Effect of Different Fixation Techniques on Segmental Kinematics and Load Sharing of Lumbar Spine: A FEM Study

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Kiapour ◽  
A. M. Kiapour ◽  
H. Serhan ◽  
S. Garfin ◽  
T. Allen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Load Distribution ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Instrumentation ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Vertebral Endplate ◽  
Fixation Devices ◽  
Fixation Techniques ◽  
Segmental Fixation ◽  
Biomechanical Parameters ◽  
Disc Level

Fusion has been the gold standard for treatment of various disorders associated with the spine especially at intervertebral disc level. The surgical procedure for fusion often requires fixation of the anterior column of the defected segment with interbody fixation devices such as cages. Anterior (ALIF), transforaminal (TLIF) and lateral (LIF) lumbar interbody fusion are some of the most common techniques for segmental fixation. The unacceptably low fusion rate with the interbody cages, when used as standalone, has led to the practice of combining these devices with posterior instrumentation. The segmental kinematics, the load distribution on the vertebral endplate and on the components of the posterior instrumentation are the key biomechanical parameters which can help to evaluate the performance of interbody fixation techniques with posterior instrumentation. We conducted a finite element (FE) study to compare biomechanics of these fixation methods.

Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cages: an independent review of 71 cases

1999 ◽  
Vol 91 (2) ◽  
pp. 186-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siviero Agazzi ◽  
Alain Reverdin ◽  
Daniel May
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Fixation Techniques ◽  
Independent Review ◽  
Fine Print

Object. The authors conducted a retrospective study to provide an independent evaluation of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in which impacted carbon cages were used. Interbody cages have been developed to replace tricortical interbody grafts in anterior and PLIF procedures. Superior fusion rates and clinical outcomes have been claimed by the developers. Methods. In a retrospective study, the authors evaluated 71 consecutive patients in whom surgery was performed between 1995 and 1997. The median follow-up period was 28 months. Clinical outcome was assessed using the Prolo scale. Fusion results were interpreted by an independent radiologist. The fusion rate was 90%. Overall, 67% of the patients were satisfied with their outcome and would undergo the same operation again. Based on the results of the Prolo scale, however, in only 39% of the patients were excellent or good results achieved. Forty-six percent of the work-eligible patients resumed their working activity. Clinical outcome and return-to-work status were significantly associated with socioeconomic factors such as preoperative employment (p = 0.03), compensation issues (p = 0.001), and length of preoperative sick leave (p = 0.01). Radiographically demonstrated fusion was not statistically related to clinical outcome (p = 0.2). Conclusions. This is one of the largest independent series in which PLIF with cages has been evaluated. The results show that the procedure is safe and effective with a 90% fusion rate and a 66% overall satisfaction rate, which compare favorably with those of traditional fixation techniques but fail to match the higher results claimed by the innovators of the cage techniques. The authors' experience confirms the reports of others that many patients continue to experience incapacitating back pain despite successful fusion and neurological recovery.

scholarly journals Outcomes of Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion for Adult Spinal Deformity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 219256822097914
Author(s):  
Lei Zhu ◽  
Jun-Wu Wang ◽  
Liang Zhang ◽  
Xin-Min Feng
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Lumbar Lordosis ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Perioperative Complications ◽  
Adult Spinal Deformity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lateral Interbody

Study Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Objectives: To evaluate clinical and radiographic outcomes, and perioperative complications of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) for adult spinal deformity (ASD). Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of related studies reporting outcomes of OLIF for ASD. The clinical outcomes were assessed by visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). The radiographic parameters were evaluated by sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), thoracic kyphosis (TK), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), Cobb angle and fusion rate. A random effects model and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were performed to investigate the results. Results: A total of 16 studies involving 519 patients were included in the present study. The mean difference of VAS-back score, VAS-leg score and ODI score before and after surgery was 5.1, 5.0 and 32.3 respectively. The mean correction of LL was 20.6°, with an average of 6.9° per level and the mean correction of Cobb was 16.4°, with an average of 4.7° per level. The mean correction of SVA, PT, SS, TK and PI-LL was 59.3 mm, 11.7°, 6.9°, 9.4° and 20.6° respectively. The mean fusion rate was 94.1%. The incidence of intraoperative and postoperative complications was 4.9% and 29.6% respectively. Conclusions: OLIF is an effective and safe surgery method in the treatment of mild or moderate ASD and it has advantages in less intraoperative blood loss and lower perioperative complications.

scholarly journals The radiological outcome in lumbar interbody fusion among rheumatoid arthritis patients: a 20-year retrospective study

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kuan-Kai Tung ◽  
Yun-Che Wu ◽  
Kun-Hui Chen ◽  
Chien-Chou Pan ◽  
Wen-Xian Lu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Substantial Improvement ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Subsidence Rate ◽  
Radiographic Outcomes ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Cage Subsidence

Abstract Background Clinical outcomes amongst Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) patients have shown satisfactory results being reported after lumbar surgery. The increased adoption of the interbody fusion technique has been due to a high fusion rate and less invasive procedures. However, the radiographic outcome for RA patients after receiving interbody fusion has scarcely been addressed in the available literature. Methods Patients receiving interbody fusion including ALIF, OLIF, and TLIF were examined for implant cage motion and fusion status at two-year follow-up. Parameters for the index correction level including ADH, PDH, WI, SL, FW, and FH were measured and compared at pre-OP, post-OP, and two-year follow-up. Results We enrolled 64 RA patients at 104 levels (mean 64.0 years old, 85.9% female) received lumbar interbody fusion. There were substantial improvement in ADH, PDH, WI, SL, FW, and FH after surgery, with both ADH and PDH having significantly dropped at two-year follow up. The OLIF group suffered from a higher subsidence rate with no significant difference in fusion rate when compared to TLIF. The fusion rate and subsidence rate for all RA patients was 90.4 and 28.8%, respectively. Conclusions We revealed the radiographic outcomes of lumbar interbody fusions towards symptomatic lumbar disease in RA patients with good fusion outcome despite the relative high subsidence rate amongst the OLIF group. Those responsible for intra-operative endplate management should be more cautious to avoid post-OP cage subsidence.

Retroperitoneal lateral lumbar interbody fusion with titanium threaded fusion cages

2002 ◽  
Vol 96 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher E. Wolfla ◽  
Dennis J. Maiman ◽  
Frank J. Coufal ◽  
James R. Wallace
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Anterior Longitudinal Ligament ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Single Cage ◽  
Novel Technique ◽  
Methodological Problems ◽  
Fine Print

Object. Intertransverse arthrodesis in which instrumentation is placed is associated with an excellent fusion rate; however, treatment of patients with symptomatic nonunion presents a number of difficulties. Revision posterior and traditional anterior procedures are associated with methodological problems. For example, in the latter, manipulation of the major vessels from L-2 to L-4 may be undesirable. The authors describe a method for performing retroperitoneal lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) in which a threaded cage is placed from L-2 through L-5 via a lateral trajectory, and they also detail a novel technique for implanting a cage from L-5 to S-1 via an oblique trajectory. Although they present data obtained over a 2-year period in the study of 15 patients, the focus of this report is primarily on describing the surgical procedure. Methods. The lateral lumbar spine was exposed via a standard retroperitoneal approach. Using the anterior longitudinal ligament as a landmark, the L2–3 through L4–5 levels were fitted with instrumentation via a true lateral trajectory; the L5—S1 level was fitted with instrumentation via an oblique trajectory. A single cage was placed at each instrumented level. Fifteen symptomatic patients in whom previous lumbar fusion had failed underwent retroperitoneal LIF. Thirty-eight levels were fitted with instrumentation. There have been no instrumentation-related failures, and fusion has occurred at 37 levels during the 2-year postoperative period. Conclusions. The use of retroperitoneal LIF in which threaded fusion cages are used avoids the technical difficulties associated with repeated posterior procedures. In addition, it allows L2—S1 instrumentation to be placed anteriorly via a single surgical approach. This construct has been shown to be biomechanically sound in animal models, and it appears to be a useful alternative for the management of failed multilevel intertransverse arthrodesis.

Extraforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion at the L5–S1 Level: Technical Considerations and Feasibility

2017 ◽  
Vol 78 (05) ◽  
pp. 507-512
Author(s):  
Denis Kaech ◽  
Pawel Baranowski ◽  
Alicja Baranowska ◽  
Didier Recoules-Arche ◽  
Arthur Kurzbuch
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Intervertebral Disk ◽  
Spinal Diseases ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Postoperative Result ◽  
Disk Space ◽  
Intervertebral Disk Space

Background Extraforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (ELIF) surgery is a muscle-sparing approach that allows the treatment of various degenerative spinal diseases. It is technical challenging to perform the ELIF approach at the L5–S1 level because the sacral ala obstructs the view of the intervertebral disk space. Methods We reported earlier on the ELIF technique in which the intervertebral disk is targeted at an angle of 45 degrees relative to the midline. In this article we describe the technical process we developed to overcome the anatomic relation between the sacral ala and the intervertebral disk space L5–S1 that hinders the ELIF approach at this level. We then report in a retrospective analysis on the short-term clinical and radiologic outcome of 100 consecutive patients with degenerative L5–S1 pathologies who underwent ELIF surgery. Results The L5–S1 ELIF approach could be realized in all patients. The short-term clinical outcome was evaluated 5 months after surgery: 92% of the patients were satisfied with their postoperative result; 8% had a poor result. Overall, 17% of the patients presented light radicular or low back pain not influencing their daily activity, and 82% of the patients working before surgery returned to work 3 to 7 months after surgery. The radiologic outcome was documented by computed tomography at 5 months after surgery and showed fusion in 99% of the patients. Lumbar magnetic resonance imaging performed in 5 patients at 6 months after surgery revealed the integrity of the paraspinal muscles. Conclusions ELIF surgery at the L5–S1 level is technically feasible for various degenerative spinal diseases. Analysis of the clinical and radiologic data in a consecutive retrospective cohort of patients who underwent this surgical procedure showed a good short-term clinical outcome and fusion rate.

scholarly journals Cortical Bone Trajectory Screws in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Minimally Invasive Surgery for Maximal Muscle Sparing—A Prospective Comparative Study with the Traditional Open Technique

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicola Marengo ◽  
Marco Ajello ◽  
Michele Federico Pecoraro ◽  
Giulia Pilloni ◽  
Giovanni Vercelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Pedicle Screws ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Prospective Comparative Study ◽  
One Year ◽  
Muscular Damage

Introduction. A prospective comparative study between classical posterior interbody fusion with peduncular screws and the new technique with divergent cortical screws was conducted. Material and Methods. Only patients with monosegmental degenerative disease were recruited into this study. We analyzed a cohort of 40 patients treated from January 2015 to March 2016 divided into 2 groups (20 patients went to traditional open surgery and 20 patients under mini-invasive strategy). Primary endpoints of this study are fusion rate and muscular damage; secondary endpoints analyzed were three different clinical scores (ODI, VAS, and EQ) and the morbidity rate of both techniques. Results. There was no significant difference in fusion rate between the two techniques. In addition, a significant difference in muscular damage was found according to the MRI evaluation. Clinical outcomes, based on pain intensity, Oswestry Disability Index status, and Euroquality-5D score, were found to be also statistically different, even one year after surgery. This study also demonstrated a correlation between patients’ muscular damage and their clinical outcome. Conclusions. Cortical bone trajectory screws would provide similar outcomes compared to pedicle screws in posterior lumbar interbody fusion at one year after surgery, and this technique represents a reasonable alternative to pedicle screws.

scholarly journals Microendoscope-Assisted Versus Open Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study

Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 150
Author(s):  
Masayoshi Fukushima ◽  
Nozomu Ohtomo ◽  
Michita Noma ◽  
Yudai Kumanomido ◽  
Hiroyuki Nakarai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Intraoperative Complications ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Open Group ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Degenerative Disease ◽  
Radiographic Findings ◽  
One Year

Background and objectives: Minimally invasive surgery has become popular for posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Microendoscope-assisted PLIF (ME-PLIF) utilizes a microendoscope within a tubular retractor for PLIF procedures; however, there are no published reports that compare Microendoscope-assisted to open PLIF. Here we compare the surgical and clinical outcomes of ME-PLIF with those of open PLIF. Materials and Methods: A total of 155 consecutive patients who underwent single-level PLIF were registered prospectively. Of the 149 patients with a complete set of preoperative data, 72 patients underwent ME-PLIF (ME-group), and 77 underwent open PLIF (open-group). Clinical and radiographic findings collected one year after surgery were compared. Results: Of the 149 patients, 57 patients in ME-group and 58 patients in the open-group were available. The ME-PLIF procedure required a significantly shorter operating time and involved less intraoperative blood loss. Three patients in both groups reported dural tears as intraoperative complications. Three patients in ME-group experienced postoperative complications, compared to two patients in the open-group. The fusion rate in ME-group at one year was lower than that in the open group (p = 0.06). The proportion of patients who were satisfied was significantly higher in the ME-group (p = 0.02). Conclusions: ME-PLIF was associated with equivalent post-surgical outcomes and significantly higher rates of patient satisfaction than the traditional open PLIF procedure. However, the fusion rate after ME-PLIF tended to be lower than that after the traditional open method.

Alloplastic or Autologous? Bone Chips versus PEEK Cage for Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Koehler ◽  
Christopher Held ◽  
Christian Stetter ◽  
Thomas Westermaier
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Instrumentation ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Cheap Alternative ◽  
Autologous Bone ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Abstract Introduction This study was conducted to compare bone-filled intervertebral cages with autologous bone chips for instrumented lumbar interbody fusion in patients with spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. Methods Surgery consisted of posterior instrumentation and decompression, diskectomy, and intervertebral fusion using a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage surrounded and filled with spongious bone chips (group 1, n = 57) or spongious bone chips alone (group 2, n = 37). The choice of method was left to the discretion of the surgeon. Postoperative results were prospectively evaluated using a standardized protocol. Radiological assessment included fusion rates and vertebral height, while clinical assessment included the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Results In group 1, a mean of 1.38 ± 0.64 segments were fused. In group 2, a mean of 1.58 ± 0.65 segments were fused. In both groups, the VAS for back pain and leg pain and the ODI improved without significant differences between the two groups. Osseous fusion was documented by computerized tomography in 73% in group 1 and 89% in group 2 after a mean of 18 months. The loss of height was 2.8 ± 4.0% in group 1 and 2.4 ± 5.2% in group 2. Conclusion Regardless of whether a PEEK cage filled with spongious bone chips or spongious bone chips alone were used for lumbar interbody fusion, clinical parameters improved significantly after surgery. There were no significant differences in the rate of bony fusion and loss of height between the two groups. The results of this nonrandomized cohort study indicate that the implantation of autologous spongious bone chips harvested during the decompression procedure is a useful and cheap alternative to an intervertebral cage in patients with degenerative pseudospondylolisthesis.

Use of a nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide composite in anterior cervical subtotal corpectomy and fusion

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 1491-1496
Author(s):  
Xiaojiang Li ◽  
Xudong Zhang ◽  
Shanshan Dong ◽  
Haijun Li ◽  
Chunlan Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Graft ◽  
Vertebral Body ◽  
Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Japanese Orthopaedic Association ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Graft Material ◽  
Improvement Rate ◽  
Fusion Surgery ◽  
Cervical Vertebral Body

This study aimed to explore the safety and efficacy of using nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide (N-HA/PA) composite in anterior cervical vertebral body subtotal corpectomy and interbody fusion. Total 50 patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy were enrolled to undergo anterior cervical spondylectomy. Bone graft pedicles were compounded with N-HA/PA and intervertebral body fusion was performed. Study outcomes included surgical efficacy and the degree of fusion. Patients in whom vertebral body fusion was performed with N-HA/PA composite pedicles had significantly improved symptoms. The postoperative Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores increased to 18.56±4.37 from 11.37±3.52, reflecting an improvement rate of 87.3%. The composite pedicle fusion rate was 96.4%. Therefore, N-HA/PA composite pedicle as a bone graft material in fusion surgery provides significant therapeutic efficacy. Moreover, the composite pedicle fusion rate is high, making it ideal for anterior cervical vertebral body subtotal corpectomy and fusion.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document