Defining cage subsidence in anterior, oblique, and lateral lumbar spine fusion approaches: a systematic review of the literature.

One of the most common complications of lumbar fusions is cage subsidence, which leads to collapse of disc height and reappearance of the presenting symptomology. However, definitions of cage subsidence are inconsistent, leading to a variety of subsidence calculation methodologies and thresholds. To review previously published literature on cage subsidence in order to present the most common methods for calculating and defining subsidence in the anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF), and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) approaches. A search was completed in PubMed and Embase with inclusion criteria focused on identifying any study that provided descriptions of the method, imaging modality, or subsidence threshold used to calculate the presence of cage subsidence. A total of 69 articles were included in the final analysis, of which 18 (26.1%) reported on the ALIF approach, 22 (31.9%) on the OLIF approach, and 31 (44.9%) on the LLIF approach, 2 of which reported on more than one approach. ALIF articles most commonly calculated the loss of disc height over time with a subsidence threshold of > 2 mm. Most OLIF articles calculated the total amount of cage migration into the vertebral bodies, with a threshold of > 2 mm. LLIF was the only approach in which most articles applied the same method for calculation, namely, a grading scale for classifying the loss of disc height over time. We recommend future articles adhere to the most common methodologies presented here to ensure accuracy and generalizability in reporting cage subsidence.

A novel MRI-based Cervical-Endplate Bone Quality score independently predicts cage subsidence after Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative cage subsidence after Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) often has adverse clinical consequences and is closely related to Bone Mineral Density (BMD). Previous studies have shown that cage subsidence can be better predicted by measuring site-specific bone density. MRI-based Endplate Bone Quality (EBQ) scoring effectively predicts cage subsidence after lumbar interbody fusion. However, there is still a lack of studies on the practical application of EBQ scoring in the cervical spine. PURPOSE: To create a similar MRI-based scoring system for Cervical-EBQ (C-EBQ) and to assess the correlation of the C-EBQ with endplate Computed Tomography (CT)-Hounsfield Units (HU) and the ability of this scoring system to independently predict cage subsidence after ACDF, comparing the predictive ability of the C-EBQ with the Cervical-Vertebral Bone Quality (C-VBQ) score. METHODS: A total of 161 patients who underwent single-level ACDF for degenerative cervical spondylosis at our institution from 2012 to 2022 were included. Demographics, procedure-related data, and radiological data were collected, and Pearson correlation test was used to determine the correlation between C-EBQ and endplate HU values. Cage subsidence was defined as fusion segment height loss of ≥ 3 mm. Receiver operating characteristic analysis and area-under-the-curve values were used to assess the predictive ability of C-EBQ and C-VBQ. A multivariate logistic regression model was developed to identify potential risk factors associated with subsidence. RESULTS: Cage subsidence was present in 65 (40.4%) of 161 patients. The mean C-EBQ score was 1.81 ± 0.35 in the group without subsidence and 2.59 ± 0.58 in the group with subsidence (P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that a higher C-EBQ score was significantly associated with subsidence (OR = 5.700; 95%CI = 3.435-8.193; P < 0.001), was the only independent predictor of cage subsidence after ACDF, had a predictive accuracy of 93.7%, which was superior to the C-VBQ score (89.2%), and was significantly negatively correlated with the endplate HU value (r = -0.58, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Higher C-EBQ scores were significantly associated with postoperative cage subsidence after ACDF. There was a significant negative correlation between C-EBQ and endplate HU values. The C-EBQ score may be a promising tool for assessing preoperative bone quality and postoperative cage subsidence and is superior to the C-VBQ.

Are the facet joint parameters risk factors for cage subsidence after TLIF in patients with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis?

PURPOSE: To assess whether preoperative facet joint parameters in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DS) are risk factors for cage subsidence (CS) following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). METHODS: We enrolled 112 patients with L4-5 DS who underwent TLIF and were followed up for > 1 year. Preoperative demographic characteristics, functional areas of paraspinal muscles and psoas major muscles (PS), total functional area relative to vertebral body area, functional cross-sectional area (FCSA) of PS and lumbar spine extensor muscles, normalized FCSA of PS to the vertebral body area (FCSA/VBA), lumbar indentation value, facet joint orientation, facet joint tropism (FT), cross-sectional area of the superior articular process (SAPA), intervertebral height index, vertebral Hounsfield unit (HU) value, lordosis distribution index, t-scores, sagittal plane parameters, visual analog scale (VAS) for low back pain, VAS for leg pain, Oswestry disability index, global alignment and proportion score and European quality of life-5 dimensions (EQ-5D) were assessed. RESULTS: Postoperative CS showed significant correlations with preoperative FO(L3-4), FT (L3 and L5), SAPA(L3-5), L5-HU, FCSA/VBA(L3-4), Pre- T-score, post-6-month VAS for back pain and EQ-5D scores among other factors. According to ROC curve analysis, the optimal decision points for FO(L3-4), L3-SAPA, FCSA/VBA(L3-4), L5-HU, and Pre- T-score were 35.88°, 43.76°,114.93, 1.73, 1.55, 136, and - 2.49. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified preoperative FO, SAPA, preoperative CT, Pre- T-score and the FCSA/VBA as independent risk factors for CS after TLIF for DS. These risk factors should enable spinal surgeons to closely monitor and prevent the occurrence of CS.

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion combined with anterolateral screw fixation and stress endplate augmentation for treating degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with osteoporosis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes of Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF)combined with anterolateral screw fixation (AF) and Stress Endplate Augmentation(SEA) versus OLIF-AF in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS)with osteoporosis (OP). METHODS: 30 patients underwent OLIF-AF-SEA (SEA group) were matched with 30 patients received OLIF-AF (control group), in terms of sex, age, body mass index (BMI) and bone mineral density (BMD). Clinical outcomes including visual analog scale (VAS) score of the lower back pain (VAS-LBP), leg pain (VAS-LP), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were evaluated at different postoperative intervals and comparedwith their preoperative counterparts. Radiographic outcomes such as disk height (DH), slip distance (SD), lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), cage subsidence (CS) rate and fusion rate were evaluated at different postoperative intervals and compared with their preoperative counterparts. RESULTS: SEA group presented to be better at 3-month and 12-month follow-up, the VAS-LBP, VAS-LP and ODI scores of the SEA group were significantly lower than the control group (3-month SEA vs control: 2.30±0.70 vs 3.30±0.75, 2.03±0.72 vs 2.90±0.76,15.60±2.36 vs 23.23±3.07, respectively, all p<0.05. VAS-LBP and ODI 12-month SEA vs control: 1.27±0.74 vs 1.93±0.58, 12.20±1.88 vs 14.43±1.89,respectively, all p<0.05). At 24-month follow-up, both groups showed no difference in fusion rate (83.33% vs 90.00%, p=0.45), while SEA group showed a lower CS rate (13.33% vs 53.33%, p<0.05). CONCLUSION: OLIF-AF-SEA was safe with no adverse effects and resulted in lower CS rate and better sagittal balance. OLIF-AF-SEA is a promising surgical method for treating patients with DLS-OP.

A novel cervical vertebral bone quality score can independently predict cage subsidence after anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion.

OBJECTIVES: To optimize cervical vertebral bone quality (C-VBQ) score and explore its effectiveness in predicting cage subsidence in Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion (ACCF) and identify a new method for evaluating subsidence without different equipment and image scale interference. METHODS: Collecting demographic, imaging, and surgical related information. Measuring Cage Subsidence with a new method. Multifactorial logistic regression was used to identify risk factors associated with subsidence. Pearson's correlation was used to determine the relationship between C-VBQ and computed tomography (CT) Hounsfield units (HU). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to assess C-VBQ predictive ability. Correlations between demographics and C-VBQ scores were analyzed using linear regression models. RESULTS: 92 patients were included in this study, 36 (39.1%) showed subsidence with a C-VBQ value of 2.05 ± 0.45, in the no-subsidence group C-VBQ Value was 3.25 ± 0.76. The multifactorial logistic regression showed that C-VBQ is an independent predictor of cage subsidence with a predictive accuracy of 93.4%. Pearson's correlation analysis showed a negative correlation between C-VBQ and HU values. Linear regression analysis showed a positive correlation between C-VBQ and cage subsidence. Univariate analyses showed that only age was associated with C-VBQ. CONCLUSIONS: The C-VBQ values obtained using the new measurements independently predicted postoperative cage subsidence after ACCF and showed a negative correlation with HU values. By adding the measurement of non-operated vertebral heights as a control standard, the results of cage subsidence measured by the ratio method are likely to be more robust, perhaps can exclude unavoidable errors caused by different equipment and proportional.

Advances in Hounsfield units value for predicting cage subsidence on spinal interbody fusion surgery.

PURPOSE: A growing number of studies have demonstrated that Hounsfield units (HU) value can effectively assess bone quality and predict cage subsidence (CS) after spinal surgery. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the utility of the HU value for predicting CS after spinal surgery and to raise some of the unresolved questions in this field. METHODS: We searched on PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library for studies correlating HU value to CS. RESULTS: Thirty-seven studies were included in this review. We found that HU value can predicted the risk of CS effectively after spinal surgery. Moreover, the HU value of the cancellous vertebral body and the cortical endplate were used for predicting CS, in comparison, the measurement method of HU value in the cancellous vertebral body was more standardized, but which region is more important to CS remains unknown. Different cutoff thresholds of HU value have been established in different surgical procedures for predicting CS. The HU value may be superior to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) for CS prediction; however, the usage standard of HU value has not been well established. CONCLUSIONS: The HU value shows great potential for predicting CS and constitutes an advantage over DEXA. However, general consensuses about how CS is defined and HU is measured, which part of HU value is more important, and the appropriate cutoff threshold of the HU value for osteoporosis and CS still require exploration.

MRI-based vertebral bone quality score for predicting cage subsidence by assessing bone mineral density following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective analysis.

PURPOSE: This is the first study to evaluate the predictive value of the vertebral bone quality (VBQ) score on cage subsidence after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in a Chinese population using the spinal quantitative computed tomography (QCT) as the clinical standard. Meanwhile, the accuracy of the MRI-based VBQ score in bone mineral density (BMD) measurement was verified. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients who underwent single-level TLIF from 2015 to 2020 with at least 1 year of follow-up. Cage subsidence was measured using postoperative radiographic images based on cage protrusion through the endplates more than 2 mm. The VBQ score was measured on T1-weighted MRI. The results were subjected to statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of 283 patients (61.1% of female) were included in the study. The subsidence rate was with 14.1% (n = 40), and the average cage subsidence was 2.3 mm. There was a significant difference in age, sex, VBQ score and spinal QCT between the subsidence group and the no-subsidence group. The multivariable analysis demonstrated that only an increased VBQ score (OR = 2.690, 95% CI 1.312-5.515, p = 0.007) and decreased L1/2 QCT-vBMD (OR = 0.955, 95% CI 0.933-0.977, p < 0.001) were associated with an increased rate of cage subsidence. The VBQ score was found to be moderately correlated with the spinal QCT (r = -0.426, p < 0.001). The VBQ score was shown to significantly predict cage subsidence, with an accuracy of 82.5%. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that the MRI-based VBQ score is a significant predictor of cage subsidence and could be used to assess BMD.

Factors influencing cage subsidence in anterior cervical corpectomy and discectomy: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Various factors have been examined in relation to cage subsidence risk, including cage material, cage geometry, bone mineral density, device type, surgical level, bone graft, and patient age. The present study aims to compare and synthesize the literature of both clinical and biomechanical studies to evaluate and present the factors associated with cage subsidence. METHODS: A comprehensive search of the literature from January 2003 to December 2021 was conducted using the PubMed and ScienceDirect databases by following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Following the screening for inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 49 clinical studies were included. Correlations between clinical and biomechanical studies are also discussed. RESULTS: Patients treated with the cage and plate combination had a lower subsidence rate than patients with the stand-alone cage. Overall, Polyetheretherketone material was shown to have a lower subsidence rate than titanium and other materials. The subsidence rate was also higher when the surgery was performed at levels C5-C7 than at levels C2-C5. No significant correlation was found between age and cage subsidence clinically. CONCLUSIONS: Cage subsidence increases the stress on the anterior fixation system and may cause biomechanical instability. Severe cage subsidence decreases the Cobb angle and intervertebral height, which may cause destabilization of the implant system, such as screw/plate loosening or breakage of the screw/plate. Various factors have been shown to influence the risk of cage subsidence. Examining clinical research alongside biomechanical studies offers a more comprehensive understanding of the subject.

Biomechanical properties of lumbar vertebral ring apophysis cage under endplate injury: a finite element analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the biomechanical properties of lumbar interbody fusion involving two types of cages. The study evaluated the effectiveness of the cage spanning the ring apophysis, regardless of the endplate's integrity. METHODS: A finite element model of the normal spine was established and validated in this study. The validated model was then utilized to simulate Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion (LLIF) with posterior pedicle screw fixation without posterior osteotomy. Two models of interbody fusion cage were placed at the L4/5 level, and the destruction of the bony endplate caused by curetting the cartilaginous endplate during surgery was simulated. Four models were established, including Model 1 with an intact endplate and long cage spanning the ring apophysis, Model 2 with endplate decortication and long cage spanning the ring apophysis, Model 3 with an intact endplate and short cage, and Model 4 with endplate decortication and short cage. Analyzed were the ROM of the fixed and adjacent segments, screw rod system stress, interface stress between cage and L5 endplate, trabecular bone stress on the upper surface of L5, and intervertebral disc pressure (IDP) of adjacent segments. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in ROM and IDP between adjacent segments in each postoperative model. In the short cage model, the range of motion (ROM), contact pressure between the cage and endplate, stress in L5 cancellous bone, and stress in the screw-rod system all exhibited an increase ranging from 0.4% to 79.9%, 252.9% to 526.9%, 27.3% to 133.3%, and 11.4% to 107%, respectively. This trend was further amplified when the endplate was damaged, resulting in a maximum increase of 88.6%, 676.1%, 516.6%, and 109.3%, respectively. Regardless of the integrity of the endplate, the long cage provided greater support strength compared to the short cage. CONCLUSIONS: Caution should be exercised during endplate preparation and cage placement to maintain the endplate's integrity. Based on preoperative X-ray evaluation, the selection of a cage that exceeds the width of the pedicle by at least 5 mm (ensuring complete coverage of the vertebral ring) has demonstrated remarkable biomechanical performance in lateral lumbar interbody fusion procedures. By opting for such a cage, we expect a reduced occurrence of complications, including cage subsidence, internal fixation system failure, and rod fracture.

Biomechanical evaluation of different sizes of 3D printed cage in lumbar interbody fusion-a finite element analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To study the biomechanical characteristics of various tissue structures of different sizes of 3D printed Cage in lumbar interbody fusion. METHODS: A finite element model of normal spine was reconstructed and verified. Pedicle screws and Cage of different sizes were implanted in the L4/5 segment to simulate lumbar interbody fusion. The range of motion of the fixed and cephalic adjacent segment, the stress of the screw-rod system, the stress at the interface between cage and L5 endplate, and intervertebral disc pressure of the adjacent segment were calculated and analyzed. RESULTS: The range of motion and intervertebral disc pressure of the adjacent segment of each postoperative model were larger than those of the intact model, but there was not much difference between them. The stress of cage-endplate interface was also larger than that of the intact model. However, the difference is that the stress of the endplate and the screw-rod system has a tendency to decrease with the increase of the axial area of cage. CONCLUSIONS: Cage with larger axial area in lumbar interbody fusion can reduce the stress of internal fixation system and endplate, but will not increase the range of motion and intervertebral disc pressure of adjacent segment. It has a certain effect in preventing the cage subsidence, internal fixation system failure and screw rod fracture.

A retrospective study on application of a classification criterion based on relative intervertebral tension in spinal fusion surgery for lumbar degenerative diseases.

BACKGROUND: As an important part of spinal fusion procedure, the selection of fusion cage size is closely related to the curative effect of the surgery. It mainly depends on the clinical experience of surgeons, and there is still a lack of objective standards. The purpose of this study is to propose the concept of relative intervertebral tension (RIT) for the first time and its grading standards to improve the surgical procedures of lumbar interbody fusion. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted from January 2018 to July 2019. A total of 83 eligible patients including 45 men and 38 women with lumbar degenerative disease underwent transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) were included in this study. A total of 151 fusion segments were divided into group A, group B and group C according to the grading standards of RIT. In addition, parameters of intervertebral space angle (ISA), intervertebral space height (ISH), intervertebral space foramen (IFH), fusion rates, cage-related complications and cage heights were also compared among the three groups. RESULTS: The ISA in group A was the smallest among three groups in contrast with group C with largest ISA at the final follow-up(P < 0.05). The group A presented the smallest ISH and IFH values(P < 0.05), compared with group B with the largest ISH and IFH values(P < 0.05). These two parameters in the group C were in-between. The fusion rates of group A, group B and group C were 100%, 96.3% and 98.8% at the final follow-up, respectively. No statistical difference in fusion rates and cage-related complications occurred among the three groups(P > 0.05), and a certain correlation between ISH and RIT was also observed. CONCLUSIONS: The concept of RIT and the application of its clinical grading standards could simplify the surgical procedures of spinal fusion and reduce cage-related complications.

Vertebral Endplate Concavity in Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Tapered 3D-Printed Porous Titanium Cage versus Squared PEEK Cage.

Background and Objectives: To prevent postoperative problems in extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF), it is critical that the vertebral endplate not be injured. Unintentional endplate injuries may depend on the cage. A novel porous titanium cage for XLIF has improved geometry with a tapered tip and smooth surface. We hypothesized that this new cage should lead to fewer endplate injuries. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study included 32 patients (mean 74.1 ± 6.7 years, 22 females) who underwent anterior and posterior combined surgery with XLIF for lumbar degenerative disease or adult spinal deformity from January 2018 to June 2022. A tapered 3D porous titanium cage (3DTi; 11 patients) and a squared PEEK cage (sPEEK; 21 patients) were used. Spinal alignment values were measured on X-ray images. Vertebral endplate concavity (VEC) was defined as concavity ≥ 1 mm of the endplate on computed tomography (CT) images, which were evaluated preoperatively and at 1 week and 3 months postoperatively. Results: There were no significant differences in the patient demographic data and preoperative and 3-month postoperative spinal alignments between the groups. A 3DTi was used for 25 levels and an sPEEK was used for 38 levels. Preoperative local lordotic angles were 4.3° for 3DTi vs. 4.7° for sPEEK (p = 0.90), which were corrected to 12.3° and 9.1° (p = 0.029), respectively. At 3 months postoperatively, the angles were 11.6° for 3DTi and 8.2° for sPEEK (p = 0.013). VEC was present in 2 levels (8.0%) for 3DTi vs. 17 levels (45%) for sPEEK (p = 0.002). After 3 months postoperatively, none of the 3DTi had VEC progression; however, eight (21%) levels in sPEEK showed VEC progression (p = 0.019). Conclusions: The novel 3DTi cage reduced endplate injuries by reducing the endplate load during cage insertion.

Influence of coronal-morphology of endplate and intervertebral space to cage subsidence and fusion following oblique lumbar interbody fusion.

BACKGROUND: Endplate morphology is considered to be one of the influencing factors of cage subsidence after lumbar interbody fusion (LIF). Previous radiographic evaluations on the endplate mostly used sagittal X-ray or MRI. However, there are few studies on the CT evaluation of the endplate and intervertebral space (IVS), especially the evaluation of coronal morphology and its influence on subsidence and fusion after LIF. We aimed to measure and classify the shapes of the endplate and IVS using coronal CT imaging and evaluate the radiographic and clinical outcomes of different shapes of the endplate/IVS following oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). METHODS: A total of 137 patients (average age 59.1 years, including 75 males and 62 females) who underwent L4-5 OLIF combined with anterolateral fixation from June 2018 to June 2020 were included. The endplate concavity depth (ECD) was measured on the preoperative coronal CT image. According to ECD, the endplate was classified as flat (< 2 mm), shallow (2-4 mm), or deep (> 4 mm). The L4-5 IVS was further classified according to endplate type. The disc height (DH), DH changes, subsidence rate, fusion rate, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) in different endplate/IVS shapes were evaluated during 1-year follow up. RESULTS: The ECD of L4 inferior endplate (IEP) was significantly deeper than that of L5 superior endplate (SEP) (4.2 ± 1.1 vs 1.6 ± 0.8, P < 0.01). Four types of L4-5 IVS were identified: shallow-shallow (16, 11.7%), shallow-flat (45, 32.9%), deep-shallow (32, 23.4%), and deep-flat (44, 32.1%). A total of 45 (32.9%) cases of cage subsidence were observed. Only one (6.3%) subsidence event occurred in the shallow-shallow group, which was significantly lower than in the other three groups (19 shallow-flat, 6 deep-shallow, and 19 deep-flat) (P < 0.05). Meanwhile, the shallow-shallow group had the highest fusion rate (15, 93.8%) and the highest rate of reach minimal clinically important difference (MCID) ODI among the four types. For a single endplate, the shape of L4 IEP is the main influencing factor of the final interbody fusion rate, and the shallow shape L4 IEP facilitates fusion ( OR = 2.85, p = 0.03). On the other hand, the flat shape L5 SEP was the main risk factor to cage subsidence (OR = 4.36, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The L4-5 IVS is asymmetrical on coronal CT view and tends to be fornix-above and flat-down. The shallow-shallow IVS has the lowest subsidence rate and best fusion result, which is possibly because it has a relatively good degree in matching either the upper or lower interface of the cage and endplates. These findings provide a basis for the further improvements in the design of OLIF cages.

Clinical and radiological evaluation of cage subsidence following oblique lumbar interbody fusion combined with anterolateral fixation.

BACKGROUND: Cage subsidence (CS) was previously reported as one of the most common complications following oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). We aimed to assess the impacts of CS on surgical results following OLIF combined with anterolateral fixation, and determine its radiological characteristics as well as related risk factors. METHODS: Two hundred and forty-two patients who underwent OLIF at L4-5 and with a minimum 12 months follow-up were reviewed. Patients were divided into three groups according to the extent of disk height (DH) decrease during follow-up: no CS (DH decrease ≤ 2 mm), mild CS (2 mm < DH decrease ≤ 4 mm) and severe CS (DH decrease > 4 mm). The clinical and radiological results were compared between groups to evaluate radiological features, clinical effects and risk factors of CS. RESULTS: CS was identified in 79 (32.6%) patients, including 48 (19.8%) with mild CS and 31 (11.8%) with severe CS. CS was mainly identified within 1 month postoperatively, it did not progress after 3 months postoperatively, and more noted in the caudal endplate (44, 55.7%). In terms of clinical results, patients in the mild CS group were significantly worse than those in the no CS group, and patients in the severe CS group were significantly worse than those in the mild CS group. There was no significant difference in fusion rate between no CS (92.6%, 151/163) and mild CS (83.3%, 40/48) groups. However, significant lower fusion rate was observed in severe CS group (64.5%, 20/31) compared to no CS group. CS related risk factors included osteoporosis (OR = 5.976), DH overdistraction (OR = 1.175), flat disk space (OR = 3.309) and endplate injury (OR = 6.135). CONCLUSION: CS following OLIF was an early postoperative complication. Higher magnitudes of CS were associated with worse clinical improvements and lower intervertebral fusion. Osteoporosis and endplate injury were significant risk factors for CS. Additionally, flat disk space and DH over-distraction were also correlated with an increased probability of CS.

Effects of the cage height and positioning on clinical and radiographic outcome of lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The proper cage positioning and height in lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). This study evaluated their effects on clinical and radiographic outcome measures in patients undergoing LLIF. METHODS: This single-center retrospective study analyzed the characteristics and perioperative data of patients who underwent LLIF between January 2019 and December 2020. Radiographic (lumbar lordosis [LL], foraminal height, disc height [DH], segmental angle [SA], cross-sectional area [CSA] of thecal sac) and clinical (Oswestry Disability Index and Visual Analog Scale) outcomes were assessed preoperatively, postoperatively, and at the last follow-up. The effects of cage height and positioning on these parameters were also investigated. RESULTS: With a mean follow-up of 12.8 months, 47 patients with 70 operated level were analyzed. Data demonstrated that postsurgical clinical and radiographic outcome measures were significantly better than before surgery(P < 0.05). Cage height and positioning showed no significant difference with regarding to clinical outcome(P > 0.05). Subgroup analysis of the cage positioning showed that DH and SA were better restored by the final follow-up in patients with anteriorly placed cages than those with posteriorly placed cages (P < 0.05). Cages of posterior position showed significantly upgrading cage subsidence (P = 0.047). Cage height subgroup analysis showed that the preoperative forminal height, DH, and SA in the 11-mm cage group were significantly lower than in the 13-mm cage group; however, these parameters were comparable in the two groups postoperatively and at the final follow-up (P > 0.05). Furthermore, the postoperative and final follow-up degrees of DH, SA, and LL have improved in the 11-mm cage group more than the 13-mm cage group. The preoperative, postoperative, and final follow-up LL values in the 11-mm cage group were lower than in the 13-mm cage group(P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Cage height and positioning did not affect the clinical outcomes in the present study. Cages in anterior position showed better restoration in DH, SA and decreased the incidence of cage subsidence. A comparable radiographic outcome can be achieved by inserting an appropriate cage height based on preoperative radiography.

Restoration and maintenance of segment lordosis in oblique lumbar interbody fusion.

PURPOSE: Restoration of the segment lordosis angle (SLA) can effectively reduce the risk of adjacent segment degeneration. This study aimed to perform a comprehensive multifactor analysis of the risk factors affecting restoration and maintenance of the SLA in oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). METHODS: Seventy-three patients (93 segments) who underwent OLIF with posterior pedicle screw fixation due to lumbar degenerative disease between January 2015 and December 2019 were included. Radiographic parameters including the middle disc height (MDH), segment lordosis angle (SLA), cage center point ratio (CPR), cage subsidence, and L1 CT Hounsfield Unit (HU) were measured. RESULTS: The postoperative SLA increased from 3.5° to 8.7°, and decreased to 6.7° at the last follow-up. Multivariate analysis showed that preoperative SLA, CPR and cage subsidence were significantly correlated with SLA restoration. The significant correlations were between restoration of SLA with pre-operative SLA (r=-0.575, adjusted R2 = 0.323, P < 0.01) and between SLA restoration and CPR (r = 0.526, adjusted R2 = 0.268, P < 0.01). Cage subsidence was found in 12.9% (12/93) of segments and was the main factor affecting SLA loss (4.2 ± 1.0° versus 1.7 ± 2.1°, P < 0.01). Logistic regression analysis showed that CPR < 50%, L1 CT HU < 110 and cage height > preoperative MDH were risk factors for cage subsidence. Cages placed anteriorly (CPR ≥ 50%) showed a large SLA increase and lower incidence of cage subsidence than those placed posteriorly (5.9 ± 3.9° versus 4.2 ± 3.2°, P < 0.05; 1.8% versus 28.9%, P < 0.05, respectively). CONCLUSION: SLA restoration is dependent on preoperative SLA, cage subsidence and cage position in OLIF. Cage position is the key determinant of SLA restoration and placement of the cage at the anterior position (CPR ≥ 50%) can achieve better restoration of the SLA and reduce the incidence of cage subsidence.

Stepwise reduction of bone mineral density increases the risk of cage subsidence in oblique lumbar interbody fusion patients biomechanically: an in-silico study.

BACKGROUND: Cage subsidence causes poor prognoses in patients treated by oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). Deterioration of the biomechanical environment initially triggers cage subsidence, and patients with low bone mineral density (BMD) suffer a higher risk of cage subsidence. However, whether low BMD increases the risk of cage subsidence by deteriorating the local biomechanical environment has not been clearly identified. METHODS: OLIF without additional fixation (stand-alone, S-A) and with different additional fixation devices (AFDs), including anterolateral single rod screws (ALSRs) and bilateral pedicle screws (BPSs) fixation, was simulated in the L4-L5 segment of a well-validated finite element model. The biomechanical effects of different BMDs were investigated by adjusting the material properties of bony structures. Biomechanical indicators related to cage subsidence were computed and recorded under different directional moments. RESULTS: Overall, low BMD triggers stress concentration in surgical segment, the highest equivalent stress can be observed in osteoporosis models under most loading conditions. Compared with the flexion-extension loading condition, this variation tendency was more pronounced under bending and rotation loading conditions. In addition, AFDs obviously reduced the stress concentration on both bony endplates and the OLIF cage, and the maximum stress on ALSRs was evidently higher than that on BPSs under almost all loading conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Stepwise reduction of BMD increases the risk of a poor local biomechanical environment in OLIF patients, and regular anti-osteoporosis therapy should be considered an effective method to biomechanically optimize the prognosis of OLIF patients.

Forearm T-score as a predictor of cage subsidence in patients with degenerative lumbar spine disease following posterior single-segment lumbar interbody fusion.

BACKGROUND: Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) has become a classic treatment modality for lumbar degenerative diseases, with cage subsidence as a potentially fatal complication due to low bone mineral density (BMD), which can be measured by forearm T-score. Hounsfield units (HU) derived from computed tomography have been a reliable method for assessing BMD. OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of forearm T-score in predicting cage subsidence after PLIF compared with lumbar spine HU values. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 71 patients who underwent PLIF and divided them into cage subsidence group and nonsubsidence group. The differences in preoperative HU value and forearm T-score were compared between groups, and the correlation between cage subsidence and clinical efficacy was analyzed. RESULTS: The subsidence rate for all 71 patients (31 men and 40 women) was 23.9%. There was no significant difference in age, sex ratio, body mass index, smoking status, follow-up time, spine BMD, and spine T-score between groups, except in the forearm T-score and lumbar spine HU values (P < 0.05). The forearm T-score (AUC, 0.840; 95% CI, 0.672-1.000) predicted cage subsidence more accurately than the mean global HU value (AUC, 0.744; 95% CI, 0.544-0.943). In logistic regression analysis, both forearm T-score and mean global HU value were found to be independent risk factors for cage subsidence (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Lower forearm T-scores and lower lumbar spine HU values were significantly associated with the occurrence of cage subsidence. Lower forearm T-scores indicated a higher risk of cage subsidence than lumbar spine HU values. Forearm T-score is more effective in predicting cage subsidence than spine T-score. Therefore, forearm dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry may be a fast, simple, and reliable method for predicting cage subsidence following PLIF. However, our results suggest that the degree of cage subsidence is not associated with clinical efficacy.

The value of Hounsfield units in predicting cage subsidence after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.

BACKGROUND: Cage subsidence may occur following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and lead to nonunion, foraminal height loss and other complications. Low bone quality may be a risk factor for cage subsidence. Assessing bone quality through Hounsfield units (HU) from computed tomography has been proposed in recent years. However, there is a lack of literature evaluating the correlation between HU and cage subsidence after TLIF. METHODS: Two hundred and seventy-nine patients suffering from lumbar degenerative diseases from April, 2016 to August, 2018 were enrolled. All underwent one-level TLIF with a minimum of 1-year follow-up. Cage subsidence was defined as > 2 mm loss of disc height at the fusion level. The participants were divided into 2 groups: cage subsidence group (CS) and non-cage subsidence group (non-CS). Bone quality was determined by HU, bone mineral density of lumbar (BMD-l) and femoral (BMD-f) from dual-emission X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). HU of each vertebra from L1 to L4 (e.g., HU1 for HU of L1) and mean value of the four vertebrae (HUm) were calculated. Visual analog scale (VAS) of back/leg pain and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were used to report clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Cage subsidence occurred in 82 (29.4%) cases at follow-ups. Mean age was 50.8 ± 9.0 years with a median follow-up of 18 months (range from 12 to 40 months). A total of 90.3% patients presented fusion with similar fusion rate between the two groups. ODI and VAS in leg were better in non-CS group at last follow-ups. Using receiver operating characteristic curves (ROCs) to predict cage subsidence, HUm provided a larger area under the curve (AUC) than BMD-l (Z = 3.83, P <  0.01) and BMD-f (Z = 2.01, P = 0.02). AUC for HU4 was larger than BMD-f and close to HUm (Z = 0.22, P = 0.481). CONCLUSIONS: Cage subsidence may indicate worse clinical outcomes. HU value could be a more effective predictor of lumbar cage subsidence compared with T-score of DXA after TLIF.

Impact of cage position on biomechanical performance of stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a finite element analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare the biomechanical performance of various cage positions in stand-alone lateral lumbar interbody fusion(SA LLIF). METHODS: An intact finite element model of the L3-L5 was reconstructed. The model was verified and analyzed. Through changing the position of the cage, SA LLIF was established in four directions: anterior placement(AP), middle placement(MP), posterior placement(PP), oblique placement(OP). A 400 N vertical axial pre-load was imposed on the superior surface of L3 and a 10 N/m moment was applied on the L3 superior surface along the radial direction to simulate movements of flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. Various biomechanical parameters were evaluated for intact and implanted models in all loading conditions, including the range of motion (ROM) and maximum stress. RESULTS: In the SA LLIF models, the ROM of L4-5 was reduced by 84.21-89.03% in flexion, 72.64-82.26% in extension, 92.5-95.85% in right and left lateral bending, and 87.22-92.77% in right and left axial rotation, respectively. Meanwhile, ROM of L3-4 was mildly increased by an average of 9.6% in all motion directions. Almost all stress peaks were increased after SA LLIF, including adjacent disc, facet joints, and endplates. MP had lower stress peaks of cage and endplates in most motion modes. In terms of the stress on facet joints and disc of the cephalad segment, MP had the smallest increment. CONCLUSION: In our study, SA LLIF risked accelerating the adjacent segment degeneration. The cage position had an influence on the distribution of endplate stress and the magnitude of facet joint stress. Compared with other positions, MP had the slightest effect on the stress in the adjacent facet joints. Meanwhile, MP seems to play an important role in reducing the risk of cage subsidence.