Comparison of rod fracture rates in long spinal deformity constructs after transforaminal versus anterior lumbar interbody fusions: a single-institution analysis

Anterior Versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion at L5-S1 in Hybrid Surgery for Adult Spinal Deformity: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis of Radiographic Results, Mechanical Complications, and Clinical Outcomes

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the radiographic results, mechanical complications, and clinical outcomes between anterior and posterior lumbar interbody fusion at L5-S1 (ALIF51 and PLIF51 groups, respectively) using a matched cohort of patients undergoing long fusion for adult spinal deformity (ASD). Methods: Patients who underwent hybrid surgery of ≥5-level fusion to the pelvis with a minimum follow-up duration of 2 years were included. The baseline characteristics of the groups were controlled using a propensity score matching analysis. The radiographic results, mechanical complications such as proximal junctional kyphosis/failure and metal failure, and clinical outcomes were compared between the groups. Results: In total, 79 patients were assigned to each group with comparable baseline data, except for a higher frequency of anterior column realignment procedures in the PLIF51 group than in the ALIF51 group (49.4% vs. 31.6%). At the last follow-up, L5-S1 segmental lordosis (SL) was significantly greater in the ALIF51 group than in the PLIF51 group (12.1° vs. 7.3°, p < 0.001). The final C7-sagittal vertical axis (SVA) was significantly smaller in the ALIF51 group than in the PLIF51 group (25.4 mm vs. 35.5 mm, p = 0.032). However, other global sagittal parameters were comparable between the groups. The mechanical complication rates, including metal failure at L5-S1, and the final clinical outcomes were comparable between the groups. Conclusions: ALIF51 has modest advantages over PLIF51 in terms of better restoring L5-S1 SL and C7-SVA with avoiding more invasive procedures above the L5-S1 levels. Other sagittal parameters, mechanical complication rates, and clinical outcomes did not differ between the groups.

Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion as a Supplement to Posterior Instrumentation in Adult Spinal Deformity Patients: A Pilot Randomized Study With a Median of Eight Years of Follow-Up

Aim We aim to assess the long-term revision rates in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) undergoing posterior instrumentation with or without supplemental anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) with a median of eight years of follow-up. Materials and methods Based on a previous pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) from 2012, all previous participants were invited to a clinical and radiographic follow-up. Full medical records from the total cohort were reviewed from the time of operation to the follow-up, and information on revision surgery due to mechanical failure was obtained and compared between the groups. Results Of the original 17 patients included in the RCT, 15 were available for follow-up and 10 attended the clinical and radiographic examination. A retrospective review was performed of the entire original cohort. The median age at follow-up was 67 (61-71) years, and the median follow-up time was 7.7 (5.1-8.8) years. Revision rates among ALIF patients were three out of seven (43%) and eight out of 10 (80%) among non-ALIF patients with pseudoarthrosis and rod breakage being the main cause. Time to failure was longer in ALIF patients with a median of 47 (28-53) months compared with non-ALIF patients with a median of 26 (9-31) months. Conclusion This study revealed a lower rate of revision surgery and a longer time to failure in patients undergoing ASD surgery with supplemental ALIF compared with posterior instrumentation alone. Further studies with a larger sample size are needed to make conclusions on the effect of a supplemental ALIF to posterior instrumentation on lowering the risk of mechanical failure in patients with adult spinal deformity.

Instrumentation Failure in Adult Spinal Deformity Patients

In recent years, advances in the surgical treatment of adult spinal deformity (ASD) have led to improved outcomes. Although these advances have helped drive the development of deformity surgery to meet the rising volume of patients seeking surgical treatment, many challenges have yet to be solved. Instrumentation failure remains one of the most common major complications following deformity surgery, associated with significant morbidity due to elevated re-operation rates among those experiencing mechanical complications. The two most frequently encountered subtypes of instrumentation failure are rod fracture (RF) and proximal junctional kyphosis/proximal junctional failure (PJK/PJF). While RF and PJK/PJF are both modes of instrumentation failure, they are two distinct entities with different clinical implications and treatment strategies. Considering that RF and PJK/PJF continue to represent a major challenge for patients with ASD and deformity surgeons alike, this review aims to discuss the incidence, risk factors, clinical impact, treatment strategies, preventive measures, and future research directions for each of these substantial complications.

Impact of Supine versus Prone Positioning on Segmental Lumbar Lordosis in Patients Undergoing ALIF Followed by PSF: A Comparative Study

Background: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and posterior spinal fusion (PSF) play pivotal roles in restoring lumbar lordosis in spinal surgery. There is an ongoing debate between combined single-position surgery and traditional prone-position PSF for optimizing segmental lumbar lordosis. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed 59 patients who underwent ALIF in the supine position followed by PSF in the prone position at a single institution. Cobb angles were measured preoperatively, post-ALIF, and post-PSF using X-ray imaging. One-way repeated measures ANOVA and post-hoc analyses with Bonferroni adjustment were employed to compare mean Cobb angles at different time points. Cohen's d effect sizes were calculated to assess the magnitude of changes. Sample size calculations were performed to ensure statistical power. Results: The mean segmental Cobb angle significantly increased from preoperative (32.2 ± 13.8 degrees) to post-ALIF (42.2 ± 14.3 degrees, Cohen's d: -0.71, p < 0.0001) and post-PSF (43.6 ± 14.6 degrees, Cohen's d: -0.80, p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between Cobb angles after ALIF and after PSF (Cohen's d: -0.10, p = 0.14). The findings remained consistent when Cobb angles were analyzed separately for single-screw and double-screw ALIF constructs. Conclusions: Both supine ALIF and prone PSF significantly increased segmental lumbar lordosis compared to preoperative measurements. The negligible difference between post-ALIF and post-PSF lordosis suggests that supine ALIF followed by prone PSF can be an effective approach, providing flexibility in surgical positioning without compromising lordosis improvement.

Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy Versus Multilevel Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Adult Spinal Deformity: Trends, Outcomes, and Cost

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) with multilevel anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) in posterior long-segment fusion.

BACKGROUND

PSO and ALIF/LLIF are 2 techniques used to restore lumbar lordosis and correct sagittal alignment, with each holding its unique advantages and disadvantages. As there are situations where both techniques can be employed, it is important to compare the risks and benefits of both.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients aged 18 years or older who underwent PSO or multilevel ALIF/LLIF with posterior fusion of 7-12 levels and pelvic fixation were identified. 1:1 propensity score was used to match PSO and ALIF/LLIF cohorts for age, sex, and relevant comorbidities, including smoking status. Logistic regression was used to compare medical and surgical outcomes. Trends and costs were generated for both groups as well.

RESULTS

ALIF/LLIF utilization in posterior long fusion has been steadily increasing since 2010, whereas PSO utilization has significantly dropped since 2017. PSO was associated with an increased risk of durotomy ( P < 0.001) and neurological injury ( P = 0.018). ALIF/LLIF was associated with increased rates of postoperative radiculopathy ( P = 0.005). Patients who underwent PSO had higher rates of pseudarthrosis within 1 and 2 years ( P = 0.015; P = 0.010), 1-year hardware failure ( P = 0.028), and 2-year reinsertion of instrumentation ( P = 0.009). Reoperation rates for both approaches were not statistically different at any time point throughout the 5-year period. In addition, there were no significant differences in both procedural and 90-day postoperative costs.

CONCLUSIONS

PSO was associated with higher rates of surgical complications compared with anterior approaches. However, there was no significant difference in overall reoperation rates. Spine surgeons should select the optimal technique for a given patient and the type of lordotic correction required.

Approaches in Anterior Column Support in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis was conducted to compare anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in terms of postoperative complications, improvement in radiographic parameters, and patient-reported outcomes.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar (pages 1-20) databases were searched up to June 2023. The studied outcomes were the rate of rod failures, rod failures requiring revision surgery, all complications, all revision surgeries, the change in pelvic tilt, sacral slope, Cobb angle, lumbar lordosis (LL), sagittal vertical axis, the postoperative pelvic incidence-LL, and LL, and the improvement in back pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).

RESULTS

Six studies were included in this meta-analysis. ALIF showed higher postoperative lordosis (P = 0.003) and better improvement in ODI (P = 0.0001). No difference was seen in the remaining outcomes between ALIF and TLIF.

CONCLUSIONS

Although ALIF had better improvement in ODI, the mean difference was 6.5 points, which is below the minimal clinically important difference, stripping this result of any clinical value. Furthermore, even though ALIF had better postoperative lordosis, the change in LL postoperatively was not different between ALIF and TLIF. With no difference in complications, sagittal and coronal alignment, and patient-reported outcomes, TLIF was shown in this study to be favored instead of ALIF in adult spinal deformity surgery to avoid all the double approach-related comorbidity.

Clinical and Radiologic Analysis of Minimally Invasive Anterior-Posterior Combined Surgery for Adult Spinal Deformity: Comparison of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion at L5/S1 (OLIF51) versus Transforaminal Interbody Fusion

Background and Objectives: Although adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery brought about improvement in the quality of life of patients, it is accompanied by high invasiveness and several complications. Specifically, mechanical complications of rod fracture, instrumentation failures, and pseudarthrosis are still unsolved issues. To better improve these problems, oblique lateral interbody fusion at L5/S1 (OLIF51) was introduced in 2015 at my institution. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes of anterior-posterior combined surgery for ASD between the use of OLIF51 and transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) at L5/S1. Materials and Methods: A total of 117 ASD patients received anterior-posterior correction surgeries either with the use of OLIF51 (35 patients) or L5/S1 TLIF (82 patients). In both groups, L1-5 OLIF and minimally invasive posterior procedures of hybrid or circumferential MIS were employed. The sagittal and coronal spinal alignment and spino-pelvic parameters were recorded preoperatively and at follow-up. The quality-of-life parameters and visual analogue scale were evaluated, as well as surgical complications at follow-up. Results: The average follow-up period was thirty months (13-84). The number of average fused segments was eight (4-12). The operation time and estimated blood loss were significantly lower in OLIF51 than in TLIF. The PI-LL mismatch, LLL, L5/S1 segmental lordosis, and L5 coronal tilt were significantly better in OLIF51 than TLIF. The complication rate was statistically equivalent between the two groups. Conclusions: The introduction of OLIF51 for adult spine deformity surgery led to a decrease in operation time and estimated blood loss, as well as improvement in sagittal and coronal correction compared to TLIF. The circumferential MIS correction and fusion with OLIF51 serve as an effective surgical modality which can be applied to many cases of adult spinal deformity.

Comparison of complications, revisions, spinopelvic parameters, and health-related quality of life after posterior spinal fusion using multiple-rod constructs or two-rod constructs for adult spinal deformity: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The incidence of mechanical complications is high in patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion (PSF) for adult spinal deformity (ASD), especially for cases with severe sagittal malalignment or a prior spinal fusion requiring three-column osteotomy (3-CO) or spinopelvic fixation (SPF). The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the complications, revisions, radiographic spinopelvic parameters, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and surgical data of PSF using multiple-rod constructs to those of two-rod constructs for the treatment of ASD.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed for relevant studies in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Complications, revisions, spinopelvic parameters, HRQoL, and surgical date were compared between patients with ASD who underwent PSF using multiple-rod constructs (multi-rod group) and two-rod constructs (two-rod group).

RESULTS

Ten studies, comprising 797 patients with ASD (399 in the multi-rod group and 398 in the two-rod group), were included. All these studies were retrospective cohort studies. There were no significant differences in the surgical, wound-related, and systemic complications between the groups. In the multi-rod group, we noted a significantly lower incidence of rod fracture (RR, 0.43; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.57, P < 0.01), pseudoarthrosis (RR, 0.38; 95% CI 0.28 to 0.53, P < 0.01), and revisions (RR, 0.44; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.58, P < 0.01); a superior restoration of PI-LL (WMD, 3.96; 95% CI 1.03 to 6.88, P < 0.01) and SVA (WMD, 31.53; 95% CI 21.16 to 41.90, P < 0.01); a better improvement of ODI score (WMD, 6.82; 95% CI 2.33 to 11.31, P < 0.01), SRS-22 total score (WMD, 0.44; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.83, P = 0.02), and VAS-BP score (WMD, 1.02; 95% CI 0.31 to 1.73, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Compared with the two-rod constructs, PSF using multiple-rod constructs was associated with a lower incidence of mechanical complications, a lower revision rate, a superior restoration of sagittal alignment, and a better improvement of HRQoL, without increasing surgical invasiveness. Multiple-rod constructs should be routinely considered to for ASD patients, especially for cases with severe sagittal malalignment or a prior spinal fusion requiring 3-CO or SPF.

Is lower screw density associated with mechanical complications in adult spinal deformity surgery?

PURPOSE

To assess the impact of screw density on: (1) rod fracture/pseudarthrosis, (2) proximal/distal junctional kyphosis/failure (PJK/DJK/PJF), and (3) deformity correction judged by sagittal vertical axis (SVA) and T1-pelvic angle (T1PA).

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery from 2013 to 2017 was undertaken. Screw density was calculated by dividing the number of screws placed by the total instrumented levels. Screw density was then dichotomized at our calculated mean density to ≥ 1.65 and < 1.65. Outcomes consisted of mechanical complications and the amount of correction obtained.

RESULTS

145 patients underwent ASD surgery with 2-year follow-up. Mean screw density (range) was 1.6 ± 0.3 (1.00-2.00). The most common levels with missing screws were L2 (n = 59, 40.7%), L3 (n = 57, 39.3%) and L1 (n = 51, 35.2%), located mainly along the concavity in 113(80.0%) patients and apices in 98 (67.6%) patients. Rod fracture/pseudarthrosis: 23/32 (71.8%) patients with rod fracture and 35/46 (76.0%) with pseudarthrosis had missing screws within two levels of the rod fracture/pseudarthrosis. Logistic regression showed no significant association between screw density and rod fracture/pseudarthrosis.

PJK/F

15/47 (31.9%) patients with PJK and 9/30 (30.0%) with PJF had missing screws within three levels of the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV). Logistic regression showed no significant association between screws density and PJK/F. Correction obtained: linear regression failed to show any significant association between screw density and SVA or T1PA correction.

CONCLUSION

These findings showed that no significant association was found between screw density and mechanical complications or the amount of correction obtained, though approximately 3 out of 4 patients with rod fracture/pseudarthrosis had missing screws at or within two levels of the pathology. The prevention of mechanical complications is likely multifactorial and subject to both patient's characteristics and surgical techniques.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Rod fractures in thoracolumbar fusions to the sacrum/pelvis for adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis: long-term follow-up of a prospective, multicenter cohort of 160 patients

OBJECTIVE

Previous reports of rod fracture (RF) in adult spinal deformity are limited by heterogeneous cohorts, low follow-up rates, and relatively short follow-up durations. Since the majority of RFs present > 2 years after surgery, true occurrence and revision rates remain unclear. The objectives of this study were to better understand the risk factors for RF and assess its occurrence and revision rates following primary thoracolumbar fusions to the sacrum/pelvis for adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis (ASLS) in a prospective series with long-term follow-up.

METHODS

Patient records were obtained from the Adult Symptomatic Lumbar Scoliosis-1 (ASLS-1) database, an NIH-sponsored multicenter, prospective study. Inclusion criteria were as follows: patients aged 40-80 years undergoing primary surgeries for ASLS (Cobb angle ≥ 30° and Oswestry Disability Index ≥ 20 or Scoliosis Research Society-22r ≤ 4.0 in pain, function, and/or self-image) with instrumented fusion of ≥ 7 levels that included the sacrum/pelvis. Patients with and without RF were compared to assess risk factors for RF and revision surgery.

RESULTS

Inclusion criteria were met by 160 patients (median age 62 years, IQR 55.7-67.9 years). At a median follow-up of 5.1 years (IQR 3.8-6.6 years), there were 92 RFs in 62 patients (38.8%). The median time to RF was 3.0 years (IQR 1.9-4.54 years), and 73% occurred > 2 years following surgery. Based on Kaplan-Meier analyses, estimated RF rates at 2, 4, 5, and 8 years after surgery were 11%, 24%, 35%, and 49%, respectively. Baseline radiographic, clinical, and demographic characteristics were similar between patients with and without RF. In Cox regression models, greater postoperative pelvic tilt (HR 1.895, 95% CI 1.196-3.002, p = 0.0065) and greater estimated blood loss (HR 1.02, 95% CI 1.005-1.036, p = 0.0088) were associated with increased risk of RF. Thirty-eight patients (61% of all RFs) underwent revision surgery. Bilateral RF was predictive of revision surgery (HR 3.52, 95% CI 1.8-6.9, p = 0.0002), while patients with unilateral nondisplaced RFs were less likely to require revision (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18-0.84, p = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides what is to the authors' knowledge the highest-quality data to date on RF rates following ASLS surgery. At a median follow-up of 5.1 years, 38.8% of patients had at least one RF. Estimated RF rates at 2, 4, 5, and 8 years after surgery were 11%, 24%, 35%, and 49%, respectively. Greater estimated blood loss and postoperative pelvic tilt were significant risk factors for RF. These findings emphasize the importance of long-term follow-up to realize the true prevalence and cumulative incidence of RF.

Systematic review and meta-analysis for the impact of rod materials and sizes in the surgical treatment of adult spine deformity

PURPOSE

To assess clinical and safety outcomes associated with different rod materials and diameters in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery.

METHODS

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis evaluated ASD surgery using pedicle screw fixation systems with rods of different materials and sizes. Postoperative outcomes (i.e., Cobb, sagittal vertical axis, and pelvic tilt angle) and complications (i.e., pseudarthrosis and rod breakage) were assessed. Random effects models (REMs) pooled data for outcomes reported in ≥ 2 studies.

RESULTS

Among 50 studies evaluating ASD surgery using pedicle screw fixation systems, 17 described rod material/diameter. Postoperative outcomes did not statistically differ between cobalt-chromium (CoCr) vs. titanium (Ti) rods (n = 2 studies; mean [95% confidence interval (CI)] sagittal vertical axis angle: CoCr 37.00° [18.58°-55.42°] and Ti 32.58° [24.62°-40.54°]; mean [95% CI] pelvic tilt angle: CoCr 26.20° [22.87°-29.53°] and Ti 20.15° [18.0°-22.31°]). The pooled proportion (95% CI) of pseudarthrosis was 15% (7-22%) for CoCr and 12% (- 8-32%) for stainless steel (SS) (n = 2 studies each; Chi2 = 0.07, p = 0.79). The pooled proportion (95% CI) of broken rods was 12% (1-22%) for Ti (n = 3 studies) and 10% (2-19) for CoCr (n = 1 study). Among 6.0-6.35 mm rods, the pooled (95% CI) postoperative Cobb angle (n = 2) was 12.01° (9.75°-14.28°), sagittal vertical axis angle (n = 4) was 35.32° (30.02°-40.62°), and pelvic tilt angle was 21.11° (18.35°-23.86°).

CONCLUSIONS

For ASD patients undergoing posterior fixation and fusion, there are no statistically significant differences in postoperative outcomes or complications among rods of varying materials and diameters. Benchmark postsurgical outcomes and complication rates by rod material and diameter are provided.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Failure in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: A Comprehensive Review of Current Rates, Mechanisms, and Prevention Strategies

STUDY DESIGN

Literature review.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review is to summarize recent literature on adult spinal deformity (ASD) treatment failure as well as prevention strategies for these failure modes.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There is substantial evidence that ASD surgery can provide significant clinical benefits to patients. The volume of ASD surgery is increasing, and significantly more complex procedures are being performed, especially in the aging population with multiple comorbidities. Although there is potential for significant improvements in pain and disability with ASD surgery, these procedures continue to be associated with major complications and even outright failure.

METHODS

A systematic search of the PubMed database was performed for articles relevant to failure after ASD surgery. Institutional review board approval was not needed.

RESULTS

Failure and the potential need for revision surgery generally fall into 1 of 4 well-defined phenotypes: clinical failure, radiographic failure, the need for reoperation, and lack of cost-effectiveness. Revision surgery rates remain relatively high, challenging the overall cost-effectiveness of these procedures.

CONCLUSION

By consolidating the key evidence regarding failure, further research and innovation may be stimulated with the goal of significantly improving the safety and cost-effectiveness of ASD surgery.

Lateral decubitus single position anterior-posterior (AP) fusion shows equivalent results to minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at one-year follow-up

PURPOSE

This study compares perioperative and 1-year outcomes of lateral decubitus single position circumferential fusion (L-SPS) versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) for degenerative pathologies.

METHODS

Multicenter retrospective chart review of patients undergoing AP fusion with L-SPS or MIS TLIF. Demographics and clinical and radiographic outcomes were compared using independent samples t tests and chi-squared analyses with significance set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 445 patients were included: 353 L-SPS, 92 MIS TLIF. The L-SPS cohort was significantly older with fewer diabetics and more levels fused. The L-SPS cohort had significantly shorter operative time, blood loss, radiation dosage, and length of stay compared to MIS TLIF. 1-year follow-up showed that the L-SPS cohort had higher rates of fusion (97.87% vs. 81.11%; p = 0.006) and lower rates of subsidence (6.38% vs. 38.46%; p < 0.001) compared with MIS TLIF. There were significantly fewer returns to the OR within 1 year for early mechanical failures with L-SPS (0.0% vs. 5.4%; p < 0.001). 1-year radiographic outcomes revealed that the L-SPS cohort had a greater LL (56.6 ± 12.5 vs. 51.1 ± 15.9; p = 0.004), smaller PI-LL mismatch (0.2 ± 13.0 vs. 5.5 ± 10.5; p = 0.004). There were no significant differences in amount of change in VAS scores between cohorts. Similar results were seen after propensity-matched analysis and sub-analysis of cases including L5-S1.

CONCLUSIONS

L-SPS improves perioperative outcomes and does not compromise clinical or radiographic results at 1-year follow-up compared with MIS TLIF. There may be decreased rates of early mechanical failure with L-SPS.

Metal failure and nonunion at L5-S1 after long instrumented fusion distal to pelvis for adult spinal deformity: Anterior versus transforaminal interbody fusion

PURPOSE

Pseudoarthrosis and metal failure at L5-S1 following long fusion surgery for adult spinal deformity (ASD) remain major issues. Few studies report on which anterior column support technique is better in terms of achieving fusion and avoiding metal failures. Our study aimed to evaluate the fusion status and metal failure rate at L5-S1 after anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

METHODS

The study population included patients aged >50 years who underwent surgery for ASD. Anterior column supports at L5-S1 using ALIF and TLIF were compared with ≥ 2-year follow-up. Fusion status on 2-year computed tomography (CT) scan, metal failure, visual analog scale (VAS), and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were evaluated.

RESULTS

98 patients were included in this study (53 ALIF group and 45 TLIF group). We achieved solid fusion on 2-year CT scans in 88.9% and 69.8% patients in the TLIF and ALIF group, respectively. Metal failure developed in nine (17.0%) and six (13.3%) patients in the ALIF and TLIF group, respectively. The most common failure type was unilateral L5-S1 rod fracture (7 and five patients in the ALIF and TLIF group, respectively). Only one patient with bilateral rod fractures in the ALIF group required revision surgery. There were no differences in the VAS and ODI scores at the last follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

TLIF showed a better fusion rate than ALIF at L5-S1 after long instrumented fusion for ASD. However, the capacity to restore sagittal parameters was greater in the ALIF group. There were no differences between the groups regarding metal failure rate, revision surgery, or clinical outcomes.

Is L5/S1 interbody fusion necessary in long-segment surgery for adult degenerative scoliosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

There is no consensus regarding the best surgical strategy at the lumbosacral junction (LSJ) in long constructs for adult spinal deformity (ASD). The use of interbody fusion (IF) has been advocated to increase fusion rates, with additional pelvic fixation (PF) typically recommended. The actual benefit of IF even when extending to the pelvis, however, has not been vigorously analyzed. The goal of this work was to better understand the role of IF, specifically with respect to arthrodesis, when extending long constructs to the ilium.

METHODS

A systematic review of the PubMed and Cochrane databases was performed to identify the relevant studies in English, addressing the management of LSJ in long constructs (defined as ≥ 5 levels) in ASD. The search terms used were as follows: "Lumbosacral Junction," "Long Constructs," "Long Fusion to the Sacrum," "Sacropelvic Fixation," "Interbody Fusion," and "Iliac Screw." The authors excluded technical notes, case reports, literature reviews, and cadaveric studies; pediatric populations; pathologies different from ASD; studies not using conventional techniques; and studies focused only on alignment of different levels.

RESULTS

The PRISMA protocol was used. The authors found 12 retrospective clinical studies with a total of 1216 patients who were sorted into 3 different categories: group 1, using PF or not (n = 6); group 2, using PF with or without IF (n = 5); and group 3, from 1 study comparing anterior lumbar interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Five studies in group 1 and 4 in group 2 had pseudarthrosis rate as primary outcome and were selected for a quantitative analysis. Forest plots were used to display the risk ratio, and funnel plots were used to look at the risk of publication bias. The summary risk ratios were 0.36 (0.23-0.57, p < 0.001) and 1.03 (0.54-1.96, p = 0.94) for the PF and IF, respectively; there is a protective effect of overall pseudarthrosis for using PF in long constructs for ASD surgeries, but not for using IF.

CONCLUSIONS

The long-held contention that L5/S1 IF is always advantageous in long-construct deformity surgery is not supported by the current literature. Based on the findings from this systematic review and meta-analysis, PF with or without additional L5/S1 interbody grafting demonstrates similar overall construct pseudarthrosis rates. The added risk and costs associated with IF, therefore, should be more closely considered on a case-by-case basis.

Does Interbody Support at L5-S1 Matter in Long Fusions to the Pelvis?: A 5-year Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review of prospectively collected data.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if the addition of L5-S1 interbody support in long fusion deformity constructs is associated with superior long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes. To compare the 5-year clinical and radiographic outcomes and complications between long fusion constructs with L5-S1 interbody support versus posterolateral fusion (PLF) alone.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Cadaveric biomechanical studies have suggested that an interbody fusion at L5-S1 is beneficial in long fusion constructs with sacropelvic fixation. However, there is limited data reflecting the superiority of interbody support augmentation in optimizing arthrodesis and deformity correction relative to PLF alone.

METHODS

Eighty-eight consecutive adults with spinal deformity who underwent at minimum T11-pelvis posterior pedicle screw instrumentation with 5-year follow-up were included. Two cohorts were compared based on technique used at the lumbosacral junction (L5-S1): (A) no interbody (PLF; n = 23), or (B) interbody support at L5-S1 (IB; n = 65). Radiographic measurements and clinical outcome measures were compared at multiple time points. Complications were recorded and compared.

RESULTS

No differences in baseline patient characteristics between cohorts. One nonunion occurred at L5-S1 in the PLF group (P = 0.091). Initial postop sagittal alignment was better in the IB group (PLF: 6.46 cm, IB: 2.48 cm, P = 0.007); however, this was not maintained over long-term follow-up. No significant differences in proximal junctional kyphosis (PLF: 7/23, IB: 9/65, P = 0.076). Proximal junctional failure was more frequent in the PLF group (PLF: 6/23, IB: 6/65, P = 0.043). No significant differences in complications were found. Both cohorts had improvement from baseline pain and functional scores.

CONCLUSION

There is no absolute long-term advantage for lumbar interbody support in adult spinal deformity patients undergoing spinal arthrodesis to the pelvis.Level of Evidence: 3.

The prevalence of proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) and proximal junctional failure (PJF) in patients undergoing circumferential minimally invasive surgical (cMIS) correction for adult spinal deformity: long-term 2- to 13-year follow-up

OBJECTIVES

This aim of this study is to evaluate the prevalence of PJK and PJF in patients who underwent circumferential minimally invasive surgery (cMIS) for ASD.

METHODS

A prospective database of patients who underwent cMIS correction of ASD from November 2006 to July 2018 was queried. PJK was defined as angle > 10° and at least 10° greater than the baseline when measuring UIV to UIV + 2. PJF was defined as any type of symptomatic PJK which required surgery. Pre-op, latest and delta SVA and PI-LL mismatch were compared between patients with PJK and without. Only patients instrumented at 4 or more levels with full length 36″ films and a minimum 2-year follow-up were included.

RESULTS

A total of 184 patients met inclusion criteria for this study. Mean follow-up time was 85.2 months (24-158.9 months, SD 39.1). Mean age was 66 years (22-85 years). The mean number of operated levels was 6.9 levels (4-16 levels, SD 2.8). A total of 21 patients (10.8%) met PJK criteria. Only 10 (4.9%) were symptomatic (PJF) and underwent revision surgery. The other 11 patients remained asymptomatic. Comparing PJK to non-PJK patients, there was no statistically significant difference in the post-op SVA, delta SVA, post-op PI/LL and delta PI/LL between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Our study would suggest that in the appropriately selected and well-optimized patient, CMIS deformity correction is associated with a low prevalence of PJK and PJF.