The analysis of segmental lordosis restored by oblique lumbar interbody fusion and related factors: building up preoperative predicting model.

BACKGROUND: Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) procedures have the potential to increase the segmental lordosis by inserting lordotic cages, however, the amount of segmental lordosis (SL) changes can vary and is likely influenced by several factors, such as patient characteristics, radiographic parameters, and surgical techniques. The objective of this study was to analyze the impact of related factors on the amount of SL changes in OLIF procedures and to build up predictive model for SL changes. METHODS: This is a retrospective study involving prospectively enrolled patients. A total of 119 patients with 174 segments undergoing OLIF procedure were included and analyzed. The lordotic cages used in all cases had 6-degree angle. Radiographic parameters including preoperative and postoperative segmental disc angle (SDA, preSDA and postSDA), SDA changes on flexion-extension views (ΔSDA-FE), CageLocation and CageInclination were measured by two observers. Interobserver reliability of measurements were ensured by analysis of interclass correlation coefficient (ICC > 0.75). Pearson correlation coefficient analysis and multivariate linear regression were employed to identify factors related to SDA changes and to build up predictive model for SDA changes. RESULTS: The average change of segmental disc angle (ΔSDA, postSDA-preSDA) was 3.9° ± 4.8° (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.1°-4.6°) with preSDA 5.3° ± 5.0°. ΔSDA was 10.8° ± 3.2° with negative preSDA (kyphotic), 5.0° ± 3.7° with preSDA ranging from 0° to 6°, and 1.0° ± 4.1° with preSDA> 6°. Correlation analysis revealed a significant negative correlation between ΔSDA and preSDA (r = - 0.713, P < 0.001), CageLocation (r = - 0.183, P = 0.016) and ΔSDA-FE (r = - 0.153, P = 0.044). In the multivariate linear regression, preSDA and CageLocation were included in the predictive model, resulting in minimal adjusted R2 change (0.017) by including CageLocation. Therefore, the recommended predictive model was ΔSDA = 7.9-0.8 × preSDA with acceptable fit. (adjusted R2 = 0.508, n = 174, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The restoration of segmental lordosis through OLIF largely depends on the preoperative segmental lordosis. The predictive model, which utilized preoperative segmental lordosis, facilitates preoperative planning for corrective surgery using the OLIF procedure.

Comparisons of oblique lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis: a prospective cohort study with a 2-year follow-up.

Objective: This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between oblique (OLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis during a 2-year follow-up. Methods: Patients with symptomatic degenerative spondylolisthesis who underwent OLIF (OLIF group) or TLIF (TLIF group) were prospectively enrolled in the authors' hospital and followed up for 2 years. The primary outcomes were treatment effects [changes in visual analog score (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) from baseline] at 2 years after surgery; these were compared between two groups. Patient characteristics, radiographic parameters, fusion status, and complication rates were also compared. Results: In total, 45 patients were eligible for the OLIF group and 47 patients for the TLIF group. The rates of follow-up were 89% and 87% at 2 years, respectively. The comparisons of primary outcomes demonstrated no different changes in VAS-leg (OLIF, 3.4 vs. TLIF, 2.7), VAS-back (OLIF, 2.5 vs. TLIF, 2.1), and ODI (OLIF, 26.8 vs. TLIF, 30). The fusion rates were 86.1% in the TLIF group and 92.5% in the OLIF group at 2 years (P = 0.365). The OLIF group had less estimated blood loss (median, 200 ml) than the TLIF group (median, 300 ml) (P < 0.001). Greater restoration of disc height was obtained by OLIF (mean, 4.6 mm) than the TLIF group (mean, 1.3 mm) in the early postoperative period (P < 0.001). The subsidence rate was lower in the OLIF group than that in the TLIF group (17.5% vs. 38.9%, P = 0.037). The rates of total problematic complications were not different between the two groups (OLIF, 14.6% vs. TLIF, 26.2%, P = 0.192). Conclusion: OLIF did not show better clinical outcomes than TLIF for degenerative spondylolisthesis, except for lesser blood loss, greater disc height restoration, and lower subsidence rate.

Lumbar Lordosis Distribution in Asymptomatic Adult Volunteers: A Systematic Review.

Background: Restoring lumbar lordosis is important for adult spinal deformity surgery. Several reports have suggested that lumbar lordosis distribution has a significant impact on the outcome of surgery, including lumbar distribution index (LDI), proximal lumbar lordosis (PLL), and distal lumbar lordosis (DLL). The features of lumbar lordosis distribution are inconclusive in asymptomatic adults. Questions/Purposes: We sought to evaluate the variation of lumbar lordosis distribution (LDI, PLL, and DLL) and to identify associated factors in asymptomatic adult volunteers. Methods: We performed a systematic review of the Embase and Medline databases to identify studies in asymptomatic adult volunteers to evaluate lumbar lordosis distribution including LDI, PLL, and DLL. Results: Twelve articles met eligibility criteria and were included in our review. The respective pooled estimates of mean and variance, respectively, were 65.10% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 62.61-67.58) and 13.70% in LDI, 16.51° (95% CI: 5.54-27.49) and 11.46° in PLL, and 35.47° (95% CI: 32.79-38.18) and 9.10° in DLL. Lumbar lordosis distribution was associated with race, age, sex, body mass index, pelvic incidence, and Roussouly classification. Conclusions: This systematic review found that despite a wide variation in LDI and PLL, DLL is maintained in a narrower range in asymptomatic adult volunteers, especially in white populations. Distal lumbar lordosis may be a more reliable radiographic parameter to restore the lumbar lordosis distribution in preoperative planning.

Regulatory SNP of RREB1 is Associated With Bone Mineral Density in Chinese Postmenopausal Osteoporosis Patients.

Postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMO) is the most common bone disorder in elderly Chinese women. Although genetic factors have been shown to have a pivotal role in PMO, studies on genetic loci associated with PMO in Chinese individuals are still lacking. We aimed to identify SNPs that contribute to PMO in Chinese individuals by conducting a genome-wide association study (GWAS). Bone mineral density (BMD) of postmenopausal Chinese women was assessed. Participants with T-score < -2.5 standard deviations (n = 341) were recruited and divided into a discovery group (n = 150) and a replication group (n = 191). GWAS was performed, with T-score as the quantitative trait, using linear regression. Our results revealed that an SNP cluster upstream of RREB1 showed a trend of association with BMD in Chinese PMO patients. The leading SNP of the cluster was rs475011 (p combined = 1.15 × 10-6, beta = 0.51), which is a splicing quantitative trait locus (sQTL) of RREB1. This association was further supported by data from the UK Biobank (UKBB; p = 9.56 × 10-12). The high BMD-associated allele G of rs475011 is related to a high intron excision ratio. This SNP may increase BMD by upregulating mature RREB1 mRNA, based on data from the Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) database. We identified BMD-associated SNPs that regulate RREB1 in Chinese PMO patients. Future functional experiments are needed to further link rs475011, RREB1, and PMO in Chinese individuals.

Additional lateral plate fixation has no effect to prevent cage subsidence in oblique lumbar interbody fusion.

BACKGROUND: For lumbar degenerative diseases, cage subsidence is a serious complication and can result in the failure of indirect decompression in the oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) procedure. Whether additional lateral plate fixation was effective to improve clinical outcomes and prevent cage subsidence was still unknown. This study aimed to compare the incidence and degree of cage subsidence between stand-alone oblique lumbar interbody fusion (SA-OLIF) and OLIF combined with lateral plate fixation (OLIF + LP) for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases and to evaluate the effect of the lateral plate fixation. METHODS: This was a retrospective comparative study. 20 patients with 21 levels underwent SA-OLIF and 21 patients with 26 levels underwent OLIF + LP. We compared clinical and radiographic outcomes between two groups. Clinical evaluation included Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back pain and leg pain, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Radiographical evaluation included disc height (DH), segmental lordosis angle (SL), and subsidence rate on standing lateral radiographs. Cage subsidence was classified using Marchi's criteria. RESULTS: The mean follow-up duration was 6.3 ± 2.4 months. There were no significant differences among perioperative data (operation time, estimated intraoperative blood loss, and complication), clinical outcome (VAS, ODI, and JOA) and radiological outcome (SH and SL). The subsidence rate was 19.0% (4/21) in SA-OLIF group and 19.2% (5/26) in OLIF + LP group. 81.0% in SA-OLIF group and 80.8% in OLIF + LP group had Grade 0 subsidence, 14.3% in SA-OLIF group and 15.4% in OLIF + LP group had Grade I subsidence, and 4.8% in SA-OLIF group and 3.8% in OLIF + LP group had Grade II subsidence (P = 0.984). One patient with severe cage subsidence and lateral plate migration underwent revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The additional lateral plate fixation does not appear to be more effective to prevent cage subsidence in the oblique lumbar interbody fusion, compared with stand-alone technique. If severe cage subsidence occurs, it may result in lateral plate migration in OLIF combined with lateral plate fixation.