Use of an autologous cortical bone graft sandwiched between two intervertebral spacers in posterior lumbar interbody fusion

2001 ◽  
Vol 24 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 119-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Ido ◽  
Y. Asada ◽  
T. Sakamoto ◽  
R. Hayashi ◽  
S. Kuriyama
Keyword(s):  
Bone Graft ◽  
Cortical Bone ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Cortical Bone Graft

scholarly journals The efficacy of porous hydroxyapatite bone chip as an extender of local bone graft in posterior lumbar interbody fusion

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (7) ◽  
pp. 1324-1330 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyoungmin Kim ◽  
Choon-Ki Lee ◽  
Jin-Sup Yeom ◽  
Jae-Hyup Lee ◽  
Ki-Ho Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Graft ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Porous Hydroxyapatite ◽  
Bone Chip ◽  
Local Bone

scholarly journals Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cortical bone trajectory screw fixation versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion using traditional pedicle screw fixation for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a comparative study

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 591-595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hironobu Sakaura ◽  
Toshitada Miwa ◽  
Tomoya Yamashita ◽  
Yusuke Kuroda ◽  
Tetsuo Ohwada
Keyword(s):  
Cortical Bone ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Surgical Outcomes ◽  
Recovery Rate ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Screw Fixation ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Cortical Bone Trajectory

OBJECTIVE Several biomechanical studies have demonstrated the favorable mechanical properties of the cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw. However, no reports have examined surgical outcomes of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with CBT screw fixation for degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) compared with those after PLIF using traditional pedicle screw (PS) fixation. The purposes of this study were thus to elucidate surgical outcomes after PLIF with CBT screw fixation for DS and to compare these results with those after PLIF using traditional PS fixation. METHODS Ninety-five consecutive patients underwent PLIF with CBT screw fixation for DS (CBT group; mean followup 35 months). A historical control group consisted of 82 consecutive patients who underwent PLIF with traditional PS fixation (PS group; mean follow-up 40 months). Clinical status was assessed using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scale score. Fusion status was assessed by dynamic plain radiographs and CT. The need for additional surgery and surgery-related complications was also evaluated. RESULTS The mean JOA score improved significantly from 13.7 points before surgery to 23.3 points at the latest follow-up in the CBT group (mean recovery rate 64.4%), compared with 14.4 points preoperatively to 22.7 points at final follow-up in the PS group (mean recovery rate 55.8%; p < 0.05). Solid spinal fusion was achieved in 84 patients from the CBT group (88.4%) and in 79 patients from the PS group (96.3%, p > 0.05). Symptomatic adjacent-segment disease developed in 3 patients from the CBT group (3.2%) compared with 9 patients from the PS group (11.0%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS PLIF with CBT screw fixation for DS provided comparable improvement of clinical symptoms with PLIF using traditional PS fixation. However, the successful fusion rate tended to be lower in the CBT group than in the PS group, although the difference was not statistically significant between the 2 groups.

scholarly journals Threaded cortical bone dowels for lumbar interbody fusion: technique and short-term results

1999 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. E8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryan Barnes ◽  
Mark R. McLaughlin ◽  
Barry Birch ◽  
Gerald E. Rodts ◽  
Regis W. Haid
Keyword(s):  
Cortical Bone ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Nerve Root Injury ◽  
Satisfactory Outcome ◽  
Bone Dowels

The authors retrospectively reviewed a series of cases involving mechanical low-back or disogenic pain; 35 patients underwent lumbar interbody fusion in which threaded cortical bone dowels (TCBDs) were placed to treat degenerative disc disease. The series was composed of 18 females, and 17 males whose mean age was 46 years (range 17-76 years). There were nine smokers in the group. All patients presented with symptoms consistent with mechanical low-back or discogenic pain, and magnetic resonance imaging–documented degenerative changes and disc collapse greater than 50%, as compared with the adjacent normal-appearing level, were confirmed. Twenty-three patients underwent a posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) procedure for placement of the TCBD, whereas 12 underwent an anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) procedure for placement of the TCBD. In all patients undergoing PLIF procedures pedicle screw and rod constructs were used without posterolateral fusion except one. In all cases of ALIF except one TCBDs were used as “stand-alone” devices without supplemental fixation. All TCBDs were packed with morselized cancellous autograft prior to implantation. The success of fusion was determined at follow-up intervals and was defined as: the absence of lucency around the TCBD; an increase in subchondral endplate sclerosis; and the presence of bridging bone incorporating the anterior bone graft as demonstrated on static lumbar radiographs and/or computerized tomography scans. Stability was also determined by an absence of movement on dynamic lumbar radiographs. The degree of lumbar lordosis at the diseased level was measured immediately postoperatively and compared with the change in lordosis at follow up. Outcomes were assessed using a modified Prolo outcome scale and rated as excellent, good, fair, or poor. Excellent and good outcomes were considered satisfactory; fair or poor outcomes were considered unsatisfactory. In 27 patients radiographic and clinical follow-up results were considered adequate (nine ALIF and 18 PLIF patients). The mean follow-up duration was 7.9 months. Overall satisfactory outcome was 70%: a 77% satisfactory outcome in PLIF patients and a 55% in ALIF patients. Osseous fusion was present in 94% of the patients in the PLIF group and in 33% of those in the ALIF group. Complications included one L-5 nerve root injury and two postoperative wound infections, all in patients who underwent PLIF; there was also a case of breakout of one implant at 8 months postoperatively. The degree of vertebral body angulation measured at last follow up compared with the measurement obtained immediately postoperative was 3.4° of kyphosis in the ALIF group and 3.1° of kyphosis in the PLIF group, which represented an 11% and 9% loss of lordosis, respectively. Preliminary results indicate that there is a dramatically higher fusion rate in PLIF compared with ALIF procedures in which TCBDs are used. There is a corresponding trend seen in patient outcomes, but no distinct difference seems apparent in terms of restoration of lordosis when performing either procedure. The results suggest that TCBDs may best be used in PLIF procedures in conjunction with pedicle screws and rod constructs. Moreover, in patients in whom TCBDs and supplemental tension band constructs are used fusion rates appear to be comparable with those reported in other series but at a faster rate (94% at 7.9 months mean follow up). Longer follow-up periods and a larger series of patients are needed to confirm these preliminary observations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document