Oblique lateral interbody fusion stand-alone vs. combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of discogenic low back pain

Stand-Alone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Supplemental Posterior Instrumentation in the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES

Compare the outcomes of stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and LLIF with supplemental posterior instrumentation in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease by a Meta-analysis.

METHODS

In this meta-analysis, we searched Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases from inception to Aug 2023. In this study, only study reporting stand-alone LLIF(stand-alone group) and LLIF with supplemental posterior instrumentation (posterior instrumentation group) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease and we excluded duplicate publications, research without full text, incomplete information or inability to conduct data extraction, animal experiments, reviews, and systematic reviews. STATA 15.1 software was used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Among the 15 included articles, the total number of patients was 1177, with 469 patients (638 fused segments) in the standalone group and 708 patients (1046 fused segments) in the posterior instrumentation group. The posterior instrumentation group was better than stand-alone group with significant differences in fusion rate, cage subsidence rate,the restoration of disc height and segmental lordosis, the improvement of ODI, and reoperation rate. While, comparing with posterior instrumentation group,the stand-alone group had less intraoperative blood loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Both stand-alone and instrumented LLIF were effective in improving the clinical outcomes of patients with lumbar degenerative disease. However, the stand-alone LLIF was associated with lower fusion rate, inferior maintenance of indirect decompression, and higher reoperation rate due to high-grade cage subsidence. For patients with risk factors of high-grade cage subsidence, the LLIF with posterior instrumentation may be a better choice.

Biomechanical differences between two different shapes of oblique lumbar interbody fusion cages on whether to add posterior internal fixation system: a finite element analysis

BACKGROUND

Oblique lateral lumbar fusion (OLIF) is widely used in spinal degeneration, deformity and other diseases. The purpose of this study was to investigate the biomechanical differences between two different shapes of OLIF cages on whether to add posterior internal fixation system, using finite element analysis.

METHODS

A complete three-dimensional finite element model is established and verified for L3-L5. Surgical simulation was performed on the verified model, and the L4-L5 was the surgical segment. A total of the stand-alone group (Model A1, Model B1) and the BPSF group (Model A2, Model B2) were constructed. The four OLIF surgical models were: A1. Stand-alone OLIF with a kidney-shaped Cage; B1. Stand-alone OLIF with a straight cage; A2. OLIF with a kidney-shaped cage + BPSF; B2. Stand-alone OLIF with a straight cage + BPSF, respectively. The differences in the range of motion of the surgical segment (ROM), equivalent stress peak of the cage (ESPC), the maximum equivalent stress of the endplate (MESE) and the maximum stress of the internal fixation (MSIF) were compared between different models.

RESULTS

All OLIF surgical models showed that ROM declines between 74.87 and 96.77% at L4-L5 operative levels. The decreasing order of ROM was Model A2 > Model B2 > Model A1 > Model A2. In addition, the ESPC and MESE of Model A2 are smaller than those of other OLIF models. Except for the left-bending position, the MSIF of Model B2 increased by 1.51-16.69% compared with Model A2 in each position. The maximum value of MESE was 124.4 Mpa for Model B1 in the backward extension position, and the minimum value was 7.91 Mpa for Model A2 in the right rotation. Stand-alone group showed significantly higher ROMs and ESPCs than the BPSF group, with maximum values of 66.66% and 70.59%. For MESE, the BPSF group model can be reduced by 89.88% compared to the stand-alone group model.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the traditional straight OLIF cage, the kidney-shaped OLIF cage can further improve the stability of the surgical segment, reduce ESPC, MESE and MSIF, and help to reduce the risk of cage subsidence.

Effect of Stand-Alone Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion (OLIF) in Treating Lumbar Spine Lesions

BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and early clinical results of stand-alone oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) in the fusion of lumbar spine lesions and to explore the indications for surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 92 cases of lumbar spine lesions treated with stand-alone OLIF in 2 medical centers from October 2014 to December 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. We included 30 males and 62 females, ages 32-83 years. RESULTS Our results showed that the operation time was 60.92±27.40 min (average 36.6 min) and the intraoperative blood loss was 68.22±141.6 ml (average 23.8 ml). The height of the intervertebral space was restored - before the operation (9.23±1.94 mm) and (12.68±2.01 mm) after the operation - and it was 10.18±2.14 mm at the last follow-up. There was a significant difference between the postoperative and preoperative values (t=9.27, P<0.0001), and there was also a significant difference between the final follow-up and postoperative comparison value (t=8.43, P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS The use of stand-alone OLIF in treating fusion of lumbar spine lesions showed excellent clinical efficacy and achieved the expected clinical improvements.

Oblique lateral internal fusion combined with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation in severe lumbar spinal stenosis: clinical and radiographic outcome

BACKGROUND

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) has been a popular technique for treating lumbar degenerative diseases. Previous studies have shown its efficiency in lumbar spinal stenosis; yet, only a few studies have investigated its application to severe lumbar spinal stenosis. Herein, we investigated the clinical and radiographic outcome of OLIF with percutaneous pedicle screws in the treatment of severe lumbar spinal stenosis.

METHODS

A total of 15 patients who underwent OLIF with percutaneous pedicle screws were retrospectively analysed. All patients were diagnosed with severe lumbar stenosis (Schizas grade C or D) through preoperative magnetic resonance image (MRI) and received OLIF combined with percutaneous pedicle screw surgery. Clinical outcomes, including visual analogue scale (VAS)-back and VAS-leg scores, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), as well as mean disc height (DH), mean foraminal height (FH), segmental lumbar lordosis (SLL) and cross-sectional area (CSA) of the spinal canal, were analysed before and after surgery and at the last follow-up. Intraoperative data, complications and fusion rate were also investigated.

RESULTS

OLIF combined with percutaneous pedicle screws was performed on 18 segments in 15 patients. Mean follow-up was 23.1 ± 4.6 months (range 15-29 months). VAS-back, VAS-leg, and ODI scores were significantly improved at the last follow-up. DH increased from 8.86 ± 3.06 mm before surgery to 13.31 ± 2.14 mm after; at the last follow-up, DH was 11.69 ± 1.87 mm. FH increased from 17.85 ± 2.26 mm before surgery to 22.09 ± 1.36 mm after; at the last follow-up, FH was 20.41 ± 0.99 mm. CSA of the spinal canal increased from 30.83 ± 21.15 mm2 before surgery to 74.99 ± 33.65 mm2 after the operation and 81.22 ± 35.53 mm2 at the last follow-up. The segmental LL before surgery, after surgery and at last follow-up was 20.27 ± 6.25 degrees, 20.83 ± 6.52 degrees and 19.75 ± 5.87 degrees, respectively. All patients have gained fusion at the last follow-up.

CONCLUSION

OLIF with percutaneous pedicle screws could achieve satisfactory clinical and radiographic effects through indirect compression by increasing DH, FH and CSA of the spinal canal in severe lumbar stenosis patients.

Oblique lateral interbody fusion combined with unilateral versus bilateral posterior fixation in patients with osteoporosis

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical efficacy of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) combined with unilateral (UPSF) and bilateral pedicle screw internal fixation (BPSF) in patients with osteoporosis.

METHODS

Clinical data of 57 patients who underwent single-segment OLIF surgery with a clear diagnosis of osteoporosis from December 2018 to May 2021 were retrospectively analyzed, of which 27 patients underwent OLIF + UPSF and 30 patients underwent OLIF + BPSF. Surgical technique-related indexes were recorded, including operative time, operative blood loss and postoperative hospital stay; clinical outcome-related indexes included postoperative complications, Visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) at preoperative, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 12 months postoperative follow-up; and imaging outcome-related indexes included the measurement of preoperative and postoperative segmental lordosis (SL), and observation of the degree of cage subsidence and bone graft fusion.

RESULTS

The surgery was successfully performed in 57 patients, and there was no statistical difference in operative blood loss and postoperative hospital stay between UPSF group and BPSF group (P > 0.05). In terms of operative time, there was a significant difference (UPSF group: 92.30 ± 11.03 min, BPSF group: 119.67 ± 16.41, P < 0.05). Postoperative VAS and ODI scores exhibited significant improvement (P < 0.05). At the 12 months postoperative follow-up, the VAS and ODI scores in the BPSF group were significantly better than those in the UPS group (P < 0.05). Compared with the preoperative images, the SL was significantly improved in both groups after surgery (P < 0.05). At 6 months postoperatively, the fusion rate in the UPSF group was significantly lower than that in the BPSF group (P < 0.05). At 1 year postoperatively, the fusion rate in the UPSF group was not significantly different from that in the BPSF group (P > 0.05). At 1 year postoperatively, the rate and degree of cage subsidence was higher in the UPSF group than in the BPSF group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In the long term, OLIF combined with bilateral posterior fixation applied to the osteoporosis patients is superior to OLIF surgery combined with unilateral posterior fixation in terms of clinical and imaging outcomes. It is effective in improving pain relief and functional improvement, accelerating bone graft fusion, and reducing cage subsidence compared with UPSF.

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.