Effect of Cage Type on Short-Term Radiographic Outcomes in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Comparing Outcomes of Banana-Shaped and Straight Cages in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aims to refine the understanding of the optimal choice between different cage shapes in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) by systematically comparing perioperative data, radiological outcomes, clinical results, and complications associated with banana-shaped and straight bullet cages.

METHODS

A meticulous literature search encompassing PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, China Knowledge Network, and Wanfang Data was executed up to October 5, 2023. Inclusion criteria focused on studies comparing banana-shaped and straight bullet cages in TLIF. The quality of included studies was assessed using appropriate tools such as the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for nonrandomized studies. Rigorous evaluations were performed for radiographic outcomes, including disc height (DH), segmental lordosis (SL), lumbar lordosis (LL), subsidence, and fusion rates. Clinical outcomes were meticulously evaluated using visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and complications.

RESULTS

The analysis incorporated 7 studies, involving 573 patients (297 with banana-shaped cages, 276 with straight cages), all with NOS ratings exceeding 5 stars. No statistically significant differences were observed in operative time, blood loss, or hospitalization between the 2 cage shapes. Banana-shaped cages exhibited greater changes in DH (p = 0.001), SL (p = 0.02), and LL (p = 0.01). Despite statistically higher changes in ODI for straight cages (26.33, p < 0.0001), the actual value remained similar to banana-shaped cages (26.15). Both cage types demonstrated similar efficacy in VAS, complication rates, subsidence, and fusion rates.

CONCLUSION

Although banana-shaped cages can excel in restoring DH, SL, and LL, straight bullet cages can provide comparable functional improvements, pain relief, and complication rates.

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with placement of steerable banana cage: A single-center retrospective analysis of radiographic parameters of success

INTRODUCTION

The transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is among the most utilized methods for the surgical treatment of lumbar degenerative disc disease. The TLIF has advanced significantly with several iterative changes since its inception in the early 1980s, with the advent of several generations of interbody types, shapes, and materials. Steerable curvilinear interbodies are among the most recent innovations in this space and may offer biomechanical advantages, namely in preservation of lumbar and segmental lordosis. While radiographic parameters have been investigated for other cage shapes and lumbar interbody fusion techniques, no study has investigated postoperative radiographic outcomes specific to TLIFs done with curvilinear interbodies.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective review of TLIFs performed with curvilinear interbodies between 2019 and 2022 at a single institution. Upright radiographs were obtained preoperatively and at several timepoints postoperatively. Radiographic variables including interspace height and segmental lordosis were collected.

RESULTS

26 surgeries with 32 curvilinear interbodies were performed across 3 years. There was significant increase in segmental lordosis at the L4-L5 (p = 0.0183) and L5-S1 levels (p = 0.004) as well as interspace height postoperatively at levels L3-L4 (p = 0.011) and L4-L5 (p = 0.002). Pain as measured with the numeric rating scale significantly improved in the overall cohort postoperatively (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

TLIF with curvilinear interbody placement increases segmental lordosis and interspace height at the L4-L5 and L5-S1 levels, and increased interspace height at the L3-L4 and L4-L5 levels. Further investigation into additional radiographic parameters is warranted and expanded cohort size would benefit deeper analysis of other spinal levels.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

As an increasing number of cage designs and materials are brought to market, studies such as this allow for better understanding of cage specific outcomes allowing for better informed device selection.

Comparison of surgical outcomes between lumbar interbody fusions using expandable and static cages: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of static cages for lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) can cause complications such as end plate violation, graft subsidence, and nerve injury. Therefore, expandable cages that allow for in-situ expansion have been developed to overcome these problems. However, it remains uncertain whether expandable cages have better surgical outcomes than static cages do.

PURPOSE

We aimed to determine the effectiveness of expandable cages by analyzing studies that compared the surgical outcomes between the use of expandable cages and static cages.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to conduct this meta-analysis and systematic review. The primary outcomes of this study were anterior disc height, posterior disc height, segmental lordosis (SL), lumbar lordosis (LL), subsidence rate, numeric rating scale (NRS) scores for back and leg pain, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).

RESULTS

Thirteen studies with 1,700 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with static cages for LIFs, expandable cages significantly increased the anterior disc height (standardized mean difference 0.478, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.088-0.867, p=.0162) and segmental lordosis (sMD 0.307, 95% CI 0.159-0.454, p<.0001). There were no significant differences in the posterior disc height, lumbar lordosis, subsidence rate, back pain, leg pain, or ODI between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Expandable cages show no clear clinical benefit over static cages.

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using banana-shaped and straight cages: meta-analysis of clinical and radiological outcomes

PURPOSE

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgery rate increased over the last decade. There is no consensus about the better shape of cage to use in TLIF. This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the shape focusing on bony union, lordosis restoration as well as perioperative complications.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar (page 1-20) were searched till September 2022. The clinical outcomes consisted of the bony union, segmental and lumbar lordosis restoration, quality of life, and operation-related outcomes.

RESULTS

Only 5 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Straight-shaped cages tended to have a lower subsidence rate compared to banana-shaped cages (p = 0.10), had a better restoration of segmental lordosis (p < 0.0001), better disc height restoration (p = 0.01), as well as a higher Oswestry Disability Index decrease (p = 0.0002).

CONCLUSION

Straight-shaped cages had a better restoration of lumbar lordosis, disc height, and a lower subsidence rate when compared to banana-shaped cages. This may be explained by the absence of the optimal placement of the curved cages, which is at the most anterior part of the disc space. Better conducted randomized controlled trial could strengthen these findings.

Early Experience With Uniplanar Versus Biplanar Expandable Interbody Fusion Devices in Single-Level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVE

To compare the early radiographic and clinical outcomes of expandable uniplanar versus biplanar interbody cages used for single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF).

METHODS

A retrospective review of 1-level MIS-TLIFs performed with uniplanar and biplanar polyetheretherketone cages was performed. Radiographic measurements were performed on radiographs taken preoperatively, at 6-week follow-up, and 1-year follow-up. Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg at 3-month and 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 93 patients (41 uniplanar, 52 biplanar) were included. Both cage types provided significant postoperative improvements in anterior disc height, posterior disc height, and segmental lordosis at 1 year. No significant differences in cage subsidence rates were found between uniplanar (21.9%) and biplanar devices (32.7%) at 6 weeks (odds ratio, 2.015; 95% confidence interval, 0.651-6.235; p = 0.249) with no additional instances of subsidence at 1 year. No significant differences in the magnitude of improvements based on ODI, VAS back, or VAS leg at 3-month or 1-year follow-up between groups and the proportion of patients achieving the minimal clinically important difference in ODI, VAS back, or VAS leg at 1 year were not statistically significantly different (p > 0.05). Finally, there were no significant differences in complication rates (p = 0.283), 90-day readmission rates (p = 1.00), revision surgical procedures (p = 0.423), or fusion rates at 1 year (p = 0.457) between groups.

CONCLUSION

Biplanar and uniplanar expandable cages offer a safe and effective means of improving anterior disc height, posterior disc height, segmental lordosis, and patient-reported outcome measures at 1 year postoperatively. No significant differences in radiographic outcomes, subsidence rates, mean subsidence distance, 1-year patient-reported outcomes, and postoperative complications were noted between groups.

Static versus Expandable Interbody Fusion Devices: A Comparison of 1-Year Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE

To compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes of static versus expandable interbody cages in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using minimally invasive surgery (MIS-TLIF).

OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE

Expandable interbody cages may potentially improve radiographic and clinical outcomes following MIS-TLIF compared to static pages, but at a potentially higher cost and increased rates of subsidence.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of 1- and 2-level MIS-TLIFs performed from 2014 to 2020 was reviewed. Radiographic measurements were obtained preoperatively, 6 weeks postoperatively, and at final follow-up. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including the Oswestry Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) back, and VAS leg were evaluated. Multivariate linear regression analysis determined the effect of cage type on the change in PROMs, controlling for demographic characteristics. Alpha was set at 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 221 patients underwent MIS-TLIF including 136 static and 85 expandable cages. Expandable cages had significantly greater anterior (static: 11.41 mm vs. expandable: 13.11 mm, p <0.001) and posterior disk heights (static: 7.22 mm vs. expandable: 8.11 mm, p <0.001) at 1-year follow-up. Expandable cages offered similar improvements in segmental lordosis at 6 weeks (static: 1.69° vs. expandable: 2.81°, p =0.243), but segmental lordosis was better maintained with expandable cages leading to significant differences at 1-year follow-up (static: 0.86° vs. expandable: 2.45°, p =0.001). No significant differences were noted in total complication (static: 12.5% vs. expandable: 16.5%, p =0.191) or cage subsidence rates (static: 19.7% vs. expandable: 22.4%, p =0.502) groups at 1-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Expandable devices provide greater improvements in radiographic measurements including anterior disk height, posterior disk height, and segmental lordosis, but this did not lead to significant improvements in PROMs, complication rates, subsidence rates, or subsidence distance.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Does the application of expandable cages in TLIF provide improved clinical and radiological results compared to static cages? A meta-analysis

Purpose

This study aimed to provide a direct meta-analysis of the evidence comparing outcomes between expandable cages and static cages in patients with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

Methods

A search of relevant materials from databases was performed from inception to March 7, 2022. Clinical and radiological outcomes were included.

Results

Ten studies (1,440 patients) were included. The anterior disc height and foraminal height for expandable cages were substantially higher than those for static cages at the final follow-up (P < 0.0001; P = 0.05). In comparison with static cages, although not statistically significant, expandable cages showed beneficial results, including an increase in posterior disc height and segmental lordosis. There were no statistically significant differences in segmental lordosis, lumbar lordosis, pelvic parameters, cage subsidence, or fusion rates (P > 0.05). Oswestry disability index scores for expandable cages were substantially lower than those for static cages at the final follow-up (P = 0.0007). Interestingly, although the preoperative visual analog scores for back and leg pain were significantly higher in the expandable group than in the static group (P < 0.0001; P = 0.008), there was no significant difference between the static and expandable groups during the final follow-up (P = 0.51; P = 0.85).

Conclusions

Expandable cages are associated with improved functional outcomes and restored postoperative disc and foraminal heights in patients with TLIF. In addition, no statistically significant differences were observed in segmental lordosis, lumbar lordosis, pelvic parameters, cage subsidence, or fusion rate.

Static cage morphology in short-segment transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions is associated with alterations in foraminal height but not clinical outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Steerable "banana" cages have been posited to increase segmental lordosis in short-segment transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIF). The same is not necessarily true for straight "bullet" cages. While increased lordosis is generally thought to be advantageous, a potential complication is decreased foraminal height. Here we evaluate for any association between cage type and change in foraminal height and clinical outcomes following short-segment TLIFs.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed consecutive one- and two-level TLIFs with bilateral facetectomies with minimum one-year clinical and radiographic follow-up. Two cohorts were based on cage morphology: steerable "banana" cage or straight "bullet" cage. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), radiographic measurements, and revision rates were compared.

RESULTS

46 patients with 53 straight and 95 patients with 131 steerable cage levels were included. Steerable cages showed increased segmental lordosis (9.1 vs 13.5°, p<0.001) and decreased foraminal height (20.3 vs 18.5 mm, p<0.001) after surgery. Straight cages demonstrated similar segmental lordosis (8.7 vs 8.1°, p=0.30) and foraminal height (19.4 vs 20.0 mm, p=0.065). Both cohorts showed improved PROMs at last follow-up (p≤0.005). Sub-analysis comparing patients that had increased or decreased foraminal height revealed similarly improved PROMs between cohorts. Revision rates at one-year were similar between cohorts (4.3% for straight and 3.2% for steerable group, p=0.72).

CONCLUSION

Although the increased segmental lordosis afforded by placement of steerable cages may decrease foraminal height after short segment TLIF, clinical outcomes are not negatively affected by this association.

Expandable vs. Static Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cages: 1-year Radiographic Parameters and Patient Reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Expandable transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) cages capable of multidirectional in situ expansion have gained popularity as they increase axial surface area for fusion and may enhance lordotic correction through a traditional MIS surgical corridor.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes between a novel expandable vs. static MIS TLIF cage for the treatment of degenerative disc disease.

STUDY DESIGN

A single center retrospective review of 120 consecutive adult patients undergoing 1 or 2-level MIS TLIF with an expandable (n=60) or static cage was performed between 2015-2019. Preoperative and 1-year postoperative radiographic and clinical outcomes were assessed by upright flexion/extension radiographs and serial confidential surveys.

RESULTS

120 patients (mean age 63.5 years, 60.0 % female) undergoing 1 and 2-level MIS TLIF met inclusion criteria. A statistically significant reduction of spondylolisthesis, restoration of foraminal, anterior and posterior disc height was achieved in both cohorts, but greater in the ECC (all p<0.05). Comparable rates of fusion, 93% and 91% were observed in the ECC and SCC. A significant reduction in NRS back and ODI scores were observed in both cohorts but more pronounced in the ECC (5.9±2.4 to 2.2±1.9 and 37.3±16.2 to 17.1±15.2) vs. SCC (6.2±2.8 to 3.2±2.5 and 41.8±16.1 to 24.3±17.5) (p<0.05). One instance of cage migration requiring reoperation occurred in the ECC.

CONCLUSIONS

Taken together, these radiographic and clinical findings suggest an expandable cage placed through an MIS corridor represents a safe, equitable and efficacious alternative to a static TLIF in adults with degenerative lumbar pathology.

Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Expandable Cages: Increased Risk of Late Postoperative Subsidence Without a Real Improvement of Perioperative Outcomes: A Clinical Monocentric Study

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is one of several approaches to lumbar interbody fusion that has proven to be a safe and effective treatment for symptomatic lumbar degenerative disease The clinical outcomes of MIS-TLIF are generally favorable, but there is still controversy regarding its ability to restore sagittal alignment. For this reason, expandable transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cages have been developed and designed to improve ability to restore disc height and segmental lordosis. The use of expandable cages in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion has increased drastically; however, it is not clear how effective cage expansion is in regard to disc space lordosis, distraction, and long-term outcome.

METHODS

We reviewed a cohort of patients with symptomatic lumbar degenerative disc pathology who underwent MIS-TLIF at our institution. We compared clinical and radiographic outcomes of expandable versus nonexpandable cage use in MIS-TLIF focusing on mean changes in segmental lordosis, disc height, and postoperative complications. The results were compared with other studies reported in the international literature.

RESULTS

Mean change in segmental lordosis was not significantly different between the 2 groups. A significantly higher rate of postoperative subsidence was demonstrated in the expandable cage group.

CONCLUSION

This study established that expandable cage use in single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion did not reduce the rate of postoperative complications, but rather significantly increased a patient's risk of postoperative subsidence. Expandable cages do not presently demonstrate improved clinical outcomes or improved sagittal alignment compared with static cages.

Variation in surgical treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis in Canada: surgeon assessment of stability and impact on treatment

INTRODUCTION

Controversy exists regarding the optimal surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DS). Not all DS patients are the same, and the degree to which inherent stability may dictate treatment is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the variability in surgical approach relative to surgeon classified stability. The secondary objective was to compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) across different surgical techniques and grades of stability.

METHODS

Patients prospectively enrolled from eleven tertiary care institutions and followed from 2015 to 2019. The surgical technique was at the surgeon's discretion. Surgeons were asked to grade the degree of instability based on the degenerative spondylolisthesis instability classification system (DSIC). DSIC categorizes three different types (I-stable, II-potentially unstable, and III-unstable). One-year changes in PROs were compared between each group. Multivariable regression was used to identify any characteristics that explained variability in treatment.

RESULTS

There were 323 patients enrolled in this study. Surgeons' stability classification versus procedure [decompression alone (D)/decompression and posterolateral fusion (D-PL)/and decompression with posterior/transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (D-PLIF/TLIF)] were as follows: type I (n = 91): D-41%/D-PL-13%/D-PLIF/TLIF-46%; type II (n = 175): D-23%/D-PL-17%/D-PLIF/TLIF-60%; and type III (n = 57):(D-0%/D-PL-14%/D-PLIF/TLIF-86%). Type I patients undergoing D-PL had some improvements in EQ-5D and NRS versus those undergoing D-PLIF/TLIF but otherwise there were no other significant differences between groups. Regression analysis demonstrated advanced age (OR = 1.06, CI 1.02-10.12) and type I (OR = 2.61, CI 1.17-5.81) were associated with receiving decompression surgery alone.

CONCLUSIONS

There exists considerable variation in surgical management of DS in Canada. Given similar PROs in two of the three groups, there is potential to tailor surgical intervention and improve resource utilization.

Static Versus Expandable Polyether Ether Ketone (PEEK) Interbody Cages: A Comparison of One-Year Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes for One-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effect of static versus expandable polyether ether ketone (PEEK) cages on both clinical and radiographic outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients who underwent one-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with either a static or expandable PEEK cage. Patient outcomes were obtained from chart review and radiographic outcomes were measured using standing, lateral radiographs. Recovery ratios and the proportion of patients achieving the minimally clinically important difference were calculated for Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Physical Component Score-12, Mental Component Score-12, visual analogue scale for back, and visual analogue scale for leg at 1 year and compared between groups. Multivariate linear regression analysis was performed to determine the effect of cage type on the change in patient-reported outcome measures, controlling for demographic factors.

RESULTS

A total of 240 patients (137 static, 103 expandable) were included in the final analysis. ΔPhysical Component Score-12 scores at 3 months were significantly greater for the static group (16.0 vs. 10.0, P = 0.043) compared with the expandable group. Multivariate regression demonstrated that use of an expandable cage was associated with greater improvements in ΔODI (β: -7.82, P = 0.048) at 1 year. No differences were found in the perioperative change in sagittal spinal alignment within or between groups at 1 year. Subsidence rates failed to show any statistically significant difference between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with an expandable PEEK cage is an independent predictor of improved ODI scores at 1 year. Our study showed no significant differences in subsidence rates or changes in sagittal spinal alignment between static and expandable PEEK cages.