Hypercomplex pedicle subtraction osteotomies: definition, early clinical and radiological results and complications

Restoring L4-S1 Lordosis Shape in Severe Sagittal Deformity: Impact of Correction Techniques on Alignment and Complication Profile

BACKGROUND

Severe sagittal plane deformity with loss of L4-S1 lordosis is disabling and can be improved through various surgical techniques. However, data are limited on the differing ability of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO), and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) to achieve alignment goals in severely malaligned patients.

METHODS

Severe adult spinal deformity patients with preoperative PI-LL >20°, L4-S1 lordosis <30°, and full body radiographs and PROMs at baseline and 6-week postoperative visit were included. Patients were grouped into ALIF (1-2 level ALIF at L4-S1), PSO (L4/L5 PSO), and TLIF (1-2 level TLIF at L4-S1). Comparative analyses were performed on demographics, radiographic spinopelvic parameters, complications, and PROMs.

RESULTS

Among the 96 included patients, 40 underwent ALIF, 27 underwent PSO, and 29 underwent TLIF. At baseline, cohorts had comparable age, sex, race, Edmonton frailty scores, and radiographic spinopelvic parameters (P > 0.05). However, PSO was performed more often in revision cases (P < 0.001). Following surgery, L4-S1 lordosis correction (P = 0.001) was comparable among ALIF and PSO patients and caudal lordotic apex migration (P = 0.044) was highest among ALIF patients. PSO patients had higher intraoperative estimated blood loss (P < 0.001) and motor deficits (P = 0.049), and in-hospital ICU admission (P = 0.022) and blood products given (P = 0.004), but were otherwise comparable in terms of length of stay, blood transfusion given, and postoperative admission to rehab. Likewise, 90-day postoperative complication profiles and 6-week PROMs were comparable as well.

CONCLUSIONS

ALIF can restore L4-S1 sagittal alignment as powerfully as PSO, with fewer intraoperative and in-hospital complications. When feasible, ALIF is a suitable alternative to PSO and likely superior to TLIF for correcting L4-S1 lordosis among patients with severe sagittal malalignment.

Post-operative L5 radiculopathy after L5-S1 hyperlordotic anterior lumbar interbody fusion (HL-ALIF) is related to a greater increase of lordosis and smaller post-operative posterior disc height: results from a cohort study

STUDY DESIGN

A single-centre retrospective study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

This study aims to investigate the rate of L5 radiculopathy, to identify imaging features associated with the complication and to evaluate the clinical outcomes in adult spine deformity patients undergoing L5-S1 ALIF with hyperlordotic cages.

METHODS

Design: retrospective cohort study. A single-centre prospective database was queried to analyse patients undergoing hyperlordotic (HL) ALIF with posterior fusion to correct spinal deformity. Clinical status was evaluated by back and leg pain numeric rate scale and Oswestry Disability Index pre-operatively and at 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-up. Spinopelvic parameters, such as pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, lumbar lordosis and L5-S1 lordosis, posterior disc height (PDH) and anterior disc height, were assessed pre-operatively and post-operatively on standardized full-spine standing EOS images. The sagittal foraminal area was measured pre- and post-operatively on a CT scan.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients with a mean age of 63.2 ± 8.6 years underwent HL-ALIF from January 2016 to December 2019. Seven of them developed post-operative root pain (5) or weakness (2) (Group A), while thirty-two did not (Group B). Root impairment was associated with greater segmental correction magnitude, 26° ± 11.1 in Group A versus 15.1° ± 9.9 in Group B (p < 0.05), and to smaller post-operative PDH, 5.9 mm ± 2.7 in Group A versus 8.3 mm ± 2.6 (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Post-operative root problems were observed in 17.9% of patients undergoing HL-ALIF for adult spine deformity. L5 radiculopathy was associated with larger sagittal angular corrections and smaller post-operative posterior disc height. One patient (2.6%) needed L5 root decompression. At 12 months of follow-up, results were equivalent between groups.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I

Diagnostic: individual cross-sectional studies with the consistently applied reference standard and blinding.

Adult spinal deformity surgery: posterior three-column osteotomies vs anterior lordotic cages with posterior fusion. Complications, clinical and radiological results. A systematic review of the literature

PURPOSE

The aim of our study is to analyse mid- to long-term severe adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery outcomes by comparing three-column osteotomies (3CO) and multiple anterior interbody fusion cages (AC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The PRISMA flowchart was used to systematically review the literature. Only articles with a minimum 24-month follow-up were examined, and 11 articles were included. The following radiological parameters were observed: pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), lumbar lordosis (LL), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), Cobb angle and T1-sacrum plumbline. Clinical outcome was assessed using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores. The main complications were analysed, and the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

Except for age, the two populations were homogeneous. Both techniques had the same number of posterior instrumented levels (7.4 ± 1.7). The AC group had a mean 3 ± 1.4 interbody fusions per patient. In the PSO group, all patients had 1 3CO and 89.8% of the osteotomies were performed at L2 or L3 vertebrae. No difference was observed between the two groups in terms of clinical outcomes. Both techniques were effective in sagittal parameters restoration with a final PI-LL mismatch = 4.4°. The PSO group had a statistically higher rate of intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.036), major complications, pseudoarthrosis and dural tears (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Both PSO and multiple AC are effective in treating ASD. Multiple AC seems more suitable when treating older patients because of a lower intraoperative blood loss, lower rate of major complications and fewer number of revision surgeries.

Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (ALIF) L5-S1 with overpowering of posterior lumbosacral instrumentation and fusion mass: a reliable solution in revision spine surgery

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In cases of spine surgical revisions of patients affected by sagittal malalignment, the restoration of the ideal lumbar lordosis (LL) is mandatory. ALIF procedures represent a powerful and effective approach to improve the LL in case of hypolordosis. This study evaluates the feasibility of ALIF to overpower posterior lumbar instrumentation and fusion mass in revision spine surgery and secondarily to estimate complications, clinical and radiological outcomes.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on the use of ALIF overpowering in cases of lumbosacral instrumentation and/or fusion. Demographic, comorbidity, corrective strategy adopted, surgical data, clinical and radiological results, and intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Twelve patients (3 male; 9 female) underwent overpowering ALIF L5-S1 were included in the study with a mean FU of 34.0 ± 13.4 months. In 10 cases, a posterior titanium instrumentation and fusion mass were present; in 2 patients, only a fusion mass was present. Indicators of pain and disability improved in all patients (p < 0.01). Sagittal realignment with the restoration of ideal spinopelvic parameters was obtained in all cases. One peritoneal lesion requiring intraoperative suture without sequelae, two cases of postoperative radiculopathy, and one posterior wound infection requiring surgical debridement and antibiotic therapy were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Anterior implant of lordotic and hyperlordotic cages with increasing segmental lordosis is possible in the presence of posterior instrumentation and/or solid fusion mass. The biomechanical strength of this corrective technique can overcome posterior instrumentation and bone fusion resistance, therefore allowing a single-staged surgery for sagittal realignment.

ALIF in the correction of spinal sagittal misalignment. A systematic review of literature

PURPOSE

We aim at analysing the impact of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) in restoring the main spinopelvic parameters, along with its potentials and limitations in correcting sagittal imbalance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The 2009 PRISMA flow chart was used to systematically review the literature; 27 papers were eventually selected. The following spinopelvic parameters were observed: pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lumbar lordosis (LLseg) and sagittal vertical axis (SVA). Papers reporting on hyperlordotic cages (HLC) were analysed separately. The indirect decompression potential of ALIF was also assessed. The clinical outcome was obtained by collecting visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Global fusion rate and main complications were collected.

RESULTS

PT, SS, LL, LLseg and SVA spinopelvic parameters all improved postoperatively by - 4.3 ± 5.2°, 3.9 ± 4.5°, 10.6 ± 12.5°, 6.7 ± 3.5° and 51.1 ± 44.8 mm, respectively. HLC were statistically more effective in restoring LL and LLseg (p < 0.05). Postoperative disc height, anterior disc height, posterior disc height and foraminal height, respectively, increased by 58.5%, 87.2%, 80.9% and 18.1%. Postoperative improvements were observed in VAS back and leg and ODI scores (p < 0.05). The global fusion rate was 94.5 ± 5.5%; the overall complication rate was 13%.

CONCLUSION

When managing sagittal imbalance, ALIF can be considered as a valid technique to achieve the correct spinopelvic parameters based on preoperative planning. This technique permits to obtain an optimal LL distribution and a solid anterior column support, with lower complications and higher fusion rates when compared to posterior osteotomies.