Stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration following previous lumbar fusion

Safety and Utility of Bilateral-contralateral Decompression for Adjacent Segment Stenosis After Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective case series study.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of bilateral-contralateral decompression using unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) for treating adjacent segment disease (ASD) after lumbar interbody fusion (LIF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ASD is a well-documented complication following LIF, often requiring additional surgical interventions. Traditional decompression techniques risk damaging the facet joints, potentially leading to further instability and degeneration. However, our bilateral-contralateral decompression using UBE focuses on minimizing facet joint resection and reducing the risk of postoperative instability.

METHODS

This study included 37 patients who underwent bilateral-contralateral UBE decompression for ASD following LIF at the L4-5 level between September 2020 and March 2022. Radiographic evaluations included measurements of vertebral range of motion (ROM), slip distance, disk height, lumbar lordosis, and facet joint preservation. Clinical assessments were performed using the visual analog scale (VAS) for back and leg pain and the Oswestry disability index (ODI).

RESULTS

The average final follow-up period was 14.5±1.9 mo. The average preoperative ROM was 3.0 degrees, which significantly increased to 4.8° at the final follow-up (P<0.05). Static structure and dynamic stability parameters, including the vertebral slip distance, lumbar lordosis, and disk height, showed no significant differences between the preoperative examination and 1-year postoperative follow-up. The facet joint preservation rate was 97.4±2.1% on average. Significant improvements in VAS scores for leg and back pain and ODI were observed. Despite improvement with conservative treatment in 7 patients with delayed instability, 2 patients required fusion surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Bilateral-contralateral decompression through UBE has proven to be an effective and safe method for treating ASD following LIF. This technique is particularly suitable for patients requiring spinal stability maintenance. The high rates of facet joint preservation and low incidence of reoperation highlight this technique as a compelling alternative treatment for spinal stenosis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Transforaminal Versus Lateral Interbody Fusions for Treatment of Adjacent Segment Disease in the Lumbar Spine

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective comparative study.

OBJECTIVE

This study compared outcomes for patients managed with a lateral approach to interbody fusion [lateral (LLIF) or oblique (OLIF)] versus a posterior (PLIF) or transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) for treatment of adjacent segment disease (ASD) above or below a prior lumbar fusion construct.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

No study has compared outcomes of lateral approaches to more traditional posterior approaches for the treatment of ASD.

METHODS

Retrospective review was performed of patients who underwent single-level lateral or posterior approaches for lumbar interbody fusion for symptomatic ASD between January 2010 and December 2021. Exclusion criteria included skeletal immaturity (age below 18 y old) and surgery indication for malignancy or infection. Patient demographics, medical comorbidities, operative details, postoperative complications, and revision surgery profiles were collected for all patients. Standard descriptive statistics were used to summarize data. Comparative statistical analyses were performed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Version 28.0.1.0; Chicago, IL).

RESULTS

A total of 152 patients (65±10 y) were included in the study with a mean duration of follow-up of 1.6±1.4 years. The cohort included 123 PLIF/TLIF (81%), 18 LLIF (12%), 11 OLIF (7%). TLIF/PLIF experienced greater mean operative time (210±62 min vs. 184±80 OLIF/105±64 LLIF, P <0.001) and estimated blood loss (414±254 mL vs. 49±29 OLIF/36±33 LLIF, P <0.001). No significant difference in rate of postoperative complications. Postoperative radicular pain was significantly greater in OLIF (7, 64%) and LLIF (7, 39%) compared with PLIF/TLIF (16, 13%), P <0.001. No statistically significant difference in health care utilization was noted between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Lateral fusions to treat ASD demonstrated no significantly different risk of complication compared with posterior approaches. Our study demonstrated significantly increased operative time and estimated blood loss for the posterior approach and an increased risk of radicular pain from manipulation/retraction of psoas following lateral approaches.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Comparative study of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression and traditional revision surgery in the treatment of symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to evaluate and compare the surgical outcomes and complications of Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression (PELD) and traditional revision surgery in treating symptomatic Adjacent Segment Degeneration (ASD). This comparison aims to delineate the advantages and disadvantages of these methods, assisting spine surgeons in making informed surgical decisions.

METHODS

66 patients with symptomatic ASD who failed conservative treatment for more than 1 month and received repeated lumbar surgery were retrospectively collected in the study from January 2015 to November 2018, with the average age of 65.86 ± 11.04 years old. According to the type of surgery they received, all the patients were divided in 2 groups, including 32 patients replaced the prior rod in Group A and 34 patients received PELD at the adjacent level in Group B. Patients were followed up routinely and received clinical and radiological evaluation at 3, 6, 12 months and yearly postoperatively. Complications and hospital costs were recorded through chart reviews.

RESULTS

The majority of patients experienced positive surgical outcomes. However, three cases encountered complications. Notably, Group B patients demonstrated superior pain relief and improved postoperative functional scores throughout the follow-up period, alongside reduced hospital costs (P < 0.05). Additionally, significant reductions in average operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay were observed in Group B (P < 0.05). Notwithstanding these benefits, three patients in Group B experienced disc re-herniation and underwent subsequent revision surgeries.

CONCLUSIONS

While PELD offers several advantages over traditional revision surgery, such as reduced operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay, it also presents a higher likelihood of requiring subsequent revision surgeries. Future studies involving a larger cohort and extended follow-up periods are essential to fully assess the relative benefits and drawbacks of these surgical approaches for ASD.

Preoperative Multifidus Muscle Quality is Associated With Patient Reported Outcomes After Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

OBJECTIVE

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) commonly involves a transpsoas approach. Despite the association between LLIF, postoperative iliopsoas weakness, and iatrogenic neuropraxia, no study has yet examined the effect of psoas or multifidus muscle quality on patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

METHODS

This study retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent LLIF with 1-year minimum follow-up. Psoas and multifidus muscle qualities were graded on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging using two validated classification systems for muscle atrophy. Average muscle quality was calculated as the mean score from all levels (L1-2 through L5-S1). Univariate and multivariate statistics were utilized to investigate the relationship between psoas/multifidus muscle quality and preoperative, 6-weeks postoperative, and final postoperative PROs.

RESULTS

74 patients (110 levels) with a mean follow-up of 18.71 ± 8.02 months were included for analysis. Greater multifidus atrophy was associated with less improvement on ODI, SF12, and VR12 (P < .05) on univariate analysis. On multivariate analysis, worse multifidus atrophy predicted less improvement on SF12 and VR12 (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Despite the direct manipulation of the psoas muscle inherent to LLIF, preoperative psoas muscle quality did not affect postoperative outcomes. Rather, the extent of preoperative multifidus fatty infiltration and atrophy was more likely to predict postoperative pain and disability. These findings suggest that multifidus atrophy may be more pertinent than psoas atrophy in its association with patient-reported outcome measures after LLIF.

The Effect of Intraoperative Prone Position on Psoas Morphology and Great Vessel Anatomy: Consequences for Prone Lateral Approach to the Lumbar Spine

BACKGROUND

This study sought to quantify radiographic differences in psoas morphology, great vessel anatomy, and lumbar lordosis between supine and prone intraoperative positioning to optimize surgical planning and minimize the risk of neurovascular injury.

METHODS

Measurements on supine magnetic resonance imaging and prone intraoperative computed tomography with O-arm from L2 to L5 levels included the anteroposterior and mediolateral proximity of the psoas, aorta, inferior vena cava (IVC), and anterior iliac vessels to the vertebral body. Psoas transverse and longitudinal diameters, psoas cross-sectional area, total lumbar lordosis, and segmental lordosis were assessed.

RESULTS

Prone position produced significant psoas lateralization, especially at more caudal levels (P < 0.001). The psoas drifted slightly anteriorly when prone, which was non-significant, but the magnitude of anterior translation significantly decreased at more caudal segments (P = 0.038) and was lowest at L5 where in fact posterior retraction was observed (P = 0.032). When prone, the IVC (P < 0.001) and right iliac vein (P = 0.005) migrated significantly anteriorly, however decreased anterior displacement was seen at more caudal levels (P < 0.001). Additionally, the IVC drifted significantly laterally at L5 (P = 0.009). Mean segmental lordosis significantly increased when prone (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Relative to the vertebral body, the psoas demonstrated substantial lateral mobility when prone, and posterior retraction specifically at L5. IVC and right iliac vein experienced significant anterior mobility-particularly at more cephalad levels. Prone position enhanced segmental lordosis and may be critical to optimizing sagittal restoration.

Adjacent Segment Disease After Spinal Fusion

» Adjacent segment disease is characterized by a degenerative process adjacent to a previously fused spine segment, with new onset of clinical symptoms such as radiculopathy, myelopathy, or instability.» Etiology is related to the natural history of the disease process, increased biomechanical stress at adjacent segments, clinical factors specific to the individual patient, intraoperative factors, and malalignment.» Treatment is usually nonoperative, but surgical intervention can be indicated. Decompression and fusion remain the mainstay of operative treatment, and isolated decompression should be considered in specific cases.» Further randomized controlled trials are needed to establish how the treatment should progress, particularly with the development of minimally invasive and endoscopic surgery.

Biomechanical Evaluation of Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Various Fixation Options for Adjacent Segment Degeneration: A Finite Element Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) is a common phenomenon after lumbar fusion. Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) may provide an alternative treatment method for ASD. This study used finite element analysis to evaluate the biomechanical effects of LLIF with various fixation options and identify an optimal surgical strategy for ASD.

METHODS

A validated L1-S1 finite element model was modified for simulation. Six finite element models of the lumbar spine were created and were divided into group 1 (L4-5 posterior lumbar interbody fusion [PLIF] + L3-4 LLIF) and group 2 (L5-S1 PLIF + L4-5 LLIF). Each group consisted of 1) cage-alone, 2) cage + lateral screw fixation (LSF), and 3) cage + bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BPSF) models. The range of motion, intradiscal pressure, and facet loads of adjacent segments as well as interbody cage stress were analyzed.

RESULTS

The stress on the LLIF cage-superior endplate interface was highest in the cage-alone model followed by the cage + LSF model and cage + BPSF model. The increase in range of motion, intradiscal pressure, and facet loads at the adjacent segment was highest in the cage + BPSF model followed by the cage + LSF model and cage-alone model. However, the biomechanical effect on the adjacent segment seemed similar in the cage-alone and cage + LSF models.

CONCLUSIONS

LLIF with BPSF is recommended when performing LLIF surgery for ASD after L4-5 and L5-S1 PLIF. Considering cage subsidence and biomechanical effects on the adjacent segment, LLIF with LSF may be a suboptimal option for ASD surgery.

Changes in psoas and posterior paraspinal muscle morphology after standalone lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a quantitative MRI-based analysis

PURPOSE

Standalone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (SA-LLIF) without posterior instrumentation can be an alternative to 360° fusion in selected cases. This study aimed to investigate quantitative changes in psoas and paraspinal muscle morphology that occur on index levels after SA-LLIF.

METHODS

Patients undergoing single- or multi-level SA-LLIF at L2/3 to L4/5 who had preoperative and postoperative lumbar MRI scans, the latter performed between 3 and 18 months after surgery for any reason, were retrospectively included. Muscle measurements were performed of the psoas and posterior paraspinal muscles (PPM; erector spinae and multifidus) on index levels using manual segmentation and an automated pixel intensity threshold method to differentiate muscle from fat signal. Changes in the total cross-sectional area (TCSA), the functional cross-sectional area (FCSA), and the percentage of fat infiltration (FI) of these muscles were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 67 patients (55.2% female, age 64.3 ± 10.6 years, BMI 26.9 ± 5.0 kg/m2) with 125 operated levels were included. Follow-up MRI scans were performed after an average of 8.7 ± 4.6 months, primarily for low back pain. Psoas muscle parameters did not change significantly, irrespective of the approach side. Among PPM parameters, the mean TCSA at L4/5 (+ 4.8 ± 12.4%; p = 0.013), and mean FI at L3/4 (+ 3.1 ± 6.5%; p = 0.002) and L4/5 (+ 3.0 ± 7.0%; p = 0.002) significantly increased.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated that SA-LLIF did not alter psoas muscle morphology, underlining its minimally invasive nature. However, FI of PPM significantly increased over time despite the lack of direct tissue damage to posterior structures, suggesting a pain-mediated response and/or the result of segmental immobilization.

Stand-Alone Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) for the Treatment of Adjacent Segment Disease (ASD) after Previous Posterior Lumbar Fusion: Clinical and Radiological Outcomes and Comparison with Posterior Revision Surgery

Background: Radiological evidence of adjacent segment disease (ASD) has been reported to have a prevalence of more than 30% and several risk factors have been reported. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of patients with symptomatic ASD treated with stand-alone OLIF and compare results with a posterior revision surgery cohort. Methods: This is a retrospective case-control study. Clinical-patient-reported outcomes were obtained at preoperative, postoperative and final follow-up visits using the Short Form (SF-36) scale, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the visual analog scale (VAS). Radiological measures include lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch, segmental coronal Cobb angle and intervertebral disc height (DH). The data are compared with a retrospective series of patients that underwent a posterior revision surgery for ASD. Results: Twenty-eight patients in the OLIF group and 25 patients in the posterior group meet inclusion criteria. The mean ages at the time of the surgery are 65.1 years and 67.5, respectively. The mean follow-up time is 36.1 months (range of 14-56). The clinical outcomes significantly improve from preoperative values from the surgery in both groups. The radiological parameters are significantly improved postoperatively and were maintained at the last follow-up in both groups. A statistically significant difference is observed between the two groups for minor complication rate, length of surgery, blood loss and DH restoration. Conclusions: Stand-alone OLIF is an effective and safe technique with low morbidity and complication rates for the treatment of selected patients with symptomatic ASD following a previous lumbar fusion.

Comparison of staged LLIF combined with posterior instrumented fusion with posterior instrumented fusion alone for the treatment of adult degenerative lumbar scoliosis with sagittal imbalance

BACKGROUND

To retrospectively compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of staged lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) combined with posterior instrumented fusion(PIF)with PIF alone for the treatment of adult degenerative lumbar scoliosis (ADLS) with sagittal imbalance.

METHODS

ADLS patients with sagittal imbalance underwent corrective surgery were included and divided into staged group (underwent multilevel LLIF in the first-stage and PIF in the second-stage) and control group (PIF alone). The clinical and radiological outcomes were evaluated and compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients with an average age of 69.7±6.3 years were enrolled, including 25 in the staged group and 20 in the control group. Compared with preoperative values, patients in both groups achieved significant improvement in terms of ODI, VAS back, VAS leg and spinopelvic parameters after surgery, which were maintained well during the follow-up period. Compared with control group, total operative time in the staged group was longer, but the amounts of blood loss and blood transfusion were reduced. The average posterior fixation segments were 6.20±1.78 in the staged group and 8.25±1.16 in the control group (P<0.01), respectively. Posterior column osteotomy (PCO) was performed in 9 patients (36%) in the staged group, while PCO and/or pedicle subtraction osteotomy were performed in 15 patients (75%) in the control group (P<0.01). There was no difference in complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Both surgical strategies were effective for the treatment of ADLS with sagittal imbalance. However, staged treatment was less invasive, which reduced the number of posterior fixation segments and osteotomy requirement.

The Feasibility of 3D Intraoperative Navigation in Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Perioperative Outcomes, Accuracy of Cage Placement and Radiation Exposure

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate perioperative outcomes, accuracy of cage placement and radiation exposure in lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) using 3D intraoperative navigation (ION), compared to conventional 2D fluoroscopy only.

METHODS

The perioperative outcomes and accuracy of cage placement were examined in all patients who underwent LLIF using ION (ION group) or fluoroscopy only (non-ION group) by a single surgeon. The radiation exposure was examined in patients who underwent stand-alone LLIF.

RESULTS

A total of 87 patients with 154 levels (ION 49 patients with 79 levels/ non-ION 38 patients with 75 levels) were included. There were no significant differences in operative time (ION 143.5 min vs. non-ION 126.0 min, P = .406), time from induction end to surgery start (ION 31.0 min vs. non-ION 31.0 min, P = .761), estimated blood loss (ION 37.5 ml vs. non-ION 50.0 ml, P = .351), perioperative complications (ION 16.3% vs. non-ION 7.9%, P = .335) and length of stay (ION 50.6 hours vs. non-ION 41.7 hours, P = .841). No significant difference was found in the accuracy of cage placement (P = .279). ION did not significantly increase total radiation dose (ION 51.0 mGy vs. non-ION 47.4 mGy, P = .237) and tended to reduce radiation dose during the procedure (ION 32.2 mGy vs. non-ION 47.4 mGy, P = .932).

CONCLUSIONS

The perioperative outcomes, accuracy of cage placement and radiation exposure in LLIF using ION were comparable to those using fluoroscopy only. The use of ION in LLIF was feasible, safe and accurate and may reduce radiation dose to the surgeon and surgical team.

Comparison of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Combined with Posterior Decompression (OLIF-PD) and Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF) in the Treatment of Adjacent Segmental Disease(ASD)

BACKGROUND

An unintended consequence following lumbar fusion is the development of adjacent segment disease (ASD). Oblique lumbar interbody fusion combined with posterior decompression (OLIF-PD) is another feasible option for ASD, and there is no literature report on this combined surgical strategy.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 18 ASD patients requiring direct decompression in our hospital between September 2017 and January 2022. Among them, eight patients underwent OLIF-PD revision and ten underwent PLIF revision. There were no significant differences in the baseline data between the two groups. The clinical outcomes and complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The operation time, operative blood loss and postoperative hospital stay in the OLIF-PD group were significantly lower than those in the PLIF group. The VAS of low back pain in the OLIF-PD group was significantly better than that in the PLIF group during the postoperative follow-up. The ODI at the last follow-up in the OLIF-PD group and the PLIF group were significantly relieved compared with those before operation. The excellent and good rate of the modified MacNab standard at the last follow-up was 87.5% in the OLIF-PD group and 70% in the PLIF group. There was a statistically significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

For ASD requiring direct decompression after posterior lumbar fusion, compared with traditional PLIF revision surgery, OLIF-PD has a similar clinical effect, but has a reduced operation time, blood loss, hospital stay and complications. OLIF-PD may be an alternative revision strategy for ASD.

Establishing minimum clinically important difference for patient-reported outcome measures in patients undergoing lateral lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND

The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) has not been established in lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). Our study aims to establish MCID for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of physical function and pain for LLIF through anchor-based and distribution-based approaches.

METHODS

Patients undergoing LLIF with preoperative and 6-month postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were identified. PROMs of Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), 12-Item Short Form Physical Component Score (SF-12 PCS), Veterans RAND 12-Item Short Form Physical Component Score (VR-12 PCS), visual analog scale (VAS) back, and VAS leg were collected at preoperative and 6-month postoperative time points. Anchor-based MCID calculations were average change, minimal detectable change, change difference, receiver operating characteristic curve, and cross-sectional analysis using ODI as the anchor. Distribution-based calculations were standard error of measurement, reliable change index, effect size, and 0.5 ∗ ΔSD.

RESULTS

Fifty patients were included. Anchor-based approaches MCID ranges were PROMIS-PF 1.1-9.6, SF-12 PCS 6.4-16.5, VR-12 PCS 5.9-12.9, VAS Back 1.4-4.6, and VAS Leg 1.3-4.3. The area under curve for receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis ranged from 0.63 to 0.71. Distribution-based MCID ranges were PROMIS-PF 1.4-4.5, SF-12 PCS 1.9-12.7, VR-12 PCS 2.0-6.6, VAS Back 0.4-1.4, and VAS Leg 0.5-2.0.

CONCLUSION

MCID thresholds varied widely depending on the calculation method. The closest to (0,1) ROC approach was the most clinically appropriate MCID calculation. The corresponding MCID values for LLIF were PROMIS-PF at 7.8, SF-12 PCS at 6.4, VR-12 PCS at 9.3, VAS Back at 4.6, and VAS Leg at 4.3.

Impact of cage position on biomechanical performance of stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a finite element analysis

Background

This study aimed to compare the biomechanical performance of various cage positions in stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion(SA LLIF).

Methods

An intact finite element model of the L3-L5 was reconstructed. The model was verified and analyzed. Through changing the position of the cage, SA LLIF was established in four directions: anterior placement(AP), middle placement(MP), posterior placement(PP), oblique placement(OP). A 400 N vertical axial pre-load was imposed on the superior surface of L3 and a 10 N/m moment was applied on the L3 superior surface along the radial direction to simulate movements of flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Various biomechanical parameters were evaluated for intact and implanted models in all loading conditions, including the range of motion (ROM) and maximum stress.

Results

In the SA LLIF models, the ROM of L4-5 was reduced by 84.21–89.03% in flexion, 72.64–82.26% in extension, 92.5-95.85% in right and left lateral bending, and 87.22–92.77% in right and left axial rotation, respectively. Meanwhile, ROM of L3-4 was mildly increased by an average of 9.6% in all motion directions. Almost all stress peaks were increased after SA LLIF, including adjacent disc, facet joints, and endplates. MP had lower stress peaks of cage and endplates in most motion modes. In terms of the stress on facet joints and disc of the cephalad segment, MP had the smallest increment.

Conclusion

In our study, SA LLIF risked accelerating the adjacent segment degeneration. The cage position had an influence on the distribution of endplate stress and the magnitude of facet joint stress. Compared with other positions, MP had the slightest effect on the stress in the adjacent facet joints. Meanwhile, MP seems to play an important role in reducing the risk of cage subsidence.

Oblique Lateral Endoscopic Decompression and Interbody Fusion for Severe Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Technical Note and Preliminary Results

OBJECTIVE

Adequacy of decompression for oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) is a real concern in patients with severe lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). With this in mind, we combined OLIF with spinal endoscopic technique to achieve a solid fusion and an adequate decompression after one operation.

METHODS

This is a technical note. The theoretical basis and operation process of this technique were introduced, and consecutive cases were retrospectively collected. Consecutive patients diagnosed with monosegmental severe LSS (L4/5) and underwent oblique lateral endoscopic decompression and interbody fusion (OLEDIF) from January 2018 to February 2020 were retrospectively collected. Clinical outcomes were assessed by claudication distance, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Secondary indicators included operation time, operative blood loss, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Ten patients were selected for the OLEDIF procedure. They were five women and five men ranging in age from 49 to 75 years (mean age of 63.9 years) and in BMI from 25.4 to 30.2 kg/m² (mean BMI of 27.5 kg/m² ). The preoperative claudication distance was 160.00 ± 68.96 m (range 70-250 m), which was significantly extended on the 3-month and 1-year follow-up (1020.00 ± 407.70 m and 1040.00 ± 416.87 m, respectively). The preoperative VAS score of back pain and radiating leg pain was 5.50 ± 0.97 (range 4-7) and 6.40 ± 0.97 (range 5-8). The score on postoperative month 3 was 1.60 ± 0.52 (range 1-2) and 1.20 ± 0.79 (range 0-2), and the 1-year follow-up score was 1.90 ± 0.74 (range 1-3) and 1.60 ± 0.70 (range 1-3), respectively. The preoperative ODI was 72.23 ± 6.30 (range 64.4-82.2), the 3-month follow-up ODI was 31.12 ± 4.20 (range 24.4-35.6), and the 1-year follow-up ODI was 29.33 ± 5.92 (range 20.0-37.8). Compared with the transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in the literature, the operation time was not prolonged (189.3 ± 32.5 min vs. 214.9 ± 60.0 min) but the amount of blood loss decreased significantly (113.3 ± 26.7 ml vs. 366.8 ± 298.2 ml). No complications were found except one case presented with dysesthesia of the left leg. Imaging results showed good fusion without cage subsidence during 1-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

OLEDIF can achieve complete ventral decompression of the spinal canal and solid fusion of the lumbar spine at one time. It is an effective minimally invasive technique for the treatment of monosegmental severe LSS, which is promising and worthy of further clinical practice.

Assessing the differences in operative and patient-reported outcomes between lateral approaches for lumbar fusion: a systematic review and indirect meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Anterior-to-psoas lumbar interbody fusion (ATP-LIF), more commonly referred to as oblique lateral interbody fusion, and lateral transpsoas lumbar interbody fusion (LTP-LIF), also known as extreme lateral interbody fusion, are the two commonly used lateral approaches for performing a lumbar fusion procedure. These approaches help overcome some of the technical challenges associated with traditional approaches for lumbar fusion. In this systematic review and indirect meta-analysis, the authors compared operative and patient-reported outcomes between these two select approaches using available studies.

METHODS

Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach, the authors conducted an electronic search using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases for studies published before May 1, 2019. Indirect meta-analysis was conducted on fusion rate, cage movement (subsidence plus migration), permanent deficits, and transient deficits; results were depicted as forest plots of proportions (effect size [ES]).

RESULTS

A total of 63 studies were included in this review after applying the exclusion criteria, of which 26 studies investigated the outcomes of ATP-LIF, while 37 studied the outcomes of LTP-LIF. The average fusion rate was found to be similar between the two groups (ES 0.97, 95% CI 0.84-1.00 vs ES 0.94, 95% CI 0.91-0.97; p = 0.561). The mean incidence of cage movement was significantly higher in the ATP-LIF group compared with the LTP-LIF group (stand-alone: ES 0.15, 95% CI 0.06-0.27 vs ES 0.09, 95% CI 0.04-0.16 [p = 0.317]; combined: ES 0.18, 95% CI 0.07-0.32 vs ES 0.02, 95% CI 0.00-0.05 [p = 0.002]). The mean incidence of reoperations was significantly higher in patients undergoing ATP-LIF than in those undergoing LTP-LIF (ES 0.02, 95% CI 0.01-0.03 vs ES 0.04, 95% CI 0.02-0.07; p = 0.012). The mean incidence of permanent deficits was similar between the two groups (stand-alone: ES 0.03, 95% CI 0.01-0.06 vs ES 0.05, 95% CI 0.01-0.12 [p = 0.204]; combined: ES 0.03, 95% CI 0.01-0.06 vs ES 0.03, 95% CI 0.00-0.08 [p = 0.595]). The postoperative changes in visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were both found to be higher for ATP-LIF relative to LTP-LIF (VAS: weighted average 4.11 [SD 2.03] vs weighted average 3.75 [SD 1.94] [p = 0.004]; ODI: weighted average 28.3 [SD 5.33] vs weighted average 24.3 [SD 4.94] [p < 0.001]).

CONCLUSIONS

These analyses indicate that while both approaches are associated with similar fusion rates, ATP-LIF may be related to higher odds of cage movement and reoperations as compared with LTP-LIF. Furthermore, there is no difference in rates of permanent deficits between the two procedures.

Rates of Postoperative Complications and Approach-related Neurological Symptoms After L4-L5 Lateral Transpsoas Lumbar Interbody Fusion Compared With Upper Lumbar Levels

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective comparative study.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the likelihood of approach-related complications for patients undergoing single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) at L4-L5 to those undergoing the procedure at upper lumbar levels.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

LLIF has been associated with a number of advantages when compared with traditional interbody fusion techniques. However, potential risks with the approach include vascular or visceral injury, thigh dysesthesias, and lumbar plexus injury. There are concerns of a higher risk of these complications at the L4-L5 level compared with upper lumbar levels.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective cohort review was completed for consecutive patients undergoing single-level LLIF between 2004 and 2019 by a single surgeon. Indication for surgery was symptomatic degenerative lumbar stenosis and/or spondylolisthesis. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts: LLIF at L4-L5 versus a single level between L1 and L4. Baseline characteristics, intraoperative complications, postoperative approach-related neurological symptoms, and patient-reported outcomes were compared and analyzed between the cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 122 were included in analysis, of which 58 underwent LLIF at L4-L5 and 64 underwent LLIF between L1 and L4. There were no visceral or vascular injuries or lumbar plexus injuries in either cohort. There was no significant difference in the rate of postoperative hip pain, anterior thigh dysesthesias, and/or hip flexor weakness between the cohorts (53.5% L4-L5 vs. 37.5% L1-L4; P=0.102). All patients reported complete resolution of these symptoms by 6-month postoperative follow-up.

DISCUSSION

LLIF surgery at the L4-L5 level is associated with a similar infrequent likelihood of approach-related complications and postoperative hip pain, thigh dysesthesias, and hip flexor weakness when compared with upper lumbar level LLIF. Careful patient selection, meticulous use of real-time neuromonitoring, and an understanding of the anatomic location of the lumbar plexus to the working corridor are critical to success.

Indirect Lumbar Decompression Combined With or Without Additional Direct Posterior Decompression: A Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVE

Indirect decompression via lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) can ameliorate central and foraminal lumbar stenosis. In severe central stenosis, additional posterior direct decompression is utilized. The aim of this review is to synthesize existing literature on these 2 techniques and identify significant differences in outcomes between isolated indirect decompression via LLIF and combined indirect decompression supplemented with direct posterior decompression.

METHODS

A database search algorithm was utilized to query MEDLINE, COCHRANE, and EMBASE to identify literature reporting adult decompression study groups that involved an oblique or lateral fusion approach through September 2020. Improvement in outcomes measures and complication rates were pooled and tested for significance.

RESULTS

A total of 110 publications were assessed with 15 studies meeting inclusion criteria, including 557 patients and 1008 levels. Mean age was 63.1 years with BMI of 27.5 kg/m². For the combined indirect and direct decompression cohort, lumbar lordosis (LL) increased 133.9%, from 22.8^o to 48.7^o, while the indirect decompression cohort LL increased 8.9%, from 41.9^o to 45.5^o. Difference in LL improvement between cohorts was insignificant (P > .05). Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) decreased from 36.5 to 19.4 in the combined indirect and direct decompression cohort, and from 44.4 to 23.1 in the indirect decompression cohort. ODI reduction was insignificant (P = .053).

CONCLUSIONS

Prior studies of both indirect decompression as well as combined indirect and direct decompression of lumbar spine stenosis are limited by small samples, heterogeneous populations, and lack of direct comparisons. Both procedures result in improved function and pain postoperatively with direct decompression restoring more lordosis in patients with worse preoperative alignment.

Single-position prone transpsoas fusion for the treatment of lumbar adjacent segment disease: early experience of twenty-four cases across three tertiary medical centers

PURPOSE

Prone transpsoas fusion (PTP) is a minimally invasive technique that maximizes the benefit of lateral access interbody surgery and the prone positioning for surgically significant adjacent segment disease. The authors describe the feasibility, reproducibility and radiographic efficacy of PTP when performed for cases of lumbar ASD.

METHODS

Adult patients undergoing PTP for treatment of lumbar ASD at three institutions were retrospectively enrolled. Demographic information was recorded, as was operative data such as adjacent segment levels, operative time, blood loss, laterality of approach, open versus percutaneous pedicle screw instrumentation and need for primary decompression. Radiographic measurements including segmental and global lumbar lordosis, pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, sacral slope and sagittal vertical axis were recorded both pre- and immediately post-operatively.

RESULTS

Twenty-four patients met criteria for inclusion. Average age was 60.4 ± 10.4 years and average BMI was 31.6 ± 5.0 kg/m². Total operative time was 204.7 ± 83.3 min with blood loss of 187.9 ± 211 mL. Twenty-one patients had pedicle screw instrumentation exchanged percutaneously and 3 patients had open pedicle screw exchange. Two patients suffered pulmonary embolism that was treated medically with no long-term sequelae. One patient had transient lumbar radicular pain and all patients were discharged home with an average length of stay of 3.0 days (range 1-6). Radiographically, global lumbar lordosis improved by an average of 10.3 ± 9.0 degrees, segmental lordosis by 10.1 ± 13.3 degrees and sagittal vertical axis by 3.2 ± 3.2 cm.

CONCLUSION

Single-position prone transpsoas lumbar interbody fusion is a clinically reproducible minimally invasive technique that can effectively treat lumbar adjacent segment disease.

5-Year Revision Rates After Elective Multilevel Lumbar/Thoracolumbar Instrumented Fusions in Older Patients: An Analysis of State Databases

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study wasto evaluate cause-specific 5-year revision rates and risk factors for revision after elective multilevel lumbar instrumented fusion in older patients.

METHODS

Older patients (>60 years) who underwent elective multilevel (3+) lumbar instrumented fusions were identified in Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project state inpatient databases and followed for 5 years for revision operations because of mechanical failure, degenerative disease (DD), infection, postlaminectomy syndrome, and stenosis. Cox proportional hazards multivariate analyses were conducted to determine risk factors associated with revision for each diagnostic cause.

RESULTS

The cohort included 5,636 patients (female-3,285; average age-71.6 years). Most of the operations were 3 to 7 levels (97.4%), and the mean length of stay was 5.4 days. The overall 5-year revision rate was 16.5% with predominant etiologies of DD (50.7%), mechanical failure (32.2%), and stenosis (8.0%). The revision procedure at the index operation was associated with an increased revision risk for DD (hazards ratio [HR] = 1.59, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.29 to 1.98, P < 0.001) and mechanical failure (HR = 1.56, 95% CI, 1.19 to 2.04, P = 0.020). Male sex was associated with a significantly reduced revision risk for DD (HR = 0.75, 95% CI, 0.62 to 0.91, P = 0.04). Age, race, and number of comorbidities had no notable effect on the overall or cause-specific risk of revision.

DISCUSSION

In this large database analysis, DD and mechanical failure were the most common etiologies comprising a 5-year revision rate of 16.5% after elective multilevel lumbar instrumented fusion in older patients. Revision operations and female patients carried the strongest risks for revision.

Pearls and Pitfalls of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion: A Comprehensive Narrative Review

Lumbar degenerative disease is a common problem in an aging society. Oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) is a minimally invasive surgical (MIS) technique that utilizes a retroperitoneal antepsoas corridor to treat lumbar degenerative disease. OLIF has theoretical advantages over other lumbar fusion techniques, such as a lower risk of lumbar plexus injury than direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF). Previous studies have reported favorable clinical and radiological outcomes of OLIF in various lumbar degenerative diseases. The use of OLIF is increasing, and evidence on OLIF is growing in the literature. The indications for OLIF are also expanding with the help of recent technical developments, including stereotactic navigation systems and robotics. In this review, we present current evidence on OLIF for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease, focusing on the expansion of surgical indications and recent advancements in the OLIF procedure.

Revision Surgery for Adjacent Segment Degeneration After Fusion for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: Is there a Correlation with Roussouly Type?

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate whether there is an association between revision surgery rates for adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) and Roussouly type after L4-5 transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for spondylolisthesis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Revision surgery for ASD is known to occur after spinal fusion; however, it is unclear whether rates of ASD are associated with certain Roussouly types.

METHODS

Patients who underwent L4-5 TLIF for spondylolisthesis at the University of California San Francisco from January 2006 to December 2016 with minimum 2-year follow-up were retrospectively analyzed by Roussouly type. Revision surgery for ASD was noted and correlated by Roussouly type. Spinopelvic parameters were also measured for correlation. A value of P < 0.05 was significant.

RESULTS

There were 174 patients who met inclusion criteria, (59 males and 115 females). The average age was 62.3 (25-80) years. A total of 132 patients had grade I spondylolisthesis, and 42 had grade II. Mean follow-up was 45.2 months (24-497). A total of 22 patients (12.6%) underwent revision surgery for ASD after L4-5 TLIF. When classified by Roussouly type, revision surgery rates for ASD were: 1, 14.3%; 2, 22.6%; 3, 4.9%; and 4, 15.6% (P = 0.013). Type 3 spines with normal PI-LL (8.85° ± 6.83°) had the lowest revision surgery rate (4.9%), and type 2 spines with PI-LL mismatch (11.06° ± 8.81°) had the highest revision surgery rate (22.6%), a four-fold difference (P = 0.013). The PI-LL mismatch did not change significantly in each type postoperatively (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

We found that there may be a correlation between Roussouly type and revision surgery for ASD after L4-5 TLIF for spondylolisthesis, with type 2 spines having the highest rate. Spinopelvic parameters may also correlate with revision surgery for ASD after L4-5 TLIF.Level of Evidence: 4.

Early Outcomes of 3D-printed Porous Titanium versus Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Cage Implantation for Standalone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Symptomatic Adjacent Segment Degeneration

OBJECTIVE

This study compared outcomes of 3D-printed porous titanium (Ti) versus polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage implantation for standalone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (SA-LLIF) in the treatment of symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration (ASD).

METHODS

44 patients (59 levels) underwent SA-LLIF with Ti or PEEK cages between 10/2016 and 07/2020. The primary outcome was cage subsidence according to Marchi et al. Secondary outcomes included revision/recommendations for revision surgery, back/leg pain severity, changes in disc/foraminal height and global/segmental lumbar lordosis.

RESULTS

44 patients (21 female) were included with a mean age at surgery of 61.8±11.5 years, average radiological follow-up of 12.5±8.2 and clinical follow-up of 11.0±7.1 months. The overall subsidence rate was significantly less in the Ti versus PEEK group (20% vs. 58.8%; p=0.004). Revision was recommended to none of the patients in the Ti and 3 in the PEEK group (p=0.239). Furthermore, patients in the Ti group showed significantly better improvement in back pain NRS score (p=0.001). Disc height (p<0.001) and foraminal height restoration (p=0.011) were statistically significant in the Ti group, whereas only disc height restoration was significant in the PEEK group (p=0.003).

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing SA-LLIF for ASD treatment, 3D-printed Ti cages had significantly lower overall subsidence rate compared to PEEK cages. Furthermore, Ti cages resulted in fewer recommendations for revision surgery. Whether greater pain reduction in the Ti group is associated with earlier or higher fusion rates needs to be further elucidated.

Development and Initial Internal Validation of a Novel Classification System for Perioperative Expectations Following Minimally Invasive Degenerative Lumbar Spine Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

This was a prospective consecutive clinical cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of our study was to develop and provide an initial internal validation of a novel classification system that can help surgeons and patients better understand their postoperative course following the particular minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and approach that is utilized.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Surgeons and patients are often attracted to the option of minimally invasive spine surgery because of the perceived improvement in recovery time and postsurgical pain. A classification system based on the impact of the surgery and surgical approach(es) on postoperative recovery can be particularly helpful.

METHODS

Six hundred thirty-one patients who underwent MIS lumbar/thoracolumbar surgery for degenerative conditions of the spine were included. Perioperative outcomes-operative time, estimated blood loss, postsurgical length of stay (LOS), 90-day complications, postoperative day zero narcotic requirement [in Morphine Milligram Equivalent (MME)], and need for intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA).

RESULTS

Postoperative LOS and postoperative narcotic use were deemed most clinically relevant, thus selected as primary outcomes. Type of surgery was significantly associated with all outcomes (P<0.0001), except intraoperative complications. Number of levels for fusion was significantly associated with operative time, in-hospital complications, 24 hours oral MME, and the need for IV PCA and LOS (P<0.0001). Number of surgical approaches for lumbar fusion was significantly associated with operative time, 24 hours oral MME, need for IV PCA and LOS (P<0.001). Based on these parameters, the following classification system ("Qureshi-Louie classification" for MIS degenerative lumbar surgery) was devised: (1) Decompression-only; (2) Fusion-1 and 2 levels, 1 approach; (3) Fusion-1 level, 2 approaches; (4) Fusion-2 levels, 2 approaches; (5) Fusion-3+ levels, 2 approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

We present a novel classification system and initial internal validation to describe the perioperative expectations following various MIS surgeries in the degenerative lumbar spine. This initial description serves as the basis for ongoing external validation.

Surgical Restoration of Sagittal Alignment of the Spine: Correlation with Improved Patient-Reported Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The sagittal-plane curvatures of the human spine are the consequence of evolution from quadrupedalism to bipedalism and are needed to maintain the center of mass of the body within the base of support in the bipedal position. Lumbar degenerative disorders can lead to a decrease in lumbar lordosis and thereby affect overall alignment of the spine. However, there is not yet enough direct evidence that surgical restoration of spinal malalignment would lead to a better clinical outcome. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the correlation between patient-reported outcomes and actual obtained spinal sagittal alignment in adult patients with lumbar degenerative disorders who underwent surgical treatment.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted through databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Embase). The last search was in November 2018. Risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale. A meta-regression analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Of 2,024 unique articles in the original search, 34 articles with 973 patients were included. All studies were either retrospective or prospective cohort studies; no randomized controlled trials were available. A total of 54 relations between preoperative-to-postoperative improvement in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and radiographic spinopelvic parameters were found, of which 20 were eligible for meta-regression analysis. Of these, 2 correlations were significant: pelvic tilt (PT) versus Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (p = 0.009) and PT versus visual analog scale (VAS) pain (p = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the current literature, lower PT was significantly correlated with improved ODI and VAS pain in patients with sagittal malalignment caused by lumbar degenerative disorders that were treated with surgical correction of the sagittal balance.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Expert Consensus on Clinical Application of Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Results From a Modified Delphi Study

STUDY DESIGN

Modified Delphi study.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to establish expert consensus on the application of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) by using the modified Delphi study.

METHODS

From June 2019 to March 2020, Members of the Chinese Study Group for Lateral Lumbar Spine Surgery were selected to collect expert feedback using the modified Delphi method where 65 spine surgeons from all over China agreed to participate. Four rounds were performed: 1 face-to-face meeting and 3 subsequent survey rounds. The consensus was achieved with ≥a 70.0% agreement for each question. The recommendation of grade A was defined as ≥90.0% of the agreement for each question. The recommendation of grade B was defined as 80.0-89.9% of the agreement for each question. The recommendation of grade C was defined as 70.0-79.9% of the agreement for each question.

RESULTS

A total of 65 experts formed a panelist group, and the number of questionnaires collected was 63, 59, and 62 in the 3 rounds. In total, 5 sections, 71 questions, and 382 items achieved consensus after the Delphi rounds including summary; preoperative evaluation; application at the lumbar spinal stenosis, lumbar disc herniation, lumbar spondylolisthesis, adult degenerative scoliosis, postoperative adjacent segmental degeneration, and revision surgery; complications; and postoperative follow-up evaluation of LLIF.

CONCLUSION

The modified Delphi method was utilized to ascertain an expert consensus from the Chinese Study Group for Lateral Lumbar Spine Surgery to inform clinical decision-making in the application of LLIF. The salient grade A recommendations of the survey are enumerated.

Implant Preservation versus Implant Replacement in Revision Surgery for Adjacent Segment Disease After Thoracolumbar Instrumentation: A Retrospective Study of 43 Patients

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the mechanical properties of a new connector rod aiming to preserve implants in revision surgery (RS) for adjacent segment disease, a problematic complication of instrumented spinal fusion, and to assess its clinical applicability.

METHODS

The mechanical properties of the connector-rod construct (implant preservation) and traditional rod construct (implant replacement) were evaluated and compared. Forty-three patients underwent RS for adjacent segment disease in the thoracolumbar spine with implant preservation or replacement, and radiological and clinical outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Mechanical properties in group A were comparable to those in group B. Total mean time from prior surgery to RS was 6.86 ± 1.08 years. Surgical time and blood loss values of group A were 40.14% and 29.29% statistically significantly smaller than values of group B. In group B, 12% (3/25) of patients developed surgical site infections. In both groups, the visual analog scale leg score decreased significantly after RS. Early postoperative (at 1-month and 3-month follow-up) Oswestry Disability Index and visual analog scale back scores of group A were significantly lower than those of group B; the difference in the visual analog scale back score between groups was significant until the 6-month follow-up. No implant failures occurred, and spinal fusion was achieved in all cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The connector rod is considered safe and can reduce the surgical time, blood loss, risk of complications, and medical costs. Better early postoperative clinical outcomes can be achieved with the rod owing to less surgical trauma.

Three-dimensional computed tomographic evaluation of lateral lumbar interbody fusion: morphometric change of intervertebral structure

PURPOSE

Two-dimensional (2D) analyses of intervertebral disc (IVD) height and foramen measurements following lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) have been reported. However, three-dimensional (3D) morphometric analysis of intervertebral structure using 3D computed tomography (3D CT) provides increased precision for measuring morphological changes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate 3D changes of lumbar IVD height and foramen diameter in degenerative lumbar disease patients following LLIF.

METHODS

Subject-based 3D CT lumbar models were created for 26 patients before and following LLIF. IVD height (whole and five anatomical zones) and foramen diameter (minimum and maximum) were measured based on the model using custom software. The sagittal placement of cages (SPC) and cross-sectional area of the thecal sac (CSA) were measured. Changes in these parameters by LLIF were quantified and statistically analysed.

RESULTS

Following LLIF, disc height increased by an average of 2.9 mm (P < 0.01). Post-operative measurements of both minimum and maximum diameters of the foramen were significantly increased by 1.0 mm and 1.9 mm, respectively (P < 0.01). Change in maximum foramen diameter was significantly correlated with change in disc height (P < 0.05). The SPC was significantly correlated with the changes in disc height and foraminal diameters (P < 0.05, respectively). No significant change between the change in disc height and CSA was found.

CONCLUSION

This preliminary study quantifies disc height and foramen diameter changes in 3D following LLIF. The presented data provide baseline intervertebral changes for future comparisons with follow-up studies and clinical outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I

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

Duration of Symptoms Does Not Affect Clinical Outcome After Lumbar Arthrodesis

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study at a single institution.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of symptom duration on clinical outcomes after posterolateral lumbar fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Nonoperative measures are generally exhausted before patients are indicated for surgical intervention, leaving patients with their symptomatology for varying lengths of time. It is unclear at what point in time surgical intervention may become less efficacious at alleviating preoperative symptoms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent primary elective open posterior lumbar spinal fusion at a single academic institution were included. Patient and operative characteristics were compared between symptom duration groups (group 1: <12 mo of pain, group 2: ≥12 mo of pain). Preoperative and final postoperative visual analog scale back/leg pain, and Oswestry Disability Index, were collected. Preoperative, immediate postoperative, and final radiographs were assessed to measure lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI), and the PI-LL difference was calculated.

RESULTS

In total, 167 patients were included in group 1, whereas 359 patients were included in group 2. Baseline demographics and operative characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. Both groups had similar changes in sagittal parameters and had no significant difference in rates of complication, reoperation, discharge to rehabilitation facility, or early adjacent segment degeneration. Both groups demonstrated similar improvement in clinical outcome measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite differences in symptom duration, patients who had pain for ≥12 months demonstrated similar improvement after posterolateral lumbar arthrodesis than those who had pain for <12 months. Extended effort of conservative treatments or delay of operative intervention does not appear to negatively impact the eventual outcome of surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

The Safety and Efficacy of Stand-Alone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Adjacent Segment Disease in a Cohort of 44 Patients

BACKGROUND

A mainstay of treatment for symptomatic adjacent segment disease (ASD) has consisted of revision with posterior decompression and fusion. This carries significant morbidity and can be technically difficult. An alternative is stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), which may avoid complications associated with revision surgery. We describe the largest cohort of patients treated with LLIF for ASD to our knowledge.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study on all patients who underwent transpsoas LLIF for ASD at a single academic center between 2012 and 2019. Postoperative improvement was measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).

RESULTS

Forty-four patients who underwent LLIF for ASD were identified. Median age was 65 years. Median time from index surgery to ASD development was 78 months. Median levels fused via LLIF was 1. Our median follow-up was 358 days. At follow-up, the median VAS back pain score was 0 (mean, 0.884), median VAS leg pain score was 1 (mean, 0.953), and median ODI was 8. The median improvement for VAS back pain was 8, for VAS leg pain was 6, and for ODI was 40. No patients suffered new neurologic symptoms postoperatively. Of the 17 patients who initially presented with non-pain neurologic symptoms, 8 (47.1%) experienced complete resolution of symptoms, and 5 (29.4%) experienced only some improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the largest cohort study of patients to date evaluating stand-alone LLIF for ASD. Our patient outcomes show it is safe and effective with low risk of morbidity.

Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Lateral Interbody Fusion for Adjacent Segment Degeneration

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

Assessment of outcomes in patients undergoing lateral interbody fusion as part of the surgical treatment of adjacent segment deterioration after previous lumbar spine fusion.

METHODS

Adult patients with previous lumbar posterior spinal fusion who presented with adjacent segment degeneration and stenosis refractory to nonoperative treatment and who underwent lateral lumbar interbody fusion were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were assessed and comparisons made between preoperative baseline and postoperative values.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients with symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration at 46 motion segments were included. Thirty (83.3%) of the 36 patients had complete relief of both preoperative lower extremity pain and back pain at the time of final follow-up. Six (16.7%) of the 36 patients had persistent pain, though in all 6 cases, the pain was less postoperatively than preoperatively. Oswestry Disability Index scores were improved significantly at final follow-up (P = .001). Compared with preoperative baseline parameters, initial and final postoperative radiographs had an increase in segmental lordosis (P < .001 and P < .001, respectively), increase in overall lumbar lordosis (P < .05 and P = .094, respectively), decrease in segmental coronal angulation (P = .63 and P < .01, respectively), decrease in overall coronal angulation (P = .063 and P = .009, respectively), and increase in intervertebral height (P < .001 and P < .001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion achieves favorable clinical and radiographic outcomes for the treatment of adjacent segment degeneration after previous lumbar fusion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Usefulness of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion as Revision Surgery: Comparison of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes Between Primary and Revision Surgery

OBJECTIVE

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) is useful as surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar disease. However, revision surgery has often resulted in worse surgical outcomes than primary surgery. Thus, we compared the usefulness of OLIF as primary surgery (PS) versus revision surgery (RS).

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated 173 patients who had undergone single-level OLIF from 2016 to 2018. The radiological and clinical outcomes were compared between PS (n = 152) and RS (n = 21). The effects of RS on the clinical outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] cutoff, 12) after surgery were investigated.

RESULTS

The ODI and visual analog scale score at 6 and 12 months after surgery was worse in the RS group than in the PS group (P < 0.05). In the RS group, the visual analog scale score for leg pain of the previous laminectomy side was worse than that of the virgin side at 6 and 12 months after surgery (P < 0.05). The disc height, ligamentum flavum, and subsidence did not differ between the 2 groups. However, the cross-sectional area enlargement differed between the 2 groups (P < 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that RS and severe subsidence were risk factors for differences in the ODI (P = 0.006 and P = 0.017, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Most radiological outcomes were similar between the RS and PS groups, with no differences in complications or the requirement for additional posterior decompression. However, OLIF resulted in relatively poor clinical outcomes when used as RS. Thus, revision spine surgery tends to result in poor outcomes compared with those of primary spine surgery; however, OLIF can be a tolerable option for revision spine surgery.

State of the art advances in minimally invasive surgery for adult spinal deformity

Adult spinal deformity (ASD) can be associated with substantial suffering due to pain and disability. Surgical intervention for achieving neural decompression and restoring physiological spinal alignment has shown to result in significant improvement in pain and disability through patient-reported outcomes. Traditional open approaches involving posterior osteotomy techniques and instrumentation are effective based on clinical outcomes but associated with high complication rates, even in the hands of the most experienced surgeons. Minimally invasive techniques may offer benefit while decreasing associated morbidity. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for ASD has evolved over the past 20 years, driven by improved understanding of open procedures along with novel technique development and technologic advancements. Early efforts were hindered due to suboptimal outcomes resulting from high pseudarthrosis, inadequate correction, and fixation failure rates. To address this, multi-center collaborative groups have been established to study large numbers of ASD patients which have been vital to understanding optimal patient selection and individualized management strategies. Different MIS decision-making algorithms have been described to better define appropriate candidates and interbody selection approaches in ASD. The purpose of this state of the review is to describe the evolution of MIS surgery for adult deformity with emphasis on landmark papers, and to discuss specific MIS technology for ASD, including percutaneous pedicle screw instrumentation, hyperlordotic grafts, three-dimensional navigation, and robotics.

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion in revision surgery for restenosis after posterior decompression

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical results of revision interbody fusion surgery between lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with propensity score (PS) adjustments and to investigate the efficacy of indirect decompression with LLIF in previously decompressed segments on the basis of radiological assessment.

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients who underwent revision surgery for recurrence of neurological symptoms after posterior decompression surgery was performed. Postoperative complications and operative factors were evaluated and compared between LLIF and PLIF/TLIF. Moreover, postoperative improvement in cross-sectional areas (CSAs) in the spinal canal and intervertebral foramen was evaluated in LLIF cases.

RESULTS

A total of 56 patients (21 and 35 cases of LLIF and PLIF/TLIF, respectively) were included. In the univariate analysis, the LLIF group had significantly more endplate injuries (p = 0.03) and neurological deficits (p = 0.042), whereas the PLIF/TLIF group demonstrated significantly more dural tears (p < 0.001), surgical site infections (SSIs) (p = 0.02), and estimated blood loss (EBL) (p < 0.001). After PS adjustments, the LLIF group still showed significantly more endplate injuries (p = 0.03), and the PLIF/TLIF group demonstrated significantly more dural tears (p < 0.001), EBL (p < 0.001), and operating time (p = 0.04). The PLIF/TLIF group showed a trend toward a higher incidence of SSI (p = 0.10). There was no statistically significant difference regarding improvement in the Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores between the 2 surgical procedures (p = 0.77). The CSAs in the spinal canal and foramen were both significantly improved (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

LLIF is a safe, effective, and less invasive procedure with acceptable complication rates for revision surgery for previously decompressed segments. Therefore, LLIF can be an alternative to PLIF/TLIF for restenosis after posterior decompression surgery.

A less invasive treatment by a full-endoscopic spine surgery for adjacent segment disease after lumbar interbody fusion

Background

Full-endoscopic spine surgery (FESS) is a suitable treatment for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) and foraminal stenosis. This study investigated the usefulness of FESS in treating adjacent segment disease (ASD) after lumbar interbody fusion (LIF).

Methods

Between September 2015 and March 2019, a total of 13 patients with symptomatic ASD after LIF underwent FESS. Discectomy and foraminoplasty using a 3.5-mm diameter high-speed drill were performed for treating LDH and foraminal stenosis. Preoperative and postoperative statuses were evaluated using Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) scores.

Results

The patients' mean age was 64.8 years; there were 10 male and 3 female patients. The mean operative time was 52.7 min. The mean pre- and postoperative NRS scores were 7.6 and 3.1, respectively. The mean pre- and postoperative mJOA scores were 10.5 and 16.1, respectively, and the mean recovery rate was 32.8%. Subsequent operative treatments were required in 3 patients for postoperative complication, insufficient decompression, and recurrence LDH.

Conclusions

FESS is a safe and effective minimally invasive treatment for ASD after LIF and a potential alternative to extend the LIF to the adjacent vertebra or sacrum.

Biomechanical evaluation of strategies for adjacent segment disease after lateral lumbar interbody fusion: is the extension of pedicle screws necessary?

Background

Adjacent segment disease (ASD) is a well-known complication after interbody fusion. Pedicle screw-rod revision possesses sufficient strength and rigidity. However, is a surgical segment with rigid fixation necessary for ASD reoperation? This study aimed to investigate the biomechanical effect of different instrumentation on lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) for ASD treatment.

Methods

A validated L2~5 finite element (FE) model was modified for simulation. ASD was considered the level cranial to the upper-instrumented segment (L3/4). Bone graft fusion in LLIF with bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) fixation occurred at L4/5. The ASD segment for each group underwent a) LLIF + posterior extension of BPS, b) PLIF + posterior extension of BPS, c) LLIF + lateral screw, and d) stand-alone LLIF. The L3/4 range of motion (ROM), interbody cage stress and strain, screw-bone interface stress, cage-endplate interface stress, and L2/3 nucleus pulposus of intradiscal pressure (NP-IDP) analysis were calculated for comparisons among the four models.

Results

All reconstructive models displayed decreased motion at L3/4. Under each loading condition, the difference was not significant between models a and b, which provided the maximum ROM reduction (73.8 to 97.7% and 68.3 to 98.4%, respectively). Model c also provided a significant ROM reduction (64.9 to 77.5%). Model d provided a minimal restriction of the ROM (18.3 to 90.1%), which exceeded that of model a by 13.1 times for flexion-extension, 10.3 times for lateral bending and 4.8 times for rotation. Model b generated greater cage stress than other models, particularly for flexion. The maximum displacement of the cage and the peak stress of the cage-endplate interface were found to be the highest in model d under all loading conditions. For the screw-bone interface, the stress was much greater with lateral instrumentation than with posterior instrumentation.

Conclusions

Stand-alone LLIF is likely to have limited stability, particularly for lateral bending and axial rotation. Posterior extension of BPS can provide reliable stability and excellent protective effects on instrumentation and endplates. However, LLIF with the use of an in situ screw may be an alternative for ASD reoperation.

Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Stand-Alone Cages for the Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Retrospective Study with 1-Year Follow-Up

Patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) often suffer from years of low back pain (LBP) due to instability of the lumbar spine and the reduction of disc height. Since January 2016, we have performed oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) on 154 patients. Among these, 56 patients who suffered from DLS underwent OLIF with stand-alone cages. Forty-two patients with a follow-up time that exceeded 1-year were enrolled for this study. The forty-two patients were followed up for at least one year. Operation segments ranged from L3-4 to L4-5. All the patients were with 1-level fusion. The mean postoperative ventral-disc height and dorsal-disc height increased significantly compared with preoperative (P < 0.05). A significant postoperative increase was also observed in the mean operative segmental lordotic angle and the whole lumbar lordotic angle (P < 0.05). Compared with preoperative, the postoperative VAS significantly decreased with no significant increase in the VAS in the last follow-up. The LBP was significantly relieved. The mean postoperative VAS of LBP decreased significantly compared with the preoperative ((1.6 ± 0.8) vs. (7.8 ± 0.8)). Postoperative complications included psoas major abscess and intervertebral space infection (1/56). Except for one patient whose cage subsided during the last follow-up, the other patients had good cage position. The one whose cage collapsed complained no symptoms including LBP. OLIF with stand-alone cages should be considered as a safe and effective option which can effectively alleviate LBP for the treatment of DLS.

Comparison of Stand-alone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Open Laminectomy and Posterolateral Instrumented Fusion in the Treatment of Adjacent Segment Disease Following Previous Lumbar Fusion Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients who underwent stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) to those who underwent posterolateral fusion (PLF) for symptomatic adjacent segment disease (ASD).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Recent studies have suggested that LLIF can successfully treat ASD; however, there are no studies to date that compare LLIF with the traditional open PLF in this cohort.

METHODS

A total of 47 consecutive patients who underwent LLIF or PLF for symptomatic ASD between January 2007 and August 2016 after failure of conservative management were reviewed for this study. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected on all patients at preoperative, postoperative, and most recent post-operative visit using the Oswestry Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale (VAS)-Back, and VAS-Leg surveys. Preoperative, immediate postoperative, and most recent postoperative radiographs were assessed for pelvic incidence, fusion, intervertebral disc height, segmental and overall lumbar lordosis (LL). Symptomatic ASD was diagnosed if back pain, neurogenic claudication, or lower extremity radiculopathy presented following a previous lumbar fusion. Preoperative plain radiographs were evaluated for evidence of adjacent segment degeneration.

RESULTS

A total of 47 patients (23 LLIF, 24 PLF) met inclusion criteria. Operative times (P < 0.001) and intraoperative blood loss (P < 0.001) were significantly higher in the PLF group. Patients who underwent PLF were discharged approximately 3 days after the LLIF patients (P < 0.001). PROs in the PLF and LLIF cohorts showed significant and equivalent improvement, with equivalent radiographic fusion rates. LLIF significantly improve segmental lordosis (P < 0.001), total LL (P = 0.003), and disc height (P < 0.001) from preoperative to immediate postoperative and final follow-up (P = 0.004, P = 0.019, P ≤ 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Although LLIF may provide less perioperative morbidity and shorter length of hospitalization, both techniques are safe and effective approaches to restore radiographic alignment and provide successful clinical outcomes in patients with adjacent segment degeneration following previous lumbar fusion surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Differences in radiographic and clinical outcomes of oblique lateral interbody fusion and lateral lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar disease: a meta-analysis

Background

In the current surgical therapeutic regimen for the degenerative lumbar disease, both oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) are gradually accepted. Thus, the objective of this study is to compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes of OLIF and LLIF for the degenerative lumbar disease.

Methods

We conducted an exhaustive literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library to find the relevant studies about OLIF and LLIF for the degenerative lumbar disease. Random-effects model was performed to pool the outcomes about disc height (DH), fusion, operative blood loss, operative time, length of hospital stays, complications, visual analog scale (VAS), and Oswestry disability index (ODI).

Results

56 studies were included in this study. The two groups of patients had similar changes in terms of DH, operative blood loss, operative time, hospital stay and the fusion rate (over 90%). The OLIF group showed slightly better VAS and ODI scores improvement. The incidence of perioperative complications of OLIF and LLIF was 26.7 and 27.8% respectively. Higher rates of nerve injury and psoas weakness (21.2%) were reported for LLIF, while higher rates of cage subsidence (5.1%), endplate damage (5.2%) and vascular injury (1.7%) were reported for OLIF.

Conclusions

The two groups are similar in terms of radiographic outcomes, operative blood loss, operative time and the length of hospital stay. The OLIF group shows advantages in VAS and ODI scores improvement. Though the incidence of perioperative complications of OLIF and LLIF is similar, the incidence of main complications is significantly different.

Biomechanical Analysis of Stand-alone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Adjacent Segment Disease

Study design

Biomechanical cadaveric study 

Objective

To compare biomechanical properties of a single stand-alone interbody fusion and a single-level pedicle screw construct above a previous lumbar pedicle fusion.

Summary of background data

Adjacent segment disease (ASD) is spondylosis of adjacent vertebral segments after previous spinal fusion. Despite the consensus that ASD is clinically significant, the surgical treatment of ASD is controversial.

Methods

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and posterior spinal fusion (PSF) with pedicle screws were analyzed within a validated cadaveric lumbar fusion model. L3-4 vertebral segment motion was analyzed within the following simulations: without implants (intact), L3-4 LLIF-only, L3-4 LLIF with previous L4-S1 PSF, L3-4 PSF with previous L4-S1 PSF, and L4-S1 PSF alone. L3-4 motion values were measured during flexion/extension with and without axial load, side bending, and axial rotation.

Results

L3-4 motion in the intact model was found to be 4.7 ± 1.2 degrees. L3-4 LLIF-only decreased motion to 1.9 ± 1.1 degrees. L3-4 LLIF with previous L4-S1 fusion demonstrated less motion in all planes with and without loading (p < 0.05) compared to an intact spine. However, L3-4 motion with flexion/extension and lateral bending was noted to be greater compared to the L3-S1 construct (p < 0.5). The L3-S1 PSF construct decreased motion to less than 1° in all planes of motion with or without loading (p < 0.05). The L3-4 PSF with previous L4-S1 PSF constructs decreased the flexion/extension motion by 92.4% compared to the intact spine, whereas the L3-4 LLIF with previous L4-S1 PSF constructs decreased motion by 61.2%.

Conclusions

Stand-alone LLIF above a previous posterolateral fusion significantly decreases motion at the adjacent segment, demonstrating its utility in treating ASD without necessitating revision. The stand-alone LLIF is a biomechanically sound option in the treatment of ASD and is advantageous in patient populations who may benefit from less invasive surgical options.

Revision for Endoscopic Diskectomy: Is Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion an Option?

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to report the clinical outcome of stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) on recurrent disk herniation and to compare the outcome of stand-alone LLIF to that of conventional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

METHODS

A retrospective study of 47 patients with recurrent disk herniation was included from January 2008 to October 2016. The inclusion criteria were 1) with recurrent disk herniation that needs revision surgery, 2) with only 1 previous percutaneous endoscopic lumbar diskectomy surgery, 3) underwent 1-level stand-alone LLIF or 1-level TLIF surgery, and 4) with follow-up more than 1 year. Patients were asked to complete the following questionnaires for outcome evaluation: visual analog scales (VAS) for both low back pain and leg pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients underwent stand-alone LLIF, and 29 patients underwent TLIF surgery. Radiographic analysis revealed a similar baseline and postoperative lumbar lordosis in both the LLIF and TLIF groups. Two weeks after surgery, the ODI and VAS scores showed a significant decrease in both groups. The TLIF group showed significantly larger postoperative VAS back pain after surgery (P = 0.03). For both VAS leg pain and ODI score during follow-up, no significance difference was found between the LLIF and TLIF groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Stand-alone LLIF is a safe and effective approach with low morbidity and acceptable complication rates for patients with recurrent disk herniation after a previous percutaneous endoscopic lumbar diskectomy surgery. Compared with the TLIF procedure, LLIF could achieve a similar improvement of patient-reported outcome with a better VAS back pain score.

Current state of minimally invasive spine surgery

Over the past two decades, minimally invasive surgical approaches have become increasingly feasible, efficient and popular for the management of a wide range of spinal disorders, with a growing body of research demonstrating numerous advantages of these techniques over the traditional open approach. In this article, we review the technologies and innovations that are expanding the horizon of minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS), and highlight high-quality peer-reviewed literature in the past year that expands our knowledge and understanding of indications, advantages and limitations of MISS.

Spondylolisthesis with Uncommon Congenital Deformity of L4-L5 Vertebral Fusion Treated by Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis and management of congenital anomalies of the spine can be a challenge because of their complex presentations. We present an uncommon case of congenital deformity of the spine with L4-L5 vertebral fusion, mimicking a single vertebra, and L3 spondylolisthesis treated by oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF).

CASE DESCRIPTION

A 69-year-old woman presented with increasing lower back pain radiating to the left leg, with aggravation of symptoms for the past 6 months, causing difficulty in walking. She also complained of paresthesia along the L3-L5 dermatomes in both legs, with more prominence on the left side. Imaging revealed fusion deformity of the L4-L5 vertebrae, as well as degenerative spondylolisthesis at the L3-L4 level. After treatment with OLIF, the patient had an uneventful recovery period. Comparisons were made between the preoperative and 6-month follow-up visual analog scale and the Oswestry Disability Index scores. The patient showed significant improvement in the scores, as well as in her symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

OLIF is a promising technique that can be applied in the management of degenerative disk diseases and also for deformities that may be formidable to treat by adopting the traditional posterior approach.