Iliac screws may not be necessary in long-segment constructs with L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion: cadaveric study of stability and instrumentation strain

Triangular pelvic fixation in the management of adult spinal deformities: technical note and preliminary results

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Optimal choice of the lower instrumented vertebra in the management of adult spinal deformity that include lumbosacral junction is still unclear. It is therefore possible to stop fixation in S1 but also lower (S2AI or iliac screws) in order to reduce the risk of implants pullout. In such situations, mechanical solicitations can lead to secondary degradation of sacro-iliac joints.

TECHNIQUE AND RESULTS

Based on triangular pelvic fixation described for pelvic trauma, a posterior only fixation that combine S1 screws, iliac screws and sacro-iliac implants can be performed.

DISCUSSION

We are describing here the operative technique of this « bedrock » fixation under fluoroscopic guidance and its preliminary results about 15 patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

The influence of lumbar vertebra and cage related factors on cage-endplate contact after lumbar interbody fusion: An in-vitro experimental study

Lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) using interbody cages is an established treatment for lumbar degenerative disc disease, but fusion results are known to be affected by risk factors such as bone mineral density (BMD), endplate geometry and cage position. At present, direct measurement of endplate-cage contact variables that affect LIF have not been fully identified. The aim of this study was to use cadaveric experiments to investigate the dependency between BMD, endplate geometry, cage parameters like type, orientation, position, and contact variables like stress and area. One vertebral body specimen from each of the five lumbar positions was harvested from five male donors. The lower half of each vertebra was potted and placed in a material testing machine (Instron 8874). A spinal cage was clamped to the machine then lowered to bring it into contact against the superior endplate. A lockable ball-joint was used to rotate the cage such that its inferior surface was congruent with the local endplate surface. A pressure sensor (Tekscan) was placed between the cage and endplate to record contact area and the peak and average contact pressures. Axial compression of 400 N was performed for five positions using a straight cage, and in one anterior position using a curved cage. The linear mixed model was utilised to perform data analyses for experimental results with statistical significance set at p < 0.05. The results indicated two trends toward significance for contact area, one for volumetric BMD (vBMD) of the vertebra (p = 0.081), and another for predicted contact area (p = 0.057). Peak contact pressure correlated significantly with vBMD (p = 0.041), and there was a trend between average contact pressure and lateral position of cage (p = 0.051). In addition, predicted contact area correlated significantly with cage orientation (p < 0.001). These results indicated that high vBMD of vertebra and a medially positioned cage led to higher contact pressures. Logically, low vBMD of vertebra and transverse cage orientation increased the contact area between the cage and endplate. In conclusion, the study identified significant influence of vBMD of vertebra, cage position and orientation on cage-endplate contact which may help to inform cage selection and design for LIF.

Innovative hydrogel-patch combination for large annulus fibrosus defects: a prospective approach to address herniation recurrence

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Large annulus fibrosus (AF) defects often lead to a high rate of reherniation, particularly in the medial AF region, which has limited self-healing capabilities. The increasing prevalence of herniated discs underscores the need for effective repair strategies.

PURPOSE

The objectives of this study were to design an AF repair technique to reduce solve the current problems of insufficient mechanical properties and poor sealing capacity.

STUDY DESIGN

In vitro biomechanical experiments and finite element analysis.

METHODS

The materials used in this study were patches and hydrogels with good biocompatibility and sufficient mechanical properties to withstand loading in the lumbar spine. Five repair techniques were assessed in this study: hydrogel filler (HF), AF patch medial barrier (MB), AF patch medial barrier and hydrogel filler (MB&HF), AF patch medial-lateral barrier (MLB), and AF patch medial-lateral barrier and hydrogel filler (MLB&HF). The repair techniques were subjected to in vitro testing (400 N axial compression and 0-500 N fatigue loading at 5Hz) and finite element analysis (400 N axial compression) to evaluate the effectiveness at repairing large AF defects. The evaluation included repair tightness, spinal stability, and fatigue resistance.

RESULTS

From the in vitro testing, the failure load of the repair techniques was in the following order HF MLB >MB&HF >MLB&HF.

CONCLUSIONS

The combined use of patches and hydrogels exhibited promising mechanical properties postdiscectomy, providing a promising solution for addressing large AF defects and improving disc stability.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

This study introduces a promising method for repairing large annular fissure (AF) defects after disc herniation, combining patch repair with a hydrogel filler. These techniques hold potential for developing clinical AF repair products to address this challenging issue.

Rod Attachment Induces Significant Strain in Lumbosacral Fixation

STUDY DESIGN

This was a laboratory investigation.

OBJECTIVE

Rod attachment can induce significant pedicle screw-and-rod pre- strain that may predispose the instrumentation to failure. This study investigated how in vitro L5-S1 rod strain and S1 screw strain during rod-screw attachment (pre-strain) compared with strains recorded during pure-moment bending ( test- strain).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The lumbosacral junction is highly vulnerable to construct failure due to rod fatigue fracture, sacral screw pull-out, and screw fatigue fracture.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twelve cadaveric specimens were instrumented with L2-ilium pedicle screws and rod. Strain gauges on contoured rods and sacral screws recorded strains during sequential rod-to-screw tightening (pre-strains). The same instrumented constructs were immediately tested in a 6-degree-of-freedom apparatus under continuous loading to 7.5 Nm in multidirectional bending while recording instrumentation test-strains. Rod and screw pre-strains and test-strains were compared using 1-way repeated-measures analysis of variance followed by Holm-Šidák paired analysis (significant at P <0.05).

RESULTS

The mean first (171±192 µE) and second (322±269 µE) rod attachment pre-strains were comparable to mean test-strains during flexion (265±109 µE) and extension (315±125 µE, P ≥0.13). The mean rod attachment pre-strain was significantly greater than mean test-strains during bidirectional lateral bending (40±32 µE ipsilateral and 39±32 µE contralateral, P <0.001) and axial rotation (72±60 µE ipsilateral and 60±57 µE contralateral, P <0.001). The mean first and second sacral screw pre-strains during rod attachment (1.03±0.66 and 1.39±1.00 Nm, respectively) did not differ significantly ( P =0.41); however, the mean sacral screw pre-strain during final (second) rod attachment was significantly greater than screw test-strains during all directions of movement (≤0.81 Nm, P ≤0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Instrumentation pre-strains imposed during in vitro rod-screw attachment of seemingly well-contoured rods in L2-ilium fixation are comparable to, and at times greater than, strains experienced during in vitro bending. Spine surgeons should be aware of the biomechanical consequences of rod contouring and attachment on construct vulnerability.

Adding sacral anchors through an S1 alar screw and multirod construct as a strategy for lumbosacral junction augmentation: an in vitro comparison to S1 pedicle screws alone with sacroiliac fixation

OBJECTIVE

Achieving solid fusion of the lumbosacral junction continues to be a challenge in long-segment instrumentation to the sacrum. The purpose of this study was to test the condition of adding sacral anchors through an S1 alar screw (S1AS) and multirod construct relative to using S1 pedicle screws (S1PSs) alone with sacroiliac fixation in lumbosacral junction augmentation.

METHODS

Seven fresh-frozen human lumbar-pelvic spine cadaveric specimens were tested under nondestructive moments (7.5 Nm). The ranges of motion (ROMs) in extension, flexion, left and right lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR) of instrumented segments (L3-S1); the lumbosacral region (L5-S1); and the adjacent segment (L2-3) were measured, and the axial construct stiffness (ACS) was recorded. The testing conditions were 1) intact; 2) bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) fixation at L3-S1 (S1PS alone); 3) BPS and unilateral S2 alar iliac screw (U-S2AIS) fixation; 4) BPS and unilateral S1AS (U-S1AS) fixation; 5) BPS and bilateral S2AIS (B-S2AIS) fixation; and 6) BPS and bilateral S1AS (B-S1AS) fixation. Accessory rods were used in testing conditions 3-6.

RESULTS

In all directions, the ROMs of L5-S1 and L3-S1 were significantly reduced in B-S1AS and B-S2AIS conditions, compared with intact and S1PS alone. There was no significant difference in reduction of the ROMs of L5-S1 between B-S1ASs and B-S2AISs. Greater decreased ROMs of L3-S1 in extension and AR were detected with B-S2AISs than with B-S1ASs. Both B-S1ASs and B-S2AISs significantly increased the ACS compared with S1PSs alone. The ACS of B-S2AISs was significantly greater than that of B-S1ASs, but with greater increased ROMs of L2-3 in extension.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding sacral anchors through S1ASs and a multirod construct was as effective as sacropelvic fixation in lumbosacral junction augmentation. The ACS was less than the sacropelvic fixation but with lower ROMs of the adjacent segment. The biomechanical effects of using S1ASs in the control of long-instrumented segments were moderate (better than S1PSs alone but worse than sacropelvic fixation). This strategy is appropriate for patients requiring advanced lumbosacral fixation, and the risk of sacroiliac joint violation can be avoided.

Radiographic comparison of lordotic and hyperlordotic implants in L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion

OBJECTIVE

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) used at the lumbosacral junction provides arthrodesis for several indications. The anterior approach allows restoration of lumbar lordosis, an important goal of surgery. With hyperlordotic ALIF implants, several options may be employed to obtain the desired amount of lordosis. In this study, the authors compared the degree of radiographic lordosis achieved with lordotic and hyperlordotic ALIF implants at the L5-S1 segment.

METHODS

All patients undergoing L5-S1 ALIF from 2 institutions over a 4-year interval were included. Patients < 18 years of age or those with any posterior decompression or osteotomy were excluded. ALIF implants in the lordotic group had 8° or 12° of inherent lordosis, whereas implants in the hyperlordotic group had 20° or 30° of lordosis. Upright standing radiographs were used to determine all radiographic parameters, including lumbar lordosis, segmental lordosis, disc space lordosis, and disc space height. Separate analyses were performed for patients who underwent single-segment fixation at L5-S1 and for the overall cohort.

RESULTS

A total of 204 patients were included (hyperlordotic group, 93 [45.6%]; lordotic group, 111 [54.4%]). Single-segment ALIF at L5-S1 was performed in 74 patients (hyperlordotic group, 27 [36.5%]; lordotic group, 47 [63.5%]). The overall mean ± SD age was 61.9 ± 12.3 years; 58.3% of patients (n = 119) were women. The mean number of total segments fused was 3.2 ± 2.6. Overall, 66.7% (n = 136) of patients had supine surgery and 33.3% (n = 68) had lateral surgery. Supine positioning was significantly more common in the hyperlordotic group than in the lordotic group (83.9% [78/93] vs 52.3% [58/111], p < 0.001). After adjusting for differences in surgical positioning, the change in lumbar lordosis was significantly greater for hyperlordotic versus lordotic implants (3.6° ± 7.5° vs 0.4° ± 7.5°, p = 0.048) in patients with single-level fusion. For patients receiving hyperlordotic versus lordotic implants, changes were also significantly greater for segmental lordosis (12.4° ± 7.5° vs 8.4° ± 4.9°, p = 0.03) and disc space lordosis (15.3° ± 5.4° vs 9.3° ± 5.8°, p < 0.001) after single-level fusion at L5-S1. The change in disc space height was similar for these 2 groups (p = 0.23).

CONCLUSIONS

Hyperlordotic implants provided a greater degree of overall lumbar lordosis restoration as well as L5-S1 segmental and disc space lordosis restoration than lordotic implants. The change in disc space height was similar. Differences in lateral and supine positioning did not affect these parameters.

Use of digital imaging correlation techniques for full-field strain distribution analysis of implantable devices and tissue in spinal biomechanics research

Few studies have used optical full-field surface strain mapping to study spinal biomechanics. We used a commercial digital imaging correlation (DIC) system to (1) compare posterior surface strains on spinal rods with those obtained from conventional foil strain gauges, (2) quantify bony vertebral body and intervertebral disc (IVD) surface strains on 3 L3-S cadaveric spines during gold-standard flexibility tests (7.5-Nm flexion-extension and 400-N compression), and (3) report our experience with the application and feasibility of DIC to comprehensively map strain in spinal biomechanics. Spinal rods were tested under zero load and using ASTM F1717 standard. For rod strain measures, the largest mean bias offset and baseline noise standard deviation under zero load for DIC were 7.6 με and 33.7 με, respectively. For tissue measures, the largest mean bias offset was 8 με for ε1 and -55 με for ε2 with baseline noise standard deviations of 19 με and 26 με, respectively. On average, DIC rod strain measurements were 5.3% less than strain gauge measurements throughout the load range. Principal IVD and bony surface strains were consistently measurable and showed marked regional differences in strain patterns under different load conditions. Strains measured on spinal rods using DIC techniques reasonably agreed with standard strain gauge measurements. Subregional strain analyses on soft and hard spinal tissues during standard flexibility tests were feasible. Optical strain mapping is a viable, accurate, and promising measurement technique for novel spinal biomechanical studies.

Is L5/S1 interbody fusion necessary in long-segment surgery for adult degenerative scoliosis? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

There is no consensus regarding the best surgical strategy at the lumbosacral junction (LSJ) in long constructs for adult spinal deformity (ASD). The use of interbody fusion (IF) has been advocated to increase fusion rates, with additional pelvic fixation (PF) typically recommended. The actual benefit of IF even when extending to the pelvis, however, has not been vigorously analyzed. The goal of this work was to better understand the role of IF, specifically with respect to arthrodesis, when extending long constructs to the ilium.

METHODS

A systematic review of the PubMed and Cochrane databases was performed to identify the relevant studies in English, addressing the management of LSJ in long constructs (defined as ≥ 5 levels) in ASD. The search terms used were as follows: "Lumbosacral Junction," "Long Constructs," "Long Fusion to the Sacrum," "Sacropelvic Fixation," "Interbody Fusion," and "Iliac Screw." The authors excluded technical notes, case reports, literature reviews, and cadaveric studies; pediatric populations; pathologies different from ASD; studies not using conventional techniques; and studies focused only on alignment of different levels.

RESULTS

The PRISMA protocol was used. The authors found 12 retrospective clinical studies with a total of 1216 patients who were sorted into 3 different categories: group 1, using PF or not (n = 6); group 2, using PF with or without IF (n = 5); and group 3, from 1 study comparing anterior lumbar interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Five studies in group 1 and 4 in group 2 had pseudarthrosis rate as primary outcome and were selected for a quantitative analysis. Forest plots were used to display the risk ratio, and funnel plots were used to look at the risk of publication bias. The summary risk ratios were 0.36 (0.23-0.57, p < 0.001) and 1.03 (0.54-1.96, p = 0.94) for the PF and IF, respectively; there is a protective effect of overall pseudarthrosis for using PF in long constructs for ASD surgeries, but not for using IF.

CONCLUSIONS

The long-held contention that L5/S1 IF is always advantageous in long-construct deformity surgery is not supported by the current literature. Based on the findings from this systematic review and meta-analysis, PF with or without additional L5/S1 interbody grafting demonstrates similar overall construct pseudarthrosis rates. The added risk and costs associated with IF, therefore, should be more closely considered on a case-by-case basis.

Assessment of L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion stability in the setting of lengthening posterior instrumentation constructs: a cadaveric biomechanical study

OBJECTIVE

Excessive stress and motion at the L5-S1 level can lead to degenerative changes, especially in patients with posterior instrumentation suprajacent to L5. Attention has turned to utilization of L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) to stabilize the lumbosacral junction. However, questions remain regarding the effectiveness of stand-alone ALIF in the setting of prior posterior instrumented fusions terminating at L5. The purpose of this study was to assess the biomechanical stability of an L5-S1 ALIF with increasing lengths of posterior thoracolumbar constructs.

METHODS

Seven human cadaveric spines (T9-sacrum) were instrumented with pedicle screws from T10 to L5 and mounted to a 6 degrees-of-freedom robot. Posterior fusion construct lengths (T10-L5, T12-L5, L2-5, and L4-5) were instrumented to each specimen, and torque-fusion level relationships were determined for each construct in flexion-extension, axial rotation, and lateral bending. A stand-alone L5-S1 ALIF was then instrumented, and L5-S1 motion was measured as increasing pure moments (2 to 12 Nm) were applied. Motion reduction was calculated by comparing L5-S1 motion across the ALIF and non-ALIF states.

RESULTS

The average motion at L5-S1 in axial rotation, flexion-extension, and lateral bending was assessed for each fusion construct with and without ALIF. After adding ALIF to a posterior fusion, L5-S1 motion was significantly reduced relative to the non-ALIF state in all but one fused surgical condition (p < 0.05). Longer fusions with ALIF produced larger L5-S1 motions, and in some cases resulted in motions higher than native state motion.

CONCLUSIONS

Posterior fusion constructs up to L4-5 could be appropriately stabilized by a stand-alone L5-S1 ALIF when using a nominal threshold of 80% reduction in native motion as a potential positive indicator of fusion. The results of this study allow conclusions to be drawn from a biomechanical standpoint; however, the clinical implications of these data are not well defined. These findings, when taken in appropriate clinical context, can be used to better guide clinicians seeking to treat L5-S1 pathology in patients with prior posterior thoracolumbar constructs.

Influence of Lumbar Lordosis on Posterior Rod Strain in Long-Segment Construct During Biomechanical Loading: A Cadaveric Study

Objective

The lordotic shape of the lumbar spine differs substantially between individuals. Measuring and recording strain during spinal biomechanical tests is an effective method to infer stresses on spinal implants and predict failure mechanisms. The geometry of the spine may have a significant effect on the resultant force distribution, thereby directly affecting rod strain.

Methods

Seven fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens (T12-sacrum) underwent standard (7.5 Nm) nondestructive sagittal plane tests: flexion and extension. The conditions tested were intact and pedicle screws and rods (PSR) at L1-sacrum. The posterior right rod was instrumented with strain gauges between L3–4 (index level) and the L5–S1 pedicle screw. All specimens underwent lateral radiographs before testing. Lordotic angles encompassing different levels (L5–S1, L4–S1, L3–S1, L2–S1, and L1–S1) were measured and compared with rod strain. Data were analyzed using Pearson correlation analyses.

Results

Strong positive correlations were observed between lordosis and posterior rod strain across different conditions. The L3–S1 lordotic angle in the unloaded intact condition correlated with peak rod strain at L3–4 with PSR during flexion (R=0.76, p=0.04). The same angle in the unloaded PSR condition correlated with peak strain in the PSR condition during extension (R=-0.79, p=0.04). The unloaded intact L2–S1 lordotic angle was significantly correlated with rod strain at L3–4 in the PSR condition during flexion (R=0.85, p=0.02) and extension (R=-0.85, p=0.02) and with rod strain at L5–S1 in the PSR condition during flexion (R=0.84, p=0.04).

Conclusion

Lordosis measured on intact and instrumented conditions has strong positive correlations with posterior rod strain in cadaveric testing.

Innovative sacropelvic fixation using iliac screws and triangular titanium implants

PURPOSE

Sacropelvic fixation is frequently used in combination with thoracolumbar instrumentation for the correction of severe spinal deformities. The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of the triangular titanium implants on the iliac screw fixation. Our hypothesis was that the use of triangular titanium implants can increase the stability of the iliac screw fixation.

METHODS

Three T10-pelvis instrumented models were created: pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, and bilateral iliac screws (IL); posterior fixation and bilateral iliac screws and triangular implants inserted bilaterally in a sacro-alar-iliac trajectory (IL-Tri-SAI); posterior fixation and bilateral iliac screws and two bilateral triangular titanium implants inserted in a lateral trajectory (IL-Tri-Lat). Outputs of these models, such as hardware stresses, were compared against a model with pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1 (PED).

RESULTS

Sacropelvic fixation decreased the L5-S1 motion by 75-90%. The motion of the SIJ was reduced by 55-80% after iliac fixation; the addition of triangular titanium implants further reduced it. IL, IL-Tri-SAI and IL-Tri-Lat demonstrated lower S1 pedicle stresses with respect to PED. Triangular implants had a protective effect on the iliac screw stresses.

CONCLUSION

Sacropelvic fixation decreased L5-S1 range of motion suggesting increased stability of the joint. The combination of triangular titanium implants and iliac screws reduced the residual flexibility of the sacroiliac joint, and resulted in a protective effect on the S1 pedicle screws and iliac screws themselves. Clinical studies may be performed to demonstrate applicability of these FEA results to patient outcomes.

Biomechanics of a laterally placed sacroiliac joint fusion device supplemental to S2 alar-iliac fixation in a long-segment adult spinal deformity construct: a cadaveric study of stability and strain distribution

OBJECTIVE

S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screw fixation effectively enhances stability in long-segment constructs. Although S2AI fixation provides a single transarticular sacroiliac joint fixation (SIJF) point, additional fixation points may provide greater stability and attenuate screw and rod strain. The objectives of this study were to evaluate changes in stability and pedicle screw and rod strain with extended distal S2AI fixation and with supplemental bilateral integration of two sacroiliac joint fusion devices implanted using a traditional minimally invasive surgical approach.

METHODS

Eight L1-pelvis human cadaveric specimens underwent pure moment (7.5 Nm) and compression (400 N) tests under 4 conditions: 1) intact (pure moment loading only); 2) L2-S1 pedicle screw and rod with L5-S1 interbody fusion; 3) added S2AI screws; and 4) added bilateral laterally placed SIJF. Range of motion (ROM), rod strain, and screw-bending moment (S1 and S2AI) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Compared with S1 fixation, S2AI fixation significantly reduced L5-S1 ROM in right lateral bending by 50% (0.11°, p = 0.049) and in compression by 39% (0.22°, p = 0.003). Compared with fixation ending at S1, extending fixation with S2AI significantly decreased sacroiliac joint ROM by 52% (0.28°, p = 0.02) in flexion, by 65% (0.48°, p = 0.04) in extension, by 59% (0.76°, p = 0.02) in combined flexion-extension, and by 36% (0.09°, p = 0.02) in left axial rotation. The addition of S2AI screws reduced S1 screw-bending moment during flexion (0.106 Nm [43%], p = 0.046). With S2AI fixation, posterior L5-S1 primary rod strain increased by 124% (159 μE, p = 0.002) in flexion, by 149% (285 μE, p = 0.02) in left axial rotation, and by 99% (254 μE, p = 0.04) in right axial rotation. Compared with S2AI fixation, the addition of SIJF reduced L5-S1 strain during right axial rotation by 6% (28 μE, p = 0.04) and increased L5-S1 strain in extension by 6% (28 μE, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-segment constructs ending with S2AI screws created a more stable construct than those ending with S1 screws, reducing lumbosacral and sacroiliac joint motion and S1 screw-bending moment in flexion. These benefits, however, were paired with increased rod strain at the lumbosacral junction. The addition of SIJF to constructs ending at S2AI did not significantly change SI joint ROM or S1 screw bending and reduced S2AI screw bending in compression. SIJF further decreased L5-S1 rod strain in axial rotation and increased it in extension.

Biomechanical effects of a novel posteriorly placed sacroiliac joint fusion device integrated with traditional lumbopelvic long-construct instrumentation

OBJECTIVE

S2-alar-iliac (S2AI) screw fixation effectively ensures stability and enhances fusion in long-segment constructs. Nevertheless, pelvic fixation is associated with a high rate of mechanical failure. Because of the transarticular nature of the S2AI screw, adding a second point of fixation may provide additional stability and attenuate strains. The objective of the study was to evaluate changes in stability and strain with the integration of a sacroiliac (SI) joint fusion device, implanted through a novel posterior SI approach, supplemental to posterior long-segment fusion.

METHODS

L1-pelvis human cadaveric specimens underwent pure moment (7.5 Nm) and compression (400 N) tests in the following conditions: 1) intact, 2) L2-S1 pedicle screw and rod fixation with L5-S1 interbody fusion, 3) added S2AI screws, and 4) added bilateral SI joint fixation (SIJF). The range of motion (ROM), rod strain, and screw bending moments (S1 and S2AI) were analyzed.

RESULTS

S2AI fixation decreased L2-S1 ROM in flexion-extension (p ≤ 0.04), L5-S1 ROM in flexion-extension and compression (p ≤ 0.004), and SI joint ROM during flexion-extension and lateral bending (p ≤ 0.03) compared with S1 fixation. SI joint ROM was significantly less with SIJF in place than with the intact joint, S1, and S2AI fixation in flexion-extension and lateral bending (p ≤ 0.01). The S1 screw bending moment decreased following S2AI fixation by as much as 78% in extension, but with statistical significance only in right axial rotation (p = 0.03). Extending fixation to S2AI significantly increased the rod strain at L5-S1 during flexion, axial rotation, and compression (p ≤ 0.048). SIJF was associated with a slight increase in rod strain versus S2AI fixation alone at L5-S1 during left lateral bending (p = 0.048). Compared with the S1 condition, fixation to S2AI increased the mean rod strain at L5-S1 during compression (p = 0.048). The rod strain at L5-S1 was not statistically different with SIJF compared with S2AI fixation (p ≥ 0.12).

CONCLUSIONS

Constructs ending with an S2AI screw versus an S1 screw tended to be more stable, with reduced SI joint motion. S2AI fixation decreased the S1 screw bending moments compared with fixation ending at S1. These benefits were paired with increased rod strain at L5-S1. Supplementation of S2AI fixation with SIJF implants provided further reductions (approximately 30%) in the sagittal plane and lateral bending SI joint motion compared with fixation ending at the S2AI position. This stability was not paired with significant changes in rod or screw strains.

Comparison of degenerative lumbar scoliosis correction and risk for mechanical failure using posterior 2-rod instrumentation versus 4-rod instrumentation and interbody fusion

PURPOSE

Four-rod instrumentation and interbody fusion may reduce mechanical complications in degenerative scoliosis surgery compared to 2-rod instrumentation. The purpose was to compare clinical results, sagittal alignment and mechanical complications with both techniques.

METHODS

Full spine radiographs were analysed in 97 patients instrumented to the pelvis: 58 2-rod constructs (2R) and 39 4-rod constructs (4R). Clinical scores (VAS, ODI, SRS-22, EQ-5D-3L) were assessed preoperatively, at 3 months, 1 year and last follow-up (average 4.2 years). Radiographic measurements were: thoracic kyphosis, lumbar lordosis, spinopelvic parameters, segmental lordosis distribution. The incidence of non-union and PJK were investigated.

RESULTS

All clinical scores improved significantly in both groups between preoperative and last follow-up. In the 2R-group, lumbar lordosis increased to 52.8° postoperatively and decreased to 47.0° at follow-up (p = 0.008). In the 4R-group, lumbar lordosis increased from 46.4 to 52.5° postoperatively and remained at 53.4° at follow-up. There were 8 (13.8%) PJK in the 2R-group versus 6 (15.4%) in the 4R-group, with a mismatch between lumbar apex and theoretic lumbar shape according to pelvic incidence. Non-union requiring revision surgery occurred on average at 26.9 months in 28 patients (48.3%) of the 2R-group. No rod fracture was diagnosed in the 4R-group.

CONCLUSION

Multi-level interbody fusion combined with 4-rod instrumentation decreased risk for non-union and revision surgery compared to select interbody fusion and 2-rod instrumentation. The role of additional rods on load sharing still needs to be determined when multiple cages are used. Despite revision surgery in the 2R group, final clinical outcomes were similar in both groups.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Impact of dual-headed pedicle screws on the biomechanics of lumbosacral junction multirod constructs

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to evaluate a novel connector design and compare it with traditional side connectors, such as a fixed-angle connector (FAC) and a variable-angle connector (VAC), with respect to lumbosacral stability and instrumentation strain.

METHODS

Standard nondestructive flexibility tests (7.5 Nm) and compression tests (400 N) were performed using 7 human cadaveric specimens (L1-ilium) to compare range of motion (ROM) stability, posterior rod strain (RS), and sacral screw bending moment (SM). Directions of motion included flexion, extension, left and right lateral bending, left and right axial rotation, and compression. Conditions included 1) the standard 2-rod construct (2R); 2) the dual-tulip head (DTH) with 4-rod construct (4R); 3) FACs with 4R; and 4) VACs with 4R. Data were analyzed using repeated-measures ANOVA.

RESULTS

Overall, there were no statistically significant differences in ROM across the lumbosacral junction among conditions (p > 0.07). Compared with 2R, DTH and FAC significantly reduced RS in extension, left axial rotation, and compression (p ≤ 0.03). VAC significantly decreased RS compared with 2R in flexion, extension, left axial rotation, right axial rotation, and compression (p ≤ 0.03), and significantly decreased RS compared with DTH in extension (p = 0.02). DTH was associated with increased SM in left and right axial rotation compared with 2R (p ≤ 0.003) and in left and right lateral bending and left and right axial rotation compared with FAC and VAC (p ≤ 0.02). FAC and VAC were associated with decreased SM compared with 2R in right and left lateral bending (p ≤ 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

RS across the lumbosacral junction can be high. Supplemental rod fixation with DTH is an effective strategy for reducing RS across the lumbosacral junction. However, the greatest reduction in RS and SM was achieved with a VAC that allowed for straight (uncontoured) accessory rod placement.

Two-level Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion at the Lumbosacral Segment has a High Risk of Pseudarthrosis and Poor Clinical Outcomes: Comparison Between the Lumbar and Lumbosacral Segments

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective study.

OBJECTIVES

The purposes of this study were to investigate the fusion rate and clinical outcomes of 2-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

PLIF provides favorable clinical outcomes and a high fusion rate. However, most extant studies have been limited to the results of single-level PLIF. Clinical outcomes and fusion rate of 2-level PLIF are unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In total, 73 patients who underwent 2-level PLIF below L3 between 2008 and 2016 (follow-up period >2 y) were included. Patients were divided into the 2 groups on the basis of surgical level. The lumbar group included 48 patients who underwent L3/4/5 PLIF, and the lumbosacral group included 25 patients who underwent L4/5/S PLIF. Fusion rate and clinical outcomes were compared. The Japanese Orthopedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) and a visual analog scale were used for evaluation.

RESULTS

Fusion rate was significantly lower in the lumbosacral group (lumbar 96% vs. lumbosacral 64%; P<0.001). Eight of 9 cases of pseudarthrosis occurred at the lumbosacral segment. Improvement in the mental health domain of the JOAPEQ was significantly lower in the lumbosacral group (lumbar 16 vs. lumbosacral 10; P=0.02). The VAS data showed that improvements in the following variables were significantly lower in the lumbosacral group than in the lumbar group: pain in low back (lumbar -38 vs. lumbosacral -23; P=0.004), pain in buttocks or lower leg (lumbar -48 vs. lumbosacral -29; P=0.04), and numbness in buttocks or lower leg (lumbar -44 vs. lumbosacral -33; P=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Two-level PLIF at the lumbosacral segment demonstrated a significantly lower fusion rate and poorer clinical outcomes than that at the lumbar-only segments. Some reinforcement for the sacral anchor is recommended to improve fusion rate, even for short fusion like 2-level PLIF, if the lumbosacral segment is included.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

The use of triangular implants to enhance sacropelvic fixation: a finite element investigation

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Long thoracolumbar fixation and fusion have become a consolidated treatment for severe spinal disorders. Concomitant sacropelvic fixation with S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screws is frequently performed to limit instrumentation failure and pseudarthrosis at the lumbosacral junction.

PURPOSE

This study explored the use of triangular titanium implants in different configurations in which the implants supplemented standard sacropelvic fixation with S2AI screws in order to further increase the stability of S2AI fixation.

STUDY DESIGN

Finite element study.

METHODS

Four T10-pelvis instrumented models were built: pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1 (PED); pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, and bilateral S2 alar-iliac screws (S2AI); pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, bilateral S2AI screws, and triangular implants inserted bilaterally in a sacral alar-iliac trajectory (Tri-SAI); pedicle screws and rods in T10-S1, bilateral S2AI screws and two bilateral triangular titanium implants inserted in a lateral trajectory (Tri-Lat). The models were tested under pure moments of 7.5 Nm in flexion-extension, lateral bending and axial rotation.

RESULTS

SIJ motion was reduced by 50% to 66% after S2AI fixation; the addition of triangular titanium implants in either a SAI or a lateral trajectory further reduced it. S2AI, Tri-SAI, and Tri-Lat resulted in significantly lower stresses in S1 pedicle screws when compared to PED. Triangular implants had a protective effect on the maximal stresses in S2AI screws, especially when placed in the SAI trajectory. Sacropelvic fixation did not have any protective effect on the posterior rods.

CONCLUSIONS

Supplementing S2AI screws with triangular implants had a protective effect on the S2AI screws themselves, as well as the S1 pedicle screws, in the tested model.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Triangular implants can substantially reduce the residual flexibility of the SIJ with respect to S2AI fixation alone, suggesting a possible role in patients needing reinforced fixation. In vivo investigation is needed to determine if these in vitro effects translate into clinically important differences.

Scoliosis surgery in adulthood: what challenges for what outcome?

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis that has progressed over time, de novo scoliosis, and degenerative scoliosis represent different types of adult spinal deformity (ASD). Functional impairment and muscular fatigue are due to sagittal and coronal imbalance of the trunk. Surgical treatment can provide a significant improvement of three-dimensional (3D) thoracolumbar alignment, function, and health-related quality of life (QoL). A patient-specific benefit-risk assessment, including clinical expectations, comorbidities, and the spinal deformity itself, has to be done preoperatively since the risk for mechanical complications is relatively high. Minimal invasive techniques combine posterior percutaneous instrumentation and lateral interbody fusion cages which enables vertebral realignment and indirect foraminal stenosis decompression. This strategy seems appropriate in mild and moderate ASD with a limited number of degenerated segments in the lumbar spine and remaining curve flexibility. Severe ASD needs to be addressed by open surgery, which combines posterior instrumentation, interbody fusion, and osteotomies in stiff deformities. Longer posterior instrumentation of the thoracolumbar spine, the sacrum, and the pelvis carries a risk for mechanical complications such as non-union and proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK). Modern surgical techniques including circumferential lumbosacral fusion and double rods might lower the risk for non-union. Accurate sagittal alignment planning, setting the lumbar sagittal apex according to pelvic incidence, and segmental lordosis distribution, are mandatory for minimizing the risk of PJK.

Biomechanics of sacropelvic fixation: a comprehensive finite element comparison of three techniques

PURPOSE

Sacropelvic fixation is frequently used in combination with thoracolumbar instrumentation for complex deformity correction and is commonly associated with pseudoarthrosis, implant failure and loosening. This study compared pedicle screw fixation (PED) with three different sacropelvic fixation techniques, namely iliac screws (IL), S2 alar-iliac screws (S2AI) and laterally placed triangular titanium implants (SI), all in combination with lumbosacral instrumentation, accounting for implant micromotion.

METHODS

Existing finite element models of pelvis-L5 of three patients including lumbopelvic instrumentation were utilized. Moments of 7.5 Nm in the three directions combined with a 500 N compressive load were simulated. Measured metrics included flexibility, instrumentation stresses and bone-implant interface loads.

RESULTS

Fixation effectively reduced the sacroiliac flexibility. Compared to PED, IL and S2AI induced a reduction in peak stresses in the S1 pedicle screws. Rod stresses were mostly unaffected by S2AI and SI, but IL demonstrated a stress increase. In comparison with a previous work depicting full osteointegration, SI was found to have similar instrumentation stresses as those due to PED.

CONCLUSIONS

Fixation with triangular implants did not result in stress increase on the lumbosacral instrumentation, likely due to the lack of connection with the posterior rods. IL and S2AI had a mild protective effect on S1 pedicle screws in terms of stresses and bone-implant loads. IL resulted in an increase in the rod stresses. A comparison between this study and previous work incorporating full osteointegration demonstrates how these results may be applied clinically to better understand the effects of different treatments on patient outcomes. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Minimally invasive approach to the lumbosacral junction with a single position, 360° fusion

Degenerative lumbar pathologies are commonly encountered at the lumbosacral junction. The transition from the mobile lumbar spine to the stiff sacroiliac segment results in high biomechanical stresses and can lead to disc degeneration, ligamentum flavum hypertrophy, neural foraminal stenosis, and other causes of pain or neurologic deficit. Surgical intervention at the lumbosacral junction must be tailored to maximize pain relief and relieve neural compression and reverse neurologic deficit while preserving the spine's natural biomechanical strength and flexibility and preventing the slow march of adjacent segment degeneration cranially into the thoracolumbar spine. It is our practice to offer combined anterior and posterior minimally invasive options when appropriate to maximize neural decompression and pain relief while ensuring proper segmental alignment and maximizing fusion rates through a minimally disruptive approach. In this article we detail a common presentation of lumbosacral pathology and the approach and considerations for a single position, minimally invasive anterior and posterior approach at the L5/S1 segment.

Evaluation of iliac screw, S2 alar-iliac screw and laterally placed triangular titanium implants for sacropelvic fixation in combination with posterior lumbar instrumentation: a finite element study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to implement laterally placed triangular titanium implants as a technique of sacropelvic fixation in long posterior lumbar instrumentation and to characterize the effects of iliac screws, S2 alar-iliac screws and of triangular implants on rod and S1 pedicle screw stresses.

METHODS

Four female models of the lumbopelvic spine were created. For each of them, five finite element models replicating the following configurations were generated: intact, posterior fixation with pedicle screws to S1 (PED), with PED and iliac screws (IL), with PED and S2 alar-iliac (S2AI) screws, and with PED and bilateral triangular titanium implants (SI). Simulations were conducted in compression, flexion-extension, lateral bending and axial rotation. Rod stresses in the L5-S1 segment as well as in the S1 pedicle screws were compared.

RESULTS

One anatomical model was not simulated due to dysmorphia of the sacroiliac joints. PED resulted in the highest implant stresses. Values up to 337 MPa in lateral bending were noted, which were more than double than the other configurations. When compared with IL, S2AI and SI resulted in lower stresses in both screws and rods (on average 33% and 41% for S2AI and 17% and 50% for SI).

CONCLUSIONS

Implant stresses after S2AI and SI fixations were lower than those attributable to IL. Therefore, pedicle screws and rods may have a lower risk of mechanical failure when coupled with sacropelvic fixation via S2AI or triangular titanium implants, although the risk of clinical loosening remains an area of further investigation. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.