Spondylolisthesis

An Update in Complication Rates Associated With Anterior Lumbar Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic Review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of complications associated with different anterior fusion techniques/approaches and adjuvant resources (i.e., computed tomography angiography (CTA), rhBMP-2, and access surgeons).

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted from 1/1/2014-4/1/2024 for studies evaluating the incidence of complications associated with anterior lumbar procedures. Comparisons of complications were made between surgical approach, use of CTA, rhBMP-2, and access surgeons. Meta-analyses were conducted using a generalized linear mixed model.

RESULTS

54 studies were included in the final analysis with 8066 patients and an average follow-up of 31.2 months. The overall complication rate associated with anterior lumbar surgery was 13.1%, including an intraoperative complication rate of 3.8%, postoperative complication rate of 7.4%, infection rate of 1.5%, and reoperation rate of 1.7%. Forest plot analysis showed no significant difference in overall complication rates between open and mini-open techniques, although mini-open techniques were associated with lower overall reoperation rates. The use of CTA was associated with an increase in intraoperative and overall complications, and the use of an access surgeon was associated with a decreased risk of reoperation. The use of rhBMP-2 was not associated with overall complication risk.

CONCLUSIONS

While anterior lumbar surgery provides numerous benefits, surgeons and patients alike should be aware of the complication and safety profile prior to surgery. High quality studies are warranted to help elucidate the true benefit of certain techniques and adjuvant resources in reducing complications.

Step by step teaching anatomy for anterior approach of the lumbar spine: A cadaveric study

PURPOSE

The authors described detailed relevant anatomy for anterior approach of the lumbosacral spine emphasizing all critical structures at risk for surgical injuries.

METHODS

Two fresh adult male cadavers were dissected at the Toulouse anatomy department. For each specimen, a step-by-step surgical approach followed by broader anatomical dissection was performed.

RESULTS

Results were divided into three compartments: anterior abdominal wall, latero/retroperitoneal space, lumbosacral prevertebral space. Each compartment was analyzed and visually described according to surgical and wider anatomical approach. Each region has critical anatomical structures that need to be well managed during surgery avoiding surgical complications. In the lumbosacral prevertebral space, the vascular anatomy is the most critical point to know to avoid potentially fatal surgical complications for patients. Ureter embedded into the posterior part of the peritoneum is also a critical structure to manage correctly during lumbosacral anterior approach. Different neural structures are also encountered with potential painful complications in case of injury.

CONCLUSIONS

In reference to anterior lumbosacral approach, critical structures to manage are peritoneum, ureter, prevertebral venous structures and hypogastric plexus. Their surgical anatomy has to be known and well recognized during surgery. Our surgical then broader anatomical dissections provide pragmatic pictural pedagogic content for teaching surgeons practicing anterior lumbosacral approach.

Enhancing the Technical Pearls for L5-S1 Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Patients with Body Mass Index More Than 30: Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes at 1-Year Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Performing anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) in patients with a body mass index (BMI) >30 presents surgical challenges. To overcome those challenges, a modified procedure is described.

METHODS

This study retrospectively reviewed patients with a BMI >30 who underwent the modified L5-S1 ALIF procedure from August 2017 to September 2023. Patient demographic and operative characteristics were collected. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were analyzed before surgery and at 1-year follow-up. An analysis was performed comparing patients with a BMI >30 who underwent the modified ALIF procedure versus the standard ALIF procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 26 patients with BMI >30 were evaluated. Thirteen received treatment with the modified ALIF technique, and 13 received treatment with the standard ALIF technique. Operative time was significantly shorter in the modified ALIF technique cohort (P = 0.006). Preoperative and postoperative radiographic findings indicated significant differences in anterior disc height (P < 0.001), posterior disc height (P = 0.02), and L5-S1 segmental lordosis (P < 0.001) in patients undergoing the modified ALIF technique. There were no intraoperative complications. Postoperative visual analog scale for back pain, visual analog scale for leg pain, and Oswestry Disability Index scores significantly improved after surgery (P < 0.05) in both cohorts after 1 year. Complete interbody fusion was achieved according to computed tomography evaluation 1 year after surgery in more than 80% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

ALIF surgery is a safe technique to address lumbar pathologies. This operative technique provides complimentary abdominal exposure data for access surgeons while performing ALIFs in patients with BMI >30. This technique could reduce operative time in such patients.

Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Which One in Which Patient?

Anterolateral approaches to the lumbar spine provide direct access to the disc space. These techniques facilitate thorough discectomy, which is essential for successful arthrodesis. They improve segmental lordosis without osteotomy and indirectly decompress neural elements in carefully selected patients. Benefits include shorter operative times, reduced blood loss, and rapid postoperative mobilization compared to posterior approaches. Each technique has specific advantages and limitations, thus none is inherently superior to another. Detailed knowledge of these techniques is essential for modern spine surgeon to provide personalized operative plan for each patient.

Posterior and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Recent Advances in Technique and Technology

Posterior approach interbody fusion techniques such as posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal interbody fusion are known as the workhorse procedures for lumbar spinal fusion. Over the years, advancements in procedural steps, technique, and technology have sought to improve patient outcomes. Within the last 2 decades, considerable emphasis has been placed upon minimally invasive techniques utilizing tubular retractors and conscious sedation. Innovation in materials engineering, visualization technology such as endoscopes, and enabling technologies such as augmented reality and robotics have served to enhance the procedures and their outcomes.

A cadaveric study showing the OLIF corridor dimensions after retraction of the abdominal great arteries and psoas major

The aim of this study is to assess the oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) corridor dimensions when the abdominal great arteries (the abdominal aorta or common iliac arteries) and psoas major are retracted. Twenty embalmed cadaveric specimens were dissected. The widths of the OLIF operative corridor at L1-2, L2-3, L3-4, and L4-5 were measured with the psoas major and abdominal great arteries in static state, with psoas retraction, and with mild retraction of the abdominal great arteries. The retractable distances of the psoas major and the abdominal great arteries at each lumbar segment were compared. In the static state, the operative corridor gradually narrowed from L1-2 to L4-5, but there was no significant difference in its width between segments (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the corridor width between segments after retraction of the psoas major or the abdominal great arteries (p > 0.05). However, retraction of either the psoas major or the abdominal great arteries made the corridor at the L1-5 segments significantly wider than those in the static state (p < 0.05), particularly at L4-5, and the retractable distance of the psoas major was significantly greater (p < 0.05). The cadaveric model demonstrated the use of abdominal great arteries retraction in principle. The OLIF operative corridor could be widened to some extent by retracting the abdominal great arteries, and widened further by retracting the psoas major.

Animal Model for Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Literature Review

Lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) is a surgical procedure for treating lumbar spinal stenosis and deformities. It removes a spinal disc and insert a cage or bone graft to promote solid fusion. Extensive research on LIF has been supported by numerous animal studies, which are being developed to enhance fusion rates and reduce the complications associated with the procedure. In particular, the anterior approach is significant in LIF research and regenerative medicine studies concerning intervertebral discs, as it utilizes the disc and the entire vertebral body. Several animal models have been used for anterior LIF (ALIF), each with distinct characteristics. However, a comprehensive review of ALIF models in different animals is currently lacking. Medium-sized and large animals, such as dogs and sheep, have been employed as ALIF models because of their suitable spine size for surgery. Conversely, small animals, such as rats, are rarely employed as ALIF models because of anatomical challenges. However, recent advancements in surgical implants and techniques have gradually allowed rats in ALIF models. Ambitious studies utilizing small animal ALIF models will soon be conducted. This review aims to review the advantages and disadvantages of various animal models, commonly used approaches, and bone fusion rate, to provide valuable insights to researchers studying the spine.

Retrospective analysis of medium-term outcomes following anterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery performed in a tertiary spinal surgical centre

INTRODUCTION

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) can treat spondylolisthesis, degenerative disc disease and pseudoarthrosis. This approach facilitates complete discectomy, disc space distraction, indirect decompression of neural foramina and placement of large interbody devices. Several intra- and postoperative complications can be attributed to the anterior approach: vascular/visceral injury, hypogastric plexus injury and urogenital consequences. Spine-specific complications include implant migration, graft failure, pseudoarthrosis and persistent symptomology.

METHODS

This retrospective study reviewed patient demographics, medium-term outcomes and complication rates following ALIF surgery performed over a 5-year period. A total of 110 consecutive patients had undergone ALIF surgery at a single tertiary spinal centre. The database was reviewed with a primary outcome of identifying postoperative 90-day complications and whether a revision anterior operation was required after primary ALIF.

RESULTS

No patients required revision anterior operation after their primary ALIF surgery by final follow-up. Out of 110 patients, 11 (10%) recorded a complication attributed to the anterior stage of their operation within 90 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Our 90-day complication rate of 10% lies within the 2.6% acute complication and 40% overall complications rates described in previous literature. The risk of vascular/visceral injury is significant (3%) and we recommend that ALIF be performed as a dual surgeon procedure with a vascular-trained access surgeon accompanying the spinal surgeon. ALIF is a valid revision surgical option for failed posterior approaches leading to complications such as pseudoarthrosis. In our sample, 89% of patients were managed with posterior fixation to augment the anterior fusion as, biomechanically, this is a proven construct.

Review of mechanisms of expandable spine surgery devices

INTRODUCTION

Expandable devices such as interbody cages, vertebral body reconstruction cages, and intravertebral body expansion devices are frequently utilized in spine surgery. Since the introduction of expandable implants in the early 2000s, the variety of mechanisms that drive expansion and implant materials have steadily increased. By examining expandable devices that have achieved commercial success and exploring emerging innovations, we aim to offer an in-depth evaluation of the different types of expandable cages used in spine surgery and the underlying mechanisms that drive their functionality.

AREAS COVERED

We performed a review of expandable spinal implants and devices by querying the National Library of Medicine MEDLINE database and Google Patents database from 1933 to 2024. Five major types of mechanical jacks that drive expansion were identified: scissor, pneumatic, screw, ratchet, and insertion-expansion.

EXPERT OPINION

We identified a trend of screw jack mechanism being the predominant machinery in vertebral body reconstruction cages and scissor jack mechanism predominating in interbody cages. Pneumatic jacks were most commonly found in kyphoplasty devices. Critically reviewing the mechanisms of expansion and identifying trends among effective and successful cages allows both surgeons and medical device companies to properly identify future areas of development.

Access to the Lumbosacral Spine: A Current View

The surgical approach to the lumbosacral spine has been the subject of experimental and scientific anatomical studies since the Hippocratic era. However, it was in the 20th century that, with the evolution of asepsis and antibiotic therapy, spine surgery began to evolve at breakneck speed, and the various possibilities of access roads became objects of development and discussion. As a result, pathologies of the lumbosacral spine can be accessed in different ways and positions, from the traditional posterior approach in the prone position to the anterior, oblique, lateral, and endoscopic approaches. The current article brings state-of-the-art access routes to the lumbosacral spine. This article objective is to elucidate the possibilities of accesses the lumbar spine for any purposes, as decompression, fusion, tumour resections, reconstruction or deformity correction, despites type of implants or implants positioning.

A Comprehensive Review of the Historical Description of Spine Surgery and Its Evolution

Major strides in the advancement of spine surgery came about in the 21st century. However, the extensive history of spine surgery can be traced back to long before this time. A clear description of the journey from a primitive yet accurate understanding of the human musculoskeletal system to today's modern aspects of spinal techniques is lacking. A narrative literature review was conducted to elucidate where spine surgery began and the techniques used that evolved over time. This review was conducted using PubMed and Google Scholar. Search terms used included "history of spine surgery," "evolution of spine surgery," "origins of spine surgery," "history of laminectomy," "history of spinal fusion," "history of lumbar interbody fusion," "minimally invasive spine surgery," and "navigation in spine surgery." We highlight the evolution of the basic understanding of anatomy and non-surgical and surgical techniques, including bracing, laminectomy, discectomy, and spinal fusion. The current evolution and integration of minimally invasive techniques, lumbar interbody fusion techniques, robotics, navigation, and motion preservation are discussed, as these are the major areas of focus for technological advancement. This review presents an overarching synopsis of the events that chronicle the progress made in spine surgery since its conception. The review uniquely contributes to the growing body of literature on the expansion of spine surgery and highlights major events in its history.

Antepsoas Approaches to the Lumbar Spine

Lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) is a well-established approach in treating spinal deformity and degenerative conditions of the spine. Since its inception in the 20th century, LIF has continued to evolve, allowing for minimally invasive approaches, high fusion rates, and improving disability scores with favorable complication rates. The anterior to the psoas (ATP) approach utilizes a retroperitoneal pathway medial to the psoas muscle to access the L1-S1intervertebral disc spaces. In contrast to the transpsoas arppoach, its primary advantage is avoiding transgressing the psoas muscle and the contained lumbar plexus, which potentially decreases the risk of injury to the lumbar plexus. Avoiding transgression of the psoas may minimize the risk of transient or permanent neurological deficits secondary to lumbar plexus injury. Indications for ATP approaches may expand as it is shown to be a safe and effective method of achieving spinal arthrodesis.

A Comparative Clinical Study of Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion between Patients with Multiply Operated Back and Patients with First-Time Surgery

Background and Objectives: Patients with multiply operated back (MOB) may suffer from persistent lower-back pain associated with back muscle damage and epidural fibrosis following repeated back surgery (Failed Back Spinal Syndrome). Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is considered to be favorable for MOB patients. However, little scientific research has been carried out for this issue due to variety of the pathogenesis. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical results of MOB patients and first-time surgery patients who underwent LLIF for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative scoliosis and/or degenerative spondylolisthesis (spinal instability). Materials and Methods: LLIF was performed for lumbar spinal stenosis with spinal instability in 55 consecutive cases of single hospital (30 males, 25 females, average age: 69). Clinical outcomes were compared between the MOB patient group (MOB group) and the first surgical patient group (F group). We evaluated the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores and JOA Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) before and 2 years after surgery. MOB patients were defined as those who have had one or more lumbar surgery on the same intervertebral or adjacent vertebrae in the past. Results: There were 20 cases (12 males, 8 females, average age: 71) in MOB group, and 35 cases (19 males, 16 females, average age: 68) in the F group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of age, sex, number of intervertebral fixations, modic change in fused intervertebral end plate, score of brief scale for evaluation of psychiatric problem, lumbar lordosis, and sagittal vertical axis before and after surgery. The preoperative JOA scores averaged 12.5 points in the MOB group and averaged 11.6 points in the F group. The postoperative JOA scores averaged 23.9 points in the MOB group and averaged 24.7 points in the F group. The preoperative JOABPEQ averaged 36.3 points in the MOB group and averaged 35.4 points in the F group. The postoperative average JOA score was 75.4 in the MOB group and 70.2 in the F group. Conclusions: Based on the results, there was no significant difference in clinical outcomes of the two groups, and there was no new residual lower-back pain. Thus, we considered that LLIF one option for patients with MOB.

Computational comparison of anterior lumbar interbody fusion and oblique lumbar interbody fusion with various supplementary fixation systems: a finite element analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) have shown a great surgical potential, while it has always been controversial which surgical approach and which type of fixation system should be selected. This study investigated the biomechanical response of ALIF and OLIF with various supplementary fixation systems using the finite element method.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Lumbar L4-L5 ALIF and OLIF models stabilized by different supplementary fixation systems (stand-alone cage, integrated stand-alone cage, anterior plate, and bilateral pedicle screw) were developed to assess the segmental range of motion (ROM), endplate stress (EPS), and screw-bone interface stress (SBIS).

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

ALIF showed lower ROM and EPS than OLIF in all motion planes and less SBIS in the most of motion planes compared with OLIF when the anterior plate or pedicle screw was used. ALIF induced higher ROM, while lower EPS and SBIS than OLIF in the majority of motion planes when integrated stand-alone cage was utilized. Using a stand-alone cage in ALIF and OLIF led to cage migration. Integrated stand-alone cage prevented the cage migration, whereas caused significantly larger ROM, EPS, and SBIS than other fixation systems except for the rotation plane. In the most of motion planes, the pedicle screw had the lowest ROM, EPS, and SBIS. The anterior plate induced a slightly larger ROM, EPS, and SBIS than the pedicle screw, while the differences were not significant.

CONCLUSION

ALIF exhibited a better performance in postoperative segmental stability, endplate stress, and screw-bone interface stress than OLIF when the anterior plate or the pedicle screw was used. The pedicle screw could provide the greatest postoperative segmental stability, less cage subsidence incidence, and lower risk of fixation system loosening in ALIF and OLIF. The anterior plate could also contribute to the stability required and fewer complications, while not as effectively as the pedicle screw. Extreme caution should be regarded when the stand-alone cage is used due to the risk of cage migration. The integrated stand-alone cage may be an alternative method; however, further optimization is needed to reduce complications and improve postoperative segmental stability.

Early effect of standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion vs. combined with lateral screw fixation of the vertebral body on single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

For the treatment of single-level lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD), oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) has clinical advantages. Whether internal fixation needs to be combined for treatment has been the subject of debate.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the early clinical effects of standalone oblique lateral interbody fusion (S-OLIF) versus OLIF combined with lateral screw fixation of the vertebral body (F-OLIF) on single-level lumbar DDD.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on the data of 34 patients for whom the OLIF technique was applied to treat single-level lumbar DDD from August 2018 to May 2021. Patients were divided into the S-OLIF (n= 18) and F-OLIF groups (n= 16). Intraoperative blood loss, operative time, and length of hospital stay were recorded. The pain visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) before and after the operation were evaluated. The disc height (DH), foraminal height (FH), fused segment lordosis (FSL), lumbar lordosis (LL), cage subsidence, and fusion by CT examination were measured before and after the operation.

RESULTS

The S-OLIF group experienced a shorter operative time and less intraoperative blood loss than the F-OLIF group, and the differences were statistically significant (p< 0.05), but the difference in the length of hospital stay was not statistically significant. The postoperative VAS score and ODI of the two groups were significantly lower than those before the operation, but the postoperative differences between the two groups were not statistically significant. Differences were not statistically significant in postoperative FH, DH, FSL and LL of the two groups. Both groups were followed up for no less than 12 months. In the two groups, fusion was achieved at the last follow-up visit.

CONCLUSION

According to short-term follow-up results, both S-OLIF and F-OLIF can achieve reliable and stable fusion and good clinical effect in the treatment of single-level lumbar DDD.

Surgeon Learning Curve and Clinical Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Posterior Percutaneous Instrumentation

OBJECTIVES

This study reports the learning phase of the minimally invasive anterior lumbar interbody fusion (mini-ALIF) approach with a vascular and orthopaedic spine surgeon team.

METHODS

Adult patients who underwent primary mini-ALIF at the lowest two segments of the lumbar spine (i.e., L4/5, L5/S1) between January 2010 and December 2018 were analyzed.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-seven patients were included. There was no notable change in total surgical time over the study period. Estimated blood loss markedly decreased until stabilizing at case 30 and slowly declined thereafter. The mean estimated blood loss was 184 mL for L5/S1, 232 mL for L4/L5, and 458 mL for two-level mini-ALIF. There were 20 vascular issues requiring primary repair or packing. Vascular issues declined over time, with a rate of 32% in the first 25 cases and 0% in the last 25. The postoperative complication rate was highest in the first 25 cases (7 of 21 total complications). The odds ratio of vascular injury with body mass index (BMI) > 35 was 4.09 (1.4 to 11.7 confidence interval, P ≤ 0.008). Total surgical time and postoperative complications increased with increasing BMI.

CONCLUSION

Performance of the mini-ALIF approach is associated with a learning curve of 25 to 30 cases before complications begin to decline. BMI > 35 is associated with increased surgical time and complications.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Supplementary Information

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

Trailblazing: the historical development of the posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF)

Today, the posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), and related methods of fusion, represent the gold standard in spinal arthrodesis. However, despite the PLIF being first performed in the 1940s, its reputation was marked by animosity for the next fifty years. Only due to the extraordinary talent and perseverance from a small group of pioneers, was the operation eventually appreciated to be an ideal fusion technique. This process of popularization has assisted the surgical community to better recognize the complexities of spinal biomechanics and has encouraged the momentum of success in modern spinal surgery. Neither the complete origins of the technique, nor the remarkable story of its propagation, have previously been reported.

Retroperitoneal Exposure of the Anterior Lumbar Spine

BACKGROUND

Anterior lumbar spine procedures such as anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) are used commonly to treat multiple pathologies, including pseudoarthrosis and degenerative disk disease. It is generally a safe and effective procedure, but an anterior approach to the lumbar spine requires critical navigation of the surgical window to avoid delicate structures. An operative technique should maximize the exposure without an increased risk of iatrogenic injury.

OBJECTIVE

To describe in detail a retroperitoneal exposure of the anterior lumbar spine.

METHODS

This surgical approach is a unique variation of standard anterior lumbar spine exposure techniques. This technique is described and illustrated in detail with an accompanying Supplemental Digital Content: video. Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was not required because this is a variation of current techniques. Patient consent was obtained for the procedure and use of operative pictures and videos.

RESULTS

Precise details of the technique are described. The surgical video demonstrates the technique for the L5-S1 ALIF approach.

CONCLUSION

This technique is a novel variation of the standard retroperitoneal exposure of the anterior lumbar spine. The incision placement, size, and dynamic blunt retraction of this approach limit tissue disruption and provide an efficient exposure that has not been previously described in the literature.

Direct reduction of high-grade lumbosacral spondylolisthesis with anterior cantilever technique - surgical technique note and preliminary results

Backgrounds

Surgical reduction for high-grade spondylolisthesis is beneficial for restoring sagittal balance and improving the biomechanical environment for arthrodesis. Compared to posterior total laminectomy and long instrumentation, anterior lumbar inter-body fusion (ALIF) is less invasive and has the biomechanical advantage of restoring the original disk height and increasing lumbar lordosis, thus improving sagittal balance. However, the application of ALIF is still limited in treating low-grade spondylolisthesis. In this study, we developed a new technique termed anterior cantilever procedure to directly reduce the slippage of high-grade lumbosacral spondylolisthesis. The purpose of our study was to investigate the surgical outcomes of the anterior cantilever procedure followed by ALIF and posterior mono-segment instrumented fixation in high-grade spondylolisthesis.

Methods

All patients with high-grade spondylolisthesis who underwent anterior cantilever procedure followed by anterior lumbar inter-body fusion (ALIF) and posterior mono-segment instrumented fixation between November 2006 and July 2017 were enrolled in our study. The slip percentage, Dubousset’s lumbosacral angle, pelvic tilt, sacral slope, pelvic incidence, and sagittal alignment were measured pre-operatively and postoperatively at the last follow-up. Surgery time, blood loss, complications, and hospital stay were also collected and analysed.

Results

A total of 11 consecutive patients with high-grade spondylolisthesis patients were included and analysed. All of the high-grade spondylolisthesis in our series occurred at the L5-S1 level. The median age was 37 years, and the median follow-up duration was 36 months. The average slip reduction was 30% (60 to 30%, P < 0.01), and the average correction of Dubousset’s lumbosacral angle was 13.8° (84.1° to 97.9°, P < 0.01). The median intra-operative blood loss was 300 mL. All patients attained improved sagittal balance after the operation and achieved solid fusion within 9 months after surgery. No incidences of implant failure, permanent neurological deficit, or pseudarthrosis were recorded at the last follow-up.

Conclusions

Anterior cantilever procedure followed by ALIF and posterior mono-segment instrumented fixation is a valid procedure for treating high-grade spondylolisthesis. It achieved a high fusion rate, partially reduced slippage, and significantly improved lumbosacral angle, while minimizing common complications, such as pseudarthrosis, nerve traction injury, excessive soft tissue dissection, and blood loss in posterior reduction procedures. However, posterior instrumentation is still required to the structural stability in the ALIF procedure.

Level of evidence

IV

Anteroinferior Psoas Technique for Oblique Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technical Note and Case Series

Objective

The aim of the present paper was to evaluate cases of lumbar degenerative diseases treated with oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) using a modified lateral approach (i.e. anteroinferior psoas exposure under direct vision) and to analyze the effect and safety of this approach.

Methods

From June 2016 to April 2019, a total of 226 patients with an average age of 65.5 ± 16.2 years (98 men and 128 women) with degenerative lumbar diseases who underwent the AIP approach of OLIF were followed up and analyzed retrospectively. Data concerning operative and clinical parameters were collected, including operative time, intraoperative estimated blood loss, duration of postoperative hospital stay, and time to ambulation after surgery. For the assessment of clinical outcomes, the visual analogue scale (VAS) score (for back pain) and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) were calculated. Complications were also recorded as surgical exposure approach‐related complications. More than 6 months after surgery, 132 patients consented to having MRI examinations to evaluate the psoas muscle atrophy when they were followed up.

Results

The mean operative time was 82.5 ± 31.6 min. The mean operative time for each segment of OLIF was 43.3 ± 15.5 min. The mean blood loss was 48.0 ± 11.6 mL. The mean blood loss for each segment of OLIF was 25.3 ± 10.1 mL. No patients needed blood transfusion intraoperatively or postoperatively. The mean hospital stay was 4.1 ± 2.1 days. All patients were followed up for 12–31 months (mean 18.2 months). Clinical assessment showed that the VAS and ODI scores at 6 months after surgery were markedly lower than the preoperative scores (P < 0.001) but did not differ from the scores at the final follow‐up (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in percentage changes of the cross‐sectional area of the lean psoas muscle and the T2 signal intensity ratio of gross psoas to quadratus lumborum muscles between the left side (operative side) and the right side (nonoperative side) (P > 0.05). A total of 11 surgical exposure approach‐related complications were reported, with an incidence of 4.9%: transient thigh pain/numbness, psoas weakness (2.2%), sympathetic chain injury (1.3%), cage subsidence (0.9%), and segmental artery injury (0.4%). There was no permanent motor neurological deficit, and no injury of vascular, ureter or peritoneal membranes.

Conclusion

The anteroinferior psoas approach for OLIF is safe and can preserve the psoas and lumbar plexus.

Technique for Exposing Lumbar Discs in Anterior Approach Using Steinmann Wires: Arthroplasties or Arthrodesis

BACKGROUND

Due to increasing longevity, the incidence of degenerative lumbar disc diseases has increased, and surgical treatment is often necessary. In this context, the anterior approach becomes an important technique. However, one of the main limitations of this method is the need for dedicated retractors, which requires larger incisions for its positioning and increases the cost of the procedure. The objective of the present study was to describe a technique for retracting abdominal structures by anterior approaches to the lumbar spine using Steinmann wires.

METHODS

This manuscript consists of a technique description of anterior approach for lumbar spine.

RESULTS

Surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spine disease is often necessary when the patients have symptoms refractory to conservative treatments. Many of them will be candidates for surgical treatment with anterior approach, either for arthrodesis/anterior lumbar interbody fusion or arthroplasty. Small incisions are performed for positioning the modified Langenbeck retractors and the Steinmann wires. These retractors are easily positioned and provide good exposure of the lumbar discs making it possible to implant appropriate cages for restoring the necessary height, lordosis, and sagittal balance.

CONCLUSIONS

The technique described is safe, inexpensive, and reproducible. Simple and easily accessible instruments are required in most hospital complexes.

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion in management of lumbar degenerative spinal stenosis in Chinese population

Purpose:

The purpose of this study was to assess the outcomes of a cohort of local Chinese patients who underwent oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) surgery for lumbar degenerative diseases.

Methods:

We adopted a minimally invasive anterior approach to the lumbar spine through retroperitoneal access. In the first part of the surgery, a 3- to 5-cm left lateral incision over the abdomen was made guided by imaging. L2–L5 disc space was approached via the corridor between the left psoas muscle and the great vessels. A specially designed interbody cage filled with bone substitute was utilized for interbody fusion. In the second part of the surgery, posterior instrumentation with or without decompression, was performed in a prone position. Efficacy and safety of the surgery were studied.

Results:

A total of 60 patients with the mean age of 68 years underwent OLIF at 83 surgical levels. Their mean operative time was 79 min, and the average blood loss was 84 ml for the OLIF part. The mean length of hospital stay was 5.5 days. Based on plain computed tomography scan obtained at post-operative 6 months, successful fusion was achieved in 82 of the 83 surgical levels. The Oswestry Disability Index for low back pain had a mean reduction of 22.3% after 6 months. Specific complications observed include transient thigh pain or numbness, retroperitoneal hematoma, post-operative ileus and Bone Morphogenetic Protein (BMP) osteolysis. None of the patients experienced infection, symptomatic pseudo-arthrosis, hardware failure, vascular injury, nerve injury, ureteral injury, bowel injury, incisional hernia or death.

Conclusion:

OLIF is an effective procedure to treat lumbar spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis with excellent fusion rate and good functional outcome. Complications specific to this procedure are not uncommon, but majority are minor and self-recovery. Proper training is required to minimize potential surgical risks.

The History of Anterior and Lateral Approaches to the Lumbar Spine

Anterior and lateral approaches to the lumbar spine are commonly used today for a variety of indications. These approaches can ultimately be traced back to early attempts to treat Pott's disease. Evidence of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection of the spine dates as far back as 2400 BCE, with ancient Egyptian mummies exhibiting lesions consistent with Pott's disease. For many centuries, Pott's disease was treated conservatively, and surgery came to be used when conservative therapy was ineffective, as medical therapy had yet to become available. In 1779, Percivall Pott recommended that peripheral paraspinal tuberculous abscesses be drained after noticing that patients' lower limb function improved after the formation of spontaneous draining sinuses. Building on Pott's ideas, Ménard described the first lateral approach to the spine via a costotransversectomy approximately 1 century after Pott's theory. Most importantly, the surge in understanding anatomy with respect to developing safe corridors to the deeper structures of the human body brought together advances in technology, instrumentation, and visualization. Surgeons were thus emboldened to explore more complex anterior approaches to the spine. In 1906, Müller reported the first successful anterior approach to the spine in a patient with Pott's disease. Over the next several decades, the efforts of surgeons such as Ito, Capener, Burns, and Mercer would lead to the development of the anterior lumbar interbody fusion. The costotransversectomy later evolved into the lateral rhachotomy and lateral extracavitary approach, which along with advances in the anterior lumbar interbody fusion paved the way for the oblique lumbar interbody fusion and lateral lumbar interbody fusion.

Technical approach, outcomes, and exposure-related complications in patients undergoing anterior lumbar interbody fusion

OBJECTIVE

To describe our technique, evaluate access related complications and factors contributing to adverse outcomes in patients undergoing retroperitoneal anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on patients undergoing ALIF at our institution from January 2008 to December 2017. Access was performed by a vascular surgeon who remained present for the duration of the case. Data collected included patients' demographics, comorbidities, exposure related complications and ileus. Study end points included major adverse events and minor complications. Major adverse events included any vascular injuries requiring repair, bowel and ureter injuries, postoperative bleeding requiring reoperation, myocardial infarction, stroke, venous thromboembolism (pulmonary embolism/deep venous thrombosis), wound dehiscence, and death. Minor complications included postoperative paralytic ileus, urinary tract infections, and surgical site infections. The incidence of incisional hernia was also evaluated.

RESULTS

During this period, 1178 patients (514 males and 664 females; mean age, 54.1 ± 13.8 years) underwent a total of 2352 levels ALIF at our institution (single level, 422 patients; 2 levels, 450; 3 levels, 205; 4 levels, 98; 5 levels, 6; 6 levels, 1; and 7 levels, 1). The median estimated blood loss was 25 mL (interquartile range, 25-50). There were 57 exposure-related complications (4.8%), including vascular injuries (venous, 13; arterial, 4) in 17 patients (1.4%), bowel injuries in three patients (serosa tear in two and arterial embolization with subsequent bowel ischemia in one). Eleven of the 13 venous injuries (84.6%) occurred while exposing the L4 to L5 lumbar level. Two of the four patients with arterial injuries developed acute limb ischemia requiring embolectomy. One embolized to the superior mesenteric artery and underwent bowel resection. Twenty patients (1.7%) developed venous thromboembolism, two of whom had sustained left iliac vein injury during exposure. Sixteen patients (1.4%) developed a retroperitoneal hematoma/seroma with nine requiring evacuation in the operating room. Thirty-six patients (3.1%) developed postoperative ileus, defined as an inability to tolerate diet on postoperative day 3. Four patients (0.4%) had a postoperative myocardial infarction, and two had a stroke and two (0.17%) died within the first 30 postoperative days. Thirty-one patients developed incisional complications, including surgical site infection in 24 and incisional hernia in 7.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that ALIF exposure can be performed safely with a relatively low overall complication rate. The majority of vascular injuries associated with this procedure are venous in nature, occurring predominantly while exposing the L4 to L5 level and can be safely addressed by an experienced vascular team.

History of Spinal Fusion: Where We Came from and Where We Are Going

Spinal fusion surgery is performed all over the world to help patients with cervical and thoracolumbar pathology. As outcomes continue to improve in patients with spine-related pathology, it is important to understand how we got to modern day spinal fusion surgery. Scientific innovations have ranged from the first spinal fusions performed with basic instrumentation in the late nineteenth century to contemporary tools such as pedicle screws, bone grafts, and interbody devices. This article tracks this technological growth so that surgeons may better serve their patients in treating spine-related pain and disability.

Overview of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery

Minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS) has continued to evolve over the past few decades, with significant advancements in technology and technical skills. From endonasal cervical approaches to extreme lateral lumbar interbody fusions, MISS has showcased its usefulness across all practice areas of the spine, with unique points of access to avoid pertinent neurovascular structures. Adult spine deformity has also recognized the importance of minimally invasive techniques in its ability to limit complications and to provide adequate sagittal alignment correction and improvements in patients' functional status. Although MISS has continued to make significant progress clinically, consideration must also be given to its economic impact and the learning curve surgeons experience in adding these procedures to their armamentarium. This review examines current innovations in MISS, as well as the economic impact and future directions of the field.

Top 100 Cited Articles on Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Bibliographic Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Bibliographic analysis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to identify the most cited studies on lumbar spondylolisthesis and report their impact in spine field.

METHODS

Thomson Reuters Web of Science-Science Citation Index Expanded was searched using title-specific search "spondylolisthesis." All studies published in English language between 1900 and 2019 were included with no restrictions. The top 100 cited articles were identified using "Times cited" arranging articles from high to low according to citation count. Further analysis was made to obtain the following items: article title, author's name and specialty, country of origin, institution, journal of publication, year of publication, citations number, study design.

RESULTS

The citation count of the top 100 articles ranged from 68 to 589. All published between 1932 and 2016. Among 20 journals, Spine had the highest number of articles (49), with citation number of 6155 out of 13 618. Second ranked was Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery with 15 articles and total citations of 3023. With regard to the primary author's specialty, orthopedic surgeons contributed to the majority of top 100 list with 82 articles, and neurosurgery was the second specialty with 11 articles. The United States had produced more than half of the list with 59 articles. England was the second country with 7 articles. Surgical management of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis was the most common discussed topic.

CONCLUSION

This article identifies the top 100 influential articles on lumbar spondylolisthesis and recognizes an important aspect of knowledge evolution served by leading researchers as they guided today's clinical decision making in spondylolisthesis.

[Retrospective study of surgical management of lumbosciatica in the Department of Orthopaedics in Tataouine, Tunisia: about 44 cases]

Lumbosciatica is a public health problem because of its socio-professional impact. The purpose of our study is to evaluate the indication for surgical treatment and the role of each technique used. We conducted a retrospective study in the Department of Orthopaedics in Tataouine. The study involved 44 patients with common lumbosciatica and having undergone surgical treatment over the period from 2013 to 2018. The information sheet included the epidemiological data and the clinical data. The patients underwent radiological assessment including lumbar spine x-ray (frontal and lateral views) and lumbar computed scan (CT) scan which clarified the cause of sciatica. Surgical treatment was indicated after medical treatment failure, in patients with hyperalgesia and in patients with neurological complication. In our study, herniated disc was the primary cause of lumbosciatica (50% of cases) followed by lumbar spinal stenosis (25%), spondylolisthesis (22.7%) and transverse mega-apophysis of L5 vertebrae (2.3%). Traditional discectomy was the most used technique for surgical treatment of herniated disc. Eight patients had spondylolisthesis. They underwent laminectomy associated with posterior arthrodesis. Lumbar spinal stenosis was treated with laminectomy alone in 54.54% of cases. Outcome was favorable during the follow up period in 90% of cases (Visual Analog Scale 3±1 at follow-up). Surgical technique depends on etiology and imaging data on which to base the choice of arthrodesis stages.

Mono- und mehrsegmentaler ventraler minimalinvasiver Zugang zur Lendenwirbelsäule (OLIF) zur Korrektur von Deformitäten

Operationsziel

Minimalinvasiver anterolateraler Zugang zur Lendenwirbelsäule („oblique lateral interbody fusion“ [OLIF]) zur Korrektur von lumbalen Deformitäten.

Indikationen

Ventrales Release bei degenerativer Lumbalskoliose oder segmentalen Kyphosen und interkorporelle Korrekturspondylodese.

Kontraindikationen

Absolute Kontraindikationen bestehen nicht. Relative Kontraindikationen sind vorangegangene (linksseitige) retroperitoneale Eingriffe bzw. Zustand nach Peritonitis mit ausgeprägten retroperitonealen Vernarbungen. Gefäßanomalien mit extrem lateral verlaufender V. iliaca communis (v. a. bei Segmentationsstörungen im vorletzten Bewegungssegment).

Operationstechnik

Über einen kleinen Hautschnitt im Bereich der linken Flanke und Wechselschnitttechnik durch die Bauchwandmuskulatur retroperitoneales Eingehen auf die laterale anteriore Lendenwirbelsäule monosegmental bzw. von L1–L5. Retraktion des M. psoas und Ausräumen des Bandscheibenfaches ggf. mit Durchtrennung des vorderen Längsbandes. Interkorporelles Release und Interposition eines Implantates zur ventralen Korrekturspondylodese.

Weiterbehandlung

Frühmobilisation nach dorsaler Instrumentation nach Abklingen der Narkose unter Thromboseprophylaxe. Leichte Kost bis zum ersten Stuhlgang. Tragen einer rumpfstabilisierenden Orthese je nach Art und Ausdehnung des Eingriffes bis zu 12 Wochen. Keine Einschränkungen bezüglich Gehstrecke, Stehen und Sitzen unmittelbar postoperativ nach Schmerzvorgabe.

Ergebnisse

Es wurden 15 konsekutive Patienten mit degenerativer lumbaler Skoliose im Sinne einer ventrodorsalen Fusionsoperation versorgt. Die operative ventrale Versorgung beinhaltete 1 bis 4 Segmente. Erfasst wurden die zugangsspezifischen Komplikationen sowie die prä- und postoperativen radiologischen Parameter. Bei keinem der 15 linksseitig retroperitoneal durchgeführten ventralen Zugänge wurden intraoperative oder postoperative zugangsspezifische Komplikationen festgestellt. Im gesamten Patientenkollektiv konnte eine signifikante Reduktion des a.p.-Cobb-Winkels von präoperativ 16° ± 6° auf 3° ± 2° postoperativ (p < 0,001) erreicht werden.

Development and Application of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

The present study reviewed the relevant recent literature regarding the development and application of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF), with a particular focus on its application and associated complications. The study evaluated the rationality of this technique and demonstrated the direction of future research by collecting data on previous operative outcomes and complications. A literature search was performed in Pubmed and Web of Science, including the following keywords and abbreviations: anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF), extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF), oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF), adjacent segment disease (ASD), and adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS). A search of literature published from January 2005 to January 2019 was conducted and all studies evaluating development and application of OLIF were included in the review. According to the literature, the indications for OLIF are various. OLIF has excellent orthopaedic effects in degenerative scoliosis patients and the incidence of bony fusion is higher than for other approaches. It also provides a better choice for revision surgery. It has various advantages in many aspects, but the complications cannot be ignored. As a new minimally invasive technique, the advantages of OLIF are obvious, but further evaluation is needed to compare its operation‐related data with that of traditional open surgery. In addition, more prospective studies are required to compare minimally invasive and open spinal surgery to confirm its specific efficacy, risk, advantages, learning curve, and ultimate clinical efficacy.

Radiographic/MR Imaging Correlation of Spinal Bony Outlines

The human spine is a highly specialized structure that protects the neuraxis and supports the body during movement, but its complex structure is a challenge for imaging. Radiographs can provide fine bony detail, but lack soft tissue definition and can be complicated by overlying structures. MR imaging allow(s) excellent soft tissue contrast, but some bony abnormalities can be difficult to discern. This makes the 2 modalities highly complementary. In this article, the authors discuss the correlation between radiographic and MR imaging appearances focusing first on disease affecting the vertebral body itself, its surrounding structures, and finally global spinal alignment.

The rate of fusion for stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) has been used for treatment of a variety of spinal conditions including degenerative disc disorders and low-grade spondylolisthesis. Expected fusion rate of stand-alone ALIF constructs is currently unclear. The aim of this study was to examine the fusion rate for ALIF without supplemental posterior fusion or instrumentation (stand-alone ALIF).

METHODS

We queried the MEDLINE, COCHRANE, and EMBASE databases for all literature related to spine fusion rates using a stand-alone ALIF procedure with a publication cutoff date of July 19, 2018. Supplementary combinations of search terms included spine, fusion, fixation, rate(s), and arthrodesis. ALIF surgery was considered stand-alone when not paired with supplemental posterior fusion or posterior spinal instrumentation. Nonhuman and non-English publications were excluded. Cohort fusion rate differences were calculated using Student t test with significance assigned if p value was less than .05.

RESULTS

Title and abstract level review required assessing 840 unique publications. Across the 55 studies that met the inclusion criteria of this systematic review, 5,517 patients and 6,303 vertebral levels were fused. The overall weighted average patient fusion rate following stand-alone ALIF was 88.2% (range: 16.6%-100%). In the 31 studies with at least 50 subjects, the weighted average fusion rate following stand-alone ALIF was 88.6% (range: 57.5%-99.0%). Use of anterior fixation plate devices yielded a fusion rate of 94.2%. Newer zero-profile interbody implants had a fusion rate of 89.2%. Fusion rates were lower in studies with 50% or more subjects having positive smoking and worker's compensation status, however these results were found to be statistically insignificant (p>.05). Fusion rate for subjects in the eight rhBMP-2 study groups was 94.4% (n=889) compared with 84.8% (n=3,102) in 38 study groups without rhBMP-2 used.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available data, stand-alone ALIF procedures yield high fusion rates overall. Fusion failure and pseudoarthrosis rates are higher in study populations involving a high percentage of smokers or positive workers compensation status. Allograft utilization does not significantly improve fusion rate when compared with autograft in stand-alone ALIF constructs.

Complications and Prevention Strategies of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion Technique

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the early complications and causes of oblique lateral interbody fusion, and put forward preventive measures.

METHODS

There were 235 patients (79 males and 156 females) analyzed in our study from October 2014 to May 2017. The average age was 61.9 ± 0.21 years (from 32 to 83 years). Ninety-one cases were treated with oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) alone (OLIF alone group) and 144 with OLIF combined with posterior pedicle screw fixation through the intermuscular space approach (OLIF combined group). In addition, 137/144 cases in the combined group were primarily treated by posterior pedicle screw fixation, while the treatments were postponed in 7 cases. There were 190 cases of single fusion segments, 11 of 2 segments, 21 of 3 segments, and 13 of 4 segments. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were observed.

RESULTS

Average follow-up time was 15.6 ± 7.5 months (ranged from 6 to 36 months). Five cases were lost to follow-up (2 cases from the OLIF alone group and 3 cases from the OLIF combined group). There were 7 cases of vascular injury, 22 cases of endplate damage, 2 cases of vertebral body fracture, 11 cases of nerve injury, 18 cases of cage sedimentation or cage transverse shifting, 3 cases of iliac crest pain, 1 case of right psoas major hematoma, 2 cases of incomplete ileus, 1 case of acute heart failure, 1 case of cerebral infarction, 3 case of left lower abdominal pain, 9 cases of transient psoas weakness, 3 cases of transient quadriceps weakness, and 8 cases of reoperation. The complication incidence was 32.34%. Thirty-three cases occurred in the OLIF alone group, with a rate of 36.26%, and 43 cases in the group of OLIF combined posterior pedicle screw fixation, with a rate of 29.86%. Fifty-seven cases occurred in single-segment fusion, with a rate of 30.0% (57/190), 4 cases occurred in two-segment fusion, with a rate of 36.36% (4/11), 9 cases occurred in three-segment fusion, with a rate of 42.86% (9/21), and 6 cases occurred in four-segment fusion, with a rate of 46.15% (6/13).

CONCLUSION

In summary, OLIF is a relatively safe and very effective technique for minimally invasive lumbar fusion. Nonetheless, it should be noted that OLIF carries the risk of complications, especially in the early stage of development.

Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Reaction Bonded Silicon Nitride Implants: Long-Term Case Series of the First Synthetic Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Spacer Implanted in Humans

BACKGROUND

In this study, a historical case series is reported of reaction bonded silicon nitride (Si₃N₄) implants for anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) for a patient population of 30 and surgery levels L3/4, L4/5, and/or L5/S1. Before the study, the only work on Si₃N₄ as a biomedical material was associated preliminary work, which involved animal trials using a rabbit model. The objective was to undertake the first use of Si₃N₄ as a biomedical material for humans, as an implant for ALIF.

METHODS

The Si₃N₄ implants were prepared by die-pressing silicon powder and reaction bonding in 95 N₂/5 H₂ at ∼1400°C for ∼50 hours. The surgeries involved a retroperitoneal approach for L3/4 and L4/5 levels and a transperitoneal approach for L5/S1 level. The patient follow-up involved assessment of radiologic fusion up to 30 years and clinical outcomes to 10 years.

RESULTS

The reaction bonded Si₃N₄ implants were found to be biologically safe and to show high fusion rates with minimal subsidence, no abnormal reaction, and no other complications. The primary outcome measure, visual analog scale back pain, improved from a preoperative mean of 8.4 (range, 6-10) to a mean of 3.7 (range, 0-9) at 5 years and a mean of 4.9 (range, 0-9) at 10 years. The Oswestry Disability Index improved from a preoperative mean of 48 (range, 26-84) to a mean of 35 (range, 4-76) at 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that Si₃N₄ is biologically safe in the long-term, with capacity for excellent radiologic osseointegration.

Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Historical Overview and a Future Perspective

: In this historical study we present an overview of lumbar interbody fusion surgery, which is one of the most commonly performed instrumented spinal fusion surgeries. The present article focuses on the history of lumbar interbody fusion surgery, starting from the foundation which was laid in the 19th and 20th century until today. The development of material and techniques evolved from simple wiring to the combination of transforaminal interbody fusion with polyether ether ketone cages and pedicle screw fixation with poly axial screws. The possibilities of instrumented spinal fusion grew during the past 100 years, and a considerable increase in instrumented spinal surgery was seen over the past decades. Today, gain lies in perfection of techniques and deliberate indication and development of guidelines. Therefore, more standardized studies on instrumented spinal surgery are needed to be done and techniques should be personalized on the patients' specific needs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A.

ALIF WITH AUTO-LOCKING CAGE WITHOUT SUPPLEMENTATION - TOMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS OF INTERBODY BONE FUSION

ABSTRACT Objective: The objective of this work is to study the fusion rate and complications of the mini-ALIF with an auto-locking device at the L5-S1 level. Methods: Retrospective and radiological study. The inclusion criteria were mini-ALIF in L5-S1 with auto-locking cage, DDD and/or low grade spondylolisthesis. The exclusion criteria were posterior/anterior supplementation; lack of 12-month follow-up images, and previous surgery at L5-S1 level. The primary endpoint was fusion assessed in CT images and/or lateral lumbar flexion/extension radiographs. The secondary endpoint was the revision surgery due to device movement/migration or pseudoarthrosis. Lumbar TCs and radiographs were analyzed during 12 months of follow-up. Fusion was defined according to Bridwell/Lenke classification. Results: Sixty-one cases were included in this study. Complete or ongoing fusion was found in 57 cases (93%). Forty-two of the 61 levels (65%) were completely fused after 12 months. Fifteen levels (28%) had evident bone growth, two levels (3%) showed lysis lines around the implant, and two levels (3%) presented lysis lines and depression. Reoperation for pedicular screw supplementation was necessary in two cases (3%), one with vertebral sliding progression (12 months), and one with symptomatic micro-movement (six months). No implant has undergone migration or expulsion of the disc space. Conclusions: Mini-ALIF in L5-S1 level using an auto-blocking interbody implant construction in cases of low segmental instability results in good interbody fusion index and low failure rate, even without the need for further supplementation, but should not be applied indiscriminately. Evidence Level: IV. Type of study: Case series.

Previously unreported complications associated with integrated cage screws following anterior lumbar interbody fusion: report of 2 cases

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is a widely performed surgical treatment for various lumbar spine pathologies. The authors present the first reports of virtually identical cases of complications with integrated screws in stand-alone interbody cages. Two patients presented with the onset of S-1 radiculopathy due to screw misplacements following an ALIF procedure. In both cases, an integrated screw from the cage penetrated the dorsal aspect of the S-1 cortical margin of the vertebra, extended into the neural foramen, and injured the traversing left S-1 nerve roots. Advanced neuroimaging findings indicated nerve root impingement by the protruding screw tip. After substantial delays, radiculopathic symptoms were treated with removal of the offending instrumentation, aggressive posterior decompression of the bony and ligamentous structures, and posterolateral fusion surgery with pedicle screw fixation. Postoperative radiographic findings demonstrated decompression of the symptomatic nerve roots via removal of the extruded screw tips from the neural foramina.

Understanding Retroperitoneal Anatomy for Lateral Approach Spine Surgery

Lateral approach spine surgery provides effective interbody stabilization, and correction and indirect neural decompression with minimal-incision and less invasive surgery compared with conventional open anterior lumbar fusion. It may also avoid the trauma to paraspinal muscles or facet joints found with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion. However, because lateral approach surgery is fundamentally retroperitoneal approach surgery, it carries potential risk to intra- and retroperitoneal structures, as seen in a conventional open anterior approach. There is an innovative lateral approach technique that reveals different anatomical views; however, it requires reconsideration of the traditional surgical anatomy in more detail than a traditional open anterior approach. The retroperitoneum is the compartmentalized space bounded anteriorly by the posterior parietal peritoneum and posteriorly by the transversalis fascia. The retroperitoneum is divided into three compartments by fascial planes: anterior and posterior pararenal spaces and the perirenal space. Lateral approach surgery requires mobilization of the peritoneum and its content and accurate exposure to the posterior pararenal space. The posterior pararenal space is confined anteriorly by the posterior renal fascia, anteromedially by the lateroconal fascia, and posteriorly by the transversalis fascia. The posterior renal fascia, the lateroconal fascia or the peritoneum should be detached from the transversalis fascia and the psoas fascia to allow exposure to the posterior pararenal space. The posterior pararenal space, however, does not allow a clear view and identification of these fasciae as this relationship is variable and the medial extent of the posterior pararenal space varies among patients. Correct anatomical recognition of the retroperitoneum is essential to success in lateral approach surgery. Spine surgeons must be aware that the retroperitoneal membrane and fascia is multilayered and more complex than is commonly understood. Preoperative abdominal images would facilitate more efficient surgical considerations of retroperitoneal membrane and fascia in lateral approach surgery.

Stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion - complications and perioperative results

OBJECTIVES

Historically, anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) was related to high rates of intraoperative complications and adverse events related to interbody devices. In recent decades, there have been technical adjustments, and cages that are more suitable have emerged. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and complication rate of the use of stand-alone mini-ALIF using a self-locking cage.

METHODS

Retrospective single center study. Inclusion criteria: retroperitoneal mini-ALIF for single-level fusion (L5S1); self-locking cage; DDD/stenosis and grade I spondylolisthesis. Exclusion criteria: posterior supplementation, previous fusion/arthroplasty. Endpoints: surgery data, intraoperative and perioperative adverse events related both to surgical access and to the intersomatic device.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven cases were enrolled. Median surgical time was 90 min; median blood loss was 100 mL. The median length of stay in the ICU was zero days; median hospital stay was one day. Ten cases had an adverse event (11.5%): four major adverse events (4.6%; 3 L bleeding; DVT; retroperitoneal haematoma; incisional hernia), and seven minor events (8%; peritoneum injury; minor vascular injury; events related to the cage). No cases of retrograde ejaculation were observed. There was improvement in pain, physical restriction, and quality of life (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The mini-ALIF procedure performed for single-level fusion at the distal lumbar level demonstrated low adverse event rates related to both the surgical approach and to the intersomatic device, with reduced hospital stay and satisfactory perioperative clinical results.

Technical description of oblique lateral interbody fusion at L1-L5 (OLIF25) and at L5-S1 (OLIF51) and evaluation of complication and fusion rates

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) procedure is aimed at mitigating some of the challenges seen with traditional anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and transpsoas lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), and allows for interbody fusion at L1-S1.

PURPOSE

The study aimed to describe the OLIF technique and assess the complication and fusion rates.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

The sample is composed of 137 patients who underwent OLIF procedure.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The outcome measures were adverse events within 6 months of surgery: infection, symptomatic pseudarthrosis, hardware failure, vascular injury, perioperative blood transfusion, ureteral injury, bowel injury, renal injury, prolonged postoperative ileus (more than 3 days), incisional hernia, pseudohernia, reoperation, neurologic deficits (weakness, numbness, paresthesia), hip flexion pain, retrograde ejaculation, sympathectomy affecting lower extremities, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction, pneumonia, and cerebrovascular accident. The outcome measures also include fusion and subsidence rates based on computed tomography (CT) done at 6 months postoperatively.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review of 150 consecutive patients was performed to examine the complications associated with OLIF at L1-L5 (OLIF25), OLIF at L5-S1 (OLIF51), and OLIF at L1-L5 combined with OLIF at L5-S1 (OLIF25+OLIF51). Only patients who had at least 6 months of postoperative follow-up, including CT scan at 6 months after surgery, were included. Independent radiology review of CT data was performed to assess fusion and subsidence rates at 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 137 patients underwent fusion at 340 levels. An overall complication rate of 11.7% was seen. The most common complications were subsidence (4.4%), postoperative ileus (2.9%), and vascular injury (2.9%). Ileus and vascular injuries were only seen in cases including OLIF51. No patient suffered neurologic injury. No cases of ureteral injury, sympathectomy affecting the lower extremities, or visceral injury were seen. Successful fusion was seen at 97.9% of surgical levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Oblique lateral interbody fusion is a safe procedure at L1-L5 as well as L5-S1. The complication profile appears acceptable when compared with LLIF and ALIF. The oblique trajectory mitigates psoas muscle and lumbosacral plexus-related complications seen with the lateral transpsoas approach. Furthermore, there is a high fusion rate based on CT data at 6 months.

Mini-open Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation Following Posterior Instrumentation

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to evaluate, clinically and radiographically, the efficacy of mini-open retroperitoneal anterior lumbar discectomy followed by anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) for recurrent lumbar disc herniation following primary posterior instrumentation.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Recurrent disc herniation following previous disc surgery occurs in 5 to 15% of cases. This is often treated by further surgical intervention where posterior approach is generally preferred. However, posterior surgery may be problematic if the initial surgery involved posterior instrumentation. An anterior approach may be indicated in these patients, and recent findings suggest that a "mini-open" procedure may have some benefits when compared with traditional open techniques and their associated morbidities.

METHODS

A total of 35 recurrent lumbar disc herniation patients (10 male, 25 female) following primary posterior instrumentation with an average age of 52.8 years (range: 34-70 yrs) who underwent the mini-open ALIF procedures between August 2001 and February 2012 were evaluated retrospectively. The ALIF was performed at the levels L4-L5 (n = 14), L5-S1 (n = 15), or both L4-L5 and L5-S1 (n = 6). Visual Analog pain Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) together with radiological results were assessed.

RESULTS

The mean operating time, intraoperative estimated blood loss, and hospital stay were 115 minutes, 70 mL, and 6 days, respectively. No blood transfusion was needed. Transient complication was recorded in two patients. Postoperative follow-up was a minimum 24.3 months. VAS score and ODI percentage decreased significantly from 7.9 ± 0.8 and 78.8% ± 12.4% pre-operatively to 1.4 ± 0.6 and 21.7 ± 4.2% at final follow-up, respectively. There was no neurological worsening and radicular pain improved significantly compared with pre-operation in all the patients. Computed tomographic reconstruction 12 and 24 months after surgery showed bony fusion, normal position, and morphology of the fusion cage in all patients.

CONCLUSION

Mini-open retroperitoneal ALIF is an effective treatment for patients with recurrent lumbar disc herniation following primary posterior instrumentation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

The Influence of Common Medical Conditions on the Outcome of Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

The authors retrospectively reviewed a consecutive series of 231 patients with anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF).

OBJECTIVE

To determine the correlations among common medical conditions, demographics, and the natural history of lumbar surgery with outcomes of ALIF.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Multiple spinal disorders are treated with ALIF with excellent success rates. Nonetheless, adverse outcomes and complications related to patients' overall demographics, comorbidities, or cigarette smoking have been reported.

METHODS

The age, sex, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, history of smoking or previous lumbar surgery, operative parameters, and complications of 231 patients who underwent ALIF were analyzed. Regression analyses of all variables with complications and surgical outcomes based on total Prolo scores were performed. Two models predicting Prolo outcome score were generated. The first model used BMI and sex interaction, whereas the second model used sex, level of surgery, presence of diabetes mellitus, and BMI as variables.

RESULTS

At follow-up, the rate of successful fusion was 99%. The overall complication rate was 13.8%, 1.8% of which occurred intraoperatively and 12% during follow-up. The incidence of complications failed to correlate with demographics, comorbidities, smoking, or previous lumbar surgery (P>0.5). ALIF at T12-L4 was the only factor significantly associated with poor patient outcomes (P=0.024). Both models successfully predicted outcome (P=0.05), although the second model did so only for males.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical level of ALIF correlated with poor patient outcomes as measured by Prolo functional scale. BMI emerged as a significant predictor of Prolo total score. Both multivariate models also successfully predicted outcomes. Surgical or follow-up complications were not associated with patients' preoperative status.

Evolution of Design of Interbody Cages for Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is one of the surgical procedures for the relief of chronic back pain, radiculopathy and neurogenic claudication in patients with degenerative lumbar spine disease that is refractory to conservative therapy, low-grade spondylolisthesis and pseudo arthrosis. Over the past half century, both the surgical techniques and instrumentation required for ALIF have changed significantly. In particular, the designs of ALIF cage and the materials used have evolved dramatically, the common goal being to improve fusion rates and optimize clinical outcomes. The increasing popularity of ALIF is reflected by the increasing abundance of published studies reporting clinical outcomes, surgical techniques and grafting options for ALIF. Developments in cage designs include cylindrical Bagby and Kuslich, cylindrical ray, cylindrical mesh, lumbar-tapered, polyethyl-etherketone cage and integral fixation cages. Biologic implants include bone dowels and femoral ring allografts. Methods for optimization of cage design have included cage dimensions, use of novel composite cage materials and integral fixation technologies. However, the historical development and evolution of cages used for ALIF has not been extensively documented. This article therefore aims to provide an overview of the historical basis for the anterior approach, evolution in design of ALIF cage implants and potential future research directions.