 3 months postoperatively, but there was no statistical difference between the 2 groups at the follow-up of 6 months, 9 months, and 12 months.

CONCLUSION

The overall clinical outcomes and complications of LLIF-LSUP were comparable to that of MIS-TLIF-BPS in this series. Compared with MIS-TLIF-BPS, LLIF-LSUP for lumbar spondylolisthesis represents a significantly shorter operating time, hospital stay and lower blood loss, and demonstrates better radiological outcomes to maintain lumbar lordosis, and reveal an overwhelming superiority in the early fusion rate.

Interspinous-Interbody Fusion via a Strictly Lateral Surgical Approach: A Biomechanical Stabilization Comparison to Constructs Requiring Both Lateral and Posterior Approaches

Objective Lumbar fusion performed through lateral approaches is becoming more common. The interbody devices are generally supported by supplemental posterior fixation implanted through a posterior approach, potentially requiring a second incision and intraoperative repositioning of the patient. A minimally invasive lateral interspinous fixation device may eliminate the need for intraoperative repositioning and avoid disruption of the supraspinous ligament. The objective of this in vitrobiomechanical study was to investigate segmental multidirectional stability and maintenance of foraminal distraction of a lateral interspinous fixation device compared to commonly used pedicle screw and facet screw posterior fixation constructs when combined with lumbar interbody cages. Methods Six human cadaver lumbar spine specimens were subjected to nondestructive quasistatic loading in the following states: (1) intact; (2) interspinous fixation device alone and (3) with lateral interbody cage; (4) lateral lumbar interbody cage with bilateral pedicle screws; (5) lateral lumbar interbody cage with unilateral pedicle screws; and (6) lateral lumbar interbody cage with facet screws. Multidirectional pure bending in 1.5 Nm increments to 7.5 Nm, and 7.5 Nm flexion-extension bending with a 700 N compressive follower load were performed separately with optoelectronic segmental motion measurement. Relative angular motions of L2-L3, L3-L4, and L4-L5 functional spinal units were evaluated, and the mean instantaneous axis of rotation in the sagittal plane was calculated for the index level. Foraminal height was assessed during combined flexion-extension and compression loading for each test construct. Results All implant configurations significantly restricted flexion-extension motion compared with intact (p < 0.05). No significant differences were found in flexion-extension when comparing the different posterior implants combined with lateral lumbar interbody cages. All posterior fixation devices provided comparable neuroforaminal distraction and maintained distraction during flexion and extension. Conclusions When combinedwith lateral lumbar interbody cages, the minimally invasive lateral interspinous fixation device effectively stabilized the spine and maintained neuroforaminal distraction comparable to pedicle screw constructs or facet screws. These results suggest the lateral interspinous fixation device may provide a favorable alternative to other posterior systems that require patient repositioning during surgery and involve a greater disruption of native tissues.

Stand-Alone Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) for the Treatment of Adjacent Segment Disease (ASD) after Previous Posterior Lumbar Fusion: Clinical and Radiological Outcomes and Comparison with Posterior Revision Surgery

Background: Radiological evidence of adjacent segment disease (ASD) has been reported to have a prevalence of more than 30% and several risk factors have been reported. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of patients with symptomatic ASD treated with stand-alone OLIF and compare results with a posterior revision surgery cohort. Methods: This is a retrospective case-control study. Clinical-patient-reported outcomes were obtained at preoperative, postoperative and final follow-up visits using the Short Form (SF-36) scale, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the visual analog scale (VAS). Radiological measures include lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch, segmental coronal Cobb angle and intervertebral disc height (DH). The data are compared with a retrospective series of patients that underwent a posterior revision surgery for ASD. Results: Twenty-eight patients in the OLIF group and 25 patients in the posterior group meet inclusion criteria. The mean ages at the time of the surgery are 65.1 years and 67.5, respectively. The mean follow-up time is 36.1 months (range of 14-56). The clinical outcomes significantly improve from preoperative values from the surgery in both groups. The radiological parameters are significantly improved postoperatively and were maintained at the last follow-up in both groups. A statistically significant difference is observed between the two groups for minor complication rate, length of surgery, blood loss and DH restoration. Conclusions: Stand-alone OLIF is an effective and safe technique with low morbidity and complication rates for the treatment of selected patients with symptomatic ASD following a previous lumbar fusion.

Biomechanical and clinical studies on lumbar spine fusion surgery: a review

Low back pain is associated with degenerative disc diseases of the spine. Surgical treatment includes fusion and non-fusion types. The gold standard is fusion surgery, wherein the affected vertebral segment is fused. The common complication of fusion surgery is adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). The ASD often leads to revision surgery, calling for a further fusion of adjacent segments. The existing designs of nonfusion type implants are associated with clinical problems such as subsidence, difficulty in implantation, and the requirement of revision surgeries. Various surgical approaches have been adopted by the surgeons to insert the spinal implants into the affected segment. Over the years, extensive biomechanical investigations have been reported on various surgical approaches and prostheses to predict the outcomes of lumbar spine implantations. Computer models have been proven to be very effective in identifying the best prosthesis and surgical procedure. The objective of the study was to review the literature on biomechanical studies for the treatment of lumbar spinal degenerative diseases. A critical review of the clinical and biomechanical studies on fusion spine surgeries was undertaken. The important modeling parameters, challenges, and limitations of the current studies were identified, showing the future research directions.

Biomechanical evaluation of two-level oblique lumbar interbody fusion combined with posterior four-screw fixation：A finite element analysis

OBJECTIVE

By constructing the three-dimensional finite element model of two-level OLIF lumbar spine, the aim of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of posterior four-screw fixation for treatment of two-level lumbar degenerative diseases from the perspective of biomechanics.

METHODS

An intact L3-S1 segment nonlinear lumbar finite element model (M0) was constructed from the CT scanning data of a healthy adult. After verification, two-level OLIF procedure were simulated, and three patterns of finite element analysis models were constructed: two-level stand-alone OLIF group (M1), two-level OLIF + four-screw fixation group (M2) and two-level OLIF + six-screw fixation group (M3). Range of motion, stress of the cage, and stress of fixation were evaluated in the different models.

RESULTS

Under various motion modes，the ROM of M2 and M3 were significantly lower than those of M1. The ROM reduction of M2 relative to M1 was much greater than that of M3 relative to M2. Moreover, the peak von Mises stresses of endplates in M2 were almost the same as those in M3. In terms of the maximum stresses of cages, M2 and M3 were essentially identical. Besides, the maximum stresses of posterior instrumentation in M2 and M3 were similar, which were mainly concentrated at the root of pedicle screws.

CONCLUSION

There were no significant differences between M2 and M3 from the biomechanical analysis. In two-level OLIF, posterior four-screw fixation can replace six-screw fixation, which reduces surgical trauma and decreases economic burden of patients, and will be a cost-effective alternative.

The preoperative Hounsfield unit value at the position of the future screw insertion is a better predictor of screw loosening than other methods

OBJECTIVE

Screw loosening is a widely reported issue after spinal screw fixation and triggers several complications after lumbar interbody fusion. Osteoporosis is an essential risk factor for screw loosening. Hounsfield units (HU) value is a credible indicator during bone mineral density (BMD) evaluation. As compared with the general evaluation of BMD, we hypothesized that specific measurements of HU at the precise location of the future screw insertion may be a better predictor of screw loosening.

METHODS

Clinical data of 56 patients treated by oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) of the L4-L5 segments with an anterior lateral single rod (ALSR) screw fixation were reviewed in this study. Vertebral bodies with ≥ 1 mm width radiolucent zones around the screw were defined as screw loosening. HU in the insertional screw positions, the central transverse plane, and the average values of three and four planes were measured. Regression analyses identified independent risk factors for screw loosening separately. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was computed to evaluate predictive performance.

RESULTS

The local HU values were significantly lower in the loosening group, regardless of the selected measuring methods. The AUC of screw loosening prediction was higher in the insertional screw positions' HU than other frequently used methods.

CONCLUSIONS

The HU value measured in the insertional screw position is a better predictor of ALSR screw loosening than other methods. The risk of screw loosening should be reduced by optimizing the trajectory of the screw based on the measurement of HU in preoperative CT.

KEY POINTS

• Osteoporosis is an essential risk factor for screw loosening, and Hounsfield units (HU) are a credible predictor during bone mineral density (BMD) evaluation. • The HU value measured in the insertional screw position is a better predictor of screw loosening than other frequently used HU measurement methods. • The risk of screw loosening might potentially be reduced by optimizing the trajectory of the screw based on the measurement of HU in preoperative CT.

Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion (XLIF) with Lateral Modular Plate Fixation: Preliminary Report on Clinical and Radiological Outcomes

The lateral transpsoas approach (extreme lateral interbody fusion, or XLIF) allows surgeons to use various lordotic cage sizes to help restore intervertebral disk height, correct sagittal alignment, and improve fusion rates. The use of standalone devices has consistently raised doubts due to the high risk of complications and inadequate functional recovery that a circumferential arthrodesis can support. The recent introduction of a novel XLIF cage with adapted lateral plate fixation (XLPF) may further enhance the structural rigidity, consolidating the cage and plate into a singular modular entity. Nine patients from our surgical centers underwent a procedure of 1-level XLIF with XLPF in selected cases. We observed that XLPF does not extend the intraoperative footprint and provides immediate rigidity to the anterior column without any additional risk of complications and with minimal increased time compared to the traditional cage implant procedure. Although it has been shown that the use of interbody fusion cages with supplemental posterior fixation improves stabilization in all directions, the technique of standalone lateral cages may also have a place in spine surgery in that the stability may be sufficient in selected cases, such as junctional syndrome and in some forms of degenerative scoliosis.

Comparison of transfacet and pedicle screws in oblique lateral interbody fusion for single-level degenerative lumbar spine diseases: a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

To perform a comparative assessment of percutaneous transfacet screws (TFS) and percutaneous bilateral pedicle screws (BPS) in oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) for the treatment of single-level degenerative lumbar spine diseases in terms of radiological examinations and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Sixty-six patients who received single-level OLIF with percutaneous supplementary fixation assisted by the robot for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine diseases were selected. There were 16 cases of OLIF with TFS and 50 cases of OLIF with BPS. The propensity score matching method selected 11 patients in each group with matched characteristics to perform a clinical comparison.

RESULTS

The estimated blood loss was 68.2 ± 25.2 ml in the OLIF with TFS group compared to 113.6 ± 39.3 ml in the OLIF with BPS group (P < 0.05). The intervertebral disc height raised from 8.6 to 12.9 mm in the TFS group and from 8.9 to 13.9 mm in the BPS group in the immediate postoperative period, and dropped to 10.8 and 12.9 mm at the twelfth month, respectively (P < 0.05). The fusion rates were 91% and 100% for TFS and BPS groups (P > 0.05). Quantitative assessments of back/leg pain of the two groups reached a healthy level in the late period of the follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Both TFS and BPS techniques for the OLIF surgery relieve back pain caused by degenerative lumbar spine diseases. The TFS technique exhibits less blood loss compared with the BPS. A moderate cage subsidence is present in TFS but no complication is reported.

Instrumentation choice and early radiographic outcome following lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF): Lateral instrumentation versus posterior pedicle screw fixation

Background

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is a minimally invasive fusion procedure that may be performed with or without supplemental instrumentation. However, there is a paucity of evidence on the effect of supplemental instrumentation technique on perioperative morbidity and fusion rate in LLIF.

Methods

A single-institutional retrospective review of patients who underwent LLIF for lumbar spondylosis was conducted. Patients were grouped according to supplemental instrumentation technique: stand-alone LLIF, LLIF with laterally placed instrumentation, or LLIF with posterior percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (PPSF). Outcomes included fusion rates, peri-operative complication, and reoperation; estimated blood loss (EBL); surgery duration; length of stay; and length of follow-up.

Results

82 patients underwent LLIF at 114 levels. 35 patients (42.7%) received supplemental lateral instrumentation, 30 (36.6%) received supplemental PPSF, and 17 (20.7%) underwent stand-alone LLIF. More patients in the lateral instrumentation group had prior lumbar fusion at adjacent levels (23/35, 65.71%) versus stand-alone (3/17, 17.6%) or PPSF (2/30, 6.67%) groups (p = 0.003). 4/17 patients (23.5%) with stand-alone LLIF and 4/35 patients (11.42%) with lateral instrumentation underwent reoperation, versus 0/30 with PPSF (p = 0.030). There was no difference in fusion rates between groups (p = 0.717). Operation duration was longer in patients with PPSF (p < 0.005) and length of follow-up was longer for PPSF than lateral instrumentation (p = 0.001). Choice of instrumentation group was a statistically significant predictor of reoperation.

Conclusions

While rates of complete radiographic fusion on imaging follow-up didn't differ, patients receiving PPSF were less likely than stand-alone or lateral instrumentation groups to require reoperation, though operative time was significantly longer. Further study of choice of supplemental instrumentation with LLIF is indicated.

Radiological follow-up of the degenerated facet joints after lateral lumbar interbody fusion with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation: Focus on spontaneous facet joint fusion

BACKGROUND

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is widely used in degenerative lumbar spine surgery. Previous studies of radiographic investigations after LLIF have assessed the anterior interbody fusion rate, the changes in the segmental lumbar lordosis, efficacy of indirect neural decompression, and remodeling of the ligamentum flavum hypertrophy and spinal canal dimension, and so on. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the radiological changes in the degenerated facet joints following LLIF with bilateral percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) fixation, focusing on spontaneous fusion.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 31 patients (79 surgical levels) who underwent two- or three-level LLIF with PPS fixation without direct posterior decompression and bone grafting. We assessed the fusion rate and characteristics of the facet joints' fusion process on the preoperative, immediately postoperative, 12-month, and at least 2-year computed tomography (CT) images. On average, the last follow-up CT was performed after 30.2 months. Multivariate logistic regression analysis investigated factors related to spontaneous facet joint fusion postoperatively.

RESULTS

The fusion rates of the interbody and facet joints were 32.9% (26/79) and 19.0% (15/79) after 12-months and 79.7% (63/79) and 58.2% (46/79) at the final CT follow-up, respectively. Of the 46 cases with spontaneous facet fusion, three cases fused posteriorly only. Concomitant anterior interbody fusion was seen in 43/46 (93.5%) cases. Facet fusion started in a ring shape from the outermost joint edges, exposing subchondral bone without cartilage covering, and progressed to the central thicker cartilage regions. Multivariate analysis established that concomitant anterior interbody fusion (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 12.10, P = 0.0035) and preoperative facet joint osteoarthritis of Weishaupt Grade ≧ 1 (aOR: 4.770, P = 0.0068) were significant contributing factors to postoperative spontaneous facet fusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that spontaneous facet fusion frequently occurs after LLIF and may be an indicator of the inherent structural stability of the LLIF construct.

Poor bone mineral density aggravates adjacent segment's motility compensation in patients with oblique lumbar interbody fusion with and without pedicle screw fixation: An in silico study

Objective

Motility compensation increases the risk of adjacent segment diseases (ASDs). Previous studies have demonstrated that patients with ASD have a poor bone mineral density (BMD), and changes in BMD affect the biomechanical environment of bones and tissues, possibly leading to an increase in ASD incidence. However, whether poor BMD increases the risk of ASD by aggravating the motility compensation of the adjacent segment remains unclear. The present study aimed to clarify this relationship in oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) models with different BMDs and additional fixation methods.

Methods

Stand-alone (S-A) OLIF and OLIF fixed with bilateral pedicle screws (BPS) were simulated in the L4–L5 segment of our well-validated lumbosacral model. Range of motions (ROMs) and stiffness in the surgical segment and at the cranial and caudal sides’ adjacent segments were computed under flexion, extension, and unilateral bending and axial rotation loading conditions.

Results

Under most loading conditions, the motility compensation of both cranial and caudal segments adjacent to the OLIF segment steeply aggravated with BMD reduction in S-A and BPS OLIF models. More severe motility compensation of the adjacent segment was observed in BPS models than in S-A models. Correspondingly, the surgical segment's stiffness of S-A models was apparently lower than that of BPS models (S-A models showed higher ROMs and lower stiffness in the surgical segment).

Conclusion

Poor BMD aggravates the motility compensation of adjacent segments after both S-A OLIF and OLIF with BPS fixation. This variation may cause a higher risk of ASD in OLIF patients with poor BMD. S-A OLIF cannot provide instant postoperative stability; therefore, the daily motions of patients with S-A OLIF should be restricted before ideal interbody fusion to avoid surgical segment complications.

Effects of osteoporosis on the biomechanics of various supplemental fixations co-applied with oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF): a finite element analysis

Background

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) is an important surgical modality for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine disease. Various supplemental fixations can be co-applied with OLIF, increasing OLIF stability and reducing complications. However, it is unclear whether osteoporosis affects the success of supplemental fixations; therefore, this study analyzed the effects of osteoporosis on various supplemental fixations co-applied with OLIF.

Methods

We developed and validated an L3-S1 finite element (FE) model; we assigned different material properties to each component and established models of the osteoporotic and normal bone lumbar spine. We explored the outcomes of OLIF combined with each of five supplemental fixations: standalone OLIF; OLIF with lateral plate fixation (OLIF + LPF); OLIF with translaminar facet joint fixation and unilateral pedicle screw fixation (OLIF + TFJF + UPSF); OLIF with unilateral pedicle screw fixation (OLIF + UPSF); and OLIF with bilateral pedicle screw fixation (OLIF + BPSF). Under the various working conditions, we calculated the ranges of motion (ROMs) of the normal bone and osteoporosis models, the maximum Mises stresses of the fixation instruments (MMSFIs), and the average Mises stresses on cancellous bone (AMSCBs).

Results

Compared with the normal bone OLIF model, no demonstrable change in any segmental ROM was apparent. The MMSFIs increased in all five osteoporotic OLIF models. In the OLIF + TFJF + UPSF model, the MMSFIs increased sharply in forward flexion and extension. The stress changes of the OLIF + UPSF, OLIF + BPSF, and OLIF + TFJF + UPSF models were similar; all stresses trended upward. The AMSCBs decreased in all five osteoporotic OLIF models during flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. The average stress change of cancellous bone was most obvious under extension. The AMSCBs of the five OLIF models decreased by 14%, 23.44%, 21.97%, 40.56%, and 22.44% respectively.

Conclusions

For some supplemental fixations, the AMSCBs were all reduced and the MMSFIs were all increased in the osteoporotic model, compared with the OLIF model of normal bone. Therefore, the biomechanical performance of an osteoporotic model may be inferior to the biomechanical performance of a normal model for the same fixation method; in some instances, it may increase the risks of fracture and internal fixation failure.

Efficacy of Single-Position Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion Combined With Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in Treating Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Cohort Study

Objective

To investigate the surgical outcomes of single-position oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (PPSF) in treating degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS).

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 85 patients with DLS who met the inclusion criteria from April 2018 to December 2020. According to the need to change their position during the operation, the patients were divided into a single-position OLIF group (27 patients) and a conventional OLIF group (58 patients). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospitalization days, instrumentation accuracy and complication rates were compared between the two groups. The visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used to evaluate the clinical efficacy. The surgical segment's intervertebral space height (IDH) and lumbar lordosis (LL) angle were used to evaluate the imaging effect.

Results

The hospital stay, pedicle screws placement accuracy, and complication incidence were similar between the two groups (P > 0.05). The operation time and intraoperative blood loss in the single-position OLIF group were less than those in the conventional OLIF group (P < 0.05). The postoperative VAS, ODI, IDH and LL values were significantly improved (P < 0.05), but there was no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

Compared with conventional OLIF, single-position OLIF combined with PPSF is also safe and effective, and it has the advantages of a shorter operation time and less intraoperative blood loss.

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.

Biomechanical Effects of Pedicle Screw Positioning on the Surgical Segment in Models After Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: An in-silico Study

Background

Bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) is the “gold standard” of fixation methods for patients with lumbar interbody fusion. Biomechanical deterioration initially triggers complications in the surgical segment. Studies proved that BPS positions and trajectory changes affect the local biomechanical environment. However, no study illustrates the biomechanical effect of insertional screw positions’ change on the surgical segment.

Methods

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) with different BPS insertional positions has been simulated in a well-validated lumbo-sacral model. Fixation stability and stress responses on the surgical segment were evaluated under identical loading conditions.

Results

There is no clear variation tendency for the risk of BPS failure and the change of strain energy density of the grafted bone. However, shifting the insertional screw position close to the surgical segment will increase the range of motions (ROM) in the surgical segment and lead to stress concentration of bony structures, especially in the caudal side of the surgical segment.

Conclusion

Adjusting the insertional position of BPS close to the surgical segment in OLIF models will lead to stress concentration of bony structures and surgical segmental instability. Therefore, reducing BPS’s fixation length was not recommended, which may increase the risk of segmental instability, non-union, and cage subsidence.

Evaluation of the Stability of a Novel Lateral Plate Internal Fixation: An In Vitro Biomechanical Study

BACKGROUND

This study aims to evaluate the biomechanical stability of a novel lateral plate (NLP) that can be used in oblique lateral lumbar fusion (OLIF).

METHODS

In vitro biomechanical tests were performed on 6 fresh calf lumbar vertebrae specimens. The surgical segment was set at L3-L4. Each specimen was tested in the following order: intact state (INT); OLIF cage only/stand-alone (SA); cage supplemented with lateral screw-rod (LSR); cage supplemented with novel lateral plate (NLP); and cage supplemented with unilateral or bilateral pedicle screw-rod (UPS or BPS). A pure moment of ±7.5 Nm was applied to the specimen to produce 6 different motion directions, including flexion and extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation, and the range of motion (ROM) of L3-L4 in each direction was recorded.

RESULTS

In addition to flexion-extension, NLP reduced the ROM of SA (P < 0.05). In flexion-extension, the ROM of NLP was similar to those of SA and LSR (P > 0.05); compared to pedicle screw-rod (PSD), the ROM of NLP was higher (P < 0.05). In lateral bending, the ROM of NLP was close to that of LSR and PSD (P > 0.05). In axial rotation, the ROM of NLP was higher than that of PSD (P < 0.05), and close to that of LSR (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

NLP can enhance surgical segment stability in all directions of motion, similar to LSR, but weaker than UPS and BPS in flexion-extension and rotation.

Development of a decision-making pathway for utilizing standalone lateral lumbar interbody fusion

PURPOSE

To develop a decision-making pathway for primary SA-LLIF. Furthermore, we analyzed the agreement of this pathway and compared outcomes of patients undergoing either SA-LLIF or 360-LLIF.

METHOD

A decision-making pathway for SA-LLIF was created based on the results of interviews/surveys of senior spine surgeons with over 10 years of experience. Internal validity was retrospectively evaluated using consecutive patients undergoing either SA-LLIF or 360-LLIF between 01/2018 and 07/2020 with 3D-printed Titanium cages. An outcome assessment looking primarily at revision surgery and secondary at cage subsidence, changes in disk and foraminal height, global and segmental lumbar lordosis, duration of surgery, estimated blood loss, and length of stay was carried out.

RESULTS

78 patients with 124 treated levels (37 SA-LLIF, 41 360-LLIF) were retrospectively analyzed. The pathway showed a direct agreement (SA-LLIF) of 100.0% and an indirect agreement (360-LLIF) of 95.1%. Clinical follow-up averaged 13.5 ± 6.5 months including 4 revision surgeries in the 360-LLIF group and none in the SA-LLIF group (p = 0.117). Radiographic follow-up averaged 9.5 ± 4.3 months, with no statistically significant difference in cage subsidence rate between the groups (p = 0.440). Compared to preoperative images, patients in both groups showed statistically significant changes in disk height (p < 0.001), foraminal height (p < 0.001), as well as restoration of segmental lordosis (p < 0.001 and p = 0.018). The SA-LLIF group showed shorter duration of surgery, less estimated blood loss and shorter LOS (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The proposed decision-making pathway provides a guide to adequately select patients for SA-LLIF. Further studies are needed to assess the external applicability and validity.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

Diagnostic: individual cross-sectional studies with consistently applied reference standard and blinding.

Additional lateral plate fixation has no effect to prevent cage subsidence in oblique lumbar interbody fusion

Background

For lumbar degenerative diseases, cage subsidence is a serious complication and can result in the failure of indirect decompression in the oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) procedure. Whether additional lateral plate fixation was effective to improve clinical outcomes and prevent cage subsidence was still unknown. This study aimed to compare the incidence and degree of cage subsidence between stand-alone oblique lumbar interbody fusion (SA-OLIF) and OLIF combined with lateral plate fixation (OLIF + LP) for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases and to evaluate the effect of the lateral plate fixation.

Methods

This was a retrospective comparative study. 20 patients with 21 levels underwent SA-OLIF and 21 patients with 26 levels underwent OLIF + LP. We compared clinical and radiographic outcomes between two groups. Clinical evaluation included Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back pain and leg pain, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Radiographical evaluation included disc height (DH), segmental lordosis angle (SL), and subsidence rate on standing lateral radiographs. Cage subsidence was classified using Marchi’s criteria.

Results

The mean follow-up duration was 6.3 ± 2.4 months. There were no significant differences among perioperative data (operation time, estimated intraoperative blood loss, and complication), clinical outcome (VAS, ODI, and JOA) and radiological outcome (SH and SL). The subsidence rate was 19.0% (4/21) in SA-OLIF group and 19.2% (5/26) in OLIF + LP group. 81.0% in SA-OLIF group and 80.8% in OLIF + LP group had Grade 0 subsidence, 14.3% in SA-OLIF group and 15.4% in OLIF + LP group had Grade I subsidence, and 4.8% in SA-OLIF group and 3.8% in OLIF + LP group had Grade II subsidence (P = 0.984). One patient with severe cage subsidence and lateral plate migration underwent revision surgery.

Conclusions

The additional lateral plate fixation does not appear to be more effective to prevent cage subsidence in the oblique lumbar interbody fusion, compared with stand-alone technique. If severe cage subsidence occurs, it may result in lateral plate migration in OLIF combined with lateral plate fixation.

An In Vitro Biomechanical Evaluation of a Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Device With Integrated Lateral Modular Plate Fixation

STUDY DESIGN

In vitro cadaveric biomechanical study.

OBJECTIVE

Biomechanically characterize a novel lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) implant possessing integrated lateral modular plate fixation (MPF).

METHODS

A human lumbar cadaveric (n = 7, L1-L4) biomechanical study of segmental range-of-motion stiffness was performed. A ±7.5 Nċm moment was applied in flexion/extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation using a 6 degree-of-freedom kinematics system. Specimens were tested first in an intact state and then following iterative instrumentation (L2/3): (1) LLIF cage only, (2) LLIF + 2-screw MPF, (3) LLIF + 4-screw MPF, (4) LLIF + 4-screw MPF + interspinous process fixation, and (5) LLIF + bilateral pedicle screw fixation. Comparative analysis of range-of-motion outcomes was performed between iterations.

RESULTS

Key biomechanical findings: (1) Flexion/extension range-of-motion reduction with LLIF + 4-screw MPF was significantly greater than LLIF + 2-screw MPF (P < .01). (2) LLIF with 2-screw and 4-screw MPF were comparable to LLIF with bilateral pedicle screw fixation in lateral bending and axial rotation range-of-motion reduction (P = 1.0). (3) LLIF + 4-screw MPF and supplemental interspinous process fixation range-of-motion reduction was comparable to LLIF + bilateral pedicle screw fixation in all directions (P ≥ .6).

CONCLUSIONS

LLIF with 4-screw MPF may provide inherent advantages over traditional 2-screw plating modalities. Furthermore, when coupled with interspinous process fixation, LLIF with MPF is a stable circumferential construct that provides biomechanical utility in all principal motions.

Biomechanical Evaluation of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Various Fixation Options: A Finite Element Analysis

Objective

The aim of the present study was to clarify the biomechanical properties of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) using different fixation methods in normal and osteoporosis spines.

Methods

Normal and osteoporosis intact finite element models of L₁–S₁ were established based on CT images of a healthy male volunteer. Group A was the normal models and group B was the osteoporosis model. Each group included four subgroups: (i) intact; (ii) stand‐alone cage (Cage); (iii) cage with lateral plate and two lateral screws (LP); and (iv) cage with bilateral pedicle screws and rods (BPSR). The L₃–L₄ level was defined as the surgical segment. After validating the normal intact model, compressive load of 400 N and torsional moment of 10 Nm were applied to the superior surface of L₂ to simulate flexion, extension, left bending, right bending, left rotation, and right rotation motions. Surgical segmental range of motion (ROM), cage stress, endplate stress, supplemental fixation stress, and stress distribution were analyzed in each group.

Results

Cage provided the minimal reduction of ROM among all motions (normal, 82.30%–98.81%; osteoporosis, 92.04%–97.29% of intact model). BPSR demonstrated the maximum reduction of ROM (normal, 43.94%–61.13%; osteoporosis, 45.61%–62.27% of intact model). The ROM of LP was between that of Cage and BPSR (normal, 63.25%–79.72%; osteoporosis, 70%–87.15% of intact model). Cage had the minimal cage stress and endplate stress. With the help of LP and BPSR fixation, cage stress and endplate stress were significantly reduced in all motions, both in normal and osteoporosis finite element models. However, BPSR had more advantages. For cage stress, BPSR was at least 75.73% less than that of Cage in the normal model, and it was at least 80.10% less than that of Cage in the osteoporosis model. For endplate stress, BPSR was at least 75.98% less than that of Cage in the normal model, and it was at least 78.06% less than that of Cage in the osteoporosis model. For supplemental fixation stress, BPSR and LP were much less than the yield strength in all motions in the two groups. In addition, the comparison between the two groups showed that the ROM, cage stress, endplate stress, and supplemental fixation stress in the normal model were less than in the osteoporosis model when using the same fixation option of OLIF.

Conclusion

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion with BPSR provided the best biomechanical stability both in normal and osteoporosis spines. The biomechanical properties of the normal spine were better than those of the osteoporosis spine when using the same fixation option of OLIF.

Biomechanical Analysis of an Interspinous Process Fixation Device with In Situ Shortening Capabilities: Does Spinous Process Compression Improve Segmental Stability?

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to characterize the biomechanical implications of spinous process compression, via in situ shortening of a next-generation interspinous process fixation (ISPF) device, in the context of segmental fusion.

METHODS

Seven lumbar cadaveric spines (L1-L4) were tested. Specimens were first tested in an intact state, followed by iterative instrumentation at L2-3 and subsequent testing. The order followed was 1) stand-alone ISPF (neutral height); 2) stand-alone ISPF (shortened in situ from neutral height; shortened); 3) lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) + ISPF (neutral); 4) LLIF + ISPF (shortened); 5) LLIF + unilateral pedicle screw fixation; 6) LLIF + bilateral pedicle screw fixation. A 7.5-Nm moment was applied in flexion/extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation via a kinematic test frame. Segmental range of motion (ROM) and lordosis were measured for all constructs. Comparative analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Statistically significant flexion/extension ROM reductions: all constructs versus intact condition (P < 0.01); LLIF + ISPF (neutral and shortened) versus stand-alone ISPF (neutral and shortened) (P < 0.01); LLIF + USPF versus ISPF (neutral) (P = 0.049); bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BPSF) versus stand-alone ISPF (neutral and shortened) (P < 0.01); LLIF + BPSF versus LLIF + unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UPSF) (P < 0.01). Significant lateral bending ROM reductions: LLIF + ISPF (neutral and shortened) versus intact condition and stand-alone ISPF (neutral) (P < 0.01); LLIF + UPSF versus intact condition and stand-alone ISPF (neutral and shortened) (P < 0.01); LLIF + BPSF versus intact condition and all constructs (P < 0.01). Significant axial rotation ROM reductions: LLIF + ISPF (shortened) and LLIF + UPSF versus intact condition and stand-alone ISPF (neutral) (P ≤ 0.01); LLIF + BPSF versus intact condition and all constructs (P ≤ 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

In situ shortening of an adjustable ISPF device may support increased segmental stabilization compared with static ISPF.

Influence of cement-augmented pedicle screws with different volumes of polymethylmethacrylate in osteoporotic lumbar vertebrae over the adjacent segments: a 3D finite element analysis

Background

Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) is commonly used for cement-augmented pedicle screw instrumentation (CAPSI) to improve the fixation stability and reduce the risk of screw loosening in the osteoporotic thoracolumbar spine. Biomechanical researches have shown that various dose of cement (1-3 ml) can be injected to enhance screw stability. To date, there have been no studies on the relationship between adjacent segment degeneration and the volume of PMMA. This study aimed to explore the influence of CAPSI with different volumes of PMMA in osteoporotic lumbar vertebrae over adjacent segments by using finite element analysis.

Methods

Seven different finite element models were reconstructed and simulated under different loading conditions, including (1) an intact model, (2) three single-level CAPSI models with different volumes of PMMA (1, 1.73, and 2.5 ml), and (3) three double-level CAPSI models with different volumes of PMMA (1, 1.73, and 2.5 ml). To improve the accuracy of the finite element analysis, the models of the injectable pedicle screw and bone cement were created by using a three-dimensional scanning machine and the CAPSI patient’s CT data, respectively. The range of motion (ROM), the stress of intervertebral discs, and the stress of facet in the adjacent segment were comparatively analyzed among the different models.

Results

The ROMs of the different segments were compared with experimental data, with good agreement under the different load conditions (21.3°, 13.55°, 13.99°, and 6.11° in flexion, extension, bending, and rotation at L3-S1 level, respectively). Compared with the intact model, the ROM, disc stresses, and facet stress in adjacent segments were found to be higher in the six operative models. Otherwise, with a larger volume of PMMA injected, the ROM, disc stresses, and facet stress slightly increased at the adjacent segment. However, the differences were insignificant with the biggest difference less than 3.8%.

Conclusions

CAPSI could increase the incidence of disk degeneration in the adjacent segment, while within a certain range, different volumes of PMMA provided an approximate impact over the adjacent segment degeneration.

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.

Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion (OLIF) with Supplemental Anterolateral Screw and Rod Instrumentation: A Preliminary Clinical Study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the technical details, clinical effectiveness, and complications of oblique lateral interbody fusion supplemented with anterolateral screw-rod instrumentation in managing degenerative lumbar diseases.

METHODS

The clinical data of 14 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases who underwent oblique lateral interbody fusion and anterolateral screw-rod instrumentation in the Department of Neurosurgery, Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital, from April 2015 to May 2018, were retrospectively analyzed. The duration of operation, estimated blood loss, radiological exposure, length of hospital stay, and complications were recorded. The visual analog scale score, Oswestry Disability Index, and radiologic parameters were evaluated before and after surgery.

RESULTS

The diagnosis included degenerative/isthmic spondylolisthesis (grade I), degenerative lumbar stenosis, disc hernia with instability, and adjacent segment disease. The follow-up period was 12-45 months. The clinical symptoms improved significantly after the operation according to the visual analog scale and Oswestry Disability Index scores. The average operation time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay were 72.50 ± 21.46 minutes, 53.21 ± 19.07 mL, and 5.57 ± 2.21 days, respectively. The postoperative radiographic examination demonstrated increased intervertebral height and foramen area (P < 0.05). The radiologic fusion rate was 95% at the last follow-up; cage subsidence was found in 1 case. No major complications, such as vascular injury, ureteral injury, or infection, occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

As an alternative method of instrumentation, anterolateral screw-rod fixation minimized the total operation time, blood loss, radiological exposure, and soft tissue disruption, and realized 1-stage intervertebral fusion and instrumentation through a single small incision.

State of the union: a review of lumbar fusion indications and techniques for degenerative spine disease

Lumbar fusion is an accepted and effective technique for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease. The practice has evolved continually since Albee and Hibbs independently reported the first cases in 1913, and advancements in both technique and patient selection continue through the present day. Clinical and radiological indications for surgery have been tested in trials, and other diagnostic modalities have developed and been studied. Fusion practices have also advanced; instrumentation, surgical approaches, biologics, and more recently, operative planning, have undergone stark changes at a seemingly increasing pace over the last decade. As the general population ages, treatment of degenerative lumbar disease will become a more prevalent-and costlier-issue for surgeons as well as the healthcare system overall. This review will cover the evolution of indications and techniques for fusion in degenerative lumbar disease, with emphasis on the evidence for current practices.

Lateral and Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion-Current Concepts and a Review of Recent Literature

PURPOSE

To review the relevant recent literature regarding minimally invasive, lateral, and oblique approaches to the anterior lumbar spine, with a particular focus on the operative and postoperative complications.

METHODS

A literature search was performed on Pubmed and Web of Science using combinations of the following keywords and their acronyms: lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF), anterior-to-psoas approach (ATP), direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF), extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF), and minimally invasive surgery (MIS). All results from January 2016 through January 2019 were evaluated and all studies evaluating complications and/or outcomes were included in the review.

RECENT FINDINGS

Transient neurological deficit, particularly sensorimotor symptoms of the ipsilateral thigh, remains the most common complication seen in LLIF. Best available current literature demonstrates that approximately 30-40% of patients have postoperative deficits, primarily of the proximal leg. Permanent symptoms are less common, affecting 4-5% of cases. Newer techniques to reduce this rate include different retractors, direct visualization of the nerves, and intraoperative neuromonitoring. OLIF may have lower deficit rates, but the available literature is limited. Subsidence rates in both LLIF and OLIF are comparable to ALIF (anterior lumbar interbody fusion), but further study is required. Supplemental posterior fixation is an active area of investigation that shows favorable biomechanical results, but additional clinical studies are needed. Minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion techniques continue to advance rapidly. As these techniques continue to mature, evidence-based risk-stratification systems are required to better guide both the patient and clinician in the joint decision-making process for the optimal surgical approach.

Biomechanical Effects of an Oblique Lumbar PEEK Cage and Posterior Augmentation

OBJECTIVE

Lumbar interbody spacers are widely used in lumbar spinal fusion. The goal of this study is to analyze the biomechanics of a lumbar interbody spacer (Clydesdale Spinal System, Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis, Tennessee, USA) inserted via oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) or direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF) approaches, with and without posterior cortical screw and rod (CSR) or pedicle screw and rod (PSR) instrumentation.

METHODS

Lumbar human cadaveric specimens (L2-L5) underwent nondestructive flexibility testing in intact and instrumented conditions at L3-L4, including OLIF or DLIF, with and without CSR or PSR.

RESULTS

OLIF alone significantly reduced range of motion (ROM) in flexion-extension (P = 0.005) but not during lateral bending or axial rotation (P ≥ 0.63). OLIF alone reduced laxity in the lax zone (LZ) during flexion-extension (P < 0.001) but did not affect the LZ during lateral bending or axial rotation (P ≥ 0.14). The stiff zone (SZ) was unaffected in all directions (P ≥ 0.88). OLIF plus posterior instrumentation (cortical, pedicle, or hybrid) reduced the mean ROM in all directions of loading but only significantly so with PSR during lateral bending (P = 0.004), without affecting the compressive stiffness (P > 0.20). The compressive stiffness with the OLIF device without any posterior instrumentation did not differ from that of the intact condition (P = 0.97). In terms of ROM, LZ, or SZ, there were no differences between OLIF and DLIF as standalone devices or OLIF and DLIF with posterior instrumentation (CSR or PSR) (P > 0.5).

CONCLUSIONS

OLIF alone significantly reduced mobility during flexion-extension while maintaining axial compressive stiffness compared with the intact condition. Adding posterior instrumentation to the interbody spacer increased the construct stability significantly, regardless of cage insertion trajectory or screw type.

In Vitro Biomechanical Evaluation of a Novel, Minimally Invasive, Sacroiliac Joint Fixation Device

Background

Sacroiliac (SI) joint pathology may result in low-back pain, which causes substantial disability. Treatment failure with operative management of SI pain may be related to incomplete fusion of the joint and to fixation failure. The objective of this study was to evaluate the initial biomechanical stability of SI joint fixation with a novel implantable device in an in vitro human cadaveric model.

Methods

The right and left sides of 3 cadaveric L4-pelvis specimens were tested (1) intact, (2) destabilized, and (3) instrumented with an implantable SI joint fixation device using a simulated single-stance load condition. Right-leg and left-leg stance data were grouped together for a sample size of 6, and angular range of motion (ROM) was determined during application of flexion-extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation bending moments to a limit of 7.5 Nm.

Results

Following intact testing, destabilization by severing the posterior SI joint capsule and ligaments and the pubic symphysis reliably produced a significantly destabilized joint with the mean angular ROM more than doubling in flexion-extension and lateral bending and more than tripling in axial rotation (P ≤ .003) compared to the intact condition. Instrumentation with the SI screw fixation device significantly reduced mean joint ROM compared to the destabilized condition in all 3 anatomic planes tested (P < .001). When compared to the intact condition, the SI-instrumented condition significantly reduced lateral bending (P = .01) and had a similar ROM in flexion-extension (P = .14) and axial rotation (P = .85).

Conclusions

Instrumentation with the SI screw fixation device significantly reduced mean joint ROM compared to the destabilized condition, with similar ROM in flexion-extension and axial rotation, and it significantly reduced ROM in lateral bending compared to that for the intact joint. The ROM values observed with the instrumented condition were comparable to levels of mobility considered favorable for spinal fusion.

Anterior and Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Supplemental Interspinous Process Fixation: Outcomes from a Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Study

Background

Rigid interspinous process fixation (ISPF) has received consideration as an efficient, minimally disruptive technique in supporting lumbar interbody fusion. However, despite advantageous intraoperative utility, limited evidence exists characterizing midterm to long-term clinical outcomes with ISPF. The objective of this multicenter study was to prospectively assess patients receiving single-level anterior (ALIF) or lateral (LLIF) lumbar interbody fusion with adjunctive ISPF.

Methods

This was a prospective, randomized, multicenter (11 investigators), noninferiority trial. All patients received single-level ALIF or LLIF with supplemental ISPF (n = 66) or pedicle screw fixation (PSF; n = 37) for degenerative disc disease and/or spondylolisthesis (grade ≤2). The randomization patient ratio was 2:1, ISPF/PSF. Perioperative and follow-up outcomes were collected (6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months).

Results

For ISPF patients, mean posterior intraoperative outcomes were: blood loss, 70.9 mL; operating time, 52.2 minutes; incision length, 5.5 cm; and fluoroscopic imaging time, 10.4 seconds. Statistically significant improvement in patient Oswestry Disability Index scores were achieved by just 6 weeks after operation (P < .01) and improved out to 12 months for the ISPF cohort. Patient-reported 36-Item Short Form Health Survey and Zurich Claudication Questionnaire scores were also significantly improved from baseline to 12 months in the ISPF cohort (P < .01). A total of 92.7% of ISPF patients exhibited interspinous fusion at 12 months. One ISPF patient (1.5%) required a secondary surgical intervention of possible relation to the posterior instrumentation/procedure.

Conclusion

ISPF can be achieved quickly, with minimal tissue disruption and complication. In supplementing ALIF and LLIF, ISPF supported significant improvement in early postoperative (≤12 months) patient-reported outcomes, while facilitating robust posterior fusion.

MIS Single-position Lateral and Oblique Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Bilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation: Feasibility and Perioperative Results

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of prospectively collected data of the first 72 consecutive patients treated with single-position one- or two-level lateral (LLIF) or oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLLIF) with bilateral percutaneous pedicle screw and rod fixation by a single spine surgeon.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical feasibility, accuracy, and efficiency of a single-position technique for LLIF and OLLIF with bilateral pedicle screw and rod fixation.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Minimally-invasive lateral interbody approaches are performed in the lateral decubitus position. Subsequent repositioning prone for bilateral pedicle screw and rod fixation requires significant time and resources and does not facilitate increased lumbar lordosis.

METHODS

The first 72 consecutive patients (300 screws) treated with single-position LLIF or OLLIF and bilateral pedicle screws by a single surgeon between December 2013 and August 2016 were included in the study. Screw accuracy and fusion were graded using computed tomography and several timing parameters were recorded including retractor, fluoroscopy, and screw placement time. Complications including reoperation, infection, and postoperative radicular pain and weakness were recorded.

RESULTS

Average screw placement time was 5.9 min/screw (standard deviation, SD: 1.5 min; range: 3-9.5 min). Average total operative time (interbody cage and pedicle screw placement) was 87.9 minutes (SD: 25.1 min; range: 49-195 min). Average fluoroscopy time was 15.0 s/screw (SD: 4.7 s; range: 6-25 s). The pedicle screw breach rate was 5.1% with 10/13 breaches measured as < 2 mm in magnitude. Fusion rate at 6-months postoperative was 87.5%. Two (2.8%) patients underwent reoperation for malpositioned pedicle screws with subsequent resolution of symptoms.

CONCLUSION

The single-position, all-lateral technique was found to be feasible with accuracy, fluoroscopy usage, and complication rates comparable with the published literature. This technique eliminates the time and staffing associated with intraoperative repositioning and may lead to significant improvements in operative efficiency and cost savings.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion and in Situ Screw Fixation for Rostral Adjacent Segment Stenosis of the Lumbar Spine

Objective

The purpose of this study is to describe the detailed surgical technique and short-term clinical and radiological outcomes of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and in situ lateral screw fixation using a conventional minimally invasive screw fixation system (MISF) for revision surgery to treat rostral lumbar adjacent segment disease.

Methods

The medical and radiological records were retrospectively reviewed. The surgery was indicated in 10 consecutive patients with rostral adjacent segment stenosis and instability. After the insertion of the interbody cage, lateral screws were inserted into the cranial and caudal vertebra using the MISF through the same LLIF trajectory. The radiological and clinical outcomes were assessed preoperatively and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively.

Results

The median follow-up period was 13 months (range, 3–48 months). Transient sensory changes in the left anterior thigh occurred in 3 patients, and 1 patient experienced subjective weakness; however, these symptoms normalized within 1 week. Back and leg pain were significantly improved (p<0.05). In the radiological analysis, both the segmental angle at the operated segment and anterior disc height were significantly increased. At 6 months postoperatively, solid bony fusion was confirmed in 7 patients. Subsidence and mechanical failure did not occur in any patients.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that LLIF and in situ lateral screw fixation may be an alternative surgical option for rostral lumbar adjacent segment disease.