Do position and size matter? An analysis of cage and placement variables for optimum lordosis in PLIF reconstruction

Biomechanical effects of cement neck and interspinous process device on locking lumbar interbody cementation

BACKGROUND

Locking lumbar interbody cementation is a surgical option in patients with osteoporosis and low mobility. It can quickly stabilize the spine construct and prevent cage subsidence. However, establishing a stable bridging neck cement between the vertebrae and disc is a key procedure.

METHODS

The validated lumbosacral model analyzed the stress cracking risks for five cement neck diameters under flexion, extension, bending, and twisting. The key indices included disc mobility and neck stress. The biomechanical impact of the interspinous process device was evaluated in high-stress fracture-prone necks.

FINDINGS

The neck diameter has a significant impact on neck stress, especially extension. The maximum neck stress with a 4-mm diameter was very close to the ultimate tensile strength (25.4 MPa) of cement, inducing a high risk of neck fracture. Generally, neck fractures have little effect on disc mobility during flexion, bending, and twisting. However, after the fracture, neck failure led to a 17.1 % increase in disc mobility during extension. If the neck diameter was less than 5 mm on intraoperative radiography, the interspinous process device effectively reduced neck stress by 51.1 % during extension and 31.7 % during bending.

INTERPRETATION

To improve neck strength, the neck diameter should be increased to at least 5 mm during the surgery. If the strength is inadequate, an interspinous process device can be considered to further minimize the risk of fractures, particularly during extension and bending movements.

Understanding the influence of cage and instrumentation strategies with oblique lumbar interbody fusion for grade I spondylolisthesis - A comprehensive biomechanical modeling study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Proper implant selection and placement in oblique lumbar intervertebral fusion (OLIF) are essential to achieve the best possible results for the patient. Key factors such as interbody cage length, height, angle, and material must all be carefully considered to achieve the intended results and minimize complications. Significant challenges remain in selecting the appropriate cage parameters to control spinal alignment while minimizing subsidence risk. Ongoing debates include how long a cage should be to optimize load distribution, as well as how variations in cage angle and placement influence the outcomes.

PURPOSE

This study aims to biomechanically model and investigate how variations in interbody cage dimensions, positioning, and material properties influence indirect decompression, realignment, and resulting stresses involved in cage subsidence.

STUDY DESIGN

Computational biomechanical study of interbody cage and OLIF influence on correction outcomes.

METHODS

A pathological finite element model of the L4-L5 segment presenting a grade I spondylolisthesis was used to simulate 172 different OLIF configurations, evaluating cage position (anterior, central, posterior), angle (6° or 12°), material (PEEK or titanium), length (40 to 60 mm), and height (10 to 14 mm). Bilateral pedicle screw fixation was also tested. The simulated outcomes included disc height, foraminal and spinal canal dimensions, segmental lordosis, vertebral slip, endplate stresses, and displacements under various loading conditions. Statistical comparisons were tested to analyze the influence of model, implant, and surgical parameters on correction outcomes.

RESULTS

Longer (left-to-right dimension) cages (60 mm), which overhang on both sides of the vertebrae and sit on the apophyseal ring, significantly reduced vertebral endplate displacements and stresses by 33% compared to shorter cages (40 mm) (p < 0.05). Posterior cage positioning improved the decompression but raised stresses by 45% and reduced segmental lordosis by 28%. Lowering cage height from 14 to 10 mm and increasing the angle from 6° to 12° reduced endplate stresses by 53% and 33%, respectively. BPS fixation decreased stresses by 36% on average. The trends observed concurred with recently published OLIF clinical studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the biomechanical influence of implant characteristics and positioning on OLIF results and subsidence risks. Competing factors unveil an optimization problem that can be effectively addressed with the help of accurate, robust, and reproducible numerical simulations and regression models. This study further confirms that the developed tools not only accurately simulate the surgical approach and corroborate clinical findings but also offer a relevant framework for in-depth analysis.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Leveraging numerical methods, this study provides biomechanical insights into how variations in cage parameters during OLIF procedures influence outcomes. The findings aim to help clinicians refine strategies to attain desired outcomes (decompression and alignment) while understanding the consequences on the risk of subsidence. By aligning with clinical trends, our results offer valuable explanations and support for biomechanical-based surgical decision-making.

MRI-based L1 Vertebral Bone Quality Scores Predict Cage Subsidence Following Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Similar to L1 CT Hounsfield Units

Cage subsidence is one of the most common complications after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and correlates with inferior bone quality. Studies have reported L1 vertebral bone quality score (VBQ) based on MRI to be a promising alternative to evaluating preoperative bone quality. However, to the knowledge of the authors, no study has examined the correlation between L1 VBQ scores and cage subsidence after TLIF.The purpose of the study was (1) to assess the interrelation between the L1 VBQ score and cage subsidence after TLIF; and (2) to compare L1 VBQ and L1 CT Hounsfield Unit (HU) values in predicting cage subsidence after TLIF.We reviewed patients who had undergone TLIF at one institution between 2012 to 2021. Cage subsidence was measured using postoperative lumbar CT based on cage protrusion through the endplates at more than 2 mm. The L1 VBQ score was calculated by dividing mean L1 signal intensity (SI) by mean SI of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) at L1. The L1 HU value representing bone mineral density (BMD) was measured using computed tomography. We then performed Student's t-test for independent samples and logistic regression analyses for statistical analysis. We also conducted receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to assess the predictive ability of the L1 VBQ score and L1 CT HU.Of 233 participants, cage subsidence was observed in 41 patients (17.6%). Comparison between the characteristics of patients between the group with subsidence and the group without subsidence revealed significant differences in the age, VBQ score, and L1 CT HU. Multivariate logistic regression showed that higher L1 VBQ score (OR = 2.499, 95% CI: 1.205-5.180, p = 0.014) and lower L1 CT HU (OR = 0.960, 95% CI: 0.933-0.987, p = 0.005) were associated with an increased rate of cage subsidence. Area under the curve (AUC) analysis of the L1 VBQ score returned 0.735 (95% CI: 0.620-0.850) and the suitable threshold was 3.424 (sensitivity: 82.9%, specificity: 70.7%). The AUC of L1 CT HU was 0.747 (95% CI: 0.642-0.852) and the suitable threshold was 136.5 (sensitivity: 85.4%, specificity: 56.1%).The present study demonstrates that L1 VBQ score and L1 CT HU are reliable predictors with similar performance for cage subsidence after TLIF.

Pear-Shaped Disc as a Risk Factor for Postoperative Sclerotic Modic Changes After Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVE

Pear-shaped disc could increase the risk of intraoperative end-plate injury, which may lead to postoperative sclerotic Modic Changes (MCs). However, there are no studies on the relationship between pear-shaped disc and postoperative sclerotic MCs. Therefore, this study investigates the risk factors for postoperative sclerotic MCs following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Specifically, the study focuses on the impact of pear-shaped disc on the occurrence of postoperative sclerotic MCs and evaluates its influence on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A total of 411 patients undergoing TLIF between January 2018 and January 2022 were included. Among them, 50 developed postoperative sclerotic MCs, while 361 did not. The two groups were matched based on various parameters. Clinical and radiographic evaluations, including visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), lumbar X-ray, CT, and MRI, were performed. Statistical analysis included independent sample t test, Pearson's chi-square test, and binary logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

After pairing, a total of 100 patients were included, including 50 patients in postoperative sclerotic MCs group and 50 patients in non-MCs group. There were 27 pear-shaped discs in the postoperative sclerotic MCs group, significantly higher than 7 in the non-MCs group (p < 0.001). Besides, BMI, endplate injury, and cage subsidence in the postoperative sclerotic MCs group were significantly higher than those in the non-MCs group, but the fusion rate was significantly lower than that in the non-MCs group. The postoperative and follow-up SL and surgical corrections of SL in postoperative sclerotic MCs group were significantly higher than those in non-MCs group. The independent risk factors identified for postoperative sclerotic MCs include pear-shaped disc and higher BMI.

CONCLUSION

Pear-shaped disc and higher body mass index (BMI) as independent risk factors for postoperative sclerotic MCs. Patients with sclerotic MCs exhibited a lower fusion rate, increased cage subsidence, and poorer symptom improvement compared to those without MCs.

Predictors of Postoperative Segmental and Overall Lumbar Lordosis in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Consecutive Case Series

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Case-Series.

OBJECTIVES

Due to heterogeneity in previous studies, the effect of MI-TLIF on postoperative segmental lordosis (SL) and lumbar lordosis (LL) remains unclear. Therefore, we aim to identify radiographic factors associated with lordosis after surgery in a homogenous series of MI-TLIF patients.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective review identified consecutive patients who underwent single-level MI-TLIF for grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis from 2015-2020. All surgeries underwent unilateral facetectomies and a contralateral facet release with expandable interbody cages. PROs included the ODI and NRS-BP for low-back pain. Radiographic measures included SL, disc height, percent spondylolisthesis, cage positioning, LL, PI-LL mismatch, sacral-slope, and pelvic-tilt. Surgeries were considered "lordosing" if the change in postoperative SL was ≥ +4° and "kyphosing" if ≤ -4°. Predictors of change in SL/LL were evaluated using Pearson's correlation and multivariable regression.

RESULTS

A total of 73 patients with an average follow-up of 22.5 (range 12-61) months were included. Patients experienced significant improvements in ODI (29% ± 22% improvement, P < .001) and NRS-BP (3.3 ± 3 point improvement, P < .001). There was a significant increase in mean SL (Δ3.43° ± 4.37°, P < .001) while LL (Δ0.17° ± 6.98°, P > .05) remained stable. Thirty-eight (52%) patients experienced lordosing MI-TLIFs, compared to 4 (5%) kyphosing and 31 (43%) neutral MI-TLIFs. A lower preoperative SL and more anterior cage placement were associated with the greatest improvement in SL (β = -.45° P = .001, β = 15.06° P < .001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In our series, the majority of patients experienced lordosing or neutral MI-TLIFs (n = 69, 95%). Preoperative radiographic alignment and anterior cage placement were significantly associated with target SL following MI-TLIF.

The rational design, biofunctionalization and biological properties of orthopedic porous titanium implants: a review

Porous titanium implants are becoming an important tool in orthopedic clinical applications. This review provides a comprehensive survey of recent advances in porous titanium implants for orthopedic use. First, the review briefly describes the characteristics of bone and the design requirements of orthopedic implants. Subsequently, the pore size and structural design of porous titanium alloy materials are presented, then we introduce the application of porous titanium alloy implants in orthopedic clinical practice, including spine surgery, joint surgery, and the treatment of bone tumors. Following that, we describe the surface modifications applied to porous titanium implants to obtain better biological functions. Finally, we discuss incorporating environmental responsive mechanisms into porous titanium alloy materials to achieve additional functionalities.

A novel technique for posterior lumbar interbody fusion to obtain a good local lordosis angle: anterior-release posterior lumbar interbody fusion

Herein, we describe a novel posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) technique with annulus fibrosus (AF) release and the use of expandable cages (called "anterior-release PLIF" [ARPLIF]). In this technique, posterior column osteotomy (PCO) and AF release provide excellent intervertebral mobility. AF release involves circumferentially peeling off the AF above or below the endplate between the fixed vertebrae under radiographic guidance without cutting the AF and anterior longitudinal ligament. Subsequently, high-angle variable-angle expandable cages are used to simultaneously expand both sides before inserting the percutaneous pedicle screws and correcting to achieve good local lumbar lordosis. PCO and AF release achieve excellent intervertebral mobility. Intervertebral mobility and simultaneous expansion of both cages disperse the force on the endplates, reducing cage subsidence, and the high-angle cages facilitate high intervertebral angle creation. The novel ARPLIF intervertebral manipulation technique can promote good local lumbar lordosis formation.

MRI-based endplate bone quality score predicts cage subsidence following oblique lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Cage subsidence is a common complication after lumbar interbody fusion surgery, with low bone mineral density (BMD) being a significant risk factor. Endplate bone quality (EBQ) obtained from clinical MRI scans has been deemed reliable in determining regional BMD. However, the association between EBQ score and cage subsidence following oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) has not been clearly established.

PURPOSE

This study aims to assess the relationship between EBQ score and cage subsidence in patients who underwent single-level OLIF.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

A retrospective study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

The study included adults with degenerative spinal conditions who underwent single-level OLIF at our institution.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Cage subsidence, disc height, EBQ score, fusion rate.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed data from patients who underwent single-level OLIF surgery at our institution between October 2017 and August 2022. Postoperative CT scans were used to measure cage subsidence, while the EBQ score was calculated using preoperative noncontrast T1-weighted MRI. To determine the predictive ability of the EBQ score, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was conducted. Additionally, univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

In this study, a total of 88 patients were included and followed up for an average of 15.8 months. It was observed that 32.9% (n=29/88) of the patients experienced cage subsidence. The postsurgery disc height was significantly higher in patients who experienced subsidence compared to those who did not. The mean EBQ scores for patients with nonsubsidence and subsidence were 2.31±0.6 and 3.48±1.2, respectively, and this difference was statistically significant. The ROC curve analysis showed that the AUC for the EBQ score was 0.811 (95% CI: 0.717-0.905). The most suitable threshold for the EBQ score was determined to be 2.318 (sensitivity: 93.1%, specificity: 55.9%). Additionally, the multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed a significant association between a higher EBQ score and an increased risk of subsidence (odds ratio [OR]=6.204, 95% CI=2.520-15.272, p<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that higher preoperative EBQ scores are significantly linked to cage subsidence following single-level OLIF. Preoperative measurement of MRI can serve as a valuable tool in predicting cage subsidence.

Effect of Cage Material and Size on Fusion Rate and Subsidence Following Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVE

Biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (BE-TLIF) is an emerging, minimally invasive technique performed under biportal endoscopic guidance. However, concerns regarding cage subsidence and sufficient fusion during BE-TLIF necessitate careful selection of an appropriate interbody cage to improve surgical outcomes. This study compared the fusion rate, subsidence, and other radiographic parameters according to the material and size of the cages used in BE-TLIF.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, patients who underwent single-segment BE-TLIF between April 2019 and February 2023 were divided into 3 groups: group A, regular-sized three-dimensionally (3D)-printed titanium cages; group B, regular-sized polyetheretherketone cages; and group C, large-sized 3D-printed titanium cages. Radiographic parameters, including lumbar lordosis, segmental lordosis, anterior and posterior disc heights, disc angle, and foraminal height, were measured before and after surgery. The fusion rate and severity of cage subsidence were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

No significant differences were noted in the demographic data or radiographic parameters between the groups. The fusion rate on 1-year postoperative computed tomography was comparable between the groups. The cage subsidence rate was significantly lower in group C than in group A (41.9% vs. 16.7%, p=0.044). The severity of cage subsidence was significantly lower in group C (0.93±0.83) than in groups A (2.20±1.84, p=0.004) and B (1.79±1.47, p=0.048).

CONCLUSION

Cage materials did not affect the 1-year postoperative outcomes of BE-TLIF; however, subsidence was markedly reduced in large cages. Larger cages may provide more stable postoperative segments.

Quantifying the Impact of Spinal Fusion Systems by Multibody Simulation

The established surgical procedure of spinal fusion, in which two or more spinal vertebrae are permanently connected, is constantly increasing worldwide due to new developments in fusion procedures and surgical techniques, as well as improved implants, even though there is still no consensus on whether fusion leads to subsequent degeneration of adjacent spinal segments. We outline the potential biomechanical impacts of mono-segmental and multi-segmental fusion on the spinal structures, especially on the adjacent functional spinal units (FSU), using MultiBody Simulation (MBS). In addition, we investigated the influence of the implant size on the loading situation of the spinal structures by analyzing suitable human MBS models, focusing on a highly detailed spinal region. Our results showed no significant increase in the load on adjacent intervertebral discs (IVD) in the present specific model configurations due to mono-segmental and multi-segmental fusion. Instead, the load was redistributed to the disadvantage of the posterior facet joints in the lumbar spine's upper section. Analysis of the influence of different implant sizes on the spinal structures' load revealed that choosing an implant size that did not correspond to the original IVD space led to a massive increase in the IVD loads.Clinical relevance: gaining new insights to improve surgical outcomes to minimize the risk of adverse effects.

Hounsfield unit for assessing bone mineral density distribution within lumbar vertebrae and its clinical values

Study Design

Retrospective radiological analysis.

Objective

The aim of this study is to evaluate the distribution of bone mineral density (BMD) in lumbar vertebrae using the Hounsfield unit (HU) measurement method and investigate the clinical implications of HU values for assessing lumbar vertebrae BMD.

Method

Two hundred and ninety-six patients were retrospectively reviewed and divided into six groups according to age: Group 1(20-29 years old), Group 2 (30-39 years old), Group 3 (40-49 years old), Group 4 (50-59 years old), Group 5 (60-69 years old), Group 6 (70-79 years old). Six different locations from each vertebra of L1-L5 were selected as regions of interest: the anterior, middle and posterior parts of the upper and lower slices of the vertebrae. HU values were measured for the six regions of interest, followed by statistical analysis.

Results

The HU values of vertebrae showed a decreasing trend from young patients to elderly patients in Group 1 to Group 5. There was no significant difference in HU values among different vertebrae in the same age group. In all age groups, the HU values of the anterior and posterior part of the vertebral body were significantly different from L1 to L3, with the anterior part of the vertebral body having lower HU values than the posterior part. The HU values of the anterior and posterior part of the vertebral body of L4 and L5 were statistically significant only in Group 5 and Group 6, and the HU values of the anterior part of the vertebral body were lower than those of the posterior part. The HU values of posterior part of L4 and L5 in Group6 were higher than those in Group5.

Conclusion

Bone mineral density in the lumbar vertebrae is not uniformly distributed, potentially attributed to varying stress stimuli. The assessment of local HU values in the lumbar spine is of significant importance for surgical treatment.

Comparison of predictive value for cage subsidence between MRI-based endplate bone quality and vertebral bone quality scores following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective propensity-matched study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Cage subsidence after lumbar fusion can lead to many adverse outcomes. Low bone mineral density (BMD) is a widely recognized risk factor for cage subsidence. Conventional methods can predict and evaluate BMD, but there are many shortcomings. Recently, MRI-based assessment of bone quality in specific parts of the vertebral body has been proposed, including scores for vertebral bone quality (VBQ) and endplate bone quality (EBQ). However, the predictive accuracy of the two scoring systems for cage subsidence after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) remains unknown. Therefore, we investigated MRI-based VBQ and EBQ scores for assessing bone quality and compared their predictive value for cage subsidence after TLIF.

PURPOSE

To compare the predictive value between MRI-based VBQ and EBQ scores for cage subsidence after TLIF.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

A retrospective case-control study.

PATIENTS SAMPLE

Patients with degenerative lumbar diseases underwent single-level TLIF at our medical center between 2014 and 2020, all of whom had preoperative MRIs available.

OUTCOMES MEASURES

Cage subsidence, disc height, VBQ score, EBQ score, upper and lower vertebral body bone quality (UL-VBQ) score.

METHODS

Data were retrospectively examined for a consecutive sample of 346 patients who underwent TLIF at our medical center between 2014 and 2020. Patients who subsequently experienced cage subsidence or not were matched to each other based on propensity scoring, and the two matched groups (52 patients each) were compared using conditional logistic regression to investigate the association between the potential radiographic factors and cage subsidence. Scores for VBQ and EBQ were assessed for their ability to predict cage subsidence in the matched patients based on the area under the receiver operative characteristic curve (AUC).

RESULTS

Among matched patients, those who suffered cage subsidence had significantly higher VBQ score (3.7 vs 3.1, p<.001) and EBQ score (5.0 vs 4.3, p<.001), and regression linked greater risk of subsidence to higher VBQ score (OR 4.557, 95% CI 1.076-19.291, p=.039) and higher EBQ score (OR 5.396, 95% CI 1.158-25.146, p=.032). A cut-off VBQ score of 3.4 predicted the cage subsidence among matched patients with an AUC of 0.799, sensitivity of 84.6%, and specificity of 69.2%. A cut-off EBQ score of 4.7 predicted subsidence with an AUC of 0.829, sensitivity of 76.9%, and specificity of 82.7%.

CONCLUSION

Higher VBQ and EBQ scores are associated with a greater risk of cage subsidence following TLIF, and EBQ may perform better because of greater specificity.

Effects of Cage Implantation Depth on Sagittal Parameters and Functional Outcomes in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of L4-L5 Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

OBJECTIVE

In the treatment of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS) with Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) surgery, interbody fusion implants play a key role in supporting the vertebral body and facilitating fusion. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of implantation depth on sagittal parameters and functional outcomes in patients undergoing PLIF surgery.

METHODS

This study reviewed 128 patients with L4-L5 LDS between January 2016 and August 2019. All patients underwent an open PLIF surgery that included intravertebral decompression, implantation of pedicle screws and cage. We grouped according to the position of the center of the cage relative to the L5 vertebral endplate. Patients with the center of the cage located at the anterior 1/2 of the upper end plate of the L5 vertebral body were divided into Anterior group, and located at the posterior 1/2 of the upper end plate of the L5 vertebral body were divided into Posterior group. The lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), sacral slope (SS), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT) and slope degree (SD) was measured for radiographic outcomes. We used the visual analog scale (VAS) and the oswestry disability index (ODI) score to assess functional outcomes. Paired t-test was used to compare imaging and bedside data before and after surgery between the two groups, and independent sample t-test, χ2 test and Fisher exact test were used to compare the data between the two groups.

RESULT

The mean follow-up of Anterior group was 44.13 ± 9.23 months, and Posterior group was 45.62 ± 10.29 months (P > 0.05). The LL, SL, PT, SS, SD and PI-LL after operation showed great improvements, relative to the corresponding preoperative values in both groups (P < 0.05). Compared to Posterior group, Anterior group exhibited far enhanced SL (15.49 ± 3.28 vs. 13.67 ± 2.53, P < 0.05), LL (53.47 ± 3.21 vs. 52.08 ± 3.15, P < 0.05) outcomes and showed depressed PI-LL (8.87 ± 5.05 vs. 10.73 ± 5.39, P < 0.05) outcomes at the final follow-up. Meanwhile, the SL in Anterior group (16.18 ± 3.99) 1 months after operation were also higher than in Posterior group (14.12 ± 3.57) (P < 0.05). We found that VAS and ODI at the final follow-up in Anterior group (3.62 ± 0.96, 25.19 ± 5.25) were significantly lower than those in Posterior group (4.12 ± 0.98, 27.68 ± 5.13) (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with LDS, the anteriorly placed cage may provide better improvement of SL after PLIF surgery. Meanwhile, the anteriorly placed cage may achieve better sagittal parameters of LL and PI-LL and functional outcomes at the final follow-up.

Development of End-to-End Artificial Intelligence Models for Surgical Planning in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is a commonly used technique for treating lumbar degenerative diseases. In this study, we developed a fully computer-supported pipeline to predict both the cage height and the degree of lumbar lordosis subtraction from the pelvic incidence (PI-LL) after TLIF surgery, utilizing preoperative X-ray images. The automated pipeline comprised two primary stages. First, the pretrained BiLuNet deep learning model was employed to extract essential features from X-ray images. Subsequently, five machine learning algorithms were trained using a five-fold cross-validation technique on a dataset of 311 patients to identify the optimal models to predict interbody cage height and postoperative PI-LL. LASSO regression and support vector regression demonstrated superior performance in predicting interbody cage height and postoperative PI-LL, respectively. For cage height prediction, the root mean square error (RMSE) was calculated as 1.01, and the model achieved the highest accuracy at a height of 12 mm, with exact prediction achieved in 54.43% (43/79) of cases. In most of the remaining cases, the prediction error of the model was within 1 mm. Additionally, the model demonstrated satisfactory performance in predicting PI-LL, with an RMSE of 5.19 and an accuracy of 0.81 for PI-LL stratification. In conclusion, our results indicate that machine learning models can reliably predict interbody cage height and postoperative PI-LL.

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with an expandable interbody device: Two-year clinical and radiographic outcomes

Background

The use of interbody cages as an adjunct to lumbar spinal fusion remains an important technique to enhance segmental stability, promote solid arthrodesis, maintain neuroforaminal decompression, and preserve/improve segmental lordosis. Appropriate segmental lumbar lordosis and sagittal balance is well-known to be critical for long-term patient outcomes. This study sought to evaluate the radiographic and clinical results of TLIF in patients using an articulating, expandable cage. Primary endpoint was clinical and radiographic outcomes, including complications, at 12 and 24 months.

Methods

A total of 37 patients underwent open single-level or 2-level TLIF by a single surgeon using an expandable cage with concomitant bilateral pedicle screws and posterolateral arthrodesis. Clinical outcomes included ODI and VAS for back and legs. Radiographic outcomes included pelvic incidence and tilt, lumbar and segmental lordoses, and disc height at the operative level(s). All outcomes were collected at baseline, 2-weeks, 6-weeks, 3-months, 6-months, 12-months, and 24-months postop.

Results

A total of 28 patients were available for analysis. Nine patients failed to follow-up at 24 months. Mean ODI scores showed significant improvement, from pre-to-postoperative at 24 months (55%; p<.0001). VAS for back and legs was significantly lower at 24 months on average by 72 and 79%, respectively (p<.0001 for both). Both segmental and lumbar lordoses significantly improved by 5.3° and 4.2° (p<.0001 and p=.049), respectively. Average disc height improved by 49% or 6.1 mm (p<.001). No device-related complications nor instances of measured subsidence. One patient had a superficial infection, and another had an intraoperatively repaired incidental durotomy.

Conclusions

The use of an expandable cage contributed to improvement in both segmental and lumbar lordosis with no reported complications at 24-month follow-up. All clinical measures significantly improved as well. The expandable cage design represents an effective and safe option to increase cage size and allow significant segmental lordosis correction.

MRI-based Endplate Bone Quality score independently predicts cage subsidence following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Cage subsidence following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has closely correlated with poor vertebral bone quality. Studies have shown better predictive value for cage subsidence by measuring bone density at specific site. However, few studies have been performed to examine the relationship between site-specific MRI bone assessment and cage subsidence in patients who have undergone lumbar interbody fusion. The association between MRI-based assessment of endplate bone quality and cage subsidence after TLIF remains unclear.

PURPOSE

To study the predictive value of MRI-based endplate bone quality (EBQ) score for cage subsidence following TLIF, using QCT bone densitometry as a reference standard.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

A retrospective study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

A total of 280 adult patients undergoing single-segment TLIF for degenerative lumbar spine disease from 2010 to 2020 at our institution who had preoperative T1-weighted MRIs.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Cage subsidence, disc height, endplate bone quality (EBQ) score, bone mineral density, fusion rate.

METHODS

The retrospective study reviewed patients who underwent TLIF at one institution between March 2010 and October 2020. Cage subsidence was measured with postoperative lumbar X-rays based on the cage protrusion through into the superior or inferior end plate or both by more than 2 mm. The EBQ score was measured from preoperative T1-weighted MRI in accordance with the previously reported method.

RESULTS

Cage subsidence was observed in 42 of the 280 patients. Bone densitometry with quantitative computed tomography was visibly reduced in the subsidence group. The mean EBQ scores of the lumbar endplate bone was 4.3±0.9 in nonsubsidence and 5.0±0.6 in subsidence. On multivariate logistic regression, the difference between the two groups was remarkable. Risk of cage subsidence increases significantly with higher EBQ scores (odds ratio [OR]=2.063, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.365-3.120, p=.001) and was an independent factor in predicting subsidence after TLIF. On receiver operating characteristic curve, the AUC for the EBQ score was 0.820 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.755-0.844) and the most suitable threshold for the EBQ score was 4.730 (sensitivity: 76.2%, specificity: 83.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher EBQ scores measured on preoperative MRI correlated significantly with cage subsidence following TLIF. Performing EBQ assessment prior to TLIF may be a valid method of predicting the risk of postoperative subsidence.

Surgical treatment of spondylolisthesis by oblique lumbar interbody fusion and transpedicular screw fixation: Comparison between conventional double position versus navigation-assisted single lateral position

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) procedures involve anterior insertion of interbody cage in lateral position. Following OLIF, insertion of pedicle screws and rod system is performed in a prone position (OLIF-con). The location of the cage is important for restoration of lumbar lordosis and indirect decompression. However, inserting the cage at the desired location is difficult without reduction of spondylolisthesis, and reduction after insertion of interbody cage may limit the amount of reduction. Recent introduction of spinal navigation enabled both surgical procedures in one lateral position (OLIF-one). Therefore, reduction of spondylolisthesis can be performed prior to insertion of interbody cage. The objective of this study was to compare the reduction of spondylolisthesis and the placement of cage between OLIF-one and OLIF-con.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 72 consecutive patients with spondylolisthesis for this study; 30 patients underwent OLIF-one and 42 underwent OLIF-con. Spinal navigation system was used for OLIF-one. In OLIF-one, the interbody cage was inserted after reducing spondylolisthesis, whereas in OLIF-con, the cage was inserted before reduction. The following parameters were measured on X-rays: pre- and postoperative spondylolisthesis slippage, reduction degree, and the location of the cage in the disc space.

RESULTS

Both groups showed significant improvement in back and leg pains (p < .05). Transient motor or sensory changes occurred in three patients after OLIF-con and in two patients after OLIF-one. Pre- and postoperative slips were 26.3±7.7% and 6.6±6.2% in OLIF-one, and 23.1±7.0% and 7.4±5.8% in OLIF-con. The reduction of slippage was 74.4±6.3% after OLIF-one and 65.4±5.7% after OLIF-con, with a significant difference between the two groups (p = .04). The cage was located at 34.2±8.9% after OLIF-one and at 42.8±10.3% after OLIF-con, with a significant difference between the two groups (p = .004).

CONCLUSION

Switching the sequence of surgical procedures with OLIF-one facilitated both the reduction of spondylolisthesis and the placement of the cage at the desired location.

Analysis of risk factors for contralateral symptomatic foraminal stenosis after unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

PURPOSE

To analyze the risk factors of contralateral symptomatic foraminal stenosis (FS) after unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and to guide and standardize the operation process of unilateral TLIF to reduce the occurrence of contralateral symptomatic FS.

METHODS

A retrospective study was undertaken on 487 patients with lumbar degeneration who underwent unilateral TLIF in the Department of Spinal Surgery of Ningbo Sixth Hospital between January 2017 and January 2021, comprising 269 males and 218 females, with a mean age of 57.1 years (range, 48-77 years). Cases of intraoperative improper operations, such as screw deviation, postoperative hematoma, and contralateral disc herniation, were excluded, and cases of nerve root symptoms caused by contralateral FS were analyzed. Post-surgery, 23 patients with nerve root symptoms caused by contralateral FS were categorized as group A, and 60 patients without nerve root symptoms were randomly selected as group B during the same period. The general data (gender, age, body mass index (BMI), bone mineral density (BMD), and diagnosis) and imaging parameters before and after operation (including contralateral foramen area (CFA), lumbar lordosis angle (LL), segmental lordosis angle (SL), disc height (DH), foramen height (FH), foramen width (FW), fusion cage position, and the difference between postoperative and preoperative) were compared between the two groups. Univariate analysis was performed, and multivariate analysis was undertaken through logistics analysis to determine the independent risk factors. Additionally, the clinical outcomes of the two groups were compared immediately before surgery and one year after surgery, using the visual analogue scale (VAS) score and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score for evaluation.

RESULTS

The patients in this study were followed up for a period of 19-25 (22.8atien months. Among them, 23 cases (4.72% incidence) were diagnosed with contralaterally symptomatic FS after the surgery. Univariate analysis indicated significant differences between the two groups in CFA, SL, FW, and cage coronal position. Logistic regression analysis identified preoperative contralateral foramen area (OR = 1.176, 95% CI (1.012, 1.367)), small segmental lordosis angle (OR = 2.225, 95% CI (1.124, 4.406)), small intervertebral foramen width (OR = 2.706, 95% CI (1.028, 7.118)), and cage coronal position not crossing the midline (OR = 1.567, 95% CI (1.142, 2.149)) as independent risk factors for contralateral symptomatic FS after unilateral TLIF. However, there was no statistically significant difference in the pain VAS score between the two groups one year after the operation. In contrast, there was a significant difference in the JOA score between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The identified risk factors for contralateral symptomatic FS after TLIF include preoperative contralateral intervertebral foramen stenosis, a small segmental lordosis angle, a small intervertebral foramen width, and the coronal position of the cage not crossing the midline. For patients with these risk factors, it is recommended to carefully lock the screw rod during the recovery of lumbar lordosis and ensure that the coronal position of the fusion cage is implanted beyond the midline. If necessary, preventive decompression should also be considered. However, this study did not quantify the imaging data for each risk factor, and further research is needed to improve our understanding of the topic.

The Impact of Cage and End plate-Related Factors on Cage Subsidence in Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVES

To identify cage and end plate factors of cage subsidence (CS) in patients who underwent oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) and their association with patient-reported outcomes.

METHODS

Sixty-one patients (43 women and 18 men), with a total of 69 segments (138 end plates) which underwent OLIF at a single academic institution between November 2018 and November 2020, were included. All the end plates were separated into CS and nonsubsidence groups. Cage-related parameters (cage height, cage width, cage insertion level, and cage position) and end plate-related parameters (position of end plate, Hounsfield unit value of the vertebra, end plate concave angle [ECA], end plate injury, and angular mismatch measured with cage/end plate angle [C/EA]) were compared and analyzed using logistic regression to predict CS. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to determine the cutoff points of the parameters.

RESULTS

Postoperative CS was identified in 50 of the 138 end plates (36.2%). The CS group had significantly lower mean Hounsfield unit values of the vertebra, higher rate of end plate injury, lower ECA, and higher C/EA than the nonsubsidence group. ECA and C/EA were identified as independent risk factors for developing CS. The optimal cutoff points for ECA and C/EA were 176.9° and 5.4°, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

An ECA greater than 176.9° and a cage/end plate angular mismatch greater than 5.4° were found to be independent risk factors of postoperative CS after the OLIF procedure. These findings aid in preoperative decision-making and intraoperative technical guidance.

A retrospective study on application of a classification criterion based on relative intervertebral tension in spinal fusion surgery for lumbar degenerative diseases

Background

As an important part of spinal fusion procedure, the selection of fusion cage size is closely related to the curative effect of the surgery. It mainly depends on the clinical experience of surgeons, and there is still a lack of objective standards. The purpose of this study is to propose the concept of relative intervertebral tension (RIT) for the first time and its grading standards to improve the surgical procedures of lumbar interbody fusion.

Methods

This retrospective study was conducted from January 2018 to July 2019. A total of 83 eligible patients including 45 men and 38 women with lumbar degenerative disease underwent transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) were included in this study. A total of 151 fusion segments were divided into group A, group B and group C according to the grading standards of RIT. In addition, parameters of intervertebral space angle (ISA), intervertebral space height (ISH), intervertebral space foramen (IFH), fusion rates, cage-related complications and cage heights were also compared among the three groups.

Results

The ISA in group A was the smallest among three groups in contrast with group C with largest ISA at the final follow-up(P < 0.05). The group A presented the smallest ISH and IFH values(P < 0.05), compared with group B with the largest ISH and IFH values(P < 0.05). These two parameters in the group C were in-between. The fusion rates of group A, group B and group C were 100%, 96.3% and 98.8% at the final follow-up, respectively. No statistical difference in fusion rates and cage-related complications occurred among the three groups(P > 0.05), and a certain correlation between ISH and RIT was also observed.

Conclusions

The concept of RIT and the application of its clinical grading standards could simplify the surgical procedures of spinal fusion and reduce cage-related complications.

Vertebral bone quality score to predict cage subsidence following oblique lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND

Current evidence suggests that the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based vertebral bone quality (VBQ) score is a good parameter for evaluating bone quality. We aimed to assess whether the VBQ score can predict the occurrence of postoperative cage subsidence after oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) surgery.

METHODS

Patients (n = 102) who had undergone single-level OLIF with a minimal follow-up for 1 year were reviewed in this study. Demographic and radiographic data of these patients were collected. Cage subsidence was defined as ≥ 2 mm of cage migration into the inferior endplate, superior endplate, or both. Further, the MRI-based VBQ score was measured on T1-weighted images. Moreover, univariable and multivariable binary logistic regression analyses were performed. Meanwhile, Pearson analysis was used to evaluate the correlation among the VBQ score, average lumbar dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) T-score, and degree of cage subsidence. Furthermore, ad-hoc analysis was used along with receiver operating characteristic curve analysis to assess the predictive ability of the VBQ score and average lumbar DEXA T-score.

RESULTS

Of 102 participants, cage subsidence was observed in 39 (38.24%) patients. According to the univariable analysis, patients with subsidence had older age, higher antiosteoporotic drug use, larger disk height change, a more concave morphology of inferior and superior endplates, higher VBQ score, and lower average lumbar DEXA T-score compared to patients without subsidence. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, a higher VBQ score was significantly associated with an increased risk of subsidence (OR = 23.158 ± 0.849, 95% CI 4.381-122.399, p < 0.001), and it was the only significant and independent predictor of subsidence after OLIF. Moreover, the VBQ score was moderately correlated with the average lumbar DEXA T-score (r = - 0.576, p < 0.001) and the amount of cage subsidence (r = 0.649, p < 0.001). Furthermore, this score significantly predicted cage subsidence with an accuracy of 83.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

The VBQ score can independently predict postoperative cage subsidence in patients undergoing OLIF surgery.

Outcome of Ti/PEEK Versus PEEK Cages in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case-control study.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to present the clinical and radiographical outcomes of the titanium-polyetheretherketone (Ti/PEEK) composite cage compared to those of the standard PEEK cage in patients receiving minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF).

METHODS

Patients receiving 1 level MI-TLIF between October 2015 and October 2017 were included with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. The patients were segregated into 2 groups; Ti/PEEK group and PEEK group. Each patient was propensity-matched using preoperative age, sex, and body mass index. Early fusion rate was evaluated by computed tomography at postoperative 6 months. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores.

RESULTS

After matching, there were 27 patients included in each group. The demographics, diagnosis, and surgical details were not significantly different between the 2 groups. The 6-month rate was 88.9% in Ti/PEEK group. The fusion rate and cage subsidence rate had no difference between the 2 groups. The complication rate in the Ti/PEEK group was comparable to that in the PEEK group. There was no difference in VAS and ODI scores during a 2-year follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of Ti/PEEK composite cage was as safe and effective as the use of PEEK cage in MI-TLIF. The 6-month fusion rate was 88.9%. Our finding revealed comparable clinical results for surgeons using Ti/PEEK composite cages in MI-TLIF compared to those using the PEEK cage.

The impact of cage positioning on lumbar lordosis and disc space restoration following minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate patient and surgical factors that predict increased overall lumbar lordosis (LL) and segmental lordosis correction following a minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) procedure.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of all patients who underwent one- or two-level LLIF. Preoperative, initial postoperative, and 6-month postoperative measurements of LL, segmental lordosis, anterior disc height, and posterior disc height were collected from standing lateral radiographs for each patient. Cage placement was measured utilizing the center point ratio (CPR) on immediate postoperative radiographs. Spearman correlations were used to assess associations between cage lordosis and radiographic parameters. Multivariate linear regression was performed to assess independent predictors of outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 106 levels in 78 unique patients were included. Most procedures involved fusion of one level (n = 50, 64.1%), most commonly L3-4 (46.2%). Despite no differences in baseline segmental lordosis, patients with anteriorly or centrally placed cages experienced the greatest segmental lordosis correction immediately (mean anterior 4.81° and central 4.46° vs posterior 2.47°, p = 0.0315) and at 6 months postoperatively, and patients with anteriorly placed cages had greater overall lordosis correction postoperatively (mean 6.30°, p = 0.0338). At the 6-month follow-up, patients with anteriorly placed cages experienced the greatest increase in anterior disc height (mean anterior 6.24 mm vs posterior 3.69 mm, p = 0.0122). Cages placed more posteriorly increased the change in posterior disc height postoperatively (mean posterior 4.91 mm vs anterior 1.80 mm, p = 0.0001) and at 6 months (mean posterior 4.18 mm vs anterior 2.06 mm, p = 0.0255). There were no correlations between cage lordotic angle and outcomes. On multivariate regression, anterior cage placement predicted greater 6-month improvement in segmental lordosis, while posterior placement predicted greater 6-month improvement in posterior disc height. Percutaneous screw placement, cage lordotic angle, and cage height did not independently predict any radiographic outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

LLIF procedures reliably improve LL and increase intervertebral disc space. Anterior cage placement improves the lordosis angle greater than posterior placement, which better corrects sagittal alignment, but there is still a significant improvement in lordosis even with a posteriorly placed cage. Posterior cage placement provides greater restoration in posterior disc space height, maximizing indirect decompression, but even the anteriorly placed cages provided indirect decompression. Cage parameters including cage height, lordosis angle, and material do not impact radiographic improvement.

TRANSILIAC ENDOSCOPIC ASSISTED ILIF: A CADAVERIC STUDY

ABSTRACT Objective: Demonstrate the feasibility of endoscopic assisted L5S1 intraforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (iLIF) through a transiliac approach. Methods: Ten transiliac iLIF and ten supra iliac iLIF were performed bilaterally at L5S1 in five randomly selected fresh-frozen human cadavers. The following measurements were recorded: distances from the transiliac track to the iliac crest, posterior superior iliac spine, and superior gluteal neurovascular bundle; pelvic parameters; approach angles; cage’s lateral and AP center point ratio (CPR); percentage of the cage crossing the midline in the AP and lateral views. Endplate integrity was assessed through endoscopic visualization. In addition, the facet joint, sacroiliac joint, iliolumbar ligament, and exiting and traversing nerve roots were checked for integrity through anatomic dissection. Results: In the transiliac technique, the axial and coronal approach angles were significantly decreased by 13.5º (95% CI -15.5; -11.5; p value<0.001) and 13.2º (95% CI -15.3; -11.1; p value<0.001), respectively, the sagittal approach angle was significantly increased by 5.4º (95% CI 1.8,8.9; p-value = 0.008), and the AP CPR was significantly higher (MD 0.16; 95% CI 0.12,0.20; p value<0.001). The percentage of the cage crossing the AP view’s midline was increased by 31.6% (95% CI 19.8,43.4; p value<0.001). The integrity of endplates, facet joints, sacroiliac joints, iliolumbar ligament, and exiting and traversing nerve roots was maintained. Conclusion: L5S1 transiliac iLIF is a feasible surgical technique. It allows a more centrally placed interbody cage in the coronal plane without compromising the anterior position in the lateral plane. The integrity of the major anatomic structures at risk was preserved. Evidence Level III: A case-control study.

A biomechanical study shows the direction of compression influences the amount of lordosis gained in lumbar fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Biomechanical model study.

BACKGROUND

Lumbar lordosis is usually lost in the degenerative process, and when lumbar fusion is required, its restoration is one of the modern metrics of a successful operation. We sought to investigate the hypothesis that changing direction of compression during surgical fusion, would gain more lordosis.

METHODS

Using a biomechanical Sawbones™ model we inserted polyaxial pedicle screws from S1 to L4. A rod was placed in the screws without requiring reduction. Markers were attached to the spinous processes to allow photographic analysis of lordosis. Two methods were compared. Method A - caudal screws were locked first and compression proceeded in a cranial direction prior to locking. Method B - cranial screws were locked first and compression proceeded caudally. Increasing levels of surgical invasiveness were tested; intact, interbody cage, inferior facet resection, and Ponte resection and using different rods including: lordotic, hyperlordotic and straight.

FINDINGS

Method B demonstrated to be consistently superior to Method A, regardless of the type of rod used and for every level of surgical invasiveness performed. (P < 0.001).

INTERPRETATION

locking the top screws first was a consistently superior method of compression, gaining more lordosis. To explain this finding we suggest the following: During posterior compression of pedicle screws along a fixed rod, screw motion is limited by the conflict between the fixed lordotic rod position, and the need for the moving screw to move in a kyphotic arc which is determined by the cage which acts as a pivot point.

Análisis radiográfico de los parámetros espinopélvicos obtenidos con el dispositivo de TLIF anterior. Estudio multicéntrico

Objetivo: Comunicar los resultados obtenidos según la posición del dispositivo de TLIF anterior. Materiales y Métodos: Estudio multicéntrico, observacional, analítico, transversal, de recuperación retrospectiva. Se evaluaron los parámetros espinopélvicos prey posoperatorios de espinogramas de 20 pacientes que fueron operados entre septiembre de 2019 y agosto de 2021. Se incluyó a pacientes sometidos a artrodesis lumbar con implante de tipo TLIF anterior. Se excluyó a pacientes sin espinograma pre- oposquirúrgico y más de un dispositivo. Resultados: La media de la lordosis monosegmentaria fue de 13,33° antes de la cirugía y de 18,81° después (p <0,001). La media de la lordosis monosegmentaria fue de 7,32°; 2,95° y 6,24° para las posiciones I, II y III, respectivamente. La media de la altura discal fue de 6,22 mm en el preoperatorio y 11,06 mm en el posoperatorio (p >0,001). Conclusiones: Los resultados de la colocación de este tipo de dispositivos y su relación con la lordosis segmentaria fueron alentadores, se comprendió la importancia de la disposición de estos en el extremo anterior del espacio discal. Nivel de Evidencia: IV

Effects of the cage height and positioning on clinical and radiographic outcome of lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The proper cage positioning and height in lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). This study evaluated their effects on clinical and radiographic outcome measures in patients undergoing LLIF.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study analyzed the characteristics and perioperative data of patients who underwent LLIF between January 2019 and December 2020. Radiographic (lumbar lordosis [LL], foraminal height, disc height [DH], segmental angle [SA], cross-sectional area [CSA] of thecal sac) and clinical (Oswestry Disability Index and Visual Analog Scale) outcomes were assessed preoperatively, postoperatively, and at the last follow-up. The effects of cage height and positioning on these parameters were also investigated.

RESULTS

With a mean follow-up of 12.8 months, 47 patients with 70 operated level were analyzed. Data demonstrated that postsurgical clinical and radiographic outcome measures were significantly better than before surgery(P < 0.05). Cage height and positioning showed no significant difference with regarding to clinical outcome(P > 0.05). Subgroup analysis of the cage positioning showed that DH and SA were better restored by the final follow-up in patients with anteriorly placed cages than those with posteriorly placed cages (P < 0.05). Cages of posterior position showed significantly upgrading cage subsidence (P = 0.047). Cage height subgroup analysis showed that the preoperative forminal height, DH, and SA in the 11-mm cage group were significantly lower than in the 13-mm cage group; however, these parameters were comparable in the two groups postoperatively and at the final follow-up (P > 0.05). Furthermore, the postoperative and final follow-up degrees of DH, SA, and LL have improved in the 11-mm cage group more than the 13-mm cage group. The preoperative, postoperative, and final follow-up LL values in the 11-mm cage group were lower than in the 13-mm cage group(P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Cage height and positioning did not affect the clinical outcomes in the present study. Cages in anterior position showed better restoration in DH, SA and decreased the incidence of cage subsidence. A comparable radiographic outcome can be achieved by inserting an appropriate cage height based on preoperative radiography.

Vertebral bone quality score independently predicts cage subsidence following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Cage subsidence following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has been associated with poor bone quality. Current evidence suggests that the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based vertebral bone quality (VBQ) score correlates with poor bone quality.

PURPOSE

To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess whether the VBQ score can predict the occurrence of postoperative cage subsidence after TLIF surgery.

DESIGN/SETTING

Retrospective single-center cohort.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients undergoing single-level TLIF for degenerative spine disease between February 2014 and October 2021.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Extent of subsidence.

METHODS

Demographic, procedure-related, and radiographic data were collected for study patients. VBQ scores were determined from preoperative T1-weighted MRI. Subsidence was defined as ≥2 mm of migration of the cage into the superior or inferior end plate or both. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to determine the correlation between potential risk factors for subsidence and actual subsidence rates.

RESULTS

Subsidence was observed among 42 of the 74 study patients. The mean VBQ scores were 2.9±0.5 for patients with subsidence and 2.5±0.5 for patients without subsidence. The difference among groups was significant (p=.003). On multivariate logistic regression, a higher VBQ score was significantly associated with an increased risk of subsidence (OR=1.5, 95% CI=1.160-1.973, p=.004) and was the only significant independent predictor of subsidence after TLIF.

CONCLUSION

We found that a higher VBQ score was significantly associated with cage subsidence following TLIF. The MRI-VBQ score may be a valuable tool for assisting in identifying patients at risk of cage subsidence following TLIF.

[Research progress of effect of cage height on outcomes of lumbar interbody fusion surgery]

Objective

To summarize the effect of cage height on outcomes of lumbar interbody fusion surgery and the importance of the cage height selection.

Methods

The related literature was widely reviewed to summarize the research progress on the complications caused by inappropriate height of the cage and the methods of selecting cage height.

Results

Inappropriate height of the cage can lead to endplate injury, cage subsidence, internal fixation failure, adjacent segmental degeneration, over-distraction related pain, insufficient indirect decompression, instability of operation segment, poor interbody fusion, poor sequence of spine, and cage displacement. At present, the selection of the cage height is based on the results of the intraoperative model test, which is reliable but high requirements for surgical experience and hard to standardize.

Conclusion

The inappropriate height of the cage may have an adverse impact on the postoperative outcome of patients. It is important to develop a selection standard of the cage height by screening the related influential factors.

Lordosis loss in degenerative spinal conditions

PURPOSE

To establish whether common degenerative lumbar spine conditions have a predictable sagittal profile and associated range of lordosis. The spinopelvic balance of a normal population and normal ranges are well described in the literature. There is also evidence that certain degenerative conditions can lead to a preponderance of loss of lordosis at specific spinal levels. There is limited literature on the range and magnitude of loss of lordosis for known degenerative lumbar spine pathologies.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of prospectively obtained radiographs from a dual surgeon database was performed and imaging analysed for spinopelvic parameters. Degenerative conditions studied were; Lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (L3/4 and L4/5 analysed separately), L5/S1 degenerative disc disease, L5/S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis. Pelvic incidence, sacral slope, pelvic tilt, segmental and global lumbar lordosis, vertebral lordosis and lumbar vertical axis were measured.

RESULTS

The range of change in segmental lordosis was normally distributed for all studied degenerative spinal conditions except L5/S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis. L5/S1 degenerative disc disease affected younger adults (mean age 37), whilst degenerative spondylolisthesis at L3/4 and L4/5 affected older adults (mean ages 69.5 and 68.9 respectively). Removing an outlying high-grade L5/S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis made the data distribution approach a normal distribution.

CONCLUSION

Most degenerative spinal pathologies cause a normally distributed spectrum of deformity which should be addressed and corrected with a tailored, individualised surgical plan for each patient. Universal treatment recommendations should be interpreted with caution.

X23D-Intraoperative 3D Lumbar Spine Shape Reconstruction Based on Sparse Multi-View X-ray Data

Visual assessment based on intraoperative 2D X-rays remains the predominant aid for intraoperative decision-making, surgical guidance, and error prevention. However, correctly assessing the 3D shape of complex anatomies, such as the spine, based on planar fluoroscopic images remains a challenge even for experienced surgeons. This work proposes a novel deep learning-based method to intraoperatively estimate the 3D shape of patients' lumbar vertebrae directly from sparse, multi-view X-ray data. High-quality and accurate 3D reconstructions were achieved with a learned multi-view stereo machine approach capable of incorporating the X-ray calibration parameters in the neural network. This strategy allowed a priori knowledge of the spinal shape to be acquired while preserving patient specificity and achieving a higher accuracy compared to the state of the art. Our method was trained and evaluated on 17,420 fluoroscopy images that were digitally reconstructed from the public CTSpine1K dataset. As evaluated by unseen data, we achieved an 88% average F1 score and a 71% surface score. Furthermore, by utilizing the calibration parameters of the input X-rays, our method outperformed a counterpart method in the state of the art by 22% in terms of surface score. This increase in accuracy opens new possibilities for surgical navigation and intraoperative decision-making solely based on intraoperative data, especially in surgical applications where the acquisition of 3D image data is not part of the standard clinical workflow.

The SNAP Trial: 2-Year Results of a Double-Blind Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial of a Silicon Nitride Versus a PEEK Cage in Patients After Lumbar Fusion Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES

Lumbar interbody fusion with cages is performed to provide vertebral stability, restore alignment, and maintain disc and foraminal height. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is commonly used. Silicon nitride (Si₃N₄) is an alternative material with good osteointegrative properties. This study was designed to assess if Si₃N₄ cages perform similar to PEEK.

METHODS

A non-inferiority double-blind multicenter RCT was designed. Patients presenting with chronic low-back pain with or without leg pain were included. Single- or double-level instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) using an oblique PEEK or Si₃N₄ cage was performed. The primary outcome was the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). The non-inferiority margin for the RMDQ was 2.6 points on a scale of 24. Secondary outcomes included the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODI), Visual Analogue Scales (VAS), SF-36 Physical Function, patient and surgeon Likert scores, radiographic evaluations for subsidence, segmental motion, and fusion. Follow-up was planned at 3, 6, 12, and 24-months.

RESULTS

Ninety-two patients were randomized (i.e. 48 to PEEK and 44 to Si₃N₄). Both groups showed good clinical improvements on the RMDQ scores of up to 5-8 points during follow-up. No statistically significant differences were observed in clinical and radiographic outcomes. Mean operative time and blood loss were statistically significantly higher for the Si₃N₄ cohort. Although not statistically significant, there was a higher incidence of complications and revisions associated with the Si₃N₄ cage.

CONCLUSIONS

There was insufficient evidence to conclude that Si₃N₄ was non-inferior to PEEK.

The value of Hounsfield units in predicting cage subsidence after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND

Cage subsidence may occur following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and lead to nonunion, foraminal height loss and other complications. Low bone quality may be a risk factor for cage subsidence. Assessing bone quality through Hounsfield units (HU) from computed tomography has been proposed in recent years. However, there is a lack of literature evaluating the correlation between HU and cage subsidence after TLIF.

METHODS

Two hundred and seventy-nine patients suffering from lumbar degenerative diseases from April, 2016 to August, 2018 were enrolled. All underwent one-level TLIF with a minimum of 1-year follow-up. Cage subsidence was defined as > 2 mm loss of disc height at the fusion level. The participants were divided into 2 groups: cage subsidence group (CS) and non-cage subsidence group (non-CS). Bone quality was determined by HU, bone mineral density of lumbar (BMD-l) and femoral (BMD-f) from dual-emission X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). HU of each vertebra from L1 to L4 (e.g., HU1 for HU of L1) and mean value of the four vertebrae (HUm) were calculated. Visual analog scale (VAS) of back/leg pain and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were used to report clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Cage subsidence occurred in 82 (29.4%) cases at follow-ups. Mean age was 50.8 ± 9.0 years with a median follow-up of 18 months (range from 12 to 40 months). A total of 90.3% patients presented fusion with similar fusion rate between the two groups. ODI and VAS in leg were better in non-CS group at last follow-ups. Using receiver operating characteristic curves (ROCs) to predict cage subsidence, HUm provided a larger area under the curve (AUC) than BMD-l (Z = 3.83, P <  0.01) and BMD-f (Z = 2.01, P = 0.02). AUC for HU4 was larger than BMD-f and close to HUm (Z = 0.22, P = 0.481).

CONCLUSIONS

Cage subsidence may indicate worse clinical outcomes. HU value could be a more effective predictor of lumbar cage subsidence compared with T-score of DXA after TLIF.

[Application of three-dimensional printed porous titanium alloy cage and poly-ether-ether-ketone cage in posterior lumbar interbody fusion]

Objective

To compare the effectiveness between three-dimensional (3D) printed porous titanium alloy cage (3D Cage) and poly-ether-ether-ketone cage (PEEK Cage) in the posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF).

Methods

A total of 66 patients who were scheduled to undergo PLIF between January 2018 and June 2019 were selected as the research subjects, and were divided into the trial group (implantation of 3D Cage, n=33) and the control group (implantation of PEEK Cage, n=33) according to the random number table method. Among them, 1 case in the trial group did not complete the follow-up exclusion study, and finally 32 cases in the trial group and 33 cases in the control group were included in the statistical analysis. There was no significant difference in gender, age, etiology, disease duration, surgical segment, and preoperative Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score between the two groups (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, complications, JOA score, intervertebral height loss, and interbody fusion were recorded and compared between the two groups.

Results

The operations of two groups were completed successfully. There was 1 case of dural rupture complicated with cerebrospinal fluid leakage during operation in the trial group, and no complication occurred in the other patients of the two groups. All incisions healed by first intention. There was no significant difference in operation time and intraoperative blood loss between groups (P>0.05). All patients were followed up 12-24 months (mean, 16.7 months). The JOA scores at 1 year after operation in both groups significantly improved when compared with those before operation (P<0.05); there was no significant difference between groups (P>0.05) in the difference between pre- and post-operation and the improvement rate of JOA score at 1 year after operation. X-ray film reexamination showed that there was no screw loosening, screw rod fracture, Cage collapse, or immune rejection in the two groups during follow-up. At 3 months and 1 year after operation, the rate of intervertebral height loss was significantly lower in the trial group than in the control group (P<0.05). At 3 and 6 months after operation, the interbody fusion rating of trial group was significantly better in the trial group than in the control group (P<0.05); and at 1 year after operation, there was no significant difference between groups (P>0.05).

Conclusion

There is no significant difference between 3D Cage and PEEK Cage in PLIF, in terms of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, complications, postoperative neurological recovery, and final intervertebral fusion. But the former can effectively reduce vertebral body subsidence and accelerate intervertebral fusion.

Comparison of local and regional radiographic outcomes in minimally invasive and open TLIF: a propensity score-matched cohort

OBJECTIVE

Local and regional radiographic outcomes following minimally invasive (MI) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus open TLIF remain unclear. The purpose of this study was to provide a comprehensive assessment of local and regional radiographic parameters following MI-TLIF and open TLIF. The authors hypothesized that open TLIF provides greater segmental and global lordosis correction than MI-TLIF.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing MI- or open TLIF for grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis was performed. One-to-one nearest-neighbor propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match patients who underwent open TLIF to those who underwent MI-TLIF. Sagittal segmental radiographic measures included segmental lordosis (SL), anterior disc height (ADH), posterior disc height (PDH), foraminal height (FH), percent spondylolisthesis, and cage position. Lumbopelvic radiographic parameters included overall lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI)-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch, sacral slope (SS), and pelvic tilt (PT). Change in segmental or overall lordosis after surgery was considered "lordosing" if the change was > 0° and "kyphosing" if it was ≤ 0°. Student t-tests or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to compare outcomes between MI-TLIF and open-TLIF groups.

RESULTS

A total of 267 patients were included in the study, 114 (43%) who underwent MI-TLIF and 153 (57%) who underwent open TLIF, with an average follow-up of 56.6 weeks (SD 23.5 weeks). After PSM, there were 75 patients in each group. At the latest follow-up both MI- and open-TLIF patients experienced significant improvements in assessment scores obtained with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the numeric rating scale for low-back pain (NRS-BP), without significant differences between groups (p > 0.05). Both MI- and open-TLIF patients experienced significant improvements in SL, ADH, and percent corrected spondylolisthesis compared to baseline (p < 0.001). However, the MI-TLIF group experienced significantly larger magnitudes of correction with respect to these metrics (ΔSL 4.14° ± 4.35° vs 1.15° ± 3.88°, p < 0.001; ΔADH 4.25 ± 3.68 vs 1.41 ± 3.77 mm, p < 0.001; percent corrected spondylolisthesis: -10.82% ± 6.47% vs -5.87% ± 8.32%, p < 0.001). In the MI-TLIF group, LL improved in 44% (0.3° ± 8.5°) of the cases, compared to 48% (0.9° ± 6.4°) of the cases in the open-TLIF group (p > 0.05). Stratification by operative technique (unilateral vs bilateral facetectomy) and by interbody device (static vs expandable) did not yield statistically significant differences (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Both MI- and open-TLIF patients experienced significant improvements in patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures and local radiographic parameters, with neutral effects on regional alignment. Surprisingly, in our cohort, change in SL was significantly greater in MI-TLIF patients, perhaps reflecting the effect of operative techniques, technological innovations, and the preservation of the posterior tension band. Taking these results together, no significant overall differences in LL between groups were demonstrated, which suggests that MI-TLIF is comparable to open approaches in providing radiographic correction after surgery. These findings suggest that alignment targets can be achieved by either MI- or open-TLIF approaches, highlighting the importance of surgeon attention to these variables.

Deterioration of the fixation segment's stress distribution and the strength reduction of screw holding position together cause screw loosening in ALSR fixed OLIF patients with poor BMD

The vertebral body's Hounsfield unit (HU) value can credibly reflect patients' bone mineral density (BMD). Given that poor bone-screw integration initially triggers screw loosening and regional differences in BMD and strength in the vertebral body exist, HU in screw holding planes should better predict screw loosening. According to the stress shielding effect, the stress distribution changes in the fixation segment with BMD reduction should be related to screw loosening, but this has not been identified. We retrospectively collected the radiographic and demographic data of 56 patients treated by single-level oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) with anterior lateral single rod (ALSR) screw fixation. BMD was identified by measuring HU values in vertebral bodies and screw holding planes. Regression analyses identified independent risk factors for cranial and caudal screw loosening separately. Meanwhile, OLIF with ALSR fixation was numerically simulated; the elastic modulus of bony structures was adjusted to simulate different grades of BMD reduction. Stress distribution changes were judged by computing stress distribution in screws, bone-screw interfaces, and cancellous bones in the fixation segment. The results showed that HU reduction in vertebral bodies and screw holding planes were independent risk factors for screw loosening. The predictive performance of screw holding plane HU is better than the mean HU of vertebral bodies. Cranial screws suffer a higher risk of screw loosening, but HU was not significantly different between cranial and caudal sides. The poor BMD led to stress concentrations on both the screw and bone-screw interfaces. Biomechanical deterioration was more severe in the cranial screws than in the caudal screws. Additionally, lower stress can also be observed in fixation segments' cancellous bone. Therefore, a higher proportion of ALSR load transmission triggers stress concentration on the screw and bone-screw interfaces in patients with poor BMD. This, together with decreased bony strength in the screw holding position, contributes to screw loosening in osteoporotic patients biomechanically. The trajectory optimization of ALSR screws based on preoperative HU measurement and regular anti-osteoporosis therapy may effectively reduce the risk of screw loosening.

Do Radiographic Results of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Vary with Cage Position in Patients with Degenerative Lumbar Diseases?

Objective

To investigate whether the radiographic results are affected by cage position in single‐level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

Method

Between January 2016 and June 2018, 130 patients (62 males and 68 females, average age: 55.28 ± 10.11 years) who underwent single‐level TLIF were analyzed retrospectively. Standing lateral radiographs of the lumbar spine were collected and evaluated preoperatively, postoperatively, and at the time of last follow‐up. Cage position in the fused segment was recorded using a central point ratio (CPR), which indicated the cage position. CPR is calculated by dividing the distance between the cage center point and the posterior extent of the superior endplate of the inferior vertebra by the length of the superior endplate of the inferior vertebra. Based on cage positions, the patients were divided into three groups: Anterior Group (n = 38); Middle Group (n = 68); and Posterior Group (n = 24). Segmental lumbar lordosis (SLL), foraminal height (FH), posterior disc height (PDH), and anterior disc height (ADH) were evaluated. A subanalysis was also performed on cage height within each group.

Results

The average follow‐up time of the patients was 35.20 ± 4.43 months. The mean values of CPR in Anterior Group, Middle Group, and Posterior Group were 0.64, 0.51, and 0.37, respectively. The FH, PDH, and ADH were significantly increased after TLIF in all groups (P < 0.05). There were significant differences in increase of SLL in Anterior Group (4.4°) and Middle Group (3.0°), but not in Posterior Group (0.3°). Furthermore, in the comparison of the three groups, the increase of SLL, FH, and PDH was statistically different (P < 0.05), while not for ADH (P > 0.05). The significant correlations in surgery were: CPR and ΔSLL (r = 0.584, P < 0.001), CPR and ΔFH (r = −0.411, P < 0.001), and CPR and ΔPDH (r = −0.457, P < 0.001). However, ADH had a positive correlation with cage height when the cage was located in anterior and middle of the endplate. Moreover, cage height had a positive correlation with SLL when the cage was located anteriorly and had a negative correlation with SLL when the cage was located posteriorly. FH and PDH both had a positive correlation with cage height in any cage position.

Conclusion

The cage located in different positions has different effects on radiographic results in single‐level TLIF. A thicker cage located anteriorly will gain maximum SLL and avoid the reduction of FH and PDH.

Comparison of prone transpsoas lateral lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spine disease: A retrospective radiographic propensity score-matched analysis

INTRODUCTION

This is the first study to compare the prone transpsoas (PTP) approach for lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) through an analysis of radiographic and clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective chart review of data for patients who underwent the PTP approach or TLIF for degenerative lumbar spine disease was conducted. Propensity score matching was completed through the utilization of a linear regression model with the classification of surgery (PTP vs. TLIF) being used as the indicator (dependent variable) and the radiographic outcomes as covariates (independent variables). Both cohorts (PTP and TLIF) were propensity score matched according to preoperative radiographic parameters using a 1-to-1 ratio to the nearest neighbor. Eleven patients in the TLIF group were matched to an equal number of patients in the PTP group who had similar propensity scores to perform a thorough analysis of clinical and radiographic outcomes.

RESULTS

The PTP approach significantly improved the lumbar lordosis angle, pelvic tilt, and the pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis value when compared to TLIF (p < 0.05). Clinically, the PTP group improved significantly in terms of the Oswestry Disability Index (p < 0.05). That approach also significantly minimized blood loss and hospital stay (p < 0.05). Furthermore, significantly more cages were placed anteriorly in the PTP group than in the TLIF group (p < 0.05). However, the PTP group had a significantly longer duration of radiation exposure (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The PTP approach resulted in greater improvement in postoperative radiographic measurements as well as patient-reported outcomes.

SPINOPELVIC PARAMETERS AFTER POSTERIOR LUMBAR ARTHRODESIS IN DEGENERATIVE SPINAL DISEASES

ABSTRACT Introduction: Spinopelvic parameters related to sagittal balance have become increasinglyimportantamong spine surgeons due to their correlation with patient satisfaction rates. Objective: The goal of this study was to evaluate changes in spinal sagittal balance after lumbar spine surgery using PLIF, the posterior lumbar interbody fusion technique. Methods: The sample consisted of adult patients with degenerative spinal disease submitted to posterior lumbar arthrodesis. Patients between 18 and 70 years of agewho underwent surgeryfrom 2015 to 2017 were included in the study and divided into short (1 level) and long arthrodesis (2 to 4 levels) groups. Radiographic analysis of the spinopelvic parameters, measured before and after lumbar arthrodesis, was conducted using the SURGIMAP software. Then we evaluated the variation between pre- and postoperative measurements and performed correlation and linear regression analyses between the parameters. Results: The sample was composed of 80 patients (48 men). The mean age was lower in the short arthrodesis group than in the long arthrodesis group (52.67 ± 9.66 years versus 59.37 ± 9.30 years, respectively; p<0.0025). Significant variations in lumbar lordosis, pelvic tilt, sagittal vertical axis, T1 pelvic angle, and pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis were found in both short and long arthrodesis groups. The variation was significantly larger in the long than in the short arthrodesis group. Conclusion: In adult degenerative spine disease, short and long arthrodesis of the lumbar spine by PLIF allows correction of the spinopelvic parameters. Level of evidence III; Retrospective, comparative study.

Does change in focal lordosis after spinal fusion affect clinical outcomes in degenerative spondylolisthesis?

Study Design:

Retrospective cohort study.

Objective:

The objective of this study is to determine the effect of focal lordosis and global alignment and proportion (GAP) scores on patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) after posterior lumbar fusion for patients with 1- or 2-level lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS).

Summary of Background Data:

In patients with DS, improvements in spinopelvic parameters are believed to improve clinical outcomes. However, the effect of changing focal lordosis in patients with 1-or 2-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis is unclear.

Materials and Methods:

Postoperative spinopelvic parameters and perioperative focal lordosis changes were measured for 162 patients at a single academic center from January 2013 to December 2017. Patients were divided into three groups: >2° (lordotic group), between 2° and −2° (neutral group), and −2°° (kyphotic group). Patients were then reclassified based on GAP scores. Recovery ratios (RR) and the number of patients achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) were calculated for PROMs. Standard descriptive statistics were reported for patient demographics and outcomes data. Multiple linear regression analysis controlled for confounders. Alpha was set at P < 0.05.

Results:

There was no significant association between change in focal lordosis and surgical complications including adjacent segment disease (P = 0.282), instrumentation failure (P = 0.196), pseudarthrosis (P = 0.623), or revision surgery (P = 0.424). In addition, the only PROM affected by change in focal lordosis was Mental Component Scores (ΔMCS-12) (lordotic = 2.5, neutral = 8.54, and kyphotic = 5.96, P = 0.017) and RR for MCS-12 (lordotic = 0.02, neutral = 0.14, kyphotic 0.10, P = 0.008). Linear regression analysis demonstrated focal lordosis was a predictor of decreased improvement in MCS-12 (β = −6.45 [−11.03- −1.83], P = 0.007). GAP scores suggested patients who were correctly proportioned had worse MCID compared to moderately disproportioned and severely disproportioned patients (P = 0.024).

Conclusions:

The change in focal lordosis not a significant predictor of change in PROMs for disability, pain, or physical function. Proportioned patients based on the GAP score had worse MCID for Oswestry Disability Index.

Level of Evidence:

III

A Retrospective Analysis of the L3-4 Disc and Spinopelvic Parameters on Outcomes in Thoracolumbar Fusion: Was Art Steffee Right?

OBJECTIVE

To determine if the L3-4 disc angle may be a surrogate marker for global lumbar alignment in thoracolumbar fusion surgery. To explore the relationship between radiographic and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after thoracolumbar fusion surgery.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review was conducted on patients who had undergone a lumbar fusion involving levels from T9 to pelvis. EuroQol-Five Dimension (EQ-5D) scores and adverse events including adjacent segment disease and degeneration, pseudoarthrosis, proximal junctional kyphosis, stenosis, and reoperation were collected. Pre- and postoperative spinopelvic parameters were measured on weight-bearing radiographs, with the L3-4 disc angle of novel interest. Univariate logistic and linear regression were performed to assess the associations of radiographic parameters with adverse event incidence and improvement in EQ-5D, respectively.

RESULTS

182 patients met inclusion criteria. Univariable analysis revealed that increased magnitude of L3-4 disc angle, anterior pelvic tilt, and pelvic incidence measures are associated with increased likelihood of developing postoperative adverse events. Conversely, increased lumbar lordosis demonstrated a decreased incidence of developing a postoperative adverse event. Linear regression showed that radiographic parameters did not significantly correlate with postoperative EQ-5D scores although scores were significantly improved post-fusion in all dimensions except Self-care (P = 0.51).

CONCLUSIONS

L3-4 disc angle magnitude may serve as a surrogate marker of global lumbar alignment. Degree of spinopelvic alignment did not correlate to improvement in EQ-5D score in the present study, suggesting that quality of life metric change may not be a sensitive or specific marker of post-fusion alignment.

Does transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion induce lordosis or kyphosis? Radiographic evaluation with a minimum 2-year follow-up

OBJECTIVE

Conflicting reports exist about whether transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) induces lordosis or kyphosis, ranging from decreasing lordosis by 3.71° to increasing it by 18.8°. In this study, the authors' aim was to identify factors that result in kyphosis or lordosis after TLIF.

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective study of open TLIF without osteotomy for spondylolisthesis with a minimum 2-year follow-up was undertaken. Preoperative and postoperative clinical and radiographic parameters and cage specifics were collected. TLIFs were considered to be "lordosing" if postoperative induction of lordosis was > 0° and "kyphosing" if postoperative induction of lordosis was ≤ 0°.

RESULTS

A total of 137 patients with an average follow-up of 52.5 months (range 24-130 months) were included. The overall postoperative disc angle (DA) and segmental lordosis (SL) increased by 1.96° and 1.88° (p = 0.003 and p = 0.038), respectively, whereas overall lumbar lordosis remained unchanged (p = 0.133). Seventy-nine patients had lordosing TLIFs with a mean SL increase of 5.72° ± 3.97°, and 58 patients had kyphosing TLIFs with a mean decrease of 3.02° ± 2.98°. Multivariate analysis showed that a lower preoperative DA, lower preoperative SL, and anterior cage placement were correlated with the greatest increase in postoperative SL (p = 0.040, p < 0.001, and p = 0.035, respectively). There was no difference in demographics, cage type or height, or spinopelvic parameters between the groups (p > 0.05). Linear regression showed that the preoperative DA and SL correlated with SL after TLIF (R2 = 0.198, p < 0.001; and R2 = 0.2931, p < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Whether a TLIF induces kyphosis or lordosis depends on the preoperative DA, preoperative SL, and cage position. Less-lordotic segments became more lordotic postoperatively, and highly lordotic segments may lose lordosis after TLIF. Cages placed more anteriorly were associated with more lordosis.

[Ventral support in dorsal lumbar fusion surgery : A case report with many incidents]

Die ventrale Abstützung im Rahmen dorsaler Fusionsoperationen ist insbesondere bei instabilen Pathologien, wie Spondylolisthesen oder Spondylodiszitiden, entscheidend für das Operationsergebnis. Der komplikative Verlauf einer Patientin mit simultan bestehender Spondylolisthese und Spondylodiszitis wird dargestellt und anhand der Literatur und des eigenen Behandlungsalgorithmus reevaluiert. Bei alleiniger Spondylodiszitis ist ein Beckenkamminterponat als Abstützung ausreichend. Bei zusätzlichen Störungen des sagittalen Profils ist eine Cage-Implantation zu bevorzugen.

Do the positioning variables of the cage contribute to adjacent facet joint degeneration? Radiological and clinical analysis following intervertebral fusion

Background

Compared to other risk factors, adjacent facet joint degeneration (AFD) is the main contributor to adjacent segment disease (ASD). The interbody cage may be a potential indirect risk of AFD. This study investigated the correlations among the lumbar sagittal balance parameters, the inter-body cage's intraoperative positioning variables, and adjacent facet joint degeneration following the transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) technique.

Methods

Patients who accepted single-level TLIF for symptomatic lumbar degenerative disease and were followed up for at least six months were enrolled in this study. According to the inclusive and exclusive criteria, 93 patients were included (44 males and 49 females). X-ray and computed tomography (CT) images were obtained before and six months after surgery. The vertebral contour and the center of the marker mass in the cage were calculated using a geometric algorithm. Orthopedic surgeons measured the disc height, lordosis angle, and facet joint degeneration. Patient-reported outcomes, including the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the visual analog scale (VAS), were used to assess the clinical outcomes. The Student’s t-test, Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and Chi-square test were used for the statistical analyses.

Results

The average age was 53.7 years old (range, 27–84 years). The average functional disability outcome assessed by the ODI was 61.2, and the average back and leg pain assessed by the VAS was 6.2 and 6.9, respectively. The patients were categorized into a normal group and an abnormal (AFD) group according to whether the facet joint degeneration was aggravated. The abnormal group had a higher back pain VAS score (P=0.031) and lower sagittal vertical position (P=0.027). The other parameters were similar at baseline (P>0.05). The cage’s sagittal vertical position decreased significantly with AFD aggravation (OR, 0.737; 95% CI, 0.561–0.969).

Conclusions

In patients with AFD aggravation, the preoperative VAS and postoperative ODI scores were significantly higher. The cage position parameters were related to AFD. A lower cage center was associated with a greater incidence of AFD.

One Year Outcomes From a Prospective Multicenter Investigation Device Trial of a Novel Conformal Mesh Interbody Fusion Device

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective multicenter investigational device exempt trial is underway evaluating a novel conformable mesh interbody fusion device in subjects undergoing single-level fusion for degenerative disc disease. Patients meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria were offered enrollment. There is no comparative group in this study.

OBJECTIVE

Establish the short and long-term safety and effectiveness of a novel conformable mesh interbody fusion device in subjects undergoing single-level fusion for degenerative disc disease unresponsive to conservative care.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion remains a critical procedure for patients with degenerative lumbar disc disease. Increasingly minimally invasive techniques have been proposed to minimize muscle dissection and tissue damage with the goal of minimizing pain and length of stay.

METHODS

One hundred two subjects were enrolled across 10 sites. Ninety nine subjects remained available for follow-up at 12-months. Physical evaluations/imaging were performed serially through 12-months. Validated assessment tools included 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for function, and computerized tomography scan for fusion. Independent committees were used to identify adverse events and for assessment of radiographic fusion.

RESULTS

Reductions in low back pain (LBP)/leg pain and improvements in functional status occur early and are maintained through 12-month follow-up. Mean VAS-LBP change from baseline to 6-weeks post-op (-46 mm) continued to improve through 12 months (-51 mm). Similar trends were observed for leg pain. Mean ODI change from baseline to 6 weeks post-op (-17) was almost doubled by 12 months (-32). Fusion rates at 12-months are high (98%). No device-related serious adverse events have occurred.

CONCLUSION

12-month outcomes demonstrated excellent patient compliance and positive outcomes for pain, function, fusion, and device safety. Clinical improvements were observed by 6-weeks post-op and appear durable up to 1 year later. A novel mesh interbody device may provide an alternative means of interbody fusion that reduces connective tissue disruption.Level of Evidence: 3.

Risk Factors of Cage Subsidence in Patients Received Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the risk factors of cage subsidence in patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) and its correlation with patient-reported outcomes.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Cage subsidence is among the cage-related complications after TLIF and may lead to poor outcomes. Few studies have addressed the incidence of cage subsidence in MI-TLIF.

METHODS

This retrospective study of a prospectively collected database was conducted from October 2015 to October 2017. All patients received MI-TLIF with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. All levels were separated into the cage subsidence (CS group) and no cage subsidence (non-CS group) groups. Cage subsidence was evaluated using lateral radiographs and defined as more than 2 mm migration of the cage into the endplate of adjacent vertebral body. Patient demographics, perioperative details, and radiographic parameters were recorded. Cage-related parameters were cage height, cage insertion level, and cage position. Cage position was recorded using central point ration (CPR). Patient-reported outcome was analyzed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) questionnaire and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients (126 levels) were included. Mean age was 66.5 years with an average follow-up of 36.9 months. Overall incidence of cage subsidence was 34.1%. The CS group had significantly higher body mass index, less bone mineral density (BMD), shorter disc height, and higher CPR than the non-CS group. BMD, disc height, and CPR were significantly negatively correlated with depth of cage subsidence. ODI improvement was significantly lesser in the CS group than in the non-CS group. Fusion rate and complications were unrelated to cage subsidence.

CONCLUSION

The BMD, disc height, and cage position were the most significant risk factors that were negatively correlated with depth of cage subsidence. Placing a TLIF cage anteriorly if possible may reduce the risk of cage subsidence.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Does interbody cage lordosis impact actual segmental lordosis achieved in minimally invasive lumbar spine fusion?

OBJECTIVE

In an effort to prevent loss of segmental lordosis (SL) with minimally invasive interbody fusions, manufacturers have increased the amount of lordosis that is built into interbody cages. However, the relationship between cage lordotic angle and actual SL achieved intraoperatively remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to determine if the lordotic angle manufactured into an interbody cage impacts the change in SL during minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) done for degenerative pathology.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective review of a single-surgeon database of adult patients who underwent primary LIF between April 2017 and December 2018. Procedures were performed for 1-2-level lumbar degenerative disease using contemporary MIS techniques, including transforaminal LIF (TLIF), lateral LIF (LLIF), and anterior LIF (ALIF). Surgical levels were classified on lateral radiographs based on the cage lordotic angle (6°-8°, 10°-12°, and 15°-20°) and the position of the cage in the disc space (anterior vs posterior). Change in SL was the primary outcome of interest. Subgroup analyses of the cage lordotic angle within each surgical approach were also conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 116 surgical levels in 98 patients were included. Surgical approaches included TLIF (56.1%), LLIF (32.7%), and ALIF (11.2%). There were no differences in SL gained by cage lordotic angle (2.7° SL gain with 6°-8° cages, 1.6° with 10°-12° cages, and 3.4° with 15°-20° cages, p = 0.581). Subgroup analysis of LLIF showed increased SL with 15° cages only (p = 0.002). The change in SL was highest after ALIF (average increase 9.8° in SL vs 1.8° in TLIF vs 1.8° in LLIF, p < 0.001). Anterior position of the cage in the disc space was also associated with a significantly greater gain in SL (4.2° vs -0.3°, p = 0.001), and was the only factor independently correlated with SL gain (p = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with cage lordotic angle, cage position and approach play larger roles in the generation of SL in 1-2-level MIS for lumbar degenerative disease.