Adjacent Segment Disease Research Articles

Revision Extension of Fusion Surgery in Thoracolumbar Spine Using a Newly Designed Revision Rod - Comparative Matched Cohort Study Versus Implant-Replacement Surgery.

Retrospective cohort study. To compare the results of revision extension of fusion surgery using the newly designed revision rod and implant-replacement surgery in thoracolumbar spine. Thirty-one patients who underwent extension of fusion surgery using the revision rod for adjacent segment disease were included in this study. Thirty-one patients who underwent implant-replacement revision surgery were selected as a control group by matching age, sex, preoperative diagnosis, and number of revision segments. The mean age was 70.7 ± 8.0years in the revision rod (RR) group and 69.0 ± 8.4years in the control group. Preoperative diagnoses, underlying diseases, and mean number of revision segments (2.2 ± 1.1) were similar in both groups. The change of hemoglobin (1.0 ± 1.9 vs 2.5 ± 1.5g/dl; P < .01), hematocrit (4.1 ± 4.9 vs 7.2 ± 4.4 % P < .01) and albumin (.8 ± .9 vs 1.3 ± .4g/dl; P < .01) levels before and after surgery showed significant differences between the two groups. Hemovac drainage was significantly less in the RR group (P = .01). The mean operative time was shorter in the RR group (203.5 ± 9.5min vs 233.5 ± 8.7min; P = .12) with no statistical difference. Radiological results showed that the average lumbar lordosis 2years after surgery was lower in the RR group compared to the control group (25.1 ± 9.9° vs 32.9 ± 9.8°; P = .02). Union rates and clinical outcomes were not different between the two groups. Revision extension of fusion surgery using a newly designed revision rod had less hemovac drainage and superior laboratory findings compared to implant-replacement revision surgery.

6. Persistent spinal pain syndrome type 2.

Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome (PSPS) refers to chronic axial pain and/or extremity pain. Two subtypes have been defined: PSPS-type 1 is chronic pain without previous spinal surgery and PSPS-type 2 is chronic pain, persisting after spine surgery, and is formerly known as Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (FBSS) or post-laminectomy syndrome. The etiology of PSPS-type 2 can be gleaned using elements from the patient history, physical examination, and additional medical imaging. Origins of persistent pain following spinal surgery may be categorized into an inappropriate procedure (eg a lumbar fusion at an incorrect level or for sacroiliac joint [SIJ] pain); technical failure (eg operation at non-affected levels, retained disk fragment, pseudoarthrosis), biomechanical sequelae of surgery (eg adjacent segment disease or SIJ pain after a fusion to the sacrum, muscle wasting, spinal instability); and complications (eg battered root syndrome, excessive epidural fibrosis, and arachnoiditis), or undetermined. The literature on the diagnosis and treatment of PSPS-type 2 was retrieved and summarized. There is low-quality evidence for the efficacy of conservative treatments including exercise, rehabilitation, manipulation, and behavioral therapy, and very limited evidence for the pharmacological treatment of PSPS-type 2. Interventional treatments such as pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) of the dorsal root ganglia, epidural adhesiolysis, and spinal endoscopy (epiduroscopy) might be beneficial in patients with PSPS-type 2. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been shown to be an effective treatment for chronic, intractable neuropathic limb pain, and possibly well-selected candidates with axial pain. The diagnosis of PSPS-type 2 is based on patient history, clinical examination, and medical imaging. Low-quality evidence exists for conservative interventions. Pulsed radiofrequency, adhesiolysis and SCS have a higher level of evidence with a high safety margin and should be considered as interventional treatment options when conservative treatment fails.

Laminectomy Adjacent to Instrumented Fusion Increases Adjacent Segment Disease.

Retrospective cohort. To determine if performing a simultaneous laminectomy at an unfused level adjacent to an instrumented fusion increases the risk of adjacent segment disease(ASD). Laminectomy adjacent to instrumented fusion has uncertain outcomes. The increased mechanical forces at the unfused laminectomy may lead to more ASD. Few studies have examined the development of ASD with regards to laminectomy performed adjacent to instrumented fusions. 789 patients underwent instrumented lumbar fusion and laminectomy at the same level(s) (n=676) or with an additional adjacent level laminectomy (n=113) with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Diagnoses were degenerative spondylosis (n=241), degenerative spondylolisthesis (n=485) and isthmic spondylolisthesis (n=63) in addition to central stenosis. Primary outcome measures included development of ASD, time to development of ASD, revision surgery, and time to revision surgery. The adjacent laminectomy group developed ASD at a significantly greater rate of 57.5% (n=65), compared with 35.2% (n=238) of the non-adjacent laminectomy group (P<0.001). Revision surgery rate was also greater in the adjacent laminectomy group (22.1% v 13.5%, P<0.001). There was no difference in time to revision surgery (31.1 v 32.6mo, P=0.71) or time to ASD development (31.2 v 32.3mo, P=0.72). ODI and VAS scores did not differ, nor did patient baseline demographics including sex, BMI, Charleston Comorbidity Index, and tobacco use. The exception was the adjacent laminectomy group average age was 67.6 while the non-adjacent laminectomy group average age was 62.3 (P<0.001). However, age was not found to be an independent predictor of ASD development (P=0.44). Surgeons should be cautious when performing a laminectomy adjacent to an instrumented fusion, as this increases the rate of ASD as well as revision surgery.

Postoperative Adjacent Segment Disease in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Adjacent Laminectomy for Grade I-II Spondylolisthesis and Adjacent Spinal Stenosis

Studies have demonstrated increased risk of adjacent segment disease (ASD) after open fusion with adjacent-level laminectomy, with rates ranging from 16%-47%, potentially related to disruption of the posterior ligamentous complex. Minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approaches may offer a more durable result. We report institutional outcomes of simultaneous MIS transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MISTLIF) and adjacent-level laminectomy for patients with low grade spondylolisthesis and ASD. Retrospective analysis was performed on patients who underwent MISTLIF with adjacent level laminectomy to treat grade I-II spondylolisthesis with adjacent stenosis at a single institution from 2007-2022. A total of 34 patients met criteria, with mean follow-up of 23.1 months. In total, 37 levels were fused and 45 laminectomies performed. In this group, 21 patients received a single level laminectomy and single-level MISTLIF, 10 patients received a 2-level laminectomy and single-level MISTLIF, 2 patients received a single-level laminectomy and 2-level MISTLIF, and 1 patient received a 2-level laminectomy and 2-level MISTLIF. Three (8.8%) patients experienced clinically significant postoperative ASD requiring reoperation. Three other patients required reoperation for other reasons. Multiple logistic regression did not reveal any association between development of ASD and surgical covariates. MISTLIF with adjacent-level laminectomy demonstrated a favorable safety profile with rates of postoperative ASD lower than published rates after open fusion and on par with the published rates of ASD from MISTLIF alone. Future prospective studies may better elucidate the durability of adjacent-level laminectomies when performed alongside MISTLIF, but retrospective data suggests it is safe and durable.

278 Lateral Anterior Column Release in Short Construct... Is It Worth It?

INTRODUCTION: Adjacent Segment Disease (ASD) is a common complication after lumbar spinal fusions. Ways to reduce the rates for ASD are highly sought after mainly to avoid re-operation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study that consisted of patients that underwent 1-2 level LLIF for degenerative spine disease from 2014-2020. Patients needed to have at least one year of follow-up and have postoperative standing x-rays. Preoperative demographics, perioperative surgical characteristics, and postoperative outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: 92 patients were included for analysis after inclusion criteria. Median follow-up period of 25 months. 54% F, 64 years of age, BMI 31. 11 patients (12%) developed ASD at a median follow up of 29 months. In the patients with ASD, 9 (82%) underwent anterior column release (ACR) with the placement of hyper-lordotic cages &gt; 20 degrees. In our cohort of short construct LLIF ACR was done 9 patients (L3/4 (7 patients) and L4/5 (2 patients). In the univariate analysis we found that age-adjusted PI-LL mismatch (p &lt; 0.003), the use of a hyperlordotic cage (p = 0.003), and ACR release (p &lt; 0.001) were significantly associated with ASD. A multivariate logistic regression model was created and showed only that ACR was predictive for ASD (Odds Ratio: 69.1, 95% confidence interval: 10.71-446.3, p &lt; 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: ACR was predictive for developing ASD in lumbar degenerative disease patients that undergo short-segment LLIF. While other factors may play a role, this was the predominant factor identified in our cohort with at least 10-fold increase risk. ACR is a powerful tool to be use in only spinal deformity. We recommend against ACR in short construct LLIF.

466 Primary Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion, With and Without Posterior Instrumentation: A 1377 Patient Cohort From a Multicenter Spine Registry

INTRODUCTION: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is a versatile and powerful technique for a variety of lumbar degenerative pathologies. Adding posterior supplementary fixation to ALIF (ALIF+PSF) is common and may confer benefits in terms of higher fusion rate but could contribute to adjacent segment disease (ASD) due to additional rigidity. METHODS: Adult patients who underwent primary ALIF for lumbar degenerative pathology between levels L4-S1 over a 12-year period were included. Cases of trauma, cancer, infection, supplemental decompression, noncontiguous fusions, prior lumbar fusions, and other interbody devices were excluded. Primary outcomes included reoperation for nonunion and ASD. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression was used to evaluate risks adjusting for patient characteristics. RESULTS: The study consisted of 1377 cases; 307 ALIF alone and 1070 ALIF+PSF. Mean follow-up time was 5.6-years. 5-year crude nonunion incidence was 2.4% for ALIF only and 0.5% for ALIF+PSF; after adjustment for covariates, a lower operative nonunion risk was observed for ALIF+PSF (HR = 0.22, 95% CI = 0.07-0.70). Of patients deemed potentially suitable for ALIF alone, one would need to add PSF in 53-patients to prevent one case of operative nonunion at a 5-year follow-up (number needed to treat). Five-year operative ASD incidence was 4.3% for ALIF only and 6.2% for ALIF+PSF; with adjustments, no difference was observed between the cohorts (HR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.53-1.74). CONCLUSIONS: While addition of posterior instrumentation in ALIFs is associated with lower risk of operative nonunion compared to ALIF alone, it is rare in both techniques (&lt;5%). Accordingly, surgeons should evaluate added risks associated with addition of PSF, and rather reserve PSF for patients at higher risk for operative nonunion. Rates of operative ASD were not statistically higher with addition of PSF suggesting concern regarding future ASD may be less supported.

Can Dynamic Spinal Stabilization Be an Alternative to Fusion Surgery in Adult Spinal Deformity Cases?

Rigid stabilization and fusion surgery are widely used for the correction of spinal sagittal and coronal imbalance (SCI). However, instrument failure, pseudoarthrosis, and adjacent segment disease are frequent complications of rigid stabilization and fusion surgery in elderly patients. In this study, we present the results of dynamic stabilization and 2-stage dynamic stabilization surgery for the treatment of spinal SCI. The advantages and disadvantages are discussed, especially as an alternative to fusion surgery. In our study, spinal, sagittal, and coronal deformities were corrected with dynamic stabilization performed in a single session in patients with good bone quality (without osteopenia and osteoporosis), while 2-stage surgery was performed in patients with poor bone quality (first stage: percutaneous placement of screws; second stage: placement of dynamic rods and correction of spinal SCI 4-6 months after the first stage). One-stage dynamic spinal instrumentation was applied to 20 of 25 patients with spinal SCI, and 2-stage dynamic spinal instrumentation was applied to the remaining 5 patients. Spinal SCI was corrected with these stabilization systems. At 2-year follow-up, no significant loss was observed in the instrumentation system, while no significant loss of correction was observed in sagittal and coronal deformities. In adult patients with spinal SCI, single or 2-stage dynamic stabilization is a viable alternative to fusion surgery due to the very low rate of instrument failure. This study questions the use of dynamic stabilization systems for the treatment of adult degenerative deformities.

A systematic review of risk factors and adverse outcomes associated with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery over the past decade.

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is one of the most frequently performed cervical surgeries in the world, yet there have been several reported complications. To determine the actual incidence of complications related to ACDF as well as any risk variables that may have been identified in earlier research. To evaluate the origin, presentation, natural history, and management of the risks and the complications, we conducted a thorough assessment of the pertinent literature. An evaluation of clinical trials and case studies of patients who experienced one or more complications following ACDF surgery was done using a PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar search. Studies involving adult human subjects that were written in the English language and published between 2012 and 2022 were included in the search. The search yielded 79 studies meeting our criteria. The overall rates of complications were as follows: Dysphagia 7.9%, psudarthrosis 5.8%, adjacent segment disease (ASD) 8.8%, esophageal perforations (EPs) 0.5%, graft or hardware failure 2.2%, infection 0.3%, recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy 1.7%, cerebrospinal fluid leak 0.8%, Horner syndrome 0.5%, hematoma 0.8%, and C5 palsy 1.9%. Results showed that dysphagia was a common postoperative sequelae with bone morphogenetic protein use and a higher number of surgical levels being the major risk factors. Pseudarthrosis rates varied depending on the factors such as asymptomatic radiographic graft sinking, neck pain, or radiculopathy necessitating revision surgery. The incidence of ASD indicated no data to support anterior cervical plating as more effective than standalone ACDF. EP was rare but frequently fatal, with no correlation found between patient age, sex, body mass index, operation time, or number of levels.

Perioperative and safety outcomes following tissue-sparing posterior cervical fusion to revise a pseudarthrosis: A multicenter retrospective review of 150 cases.

Posterior cervical fusion (PCF) with lateral mass screws is a favorable treatment option to revise a symptomatic pseudarthrosis due to reliable rates of arthrodesis; however, this technique introduces elevated risk for wound infection and hospital readmission. A tissue-sparing PCF approach involving facet fixation instrumentation reduces the rates of postoperative complications while stabilizing the symptomatic level to achieve arthrodesis; however, these outcomes have been limited to small study cohorts from individual surgeons commonly with mixed indications for treatment. One hundred and fifty cases were identified from a retrospective chart review performed by seven surgeons across six sites in the United States. All cases involved PCF revision for a pseudarthrosis at one or more levels from C3 to C7 following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). PCF was performed using a tissue-sparing technique with facet instrumentation. Cases involving additional supplemental fixation such as lateral mass screws, rods, wires, or other hardware were excluded. Demographics, operative notes, postoperative complications, hospital readmission, and subsequent surgical interventions were summarized as an entire cohort and according to the following risk factors: age, sex, number of levels revised, body mass index (BMI), and history of nicotine use. The average age of patients at the time of PCF revision was 55 ± 11 years and 63% were female. The average BMI was 29 ± 6 kg/m2 and 19% reported a history of nicotine use. Postoperative follow-up visits were available with a median of 68 days (interquartile range = 41-209 days) from revision PCF. There were 91 1-level, 49 2-level, 8 3-level, and 2 4±-level PCF revision cases. The mean operative duration was 52 ± 3 min with an estimated blood loss of 14 ± 1.5cc. Participants were discharged an average of 1 ± 0.05 days following surgery. Multilevel treatment resulted in longer procedure times (single = 45 min, multi = 59 min, P = 0.01) but did not impact estimated blood loss (P = 0.94). Total nights in the hospital increased by 0.2 nights with multilevel treatment (P = 0.01). Sex, age, nicotine history, and BMI had no effect on recorded perioperative outcomes. There was one instance of rehospitalization due to deep-vein thrombosis, one instance of persistent pseudarthrosis at the revised level treated with ACDF, and four instances of adjacent segment disease. In patients initially treated with multilevel ACDF, revisions occurred most commonly on the caudal level (48% of revised levels), followed by the cranial (43%), and least often in the middle level (9%). This chart review of perioperative and safety outcomes provides evidence in support of tissue-sparing PCF with facet instrumentation as a treatment for symptomatic pseudarthrosis after ACDF. The most common locations requiring revision were the caudal and cranial levels. Operative duration and estimated blood loss were favorable when compared to open alternatives. There were no instances of postoperative wound infection, and the majority of patients were discharged the day following surgery.

A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study Comparing 3 Different Spine Pedicle Screw Fixation Methods: Freehand, Fluoroscopy-Guided, and Robot-Assisted Techniques.

This study aimed to compare the accuracy of robotic spine surgery and conventional pedicle screw fixation in lumbar degenerative disease. We evaluated clinical and radiological outcomes to demonstrate the noninferiority of robotic surgery. This study employed propensity score matching and included 3 groups: robot-assisted mini-open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) (robotic surgery, RS), c-arm guided minimally invasive surgery transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (C-arm guidance, CG), and freehand open PLIF (free of guidance, FG) (54 patients each). The mean follow-up period was 2.2 years. The preoperative spine condition was considered. Accuracy was evaluated using the Gertzbein-Robbins scale (GRS score) and Babu classification (Babu score). Radiological outcomes included adjacent segmental disease (ASD) and mechanical failure. Clinical outcomes were assessed based on the visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index, 36-item Short Form health survey, and clinical ASD rate. Accuracy was higher in the RS group (p < 0.01) than in other groups. The GRS score was lower in the CG group, whereas the Babu score was lower in the FG group compared with the RS group. No significant differences were observed in radiological and clinical outcomes among the 3 groups. Regression analysis identified preoperative facet degeneration, GRS and Babu scores as significant variables for radiological and clinical ASD. Mechanical failure was influenced by the GRS score and patients' age. This study showed the superior accuracy of robotic spine surgery compared with conventional techniques. When combined with minimally invasive surgery, robotic surgery is advantageous with reduced ligament and muscle damage associated with traditional open procedures.

Analyzing isolated degeneration of lumbar facet joints: implications for degenerative instability and lumbar biomechanics using finite element analysis.

The facet joint contributes to lumbar spine stability as it supports the weight of body along with the intervertebral discs. However, most studies on the causes of degenerative lumbar diseases focus on the intervertebral discs and often overlook the facet joints. This study aimed to investigate the impact of facet joint degeneration on the degenerative changes and diseases of the lumbar spine. A finite element model of the lumbar spine (L1-S1) was fabricated and validated to study the biomechanical characteristics of the facet joints. To simulate degeneration of the facet joint, the model was divided into four grades based on the number of degenerative segments (L4-L5 or L4-S1) and the contact condition between the facet joint surfaces. Finite element analysis was performed on four spine motions: flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial torsion, by applying a pure moment to the upper surface of L1. Important parameters that could be used to confirm the effect of facet joint degeneration on the lumbar spine were calculated, including the range of motion (ROM) of the lumbar segments, maximum von Mises stress on the intervertebral discs, and reaction force at the facet joint. Facet joint degeneration affected the biomechanical characteristics of the lumbar spine depending on the movements of the spine. When analyzed by dividing it into degenerative onset and onset-adjacent segments, lumbar ROM and the maximum von Mises stress of the intervertebral discs decreased as the degree of degeneration increased in the degenerative onset segments. The reaction force at the facet joint decreased with flexion and increased with lateral bending and axial torsion. In contrast, lumbar ROM of the onset-adjacent segments remained almost unchanged despite severe degeneration of the facet joint, and the maximum von Mises stress of the intervertebral discs increased with flexion and extension but decreased with lateral bending and axial torsion. Additionally, the facet joint reaction force increased with extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. This analysis, which combined the ROM of the lumbar segment, maximum von Mises stress on the intervertebral disc, and facet joint reaction force, confirmed the biomechanical changes in the lumbar spine due to the degeneration of isolated facet joints under the load of spinal motion. In the degenerative onset segment, spinal instability decreased, whereas in the onset-adjacent segment, a greater load was applied than in the intact state. When conducting biomechanical studies on the lumbar spine, considering facet joint degeneration is important since it can lead to degenerative spinal diseases, including adjacent segment diseases.

Radiographic Risk Factors for Adjacent Segment Disease Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Systematic review and meta-analysis. To assess the radiographic risk factors for adjacent segment disease (ASD) following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative cervical spine pathologies. PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library databases were searched up to December 2023. The primary inclusion criteria were degenerative spinal conditions treated with ACDF, comparing radiological parameters in patients with and without postoperative ASD. The radiographic parameters included intervertebral disc height, cervical sagittal alignment, sagittal segmental alignment, range of motion, segmental height, T1 slope, sagittal vertical axis (SVA), thoracic inlet angle (TIA), and plate to disc distance (PPD). Risk of bias was assessed for all studies. The Cochrane Review Manager was utilized to perform the meta-analysis. From 7044 articles, 13 retrospective studies were included in the final analysis. Three studies had "not serious" bias and the other 10 studies had serious or very serious bias. The total number of patients in the included studies was 1799 patients. Five studies included single-level ACDF, 2 studies included multi-level ACDF, and 6 studies included single or multi-level ACDF. On meta-analysis, the significant risk factors associated with ASD development were reduced postoperative cervical lordosis (mean difference [MD] = 3.35°, P = .002), reduced last-follow-up cervical lordosis (MD = -3.02°, P = .0003), increased preoperative to postoperative cervical sagittal alignment change (MD = -3.68°, P = .03), and the presence of developmental cervical canal stenosis (Odds ratio [OR] = 4.17, P < .001). Decreased postoperative cervical lordosis, greater change in cervical sagittal alignment and developmental cervical canal stenosis were associated with an increased risk of ASD following ACDF.

Completely Minimally Invasive Implant Removal and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Adjacent Segment Disease: Case Series and Operative Video.

Adjacent segment disease is a relatively common late complication after lumbar fusion. If symptomatic, certain patients require fusion of the degenerated adjacent segment. Currently, there are no posterior completely minimally invasive techniques described for fusion of the adjacent segment above or below a previous fusion. We describe here a novel minimally invasive technique for both implant removal (MIS-IR) and adjacent level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) for lumbar stenosis. Demographic, surgical, and radiographic outcome data were collected for patients with lumbar stenosis and previous lumbar fusion, who were treated with MIS-IR and MIS-TLIF through the same incision. Radiographic outcomes were assessed postoperatively and complications were assessed at the primary end point of 3 months. A total of 14 patients (7 female and 7 male), with average age 64.6 years (SD 13.4), were included in this case series. Nine patients had single-level MIS-IR with single-level MIS-TLIF. Three patients had 2-level MIS-IR with single-level MIS-TLIF. Two patients had single-level MIS-IR with 2-level MIS-TLIF. Only 1 patient had a postoperative complication-hematoma requiring same-day evacuation. There were no other complications at the primary end point and no fusion failure at the hardware removal levels to date (average follow-up, 11 months). Average increases in posterior disk height and foraminal height after MIS-TLIF were 4.44, and 2.18 mm, respectively. Minimally invasive spinal IR can be successfully completed along with adjacent level TLIF through the same incisions, via an all-posterior approach.

Adjacent Segment Degeneration and Adjacent Segment Disease: Implications following Spinal Fusion Surgery

Spinal fusion is a common and effective option for patients with symptomatic degenerative disc disorders. However, concerns have raised over the probability of adjacent segment degeneration (ASDe) and adjacent segment disease (ASDi) following spinal instrumentation. Current study sought to document evidence on the incidence of ASDe and ASDi after lumbar fusion surgery and the risk factors precipitating adjacent pathologies. Given the benefits of spinal fusion surgery, it remains unclear whether adjacent pathologies are attributed to the natural degeneration or the adjacent fusion.

Comparison of facet fusion rates and clinical outcomes between cortical bone trajectory screw and percutaneous pedicle screw fixation for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

BACKGROUND CONTEXTCortical bone trajectory (CBT) screws have been introduced as an alternative technique for pedicle screw (PS) insertion because they have greater contact with the cortex and a greater uniaxial pullout load than traditional PS. CBT screwing can also minimize muscle dissection. However, CBT screws and traditional PSs have not yet been compared in terms of fusion rates and clinical outcomes for particular operative procedures. PURPOSEThis study aimed to assess the fusion rate and clinical outcomes of facet fusion (FF) fixed with CBT screws (CBT-FF) and to compare them with those of FF fixed with percutaneous PS (PPS-FF). STUDY DESIGNRetrospective study. PATIENT SAMPLERecords of 68 patients who underwent CBT-FF for single-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) with at least 1 year of follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. The control group comprised 143 patients who underwent PPS-FF under the same conditions. OUTCOME MEASURESComputed tomography was performed to confirm fusion. Therapeutic effectiveness was assessed as a clinical outcome using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ), Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and visual analog scale (VAS) preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. The rate of revision surgery was also calculated. Intraoperative blood loss was measured. METHODSFusion rate, clinical outcomes, revision surgery rate, and intraoperative blood loss of CBT-FF and PPS-FF were compared. RESULTSThe CBT-FF and PPS-FF fusion rates were 91.2% and 90.1%, respectively. The JOABPEQ category scores demonstrated therapeutic effectiveness in 74.5% and 77.1% of the patients for low back pain; the corresponding proportions for walking ability were 84.7% and 89.3%, respectively. No significant differences in therapeutic effectiveness were observed for any category, including the RMDQ and VAS scores for buttock and lower limb pain. Three patients required revision surgery for adjacent segment disease between 6 months and 3.5 years after CBT-FF (revision surgery rate, 4.4%), whereas the revision surgery rate for PPS-FF was 6.3% (9/143 cases). Average intraoperative blood loss was significantly less in the CBT-FF group than in the PPS-FF group. CONCLUSIONSBoth procedures were equally useful in terms of fusion rate and clinical outcomes for DLS management.

Are there differences in the reoperation rates for operative adjacent-segment disease between ALIF+PS, PLIF+PS, TLIF+PS, and LLIF+PS? An analysis of a cohort of 5291 patients.

Biomechanical factors in lumbar fusions accelerate the development of adjacent-segment disease (ASD). Stiffness in the fused segment increases motion in the adjacent levels, resulting in ASD. The objective of this study was to determine if there are differences in the reoperation rates for symptomatic ASD (operative ASD) between anterior lumbar interbody fusion plus pedicle screws (ALIF+PS), posterior lumbar interbody fusion plus pedicle screws (PLIF+PS), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion plus pedicle screws (TLIF+PS), and lateral lumbar interbody fusion plus pedicle screws (LLIF+PS). A retrospective study using data from the Kaiser Permanente Spine Registry identified an adult cohort (≥ 18 years old) with degenerative disc disease who underwent primary lumbar interbody fusions with pedicle screws between L3 to S1. Demographic and operative data were obtained from the registry, and chart review was used to document operative ASD. Patients were followed until operative ASD, membership termination, the end of study (March 31, 2022), or death. Operative ASD was analyzed using Cox proportional hazards models. The final study population included 5291 patients with a mean ± SD age of 60.1 ± 12.1 years and a follow-up of 6.3 ± 3.8 years. There was a total of 443 operative ASD cases, with an overall incidence rate of reoperation for ASD of 8.37% (95% CI 7.6-9.2). The crude incidence of operative ASD at 5 years was the lowest in the ALIF+PS cohort (7.7%, 95% CI 6.3-9.4). In the adjusted models, the authors failed to detect a statistical difference in operative ASD between ALIF+PS (reference) versus PLIF+PS (HR 1.06 [0.79-1.44], p = 0.69) versus TLIF+PS (HR 1.03 [0.81-1.31], p = 0.83) versus LLIF+PS (HR 1.38 [0.77-2.46], p = 0.28). In a large cohort of over 5000 patients with an average follow-up of > 6 years, the authors found no differences in the reoperation rates for symptomatic ASD (operative ASD) between ALIF+PS and PLIF+PS, TLIF+PS, or LLIF+PS.

Impact of osteoporosis and Cement-Augmented fusion on adjacent spinal levels Post-Fusion Surgery: Patient-Specific finite element analysis

Cement-augmentation is a technique commonly used during posterior lumbar instrumented fusion (PLIF) to reinforce compromised osteoporotic vertebral bone, minimize the risk of loosening screws, enhance stability, and improve overall surgical outcomes. In this study, we introduce a novel segmented vertebral body regional modeling approach to investigate the effects of osteoporosis and cement-augmented lumbar fusion on disc biomechanics at spinal levels adjacent to the fused vertebrae. Using our previously validated personalized-poroelastic-osteoligamentous FE model of the spine, fusion was simulated at L4-L5, and the biomechanics of adjacent levels were studied for 30 patients (non-osteoporotic patients (N = 15), osteoporotic patients (N = 15)). PLIF models, with and without cement-augmentation, were developed and compared after an 8 h-rest period (200 N), following a 16 h-cyclic compressive loading of 500–1000 N (40 and 20 min, respectively). Movement in different directions (flexion/ extension/ lateral bending/ axial rotation) was simulated using 10Nm moment before and after cyclic loading. The material mapping algorithm was validated by comparing the results of voxel-based and parametric models. The FE cement-augmented models, subject to daily activity loading, demonstrated significant differences in disc height loss and fluid loss as compared to non-cemented models. The calculated axial stress and fiber strain values were also significantly higher for these models. This work demonstrates that although osteoporosis does not significantly alter the time-dependent characteristics of adjacent IVDs post-surgery, cement-augmentation increases the risk of adjacent segment disease (ASD) incidence. A holistic understanding of the trade-offs and long-term complex interplay between structural reinforcement modalities, including cement augmentation, and altered biomechanics warrants further investigation.

Articular arthrodesis with the facet wedge technique for the treatment of unstable lumbar degenerative disease and associated conditions: A retrospective study of 96 patients

BackgroundLumbar articular fusion with the facet wedge (FW) technique is gaining increasing interest among surgeons for the treatment of vertebral instability due to its limited invasiveness and ease of use. Studies on cadavers have reported biomechanical properties similar to pedicle screws. Yet, the evidence supporting their use is still limited and moreover focused only on spinal degenerative disease. Methods96 cases of lumbar articular fusion with the FW techniques performed at 3 different centers between 2014 and 2022 were retrospectively analyzed based on the specific surgical indications: 1) degenerative spondylolisthesis/unstable lumbar stenosis; 2) synovial cysts; 3) adjacent segment disease (ASD). Medical records were reviewed to identify rates of complications and measures of functional outcome (ODI, low back pain VAS and modified Macnab scale) were collected both at baseline and at the follow-up visits. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was adopted to test for significant functional improvements. ResultsSignificative clinical improvements were observed from baseline to follow-up regarding ODI and VAS scores. Overall rate of moderate and severe complications (according to Landriel–Ibañez scale) was 7.9%. Only 3.4% of patients with degenerative disease developed ASD requiring reoperations. Only one case of radicular deficit and one of device mobilization were reported. 2/4 cases of synovial cysts treated with unilateral fusions developed contralateral complications. 9 out of 16 (56.25%) patients who underwent long-term postoperative CT scans presented adequate degree of articular fusion. ConclusionFW technique is easy, safe, and effective. Its low rate of complications justifies its use for cases of mild lumbar instability.

Comparison of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Mis-TLIF) with bilateral decompression via unilateral approach and open-TLIF with bilateral decompression for degenerative lumbar diseases: a retrospective cohort study

ObjectivePresently, no study has compared the clinical outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Mis-TLIF) with bilateral decompression via the unilateral approach (BDUA) and Open-TLIF with bilateral decompression for degenerative lumbar diseases (DLD). We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of through Mis-TLIF combined with BDUA and Open-TLIF with bilateral decompression for the treatment of DLD, and reported the learning curve of the procedure of MIS-TLIF with BDUA.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the prospectively collected data of consecutive DLD patients in the two groups from January 2016 to January 2020.ResultsThe operative time (OT) was significantly longer in the Mis-TLIF group (n = 113) than in the Open-TLIF group (n = 135). The postoperative drainage volume (PDV) and length of stay (LOS) were significantly higher in the Open-TLIF group than in the Mis-TLIF group. Additionally, the complication rate was significantly higher in the Open-TLIF group than in the Mis-TLIF group (14.8% vs. 6.2%, P = 0.030), while there was no significant difference in the reoperation and adjacent segment disease rates between the two groups. There were no significant differences in back pain and leg pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) between the two groups preoperatively, at discharge, and 2 years postoperatively. Patients in both groups showed significant improvements in NRS scores and ODI scores after surgery. OT was negatively correlated with the number of surgeries performed (P < 0.001, r = −0.43). The learning curve of Mis-TLIF with BDUA was steep, with OT tapered to steady state in 43 cases.ConclusionCompared with Open-TLIF with bilateral decompression, Mis-TLIF with BDUA can achieve equivalent clinical outcomes, lower PDV and LOS, and lower complication rates. Although this procedure took longer, it could be a viable alternative for the treatment of DLD after a steep learning curve.

Perspective: Cervical laminoforaminotomy (CLF) is safer than anterior cervical diskectomy/fusion (ACDF) for lateral cervical disease.

The literature documents that laminoforaminotomy (CLF), whether performed open, minimally invasively, or microendoscopically, is safer than anterior cervical diskectomy/fusion (ACDF) for lateral cervical disease. ACDF for lateral cervical disc disease and/or spondylosis exposes patients to multiple major surgical risk factors not encountered with CLF. These include; carotid artery or jugular vein injuries, esophageal tears, dysphagia, recurrent laryngeal nerve injuries, tracheal injuries, and dysphagia. CLF also exposes patients to lower rates of vertebral artery injury, dural tears (DT)/cerebrospinal fluid fistulas, instability warranting fusion, adjacent segment disease (ASD), plus cord and/or nerve root injuries. Further, CLF vs. ACDF for lateral cervical pathology offer reduced tissue damage, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of stay (LOS), and cost. CLFs', whether performed open, minimally invasively, or microendoscopically, offer greater safety, major pros with few cons, and decreased costs vs. ACDF for lateral cervical disease.