Estimation of the ideal correction of lumbar lordosis to prevent reoperation for symptomatic adjacent segment disease after lumbar fusion in older people

Distal Lumbar Lordosis is Associated With Reoperation for Adjacent Segment Disease After Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Conditions

STUDY DESIGN

A single centre retrospective review.

OBJECTIVE

Recent studies have suggested that distal lordosis (L4-S1, DL) remains constant across all pelvic incidence (PI) subgroups, whilst proximal lordosis (L1-L4, PL) varies. We sought to investigate the impact of post-operative DL on adjacent segment disease (ASD) requiring reoperation in patients undergoing lumbar fusion for degenerative conditions.

METHODS

Patients undergoing 1-3 level lumbar fusion with the two senior authors between 2007-16 were included. Demographic and radiographic data were recorded. Univariate, multivariate binary logistic regression, and Kaplan Meier survivorship analyses were performed.

RESULTS

335 patients were included in the final analysis. Most had single (67%) or two (31%) level fusions. The mean follow-up was 64-month. Fifty-seven patients (17%) underwent reoperation for ASD at an average of 78-month post-operatively (R group). The R group had a significantly lower mean post-operative DL (27.3 vs 31.1 deg, P < .001) and mean PI (55.5 vs 59.2 deg, P < .05). On univariate analysis, patients with a post-operative DL of <35 deg had higher odds of reoperation for ASD than those with a post-operative DL of ≥35 deg (OR 2.7, P = .016). In the multivariate model, post-operative DL, low/average PI, and spondylolisthesis were all significantly associated with reoperation for ASD.

CONCLUSION

This study provides preliminary support to an association between post-operative distal lumbar lordosis and risk of reoperation for ASD in patients undergoing fusions for degenerative conditions. Further multicentre prospective study is needed to independently confirm this association and identify the impact of restoration of physiological distal lumbar lordosis on long term patient outcomes.

Incidence and risk factors of new-onset sacroiliac joint pain after spinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

A systematic review and meta-analysis for incidence and risk factors of new-onset sacroiliac joint pain (SIJP) after spinal surgery aimed to provide evidence-based medical references for its early prevention, timely intervention, and appropriate treatment.

Methodology

The protocol of the systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Review (PROSPERO) with the PROSPERO ID (CRD42023463177). Relevant studies were searched to January 2024 from the databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, and the types of studies were cohort studies, case-control studies, and cross-sectional studies. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the Cross-Sectional/Prevalence Study Quality recommended by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). Two authors conducted studies search, data extraction, and quality assessment independently. Meta-analyses were done using Stata 14.0 software.

Results

Twelve observational studies with 3,570 spinal surgery patients were included. Ten were case-control studies, one was a cross-sectional study, and another was a cohort study, all of which were of moderate quality and above. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the incidence of new-onset SIJP after spinal surgery was 9.40%; females, no. of surgical segments, fusion to the sacrum, and postoperative pelvic tilt (PT) were significantly associated with the new-onset SIJP after spinal surgery. Meta-analyses for preoperative and postoperative controls of spondylopelvic parameters showed that postoperative lumbar lordosis (LL) in the SIJP group and postoperative LL and sacral slope (SS) of patients in the NoSIJP group had significant differences from preoperative.

Conclusion

Available evidence suggests that an increased risk of new-onset SIJP after spinal surgery is associated with sex, multi-segmental surgery, fusion to the sacrum, and greater postoperative PT.

Do adult spinal deformity patients who achieve and maintain PI-LL < 10 have better patient-reported and clinical outcomes compared to patients with PI-LL ≥ 10? A propensity score-matched analysis

PURPOSE

To investigate whether patients with spinopelvic mismatch (PI-LL ≥ 10) report worse patient-reported outcomes (PROs) compared to patients who achieve PI-LL < 10 at 2-year postop.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, propensity score matching (PSM) was used to analyze patients who underwent posterior spinal fusion due to deformity, as defined by one or more of the following criteria: PI-LL ≥ 25°, T1 pelvic angle ≥ 30°, sagittal vertical axis ≥ 15 cm, thoracic scoliosis ≥ 70°, thoracolumbar scoliosis ≥ 50°, coronal malalignment ≥ 7 cm, or those who underwent a three-column osteotomy or fusion with ≥ 12 levels. Key outcomes were total Scoliosis Research Society-22r, Oswestry Disability Index (PROs), and reoperation at 1- and 2-year postop. Patients were dichotomized based on their 2-year alignment: PI-LL ≥ 10° and PI-LL < 10°. A multivariable logistic regression model identified factors associated with achieving PI-LL < 10°, and independent predictors were matched using propensity score matching. Binary outcomes within matched cohorts were analyzed using the McNemar test, while continuous outcomes were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-four patients with 2-year follow-up were included; mean age was 50.5 (standard error mean (SEM): 1.4) years, body mass index was 24.1(SEM 1.0), and number of operative levels was 13.5 (SEM 0.3). 84 (51.2%) and 80 (48.8%) patients achieved PI-LL < 10 and PI-LL ≥ 10 at 2-year follow-up, respectively. Baseline pelvic incidence [odds ratio (OR): 0.96 (95% CI 0.92-0.99)] and baseline PI-LL [OR: 0.95 (95% CI 0.9-0.99)] were independent predictors of achieving PI-LL < 10 at 2 years. When comparing propensity matched pairs, no significant differences were found in baseline PROs. At both 1- and 2-year follow-up, outcomes on the SRS-22r scale were nearly identical for both groups (function [4.1(0.1) vs 4.0 (0.1), P = 0.75] ,Pain [3.9 (0.2) vs 3.9 (0.2), P = 0.86], appearance [4.2 (0.2) vs 3.8 (0.2), P = 0.08], mental health [4.1 (0.2) vs 4.1 (0.1), P = 0.96], satisfaction [4.4 (0.2) vs 4.4 (0.2), P = 0.72], and total [90.2 (2.5) vs 88.1 (2.5), P = 0.57]). Additionally, ODI scores at 2 years were comparable [18.1 (2.9) vs 22.4 (2.9), P = 0.30]. The 90-day reoperation rate was 2.6% (one patient) in both matched cohorts (P > 0.99). There was no significant difference in 1-year (P > 0.9999) or 2-year (P = 0.2207) reoperation rates between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients who achieve and maintain PI-LL < 10 2-years postop following adult spinal deformity surgery have nearly identical SRS-22r and ODI outcomes, and comparable 2-year reoperation rates as compared to patients who have PI-LL ≥ 10.

Relationship between lumbar lordosis, pelvic parameters, PI-LL mismatch and outcome after short fusion surgery for lumbar degenerative disease. Literature review, rational and presentation of public study protocol: RELApSE study (registry for evaluation of lumbar artrodesis sagittal alignEment)

Background

Vertebral arthrodesis for degenerative pathology of the lumbar spine still remains burdened by clinical problems with significant negative results. The introduction of the sagittal balance assessment with the evaluation of the meaning of pelvic parameters and spinopelvic (PI-LL) mismatch offered new evaluation criteria for this widespread pathology, but there is a lack of consistent evidence on long-term outcome.

Methods

The authors performed an extensive systematic review of literature, with the aim to identify all potentially relevant studies about the role and usefulness of the restoration or the assessment of Sagittal balance in lumbar degenerative disease. They present the study protocol RELApSE (NCT05448092 ID) and discuss the rationale through a comprehensive literature review.

Results

From the 237 papers on this topic, a total of 176 articles were selected in this review. The analysis of these literature data shows sparse and variable evidence. There are no observations or guidelines about the value of lordosis restoration or PI-LL mismatch. Most of the works in the literature are retrospective, monocentric, based on small populations, and often address the topic evaluation partially.

Conclusions

The RELApSE study is based on the possibility of comparing a heterogeneous population by pathology and different surgical technical options on some homogeneous clinical and anatomic-radiological measures aiming to understanding the value that global lumbar and segmental lordosis, distribution of lordosis, pelvic tilt, and PI-LL mismatch may have on clinical outcome in lumbar degenerative pathology and on the occurrence of adjacent segment disease.

Application of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion Combined with Bridge-Locking Cage in Adjacent Segment Disease After Lumbar Fusion

OBJECTIVE

Adjacent segment disease (ASD) is considered any abnormal process that develops in the mobile segment next to spinal fusion, accompanied by related symptoms. To evaluate the efficacy and complications of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) combined with bridge-locking fusion on ASD after lumbar fusion.

METHODS

A total of 35 ASD patients who required re-operation after lumbar fusion in our hospital from March 2014 to March 2020 were retrospectively analyzed, among which 13 cases (seven males and six females; 62.3 ± 11.3 years old) received the treatment of OLIF + bridge-locking cage internal fixation (OLIF group), and 22 cases (14 males and eight females; 52.3 ± 17.8 years old) received the treatment of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) + pedicle screw fixation (TLIF group). The comparison of the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, and length of hospital stay between the two groups of patients was performed using the t-test. The comparison of Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at different time points before and after the operation was performed using analysis of variance for repeated measurement data. The fusion rate and postoperative complications of the two groups of patients were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The operation time of patients in the OLIF group (55.4 ± 12.4 min) was significantly shorter than that of patients in the TLIF group (94.3 ± 22.9 min) (P < 0.05), the length of stay of patients in the OLIF group (7.4 ± 2.3 day) was significantly shorter than that of patients in the TLIF group (12.4 ± 3.2 day) (P < 0.05); the intraoperative blood loss (62.2 ± 30.1 mL) and postoperative drainage (47.3 ± 22.4 mL) of patients in the OLIF group were significantly less than those of patients in the TLIF group with intraoperative blood loss (363.4 ± 120.2 mL) and postoperative drainage (285.5 ± 57.8 mL) (all Ps < 0.05). Besides, the VAS and ODI scores of the two groups of patients were improved 3 months after the operation and at the last follow-up (all Ps < 0.05). Three patients in the OLIF group developed complications such as hip flexion weakness and fusion cage sink, with an incidence of 23.1%. Three patients in the TLIF group developed complications including wound infection and intraoperative nerve injury, with an incidence of 22.7%.

CONCLUSION

The combination of OLIF and bridge-locking cage may be a safe and effective therapy for ASD patients after lumbar fusion operation.

Characterization and rate of symptomatic adjacent-segment disease after index lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a single-institution, multisurgeon case series with long-term follow-up

OBJECTIVE

The rate of symptomatic adjacent-segment disease (ASD) after newer minimally invasive techniques, such as lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), is not known. This study aimed to assess the incidence of surgically significant ASD in adult patients who have undergone index LLIF and to identify any predictive factors.

METHODS

Patients who underwent index LLIF with or without additional posterior pedicle screw fixation between 2010 and 2012 and received a minimum of 2 years of postoperative follow-up were retrospectively included. Demographic and perioperative data were recorded, as well as radiographic data and immediate perioperative complications. The primary endpoint was revision surgery at the level above or below the previous construct, from which a survivorship model of patients with surgically significant symptomatic ASD was created.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven patients with a total of 163 interbody levels were included in this analysis. In total, 17 (25.4%) patients developed surgically significant ASD and required additional surgery, with a mean ± SD time to revision of 3.59 ± 2.55 years. The mean annual rate of surgically significant ASD was 3.49% over 7.27 years, which was the average follow-up. One-third of patients developed significant disease within 2 years of index surgery, and 1 patient required surgery at the adjacent level within 1 year. Constructs spanning 3 or fewer interbody levels were significantly associated with increased risk of surgically significant ASD; however, instrument termination at the thoracolumbar junction did not increase this risk. Surgically significant ASD was not impacted by preoperative disc height, foraminal area at the adjacent levels, or changes in global or segmental lumbar lordosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of surgically significant ASD after LLIF was similar to the previously reported rates of other minimally invasive spine procedures. Patients with shorter constructs had higher rates of subsequent ASD.