Parameters influencing the outcome after total disc replacement at the lumbosacral junction. Part 2: distraction and posterior translation lead to clinical failure after a mean follow-up of 5 years

Analysis of factors impacting inter-body fusion cage subsidence following an oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) stand-alone procedure

BackgroundLumbar oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF stand-alone) procedures have become a common treatment for various spinal conditions, including spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis. However, cage subsidence following OLIF stand-alone procedures is a significant concern that can compromise the surgical outcomes.ObjectiveTo investigate the occurrence of cage subsidence following OLIF procedures and identify the relevant factors influencing cage subsidence.MethodA retrospective analysis was conducted on 86 patients who underwent elective OLIF stand-alone procedures at the Affiliated People's Hospital of Qingdao University between 2019 and 2023. Patients were categorized into two groups based on disc height (DH) subsidence: cage non-subsidence group (< 2 mm) and cage subsidence group (> 2 mm). General and imaging data were collected pre-surgery, post-surgery, and at six months follow-up. Single-factor analysis identified factors influencing cage subsidence, followed by multi-factor regression analysis on these variables to determine their impact.ResultsWhen the degree of DH subsidence in the last follow-up (M6) was evaluated, among the 86 patients (102 segments), 26 patients (25.49%) fulfilled the criteria for cage subsidence. Factors with clinical and statistical significance in the single-factor analysis were incorporated into the multi-factor analysis, and it was found that the mean CT value of the concerned segment, multifidus area, and severe multifidus atrophy were relevant risk factors for cage subsidence; the protective factors for cage subsidence were degree III zygapophyseal joint degeneration, posterior cage position, and end-plate inflammation sclerosis (P < 0.05).ConclusionSurgeons should be cautious in preoperatively identifying patients at risk of cage subsidence, particularly those with a low mean CT value of the concerned segment or severe multifidus atrophy. During surgery, selecting a cage of adequate length to span the epiphyseal ring and align with the original DH can help protect paravertebral muscles from iatrogenic injury and reduce the risk of cage subsidence.

Risk Factors of Cage Subsidence Following Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the risk factors for cage subsidence (CS) after oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF).

METHODS

The cohort and case-control studies which reporting potential risk factors for CS following OLIF were searched in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from database inception to June 17, 2023. Two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of the literature according to the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. RevMan5.3 software was used for Meta analysis. χ2 statistics and I2 statistics were used to evaluate heterogeneity, and the analysis results were represented by forest plots.

RESULTS

A total of 8 studies with 280 cases of CS from 832 patients who underwent OLIF met the inclusion criteria. Elderly patients over 60 years old (odds ratio [OR] 2.44, 95% CI 1.38-4.31, P = 0.002), osteoporosis (OR 4.18, 95% CI 2.30-7.61, P = 0.002), end plate injury (OR 5.72, 95% CI 2.32-14.11, P = 0.0002), and overdistraction of intervertebral space (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.3 2-2.11, P < 0.0001) were potential risk factors, while Hounsfield units value of the vertebral body (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95-1.00, P = 0.02) is a protective factor. The number of operative segments did not increase the risk of CS.

CONCLUSIONS

Older age, osteoporosis, endplate injury, and overdistraction of the intervertebral space may increase the risk of CS after OLIF. Although the incidence rate of CS is low, implementing effective preventions is a priority for clinicians based on these risk factors.

What can we learn from long-term studies on chronic low back pain? A scoping review

PURPOSE

A scoping review was conducted with the objective to identify and map the available evidence from long-term studies on chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP), to examine how these studies are conducted, and to address potential knowledge gaps.

METHOD

We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE up to march 2021, not restricted by date or language. Experimental and observational study types were included. Inclusion criteria were: participants between 18 and 65 years old with non-specific sub-acute or chronic LBP, minimum average follow-up of > 2 years, and studies had to report at least one of the following outcome measures: disability, quality of life, work participation, or health care utilization. Methodological quality was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project quality assessment. Data were extracted, tabulated, and reported thematically.

RESULTS

Ninety studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies examined invasive treatments (72%), conservative (21%), or a comparison of both (7%). No natural cohorts were included. Methodological quality was weak (16% of studies), moderate (63%), or strong (21%) and generally improved after 2010. Disability (92%) and pain (86%) outcomes were most commonly reported, followed by work (25%), quality of life (15%), and health care utilization (4%). Most studies reported significant improvement at long-term follow-up (median 51 months, range 26 months-18 years). Only 10 (11%) studies took more than one measurement > 2 year after baseline.

CONCLUSION

Patients with persistent non-specific LBP seem to experience improvement in pain, disability and quality of life years after seeking treatment. However, it remains unclear what factors might have influenced these improvements, and whether they are treatment-related. Studies varied greatly in design, patient population, and methods of data collection. There is still little insight into the long-term natural course of LBP. Additionally, few studies perform repeated measurements during long-term follow-up or report on patient-centered outcomes other than pain or disability.

Incidence and Resolution Strategies for Early-Onset Postoperative Leg Pain Following Lumbar Total Disc Replacement

BACKGROUND

Lumbar total disc replacement (TDR) has produced results similar or superior to fusion in treating symptomatic disc degeneration. Some patients have reported onset of leg pain early after surgery. Little information is available specifically on this problem. The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence of early-onset postoperative leg pain following lumbar TDR and to describe strategies for its treatment.

METHODS

The study was based on a post hoc analysis of prospectively collected adverse event data from 283 patients in the activL Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption study. Early-onset leg pain was defined as occurring between 0 and 4 weeks postprocedure, and the baseline visual analog scale score in the affected leg(s) was <25 (of 100). The treatment types these patients received were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among 283 patients, 26 (9.2%) had an early-onset leg pain event. The majority of these events resolved (20/26, 76.9%). Of those resolving, 55% (11/20) did so within 3 months. Most patients received at least 1 drug treatment for leg pain (92.3%). Of those receiving drug therapy, the most common type was neurogenic (61.5%), followed by narcotics (46.2%). Steroid use was prescribed in 30.8%. The majority of resolved cases were not on narcotics and resolved with neurogenic drugs. Three patients went on to have surgery, none of whom benefited from it. Age, body mass index, and baseline disability scores were predictive of time to resolution.

CONCLUSION

Early-onset postoperative leg pain occurred in approximately 10% of lumbar TDR patients. The majority of events resolved, often within 3 months. Treatment with conservative care, including medication(s), was more effective in resolving symptoms rather than surgery.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study provides useful information for providers and patients on the incidence, treatment, and resolution of leg pain with onset after lumbar TDR and not related to direct neural compression identified by imaging.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

Accuracy of various fluoroscopic landmarks for determination of midline implant placement within the cervical disc space

PURPOSE

The traditional teaching has been that proper function of a cervical disc replacement is dependent upon appropriate placement, which includes centering the device in the coronal plane. The purpose of this study was to identify the most reliable anatomical landmark for determining midline placement of an implant within the cervical disc space under fluoroscopy.

METHODS

Digital fluoroscopy images were taken for each cervical level at 0 °, 2.5 °, 5 °, 7.5 °, 10 °, and 15 ° from the mid-axis by rotating the C-arm beam of six cadavers. Thin-slice CT scanning of the same levels was subsequently performed. Three independent reviewers measured the distance between anatomic structures: (a) tip of the right uncinate; (b) medial border of the right pedicle; and (c) center of the spinous processes for different x-ray angles across cervical levels C3-7.

RESULTS

Both the uncinate and pedicle demonstrated superior overall accuracy to that of the spinous process (p ≤ 0.02) at all angles except at 0 ° for the pedicle where the difference was not statistically significant. Overall (pooled C3-7), the accuracy of the uncinate did not differ significantly from that of the pedicle at any fluoroscopic angle. The center of the spinous process measurement was particularly sensitive to deviations from the perfect anteroposterior fluoroscopy image.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this investigation suggest that the tip of the uncinate and the medial border of the pedicle are more accurate measures of midline in the cervical spine than the center of the spinous process and are less susceptible to inadvertent off-axis imaging.

Validation of Pre-operative Templating for Total Disc Replacement Surgery

Objectives

This was an analytic retrospective observational study. The aims were (1) to validate patient-specific templating process by comparing postoperative range of motion (ROM) with that predicted by the model, (2) to retrospectively determine the ideal implant size, height, configuration, and location to evaluate if the ROM achieved could have been improved, and (3) to correlate postoperative ROM and clinical outcome.

Background

Previous research revealed that after total disc replacement surgery, 34% of patients with less than 5° of postoperative ROM developed adjacent segment disease. The match between patient anatomy (size, facet orientation, disc height) and implant parameters are likely to affect postoperative ROM and clinical outcomes.

Methods

Seventeen consecutive patients were implanted with 22 ProDisc-L devices between 2008 and 2015. Three-dimensional finite element (FE) models of the implanted segment were constructed from preoperative computed tomography scans and virtually implanted with the ProDisc-L implant. ROM was determined with the endpoints of facet impingement in flexion and implant contact in extension. FE templating was used to determine the optimal implant size and location. ROM was then measured directly from flexion and extension radiographs and compared to predicted ROM. Pre and postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) data were used to correlate ROM with clinical outcomes.

Results

No significant difference was found between the actual and predicted ROM. The computational templating procedure identified an optimal ROM that was significantly greater than actual ROM. The ROM in our cohort could have been improved by an average of 1.2° or 12% had a different implant size or position been used.

Conclusions

FE analyses accurately predicted ROM in this cohort and can facilitate selection of the optimal implant size and location that we believe will increase the chance of achieving clinical success with the application of this technology.

Magnetic resonance morphometry of the adult normal lumbar intervertebral space

PURPOSE

This study aims to: (a) quantify and evaluate normal relationships between neighboring spinal units using MR imaging indices, (b) propose an easy-to-apply-and-reproduce method of estimating the correct amount of distraction when surgically restoring a collapsed intervertebral disc, based on individualized measurements.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cross-sectional MR imaging study of 119 adult subjects, aged 18-54, asymptomatic for low back pain. Each of the examinees should demonstrate two or more consecutive intervertebral discs classified as Pfirrmann grade I or II to be included. We measured and studied the relationships of disc height index, Dabbs index, Farfan index, disc convexity index and mean and posterior disc height per spinal level using multiple regression analysis. All measurements were tested for intra- and interobserver agreement by two raters.

RESULTS

DHI, Dabbs, Farfan, and mean disc height had a statistically significant correlation with the spinal level and age. Our results were highly reproducible, with excellent inter- and intraobserver agreement and reliability between two raters (ICC = 0.992 and 0.994, respectively). Furthermore, we expressed each intervertebral space as a percentage of its adjacent space, introducing the coefficient α factor for every intervertebral space.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that a normal values' database to refer during preoperative planning of correction of a degenerated intervertebral disc is feasible. Our study offers new anatomical and radiological insight in terms of spinal measurements and their potential correlation with current surgical techniques. A new approach for calculating disc space as an expression of its adjacent disc has been introduced with various potential applications.

We Need to Talk about Lumbar Total Disc Replacement

BACKGROUND

Replacement of a diseased lumbar intervertebral disc with an artificial device, a procedure known as lumbar total disc replacement (LTDR), has been practiced since the 1980s.

METHODS

Comprehensive review of published literature germane to LTDR, but comment is restricted to high-quality evidence reporting implantation of lumbar artificial discs that have been commercially available for at least 15 years at the time of writing and which continue to be commercially available.

RESULTS

LTDR is shown to be a noninferior (and sometimes superior) alternative to lumbar fusion in patients with discogenic low back pain and/or radicular pain attributable to lumbar disc degenerative disease (LDDD). Further, LTDR is a motion-preserving procedure, and evidence is emerging that it may also result in risk reduction for subsequent development and/or progression of adjacent segment disease.

CONCLUSIONS

In spite of the substantial logistical challenges to the safe introduction of LTDR to a health care facility, the procedure continues to gain acceptance, albeit slowly.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Patients with LDDD who are considering an offer of spinal surgery can only provide valid and informed consent if they have been made aware of all reasonable surgical and nonsurgical options that may benefit them. Accordingly, and in those cases in which LTDR may have a role to play, patients under consideration for other forms of spinal surgery should be informed that this valid procedure exists.

Lumbar total disc arthroplasty: outdated surgery or here to stay procedure? A systematic review of current literature

Background

The purpose of this study was to summarize the available evidence about total lumbar disc replacement (TDR), focusing our attention on four main topics: clinical and functional outcomes, comparison with fusion surgery results, rate of complications and influence on sagittal balance.

Materials and methods

We systematically searched Pubmed, Embase, Medline, Medscape, Google Scholar and Cochrane library databases in order to answer our four main research questions. Effective data were extracted after the assessment of methodological quality of the trials.

Results

Fifty-nine pertinent papers were included. Clinical and functional scores show statistically significant improvements, and they last at all time points compared to baseline. The majority of the articles show there is no significant difference between TDR groups and fusion groups. The literature shows similar rates of complications between the two surgical procedures.

Conclusions

TDR showed significant safety and efficacy, comparable to lumbar fusion. The major advantages of a lumbar TDR over fusion include maintenance of segmental motion and the restoration of the disc height, allowing patients to find their own spinal balance. Disc arthroplasty could be a reliable option in the treatment of degenerative disc disease in years to come.

Level of evidence

II.

Postoperative posterior lumbar muscle changes and their relationship to segmental motion preservation or restriction: a randomized prospective study

OBJECTIVE

To date, it remains unclear whether the preservation of segmental motion by total disc replacement (TDR) or motion restriction by stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) have an influence on postoperative degeneration of the posterior paraspinal muscles or the associated clinical results. Therefore, the purpose of the present prospective randomized study was to evaluate the clinical parameters and 3D quantitative radiological changes in the paraspinal muscles of the lumbar spine in surgically treated segments and superior adjacent segments after ALIF and TDR.

METHODS

A total of 50 patients with chronic low-back pain caused by single-level intervertebral disc degeneration (Pfirrmann Grade ≥ III) and/or osteochondrosis (Modic Type ≤ 2) without symptomatic facet joint degeneration (Fujiwara Grade ≤ 2, infiltration test) of the segments L4-5 or L5-S1 were randomly assigned to 2 treatment groups. Twenty-five patients were treated with a stand-alone ALIF and the remaining 25 patients underwent TDR. For ALIF and TDR, a retroperitoneal approach was used. At 1 week and at 12 months after surgery, CT was used to analyze paraspinal lumbar muscle tissue volume and relative fat content. Residual muscle tissue volume at 12 months and change in the relative fat content were compared between the groups. In addition, clinical parameters (visual analog scale [VAS] for low-back pain and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] Questionnaire Version 2 for function) were compared.

RESULTS

Compared with 1 week after surgery, the radiological analysis at 12 months revealed a small decrease in the posterior muscle volume (the mean decrease was < 2.5%), along with a small increase in the relative fat content (the mean increase was < 1.9%), in both groups at the index and superior adjacent segments. At the adjacent segment, the ALIF group presented significantly less muscle tissue volume atrophy and a smaller increase in fat content compared with the TDR group. At final follow-up, the clinical parameters related to pain and function were significantly improved in both groups compared with 1 week postsurgery, but there were no differences between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Motion restriction via stand-alone ALIF and motion preservation via TDR both present small changes in the posterior lumbar paraspinal muscles with regard to volume atrophy or fatty degeneration at the index and superior adjacent segments. Therefore, although the clinical outcome was not affected by the observed muscular changes, the authors concluded that the expected negative influence of motion restriction on the posterior muscles compared with motion preservation does not occur on a clinically relevant level.

Rotation effect and anatomic landmark accuracy for midline placement of lumbar artificial disc under fluoroscopy

PURPOSE

Total disc arthroplasty can be a viable alternative to fusion for degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine. The correct placement of the prosthesis within 3 mm from midline is critical for optimal function. Intra-operative radiographic error could lead to malposition of the prosthesis. The objective of this study was first to measure the effect of fluoroscopy angle on the placement of prosthesis under fluoroscopy. Secondly, determine the visual accuracy of the placement of artificial discs using different anatomical landmarks (pedicle, waist, endplate, spinous process) under fluoroscopy.

METHODS

Artificial discs were implanted into three cadaver specimens at L2-3, L3-4, and L4-L5. Fluoroscopic images were obtained at 0°, 2.5°, 5°, 7.5°, 10°, and 15° from the mid axis. Computerized tomography (CT) scans were obtained after the procedure. Distances were measured from each of the anatomic landmarks to the center of the implant on both fluoroscopy and CT. The difference between fluoroscopy and CT scans was compared to evaluate the position of prosthesis to each anatomic landmark at different angles.

RESULTS

The differences between the fluoroscopy to CT measurements from the implant to pedicle was 1.31 mm, p < 0.01; implant to waist was 1.72 mm, p < 0.01; implant to endplate was 1.99 mm, p < 0.01; implant to spinous process was 3.14 mm, p < 0.01. When the fluoroscopy angle was greater than 7.5°, the difference between fluoroscopy and CT measurements was greater than 3 mm for all landmarks.

CONCLUSIONS

A fluoroscopy angle of 7.5° or more can lead to implant malposition greater than 3 mm. The pedicle is the most accurate of the anatomic landmarks studied for placement of total artificial discs in the lumbar spine.

ISASS Policy Statement - Lumbar Artificial Disc

PURPOSE

The primary goal of this Policy Statement is to educate patients, physicians, medical providers, reviewers, adjustors, case managers, insurers, and all others involved or affected by insurance coverage decisions regarding lumbar disc replacement surgery.

PROCEDURES

This Policy Statement was developed by a panel of physicians selected by the Board of Directors of ISASS for their expertise and experience with lumbar TDR. The panel's recommendation was entirely based on the best evidence-based scientific research available regarding the safety and effectiveness of lumbar TDR.

ALIF and total disc replacement versus 2-level circumferential fusion with TLIF: a prospective, randomized, clinical and radiological trial

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, randomized trial.

PURPOSE

The treatment of degenerative disc disease (DDD) with two-level fusion has been associated with a reasonable rate of complications. The aim of the present study was to compare (Hybrid) stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) at L5/S1 with total disc replacement at L4/5 (TDR) as an alternative surgical strategy to (Fusion) 2-level circumferential fusion employing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with transpedicular stabilization at L4-S1.

METHODS

A total of 62 patients with symptomatic DDD of segments L5/S1 (Modic ≥2°) and L4/5 (Modic ≤2°; positive discography) were enrolled; 31 were treated with Hybrid and 31 with Fusion. Preoperatively, at 0, 12, and a mean follow-up of 37 months, clinical (ODI, VAS) and radiological evaluations (plain/extension-flexion radiographs evaluated for implant failure, fusion, global and segmental lordosis, and ROM) were performed.

RESULTS

In 26 of 31 Hybrid and 24 of 31 Fusion patients available at the final follow-up, we found a significant clinical improvement compared to preoperatively. Hybrid patients had significantly lower VAS scores immediately postoperatively and at follow-up compared to Fusion patients. The complication rates were low and similar between the groups. Lumbar lordosis increased in both groups. The increase was mainly located at L4-S1 in the Hybrid group and at L1-L4 in the Fusion group. Hybrid patients presented with increased ROM at L4/5 and L3/4, and Fusion patients presented with increased ROM at L3/4, with significantly greater ROM at L3/4 compared to Hybrid patients at follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Hybrid surgery is a viable surgical alternative for the presented indication. Approach-related inferior trauma and the balanced restoration of lumbar lordosis resulted in superior clinical outcomes compared to two-level circumferential fusion with TLIF.

Parameters influencing the outcome after total disc replacement at the lumbosacral junction. Part 1: misalignment of the vertebrae adjacent to a total disc replacement affects the facet joint and facet capsule forces in a probabilistic finite element analysis

PURPOSE

After total disc replacement with a ball-and-socket joint, reduced range of motion and progression of facet joint degeneration at the index level have been described. The aim of the study was to test the hypothesis that misalignment of the vertebrae adjacent to the implant reduces range of motion and increases facet joint or capsule tensile forces.

METHODS

A probabilistic finite element analysis was performed using a lumbosacral spine model with an artificial disc at level L5/S1. Misalignment of the L5 vertebra, the gap size of the facet joints, the transection of the posterior longitudinal ligament, and the spinal shape were varied. The model was loaded with pure moments.

RESULTS

Misalignment of the L5 vertebra reduced the range of motion up to 2°. A 2-mm displacement of the L5 vertebra in the anterior direction already led to facet joint forces of approximately 240 N. Extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation caused maximum facet joint forces between 280 and 380 N, while flexion caused maximum forces of approximately 200 N. A 2-mm displacement in the posterior direction led to capsule forces of approximately 80 N. Additional moments increased the maximum facet capsule forces to values between 120 and 230 N.

CONCLUSIONS

Misalignment of the vertebrae adjacent to an artificial disc strongly increases facet joint or capsule forces. It might, therefore, be an important reason for unsatisfactory clinical results. In an associated clinical study (Part 2), these findings are validated.