Preoperative conservative treatment is insufficiently described in clinical trials of lumbar fusion: a scoping review.

PURPOSE: To identify how pre-surgical conservative care is characterized and reported in randomized controlled trials of adults undergoing elective lumbar fusion, including duration and type of treatment. METHODS: The study design is a scoping review. Data sources include PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). All randomized controlled trials published in English between January 1, 2005, and February 15, 2022, assessing lumbar fusion as the intervention were included in this review. RESULTS: Of 166 studies, 62.0% reported a failure in conservative care prior to lumbar fusion, but only 15.1% detailed the type of specific conservative care received. None of the trials provided sufficient details to understand the nature of the pre-surgical conservative treatment, such as frequency, recency/timing, or dosage of conservative interventions. CONCLUSION: Although roughly two-thirds of trials reported that patients failed conservative care prior to receiving a lumbar fusion, few studies named the conservative intervention provided and no studies provided any details regarding dosing or recency of care. This lack of information creates ambiguity in the surgical decision-making process, setting the assumption that all patients received adequate conservative care prior to surgery. Details about pre-surgical conservative care should be disclosed to allow for appropriate clinical application, decision-making, and interpretation of treatment effects.

Comprehensive geriatric assessment to predict adverse events in elderly patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion surgery.

PURPOSE: Although comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) has been used widely, its impact on adverse events in elderly patients has not been fully examined. The present study aimed to investigate the relationships between subcomponents of CGA and adverse events (AEs) in elderly patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion surgery. METHODS: A total of 242 eligible elderly patients enrolled. Our CGA included activities of daily living, instrumental activities of daily living, nutritional status, cardiac function, pulmonary function, renal function, frailty, cognition, anxiety, depression, delirium, chronic pain score, comorbidity and polypharmacy. Comprehensive complication index was used to summarize postoperative complications and its severity. Logistic regression was performed to determine the relationships between subcomponents of a CGA and postoperative AEs. RESULTS: Present study found that female were more vulnerable to have AEs. Postoperative major AEs were associated with delirium (odds ratio (OR): 4.302, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.720-10.761, p = 0.002), nutritional status (OR: 3.030, 95%CI 1.218-7.541, p = 0.017), cognitive impairment (OR: 4.122, 95%CI 1.179-14.407, p = 0.027), Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) (OR: 4.800, 95%CI 1.852-12.440, p = 0.001) and severe dependent (OR: 3.772, 95%CI 1.116-9.841, p = 0.007). Further analysis showed that delirium (OR: 2.824, 95%CI 1.068-7.467, p = 0.036) and CCI (OR: 3.221, 95%CI 1.184-8.766, p = 0.022) were independently related to major AEs. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that preoperative screening preoperative delirium, cognitive, nutrition and CCI are essential to prevent postoperative major AEs of the surgical elderly.

Prospective same day discharge instrumented lumbar spine surgery - a forty patient consecutive series.

PURPOSE: Outpatient lumbar decompression surgeries have been successfully performed in France for over twenty years, earning acceptance. However, outpatient instrumented lumbar spine procedures and arthroplasties are less documented. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, efficiency, and safety of outpatient lumbar instrumented surgery. METHODS: A prospective single-center study involving three experienced surgeons was conducted from September 2020 to September 2021, with a minimum six-month postoperative follow-up. Inclusion criteria comprised patients aged 18 to 75 eligible for same-day discharge, undergoing single-level lumbar spinal fusion or arthroplasty via anterior or posterior Wiltse approach. The primary endpoint was assessing the percentage of successful outpatient discharges (within twelve hours), with secondary endpoints including perioperative/postoperative complications and discharge pain prescriptions in terms of frequency and severity. RESULTS: Forty patients (mean age: 44 years; 16/24 male/female ratio) underwent surgery, including 18 lumbar arthroplasties, twelve ALIF, and ten TLIF procedures. The majority of surgeries were performed at L4-L5 (18 procedures) and L5-S1 levels (22 procedures). 95% (38/40) of patients were successfully discharged within twelve hours, with only two patients discharged the following day. No postoperative hematomas, serious adverse events, or revision surgeries were noted. CONCLUSION: 95% of patients were discharged successfully within twelve hours following outpatient lumbar fusion surgery, with a 100% patient satisfaction rate. Specific technical solutions were not necessary, and oral pain relief sufficed. Patient selection and education, including early pain management, played crucial roles in complication avoidance. This study underscores the safety of outpatient instrumented lumbar spine procedures, leading to cost reduction and expedited recovery.

An evaluation of fusion status following lumbar fusion surgery utilizing multi-planar computed tomography.

PURPOSE: To report the rate of fusion in a sample of patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery and assess interrater reliability of computed tomography (CT)-based parameters for the assessment of fusion. METHODS: All adult patients who underwent lumbar fusion surgery from 2017 to 2021 were retrospectively identified. Patient demographics and surgical characteristics were collected through chart review of the electronic medical records. CT scans were reviewed independently by two attending spine surgeons and two spine fellows. Fusion was defined as evidence of bone bridging in any one of (1) posterolateral gutters, (2) facets, or (3) interbody (when applicable) on any CT views. Evidence of screw haloing was indicative of nonunion. Interrater reliability was determined using cohen's kappa. Afterwards, a consensus agreement for each component of fusion was reached between participants. RESULTS: The overall fusion rate among all procedures was 63/69 (91.3%). Overall 22/25 (88.0%) TLIF, 16/19 (84.2%) PLDF, 3/3 (100%) LLIF, and 22/22 (100%) circumferential fusions experienced a successful fusion. Interrater reliability was good for interbody fusion (k = 0.734) and moderate for all other measures (k = 0.561 for posterolateral fusion; k = 0.471 for facet fusion; k = 0.458 for screw haloing). Overall, interrater reliability as to whether a patient had a fusion or nonunion was moderate (k = 0.510). CONCLUSION: There was only moderate interrater reliability across most radiographic measures used in assessing lumbar fusion status. Reliability was highest when evaluating the presence of interbody fusion. The majority of fusions occurred across the facet joints.

Comparison of the clinical outcomes of VBE-TLIF versus MIS-TLIF for single-level degenerative lumbar diseases.

OBJECTIVE: This research aims to compare the clinical outcomes of VBE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF for the treatment of patients with single-level degenerative lumbar diseases. METHODS: Ninety patients were enrolled in this study. The estimated blood loss, operation time, postoperative hospitalization days, time to functional exercise, amount of surgical drain and inflammatory index were recorded. The visual analog scale, Oswestry dysfunction index and modified MacNab criteria were used to assessed the patient's back and leg pain, functional status and clinical satisfaction rates. RESULTS: The average operation time of the VBE-TLIF group was longer than that of the MIS-TLIF group. The time for functional exercise, length of hospital stay, estimated blood loss and amount of surgical drain in the VBE-TLIF group were relative shorter than those in the MIS-TLIF group. Additionally, the levels of CRP, neutrophil, IL-6 and CPK in the VBE-TLIF group were significantly lower than those in the MIS-TLIF group at postoperative days 1 and 3, respectively (P < 0.001). Patients undergoing VBE-TLIF had significantly lower back VAS scores than those in the MIS-TLIF group on postoperative days 1 and 3 (P < 0.001). No significant differences were found in the clinical satisfaction rates (95.83 vs. 95.24%, P = 0.458) or interbody fusion rate (97.92 vs. 95.24%, P = 0.730) between these two surgical procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Both VBE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF are safe and effective surgical procedures for patients with lumbar diseases, but VBE-TLIF technique is a preferred surgical procedure with merits of reduced surgical trauma and quicker recovery.

Comparative evaluation of postoperative outcomes and expenditure between robotic and conventional single-level lumbar fusion surgery: a comprehensive analysis of nationwide inpatient sample data.

INTRODUCTION: In this study, we investigate the evolution of lumbar fusion surgery with robotic assistance, specifically focusing on the impact of robotic technology on pedicle screw placement and fixation. Utilizing data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) covering 2016 to 2019, we conduct a comprehensive analysis of postoperative outcomes and costs for single-level lumbar fusion surgery. Traditionally, freehand techniques for pedicle screw placement posed risks, leading to the development of robotic-assisted techniques with advantages such as reduced misplacement, increased precision, smaller incisions, and decreased surgeon fatigue. However, conflicting study results regarding the efficacy of robotic assistance in comparison to conventional techniques have prompted the need for a thorough evaluation. With a dataset of 461,965 patients, our aim is to provide insights into the impact of robotic assistance on patient care and healthcare resource utilization. Our primary goal is to contribute to the ongoing discourse on the efficacy of robotic technology in lumbar fusion procedures, offering meaningful insights for optimizing patient-centered care and healthcare resource allocation. METHODS: This study employed data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) spanning the years 2016 to 2019 from USA, 461,965 patients underwent one-level lumbar fusion surgery, with 5770 of them having the surgery with the assistance of robotic technology. The study focused primarily on one-level lumbar fusion surgery and excluded non-elective cases and those with prior surgeries. The analysis encompassed the identification of comorbidities, surgical etiologies, and complications using specific ICD-10 codes. Throughout the study, a constant comparison was made between robotic and non-robotic lumbar fusion procedures. Various statistical methods were applied, with a p value threshold of < 0.05, to determine statistical significance. RESULTS: Robotic-assisted lumbar fusion surgeries demonstrated a significant increase from 2016 to 2019, comprising 1.25% of cases. Both groups exhibited similar patient demographics, with minor differences in payment methods, favoring Medicare in non-robotic surgery and more private payer usage in robotic surgery. A comparison of comorbid conditions revealed differences in the prevalence of hypertension, dyslipidemia, and sleep apnea diagnoses-In terms of hospitalization outcomes and costs, there was a slight shorter hospital stay of 3.06 days, compared to 3.13 days in non-robotic surgery, showcasing a statistically significant difference (p = 0.042). Robotic surgery has higher charges, with a mean charge of $154,673, whereas non-robotic surgery had a mean charge of $125,467 (p < 0.0001). Robotic surgery demonstrated lower rates of heart failure, acute coronary artery disease, pulmonary edema, venous thromboembolism, and traumatic spinal injury compared to non-robotic surgery, with statistically significant differences (p < 0.05). Conversely, robotic surgery demonstrated increased post-surgery anemia and blood transfusion requirements compared to non-robotic patients (p < 0.0001). Renal disease prevalence was similar before surgery, but acute kidney injury was slightly higher in the robotic group post-surgery (p = 0.038). CONCLUSION: This is the first big data study on this matter, our study showed that Robotic-assisted lumbar fusion surgery has fewer post-operative complications such as heart failure, acute coronary artery disease, pulmonary edema, venous thromboembolism, and traumatic spinal injury in comparison to conventional methods. Conversely, robotic surgery demonstrated increased post-surgery anemia, blood transfusion and acute kidney injury. Robotic surgery has higher charges compared to non-robotic surgery.

Association of modic changes and postoperative surgical site infection after posterior lumbar spinal fusion.

PURPOSE: Postoperative surgical site infection is one of the most serious complications following spine surgery. Previous studies have reported Modic changes (MC) represent a subclinical infection. This study aims to investigate the relation between Modic changes and surgical site infection after posterior lumbar fusion surgery. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 424 patients who received posterior lumbar fusion. Preoperative clinical and radiological parameters were recorded. Primary outcome was the rate of postoperative surgical site infection. Covariates included age, body mass index (BMI), sex, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic heart failure, Pfirrmann classification, fused levels, and operation duration. The presence of Modic changes was used as an exposition variable, and adjusted for other risk factors in multivariate analyses. RESULTS: Of the 424 patients, 30 (7%) developed an acute surgical site infection. Infection had no relation to age, sex, BMI, and comorbidities. There were 212 (50%) patients with MC, and 23 (10.8%) had a surgical site infection, compared to 212 (50%) patients without MC in which there were 7 (3.3%) surgical site infections. MC was associated with surgical site infection in univariate analysis (odds ratio [OR] = 3.56, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.49-8.50, p = 0.004) and multivariate logistic regression analysis (OR = 3.05, 95% CI: 1.26-7.37, p = 0.013). There was statistically significant between specific type (p = 0.035) and grade of MCs (p = 0.0187) and SSI. CONCLUSIONS: MCs may be a potential risk factor for SSI following posterior lumbar spinal intervertebral fusion. Type I and grade C MCs showed a higher infection rate compared with other MC types and grades.

Multicenter external validation of prediction models for clinical outcomes after spinal fusion for lumbar degenerative disease.

BACKGROUND: Clinical prediction models (CPM), such as the SCOAP-CERTAIN tool, can be utilized to enhance decision-making for lumbar spinal fusion surgery by providing quantitative estimates of outcomes, aiding surgeons in assessing potential benefits and risks for each individual patient. External validation is crucial in CPM to assess generalizability beyond the initial dataset. This ensures performance in diverse populations, reliability and real-world applicability of the results. Therefore, we externally validated the tool for predictability of improvement in oswestry disability index (ODI), back and leg pain (BP, LP). METHODS: Prospective and retrospective data from multicenter registry was obtained. As outcome measure minimum clinically important change was chosen for ODI with ≥ 15-point and ≥ 2-point reduction for numeric rating scales (NRS) for BP and LP 12 months after lumbar fusion for degenerative disease. We externally validate this tool by calculating discrimination and calibration metrics such as intercept, slope, Brier Score, expected/observed ratio, Hosmer-Lemeshow (HL), AUC, sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: We included 1115 patients, average age 60.8 ± 12.5 years. For 12-month ODI, area-under-the-curve (AUC) was 0.70, the calibration intercept and slope were 1.01 and 0.84, respectively. For NRS BP, AUC was 0.72, with calibration intercept of 0.97 and slope of 0.87. For NRS LP, AUC was 0.70, with calibration intercept of 0.04 and slope of 0.72. Sensitivity ranged from 0.63 to 0.96, while specificity ranged from 0.15 to 0.68. Lack of fit was found for all three models based on HL testing. CONCLUSIONS: Utilizing data from a multinational registry, we externally validate the SCOAP-CERTAIN prediction tool. The model demonstrated fair discrimination and calibration of predicted probabilities, necessitating caution in applying it in clinical practice. We suggest that future CPMs focus on predicting longer-term prognosis for this patient population, emphasizing the significance of robust calibration and thorough reporting.

A comparative cohort study of surgical approaches for adult spinal deformity at a minimum 2-year follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN: This study was a retrospective multi-center comparative cohort study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective institutional database of operative adult spinal deformity patients was utilized. All fusions > 5 vertebral levels and including the sacrum/pelvis were eligible for inclusion. Revisions, 3 column osteotomies, and patients with < 2-year clinical follow-up were excluded. Patients were separated into 3 groups based on surgical approach: 1) posterior spinal fusion without interbody (PSF), 2) PSF with interbody (PSF-IB), and 3) anteroposterior (AP) fusion (anterior lumbar interbody fusion or lateral lumbar interbody fusion with posterior screw fixation). Intraoperative, radiographic, and clinical outcomes, as well as complications, were compared between groups with ANOVA and χ2 tests. RESULTS: One-hundred and thirty-eight patients were included for study (PSF, n = 37; PSF-IB, n = 44; AP, n = 57). Intraoperatively, estimated blood loss was similar between groups (p = 0.171). However, the AP group had longer operative times (547.5 min) compared to PSF (385.1) and PSF-IB (370.7) (p < 0.001). Additionally, fusion length was shorter in PSF-IB (11.4) compared to AP (13.6) and PSF (12.9) (p = 0.004). There were no differences between the groups in terms of change in alignment from preoperative to 2 years postoperative. There were no differences in clinical outcomes. While postoperative complications were largely similar between groups, operative complications were higher in the AP group (31.6%) compared to the PSF (5.4%) and PSF-IB (9.1) groups (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: While there were differences in intraoperative outcomes (operative time and fusion length), there were no differences in postoperative clinical or radiographic outcomes. AP fusion was associated with a higher rate of operative complications.

How does cervical sagittal profile change after the spontaneous compensation of global sagittal imbalance following one- or two-level lumbar fusion.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the cervical sagittal profile after the spontaneous compensation of global sagittal imbalance and analyze the associations between the changes in cervical sagittal alignment and spinopelvic parameters. METHODS: In this retrospective radiographic study, we analyzed 90 patients with degenerative lumbar stenosis (DLS) and sagittal imbalance who underwent short lumbar fusion (imbalance group). We used 60 patients with DLS and sagittal balance as the control group (balance group). Patients in the imbalance group were also divided into two groups according to the preoperative PI: low PI group (≤ 50°), high PI group (PI > 50°). We measured the spinal sagittal alignment parameters on the long-cassette standing lateral radiographs of the whole spine. We compared the changes of spinal sagittal parameters between pre-operation and post-operation. We observed the relationships between the changes in cervical profile and spinopelvic parameters. RESULTS: Sagittal vertical axis (SVA) occurred spontaneous compensation (p = 0.000) and significant changes were observed in cervical lordosis (CL) (p = 0.000) and cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) (p = 0.023) after surgery in the imbalance group. However, there were no significant differences in the radiographic parameters from pre-operation to post-operation in the balance group. The variations in CL were correlated with the variations in SVA (R = 0.307, p = 0.041). The variations in cSVA were correlated with the variations in SVA (R=-0.470, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Cervical sagittal profile would have compensatory changes after short lumbar fusion. The spontaneous decrease in CL would occur in patients with DLS after the spontaneous compensation of global sagittal imbalance following one- or two-level lumbar fusion. The changes of cervical sagittal profile were related to the extent of the spontaneous compensation of SVA.

Pseudarthrosis risk factors in lumbar fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

This study presents a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of pseudarthrosis risk factors following lumbar fusion procedures. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were used for outcome measurements. The objective of this study was to identify the independent risk factors for pseudarthrosis after lumbar spinal fusion, which is crucial for mitigating morbidity and reoperation. Systematic searches in PubMed, Embase, and Scopus (1990-July 2021) were conducted using specific terms. The inclusion criteria included prospective and retrospective cohorts and case‒control series reporting ORs with 95% CIs from multivariate analysis. The quality assessment utilized the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Meta-analysis, employing OR and 95% CI, assessed pseudarthrosis risk factors in lumbar fusion surgery, depicted in a forest plot. Of the 568 abstracts identified, 12 met the inclusion criteria (9 retrospective, 2006-2021). The 17 risk factors were categorized into clinical, radiographic, surgical, and bone turnover marker factors. The meta-analysis highlighted two significant clinical risk factors: age (95% CI 1.02-1.11; p = 0.005) and smoking (95% CI 1.68-5.44; p = 0.0002). The sole significant surgical risk factor was the number of fused levels (pooled OR 1.35; 95% CI 1.17-1.55; p < 0.0001). This study identified 17 risk factors for pseudarthrosis after lumbar fusion surgery, emphasizing age, smoking status, and the number of fusion levels. Prospective studies are warranted to explore additional risk factors and assess the impact of surgery and graft type.

Spinal fusion surgery use among adults with low back pain enrolled in a digital musculoskeletal program: an observational study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare 12-month spinal fusion surgery rates in the setting of low back pain among digital musculoskeletal (MSK) program participants versus a comparison cohort who only received usual care. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study with propensity score matched comparison cohort using commercial medical claims data representing over 100 million commercially insured lives. METHODS: All study subjects experienced low back pain between January 2020 and December 2021. Digital MSK participants enrolled in the digital MSK low back program between January 2020 and December 2021. Non-participants had low back pain related physical therapy (PT) between January 2020 and December 2021. Digital MSK participants were matched to non-participants with similar demographics, comorbidities and baseline MSK-related medical care use. Spinal fusion surgery rates at 12 months post participation were compared. RESULTS: Compared to non-participants, digital MSK participants had lower rates of spinal fusion surgery in the post-period (0.7% versus 1.6%; p < 0.001). Additionally, in the augmented inverse probability weighting (AIPW) model, digital MSK participants were found to have decreased odds of undergoing spinal fusion surgery (adjusted odds ratio: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.51-0.81). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that participation in a digital MSK program is associated with a lower rate of spinal fusion surgery.

Impact of surgical risk factors for non-union on lumbar spinal fusion outcomes using cellular bone allograft at 24-months follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The current report investigates fusion rates and patient-reported outcomes following lumbar spinal surgery using cellular bone allograft (CBA) in patients with risk factors for non-union. METHODS: A prospective, open label study was conducted in subjects undergoing lumbar spinal fusion with CBA (NCT02969616) to assess fusion success rates and patient-reported outcomes in subjects with risk factors for non-union. Subjects were categorized into low-risk (≤ 1 risk factors) and high-risk (> 1 risk factors) groups. Radiographic fusion status was evaluated by an independent review of dynamic radiographs and CT scans. Patient-reported outcome measures included quality of life (EQ-5D), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analog Scales (VAS) for back and leg pain. Adverse event reporting was conducted throughout 24-months of follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 274 subjects were enrolled: 140 subjects (51.1%) were categorized into the high-risk group (> 1 risk factor) and 134 subjects (48.9%) into the low-risk group (≤ 1 risk factors). The overall mean age at screening was 58.8 years (SD 12.5) with a higher distribution of females (63.1%) than males (36.9%). No statistical difference in fusion rates were observed between the low-risk (90.0%) and high-risk (93.9%) groups (p > 0.05). A statistically significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes (EQ-5D, ODI and VAS) was observed at all time points (p < 0.05) in both low and high-risk groups. The low-risk group showed enhanced improvement at multiple timepoints in EQ-5D, ODI, VAS-Back pain and VAS-Leg pain scores compared to the high-risk group (p < 0.05). The number of AEs were similar among risk groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates high fusion rates following lumbar spinal surgery using CBA, regardless of associated risk factors. Patient reported outcomes and fusion rates were not adversely affected by risk factor profiles. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02969616 (21/11/2016).

The impact of nursing interventions on the rehabilitation outcome of patients after lumbar spine surgery.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the impact of nursing interventions on the rehabilitation outcomes of patients after lumbar spine surgery and to provide effective references for future postoperative care for patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery. METHODS: The study included two groups: a control group receiving routine care and an observation group receiving additional comprehensive nursing care. The comprehensive care encompassed postoperative rehabilitation, pain, psychological, dietary management, and discharge planning. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey, self-rating depression scale (SDS) and self-rating anxiety scale(SAS) were used to assess physiological and psychological recovery. Blood albumin, haemoglobin, neutrophil counts, white blood cell counts, red blood cell counts, inflammatory markers (IL-6, IL-10, and IFN-γ) were measured, and the incidence of postoperative adverse reactions was also recorded. RESULTS: Patients in the observation group exhibited significantly improved VAS, ODI, SF-36, SDS and SAS scores assessments post-intervention compared to the control group (P < 0.05). Moreover, levels of IL-6, IL-10, and IFN-γ were more favorable in the observation group post-intervention (P < 0.05), indicating a reduction in inflammatory response. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative adverse reactions between the groups (P > 0.05), suggesting that the comprehensive nursing interventions did not increase the risk of adverse effects. CONCLUSION: Comprehensive nursing interventions have a significant impact on the postoperative recovery outcomes of patients with LSS, alleviating pain, reducing inflammation levels, and improving the overall quality of patient recovery without increasing the patient burden. Therefore, in clinical practice, it is important to focus on comprehensive nursing interventions for patients with LSS to improve their recovery outcomes and quality of life.

Lateral-PLIF for spinal arthrodesis: concept, technique, results, complications, and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) surgery represents an effective option to treat degenerative conditions in the lumbar spine. To reduce the drawbacks of the classical technique, we developed a variant, so-called Lateral-PLIF, which we then evaluated through a prospective consecutive series of patients. METHODS: All adult patients treated at our institute with single or double level Lateral-PLIF for lumbar degenerative disease from January to December 2017 were prospectively collected. Exclusion criteria were patients < 18 years of age, traumatic patients, active infection, or malignancy, as well as unavailability of clinical and/or radiological follow-up data. The technique consists of insert the cages bilaterally through the transition zone between the central canal and the intervertebral foramen, just above the lateral recess. Pre- and postoperative (2 years) questionnaires and phone interviews (4 years) assessed pain and functional outcomes. Data related to the surgical procedure, postoperative complications, and radiological findings (1 year) were collected. RESULTS: One hundred four patients were selected for the final analysis. The median age was 58 years and primary symptoms were mechanical back pain (100, 96.1%) and/or radicular pain (73, 70.2%). We found a high fusion rate (95%). A statistically significant improvement in functional outcome was also noted (ODI p < 0.001, Roland-Morris score p < 0.001). Walking distance increased from 812 m ± 543 m to 3443 m ± 712 m (p < 0.001). Complications included dural tear (6.7%), infection/wound dehiscence (4.8%), and instrument failure (1.9%) but no neurological deterioration. CONCLUSIONS: Lateral-PLIF is a safe and effective technique for lumbar interbody fusion and may be considered for further comparative study validation with other techniques before extensive use to treat lumbar degenerative disease.

A systematic review and update on diagnosis and treatment of new onset sacroiliac joint dysfunction after lumbar fusion.

BACKGROUND: Sacroiliac joint dysfunction (SIJD) after lumbar/lumbosacral fusion has become increasingly recognized as the utilization of lumbar fusion has grown. Despite the significant morbidity associated with this condition, uncertainty regarding its diagnosis and treatment remains. We aim to update the current knowledge of the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of post-lumbar surgery SIJD. METHODS: PRISMA guidelines were used to search the PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Reviews, Embase, and OVID databases for literature published in the last 10 years. The ROBIS tool was utilized for risk of bias assessment. Statistical analyses were performed using the R foundation. A Fisher's exact test was performed to determine the risk of SIJD based on operative technique, gender, and symptom onset timeline. Odds ratios were reported with 95% confidence intervals. A p-value [Formula: see text] 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Seventeen publications were included. The incidence of new onset SIJD was 7.0%. The mean age was 56 years, and the follow-up length was 30 months. SIJD was more common with fixed lumbar fusion vs floating fusion (OR = 1.48 [0.92, 2.37], p = 0.083), fusion of [Formula: see text] 3 segments (p < 0.05), and male gender increased incidence of SIJD (OR = 1.93 [1.27, 2.98], p = 0.001). Intra-articular injection decreased the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score by 75%, while radiofrequency ablation (RFA) reduced the score by 90%. An open approach resulted in a 13% reduction in VAS score versus 68 and 29% for SIJ fixation using the iFuse and DIANA approaches, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar fusion predisposes patients to SIJD, likely through manipulation of the SIJ's biomechanics. Definitive diagnosis of SIJD remains multifaceted and a newer modality such as SPECT/CT may find a future role. When conservative measures are ineffective, RFA and SIJ fixation using the iFuse System yield the greatest improvement VAS and ODI.

The Effects of Longer Use of Teriparatide on Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes after Spinal Fusion in Geriatric Patients.

Background: Teriparatide is an anabolic agent for osteoporosis and is believed to improve the bone healing process. Previous studies showed that teriparatide could enhance not only fracture healing but also spine fusion. It has been reported that use of teriparatide could promote the spine fusion process and decrease mechanical complications. However, there was no consensus regarding optimal treatment duration. The purpose of this study was to compare surgical outcomes between short-duration and long-duration teriparatide treatment after lumbar fusion surgery in elderly patients. Materials and Methods: All consecutive patients older than 60 years who underwent 1-level lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative diseases between January 2015 and December 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Based on the duration of teriparatide treatment (daily subcutaneous injection of 20 µg teriparatide), patients were subdivided into two groups: a short-duration (SD) group (<6 months) and a long-duration (LD) group (≥6 months). Mechanical complications, such as screw loosening, cage subsidence, and adjacent vertebral fractures, were investigated. Postoperative 1-year union rate was also evaluated on computed tomography. Clinical outcomes were recorded using visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Between-group differences for these radiographic and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Results: Ninety-one patients were reviewed in this study, including sixty patients in the SD group and thirty-one patients in the LD group. Their mean age was 72.3 ± 6.2 years, and 79 patients were female. Mean T-score was -3.3 ± 0.8. Cage subsidence (6.7% vs. 3.2%), screw loosening (28.3% vs. 35.5%), and adjacent vertebral fracture (6.7% vs. 9.7%) were not significantly different between the SD and LD groups. Union rate at 1-year postoperative was 65.0% in the SD group and 87.1% in the LD group (p = 0.028). Both groups showed improvement in VAS and ODI after surgery. However, the differences of VAS from preoperative to 6 months and 1 year postoperative were significantly higher in the LD group. Conclusions: Longer teriparatide treatment after lumbar fusion surgery resulted in a higher union rate at 1-year postoperative than the shorter treatment. Also, it could be more beneficial for clinical outcomes.

Comparative Analysis of Vascular Structures in OLIF51 and the Lateral Corridor Approach under Supine MRI and Intraoperative Enhanced CT in the Lateral Decubitus Position.

Background and Objectives: As the oblique lateral interbody fusion at L5/S1 (OLIF51) and the lateral corridor approach (LCA) have gained popularity, an understanding of the precise vascular structure at the L5/S1 level is indispensable. The objectives of this study were to investigate the vascular anatomy at the L5/S1 level, and to compare the movement of vascular tissue between the supine and lateral decubitus positions using intraoperative enhanced CT and MRI. Materials and Methods: A total of 43 patients who underwent either OLIF51 or LCA were investigated with an average age at surgery of 60.4 (37-80) years old. The preoperative MRI was taken to observe the axial and sagittal anatomy of the vascular position under the supine position. The intraoperative vein-enhanced CT was taken just before incision in the right decubitus position, and compared to supine MRI anatomy. Iliolumbar vein appearance and its types were also classified. Results: The average vascular window allowed for OLIF51 was 22.8 mm and 34.1 mm at either the L5 caudal endplate level or the S1 cephalad endplate level, respectively. The LCA was 14.2 mm and 12.6 mm at either level, respectively. The left common iliac vein moved 3.8 mm and 6.9 mm to the right direction at either level from supine to the right decubitus position, respectively. The bifurcation moved 6.3 mm to the caudal direction from supine to right decubitus. The iliolumbar vein was located at 31 mm laterally from the midline, and the MRI detection rate was 52%. Conclusions: The precise measurement of vascular anatomy indicated that the OLIF51 approach was the standard minimally invasive anterior approach for the L5/S1 disc level compared to LCA; however, there were many variations in quantitative anatomy as well as significant vascular movements between the supine and right decubitus positions. In the clinical setting of OLIF51 and LCA surgeries, careful preoperative evaluation and intraoperative 3D imaging are recommended for safe and accurate surgery.

[Comparison of Clinical Effects of Cortical Bone Trajectory Screws and Traditional Pedicle Screws in Posterior Lumbar Fusion]. / è °æ¤ŽåŽè·¯èžåˆæœ¯ä¸­çš®è´¨éª¨è½¨è¿¹èžºé’‰å’Œä¼ ç»Ÿæ¤Žå¼“æ ¹èžºé’‰çš„ä¸´åºŠæ•ˆæžœæ¯”è¾ƒ.

Objective: To compare the clinical effects of cortical bone trajectory screws and traditional pedicle screws in posterior lumbar fusion. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted to analyze lumbar degeneration patients who underwent surgical treatment at our hospital between January 2016 and January 2019. A total of 123 patients who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled. The subjects were divided into two groups according to their surgical procedures and the members of the two groups were matched by age, sex, and the number of fusion segments. There were 63 patients in the traditional pedicle screws (PS) group and 60 in the cortical bone trajectory screws (CBTS) group. The outcomes of the two groups were compared. The primary outcome measures were perioperative conditions, including operation duration, estimated intraoperative blood loss (EBL), and length-of-stay (LOS), visual analog scale (VAS) score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, and interbody fusion rate. The secondary outcome measures were the time to postoperative ambulation and the incidence of complications. VAS scores and ODI scores were assessed before operation, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 12 months after operation, and at the final follow-up. The interbody fusion rate was assessed in 1 year and 2 years after the operation and at the final follow-up. Results: The CBTS group showed a reduction in operation duration ([142.8±13.1] min vs. [174.7±15.4] min, P<0.001), LOS ([9.5±1.5] d vs. [12.0±2.0] d, P<0.001), and EBL ([194.2±38.3] mL vs. [377.5±33.1] mL, P<0.001) in comparison with the PS group. The VAS score for back pain in the CBTS group was lower than that in the PS group at 1 week and 1 month after operation and the ODI score in the CBTS group was lower than that in the PS group at 1 month after operation, with the differences being statistically significant (P<0.05). At each postoperative time point, the VAS score for leg pain and the interbody fusion rate did not show significant difference between the two groups. The VAS score for back and leg pain and the ODI score at each time point after operation in both the CBTS group and the PS group were significantly lower than those before operation (P<0.05). No significant difference was found in the time to postoperative ambulation or the overall complication incidence between the two groups. Conclusion: The CBTS technique could significantly shorten the operation duration and LOS, reduce EBL, and achieve the same effect as the PS technique does in terms of intervertebral fusion rate, pain relief, functional improvement, and complication incidence in patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion.

Validation of Roussouly classification in predicting the occurrence of adjacent segment disease after short-level lumbar fusion surgery.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies demonstrated that restoring sagittal alignment to the original Roussouly type can remarkably reduce complication rates after adult spinal deformity surgery. However, there is still no data proving the benefit of maintaining ideal Roussouly shape in the lumbar degenerative diseases and its association with the development of adjacent segment disease (ASD). Thus, this study was performed to validate the usefulness of Roussouly classification to predict the occurrence of ASD after lumbar fusion surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed 234 consecutive patients with lumbar degenerative diseases who underwent 1- or 2-level fusion surgery. Demographic and radiographic data were compared between ASD and non-ASD groups. The patients were classified by both "theoretical" [based on pelvic incidence (PI)] and "current" (based on sacral slope) Roussouly types. The patients were defined as "matched" if their "current" shapes matched the "theoretical" types and otherwise as "mismatched". The logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the factors associated with ASD. Finally, clinical data and spinopelvic parameters of "theoretical" and "current" types were compared. RESULTS: With a mean follow-up duration of 70.6 months, evidence of ASD was found in the 68 cases. Postoperatively, ASD group had more "current" shapes classified as type 1 or 2 and fewer as type 3 than the non-ASD group (p < 0.001), but the distribution of "theoretical" types was similar between groups. Moreover, 80.9% (55/68) of patients with ASD were mismatched, while 48.2% (80/166) of patients without ASD were mismatched (p < 0.001). A multivariate analysis identified age [odds ratio (OR) = 1.058)], 2-level fusion (OR = 2.9830), postoperative distal lordosis (DL, OR = 0.949) and mismatched Roussouly type (OR = 4.629) as independent risk factors of ASD. Among the four "theoretical" types, type 2 had the lowest lumbar lordosis, DL, and segmental lordosis. When considering the "current" types, current type 2 was associated with higher rates of 2-level fusion, worse DL, and greater pelvic tilt compared with other current types. CONCLUSIONS: DL loss and mismatched Roussouly type were significant risk factors of ASD. To decrease the incidence of ASD, an appropriate value of DL should be achieved to restore sagittal alignment back to the ideal Roussouly type. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4.