Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cage Research Articles

Commentary on "Three-Dimensional-Printed Titanium Versus Polyetheretherketone Cages for Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review of Comparative In Vitro, Animal, and Human Studies".

Commentary on "Three-Dimensional-Printed Titanium Versus Polyetheretherketone Cages for Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review of Comparative In Vitro, Animal, and Human Studies".

Designing an anatomical contour titanium 3D-printed oblique lumbar interbody fusion cage with porous structure and embedded fixation screws for patients with osteoporosis.

This study aimed to design an anatomical contour metal three-dimensional (3D)-printed oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) cage with porous (lattices) structure and embedded screw fixation to enhance bone ingrowth to reduce the risk of cage subsidence and avoid the stress-shielding effect. Finite element (FE) analysis and weight topology optimization (WTO) were used to optimize the structural design of the OLIF cage based on the anatomical contour morphology of patients with osteoporosis. Two oblique embedded fixation screws and lattice design with 65% porosity and average pore size of 750 μm were equipped with the cage structure. The cage was fabricated via metal 3D printing, and static/dynamic compression and compressive-shear tests were performed in accordance with the ASTM F2077-14 standard to evaluate its mechanical resistance. On FE analysis, the OLIF cage with embedded screw model had the most stability, lowest stress values on the endplate, and uniform stress distribution versus standalone cage and fixed with lateral plate under extension, lateral flexion, and rotation. The fatigue test showed that the stiffnesses/endurance limits (pass 5 million dynamic test) were 16,658 N/mm/6000 N for axial load and 19,643 N/mm/2700 N for compression shear. In conclusion, an OLIF cage with embedded fixation screws can be designed by integrating FE and WTO analysis based on the statistical results of endplate morphology. This improves the stability of the OLIF cage to decrease endplate destruction. The complex contour and lattice design of the OLIF cage need to be manufactured via metal 3D printing; the dynamic axial compression and compressive-shear strengths are greater than that of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) standard.

Quantitative Biomechanical Evaluation for Optimal Spinal Instrumentation to Prevent Mechanical Complications in Spinal Fusion from the Lower Thoracic Spine to the Pelvis for Adult Spinal Deformity: A Finite Element Analysis.

Mechanical complications, such as rod fracture (RF) and proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK), commonly occur after adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. A rigid construct is preferred to prevent RF, whereas it is a risk factor for PJK. This controversial issue urged us to conduct a biomechanical study for seeking the optimal construct to prevent mechanical complications. A three-dimensional nonlinear finite element model, which consisted of the lower thoracic and lumbar spine, pelvis, and femur, was created. The model was instrumented with pedicle screws (PSs), S2-alar-iliac screws, lumbar interbody fusion cages, and rods. Rod stress was measured when a forward-bending load was applied at the top of the construct to evaluate the risk of RF in constructs with or without accessory rods (ARs). In addition, fracture analysis around the uppermost instrumented vertebra (UIV) was performed to assess the risk of PJK. Changing the rod material from titanium alloy (Ti) to cobalt chrome (CoCr) decreased shearing stress at L5-S1 by 11.5%, and adding ARs decreased it by up to 34.3% (for the shortest ARs). Although the trajectory (straightforward vs. anatomical) of PSs did not affect the fracture load for UIV+1, changing the anchor from PSs to hooks at the UIV reduced it by 14.8%. Changing the rod material from Ti to CoCr did not alter the load, whereas the load decreased by up to 25.1% as the AR became longer. The PSs at the UIV in the lower thoracic spine, CoCr rods as primary rods, and shorter ARs should be used in long fusion for ASD to prevent mechanical complications.

Titanium‑coated polyetheretherketone cages vs. polyetheretherketone cages in lumbar interbody fusion: A systematic review and meta‑analysis.

Fusion material is one of the key factors in the success of lumbar interbody fusion surgery. The present meta-analysis compared the safety and efficacy of titanium-coated (Ti) polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and PEEK cages. Published literature on the use of Ti-PEEK and PEEK cages in lumbar interbody fusion was systematically searched on Embase, PubMed, Central, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Wanfang databases. A total of 84 studies were retrieved and seven were included in the present meta-analysis. Literature quality was assessed using the Cochrane systematic review methodology. After data extraction, meta-analysis was performed using the ReviewManager 5.4 software. Meta-analysis showed that, compared with that in the PEEK cage group, the Ti-PEEK cage group showed a higher interbody fusion rate at 6 months postoperatively (95% CI, 1.09-5.60; P=0.03) and improved Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores at 3 months postoperatively [95% CI, -7.80-(-0.62); P=0.02] and visual analog scale (VAS) scores of back pain at 6 months postoperatively [95% CI, -0.8-(-0.23); P=0.0008]. However, there were no significant differences in intervertebral bone fusion rate (12 months after surgery), cage subsidence rate, ODI score (6 and 12 months after surgery) or VAS score (3 and 12 months after surgery) between the two groups. The results of the meta-analysis showed that the Ti-PEEK group had an improved interbody fusion rate and higher postoperative ODI score in the early postoperative period (≤6 months).

Biplanar Expandable Cages for Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Are Safe and Achieve Good 1-Year Clinical and Radiological Outcomes in an Asian Population.

This study investigated 1-year clinical and radiological outcomes of biplanar expandable (BE) cages following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in an Asian population. A retrospective review was conducted of all consecutive patients who underwent TLIF with BE cages performed by 2 fellowship-trained spine surgeons from 2020 to 2021. Inclusion criteria included open or minimally invasive (MIS) TLIF, of up to 3 spinal segments, performed for treatment of degenerative disc disease, spondylolisthesis, or spinal stenosis. Patient-reported outcomes, including visual analog score (VAS) for back and lower limb pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and North American Spine Society neurogenic symptom score (NSS), and various radiographic parameters, were evaluated. A total of 23 patients underwent TLIF with BE cages with a follow-up duration of 1.25 years. Of those patients, 7 (30%) underwent 1-level TLIF, 12 (52%) underwent 2-level TLIF, and 4 (18%) underwent 3-level TLIF, with a total of 43 spinal segments fused. Four patients (17%) underwent MIS TLIF while 19 patients (83%) underwent open TLIF. VAS for back pain scores improved by 4.8 ± 3.4 (P < 0.001) from 6.5 ± 2.6 to 1.7 ± 2.2; VAS for lower limb pain scores improved by 5.2 ± 3.8 (P < 0.001) from 5.7 ± 3.4 to 0.5 ± 1.6; ODI scores improved by 29.0 ± 18.1 (P < 0.001) from 49.4 ± 15.1 to 20.4 ± 14.2; and NSS scores improved by 36.8 ± 22.1 (P < 0.001) from 53.3 ± 21.1 to 16.5 ± 19.8. Significant improvements in radiological parameters included increase in anterior disc height, posterior disc height, foraminal height, segmental lordosis, and lumbar lordosis. There were no implant-related complications, cage subsidence, cage migration, or revision surgery at 1 year. TLIF performed with BE cages led to significantly improved patient-reported outcomes and radiographic parameters at 1 year and is safe for use in Asians. The results of this study support the effectiveness and safety of TLIF with biplanar expandable cages.

494 Comparison of Disc Height Restoration and Subsidence Rates Between Static Versus Expandable Titanium Cages for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion

INTRODUCTION: It has been shown that expandable cages for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) are associated with increased rates of subsidence. However, as lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) cages offer substantially larger footprints, this may offset the risks. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of a consecutive adult patients undergoing LLIF with either static or expandable cages from 2013-2021. Demographics and surgical details were collected. Posterior disc height (PDH), subsidence, and fusions status were compared between patients with static and expandable cages. Follow-up were reported at minimum 6-months and 1-year. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients had 173 cages implanted: 96 patients with 143 static cages vs. 24 patients with 30 expandable cages. Mean age was 63.4 and 62.4% were male. There were no significant differences in age, gender, BMI, smoking, or osteoporosis. Overall, PDH was significantly increased following LLIF (4.1 v 7.4 mm, p &lt; 0.001). Static and expandable cage types had similar magnitude (3.7 v 3.3 mm, p = 0.311) and percentage (89.0% v 121.5%, p = 0.127) change in PDH, respectively. Overall incidence of cage subsidence at 6-months and 1-year was 6.9% and 10.4% respectively. There was no significant difference in subsidence rates between cage types at 6 months (7.0% v 6.7%, p = 0.949) and 1-year (11.2 v 6.7%, p = 0.461). Radiographic evidence of fusion was present in 92.7% of cases at 1-year, and both cage types achieved similar fusion rates as well (92.2% v 95.6%, p = 0.555). CONCLUSIONS: LLIF static and expandable cages offer similar PDH restoration depending on surgical goals. Expandable cages seem to be less prone to subsidence than smaller TLIF cage counterparts and offer similar fusion rates to static cages. Larger cohort studies are warranted to further validate these findings which are ongoing.

Biomechanical evaluation of an osteoporotic anatomical 3D printed posterior lumbar interbody fusion cage with internal lattice design based on weighted topology optimization.

In this study, we designed and manufactured a posterior lumbar interbody fusion cage for osteoporosis patients using 3D-printing. The cage structure conforms to the anatomical endplate's curved surface for stress transmission and internal lattice design for bone growth. Finite element (FE) analysis and weight topology optimization under different lumbar spine activity ratios were integrated to design the curved surface (CS-type) cage using the endplate surface morphology statistical results from the osteoporosis patients. The CS-type and plate (P-type) cage biomechanical behaviors under different daily activities were compared by performing non-linear FE analysis. A gyroid lattice with 0.25 spiral wall thickness was then designed in the internal cavity of the CS-type cage. The CS-cage was manufactured using metal 3D printing to conduct in vitro biomechanical tests. The FE analysis result showed that the maximum stress values at the inferior L3 and superior L4 endplates under all daily activities for the P-type cage implantation model were all higher than those for the CS-type cage. Fracture might occur in the P-type cage because the maximum stresses found in the endplates exceeded its ultimate strength (about 10 MPa) under flexion, torsion and bending loads. The yield load and stiffness of our designed CS-type cage fall into the optional acceptance criteria for the ISO 23089 standard under all load conditions. This study approved a posterior lumbar interbody fusion cage designed to have osteoporosis anatomical curved surface with internal lattice that can achieve appropriate structural strength, better stress transmission between the endplate and cage, and biomechanically tested strength that meets the standard requirements for marketed cages.

Measuring compressive loads on a ‘smart’ lumbar interbody fusion cage: Proof of concept

There are several complications associated with lumbar interbody fusion surgery however, pseudarthrosis (non-union) presents a multifaceted challenge in the postoperative management of the patient. Rates of pseudarthrosis range from 3 to 20 % in patients with healthy bone and 20 to 30 % in patients with osteoporosis. The current methods in post-operative follow-up - radiographs and CT, have high false positive rates and poor agreement between them. The aim of this study was to develop and test a proof-of-concept load-sensing interbody cage that may be used to monitor fusion progression. Piezoresistive pressure sensors were calibrated and embedded within a polyether ether ketone (PEEK) interbody cage. Silicone and poly (methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) were inserted in the graft regions to simulate early and solid fusion. The load-sensing cage was subjected to distributed and eccentric compressive loads up to 900 N between synthetic lumbar vertebral bodies. Under maximum load, the anterior sensors recorded a 56–58 % reduction in pressure in the full fusion state compared to early fusion. Lateral regions measured a 36–37 % stress reduction while the central location reduced by 45 %. The two graft states were distinguishable by sensor-recorded pressure at lower loads. The sensors more effectively detected left and right eccentric loads compared to anterior and posterior. Further, the load-sensing cage was able to detect changes in endplate stiffness. The proof-of-concept ‘smart’ cage could detect differences in fusion state, endplate stiffness, and loading conditions in this in vitro experimental setup.

Radiographic comparison of L5-S1 lateral anterior lumbar interbody fusion cage subsidence and displacement by fixation strategy: anterior plate versus integrated screws.

The aim of this study was to radiographically compare cage subsidence and displacement between L5-S1 lateral anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) cages secured with an anterior buttress plate and cages secured with integrated screws. Consecutive patients who underwent L5-S1 lateral ALIF with supplemental posterior fixation by a single surgeon from June 2016 to January 2021 were reviewed. Radiographs were analyzed and compared between the two groups based on the type of fixation used to secure the L5-S1 lateral ALIF cage: 1) anterior buttress plate or 2) integrated screws. The following measurements at L5-S1 were analyzed on radiographs obtained preoperatively, before discharge, and at latest follow-up: 1) anterior disc height, 2) posterior disc height, and 3) segmental lordosis. Cage subsidence and anterior cage displacement were determined radiographically. One hundred thirty-nine patients (mean age 60.0 ± 14.3 years) were included for analysis. Sixty-eight patients were treated with an anterior buttress plate (mean follow-up 12 ± 5 months), and 71 were treated with integrated screws (mean follow-up 9 ± 3 months). Mean age, sex distribution, preoperative L5-S1 lordosis, preoperative L5-S1 anterior disc height, and preoperative L5-S1 posterior disc height were statistically similar between the two groups. After surgery, the segmental L5-S1 lordosis and L5-S1 anterior disc heights significantly improved for both groups, and each respective measurement was similar between the groups at final follow-up. Posterior disc heights significantly increased after surgery with integrated screws but not with the anterior buttress plate. As such, posterior disc heights were significantly greater at final follow-up for integrated screws. Compared with patients who received integrated screws, significantly more patients who received the anterior buttress plate had cage subsidence cranially through the L5 endplate (20.6% vs 2.8%, p < 0.01), cage subsidence caudally through the S1 endplate (27.9% vs 0%, p < 0.01), and anterior cage displacement (22.1% vs 0%, p < 0.01). In this radiographic analysis of 139 patients who underwent lateral L5-S1 ALIF supplemented by posterior fixation, L5-S1 cages secured with an anterior buttress plate demonstrated significantly higher rates of cage subsidence and anterior cage displacement compared with cages secured with integrated screws. While the more durable stability afforded by cages secured with integrated screws suggests that they may be a more viable fixation strategy for L5-S1 lateral ALIFs, there are multiple factors that can contribute to cage subsidence, and, thus, definitive presumption cannot be made that the findings of this study are directly related to the buttress plate.

Assessment of the Strain Field Induced Under Load in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cage Printed in Additive Manufacturing

Assessment of the Strain Field Induced Under Load in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cage Printed in Additive Manufacturing

Biomechanical assessment of the effect of sublaminar band tensioning on lumbar motion.

Adjacent-segment disease (ASD) proximal to lumbosacral fusion is assumed to result from increased stress and motion that extends above or below the fusion construct. Sublaminar bands (SBs) have been shown to potentially mitigate stresses in deformity constructs. A similar application of SBs in lumbar fusions is not well described yet may potentially mitigate against ASD. Eight fresh-frozen human cadaveric spine specimens were instrumented with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) cages at L3-4 and L4-5, and pedicle screws from L3 to S1. Bilateral SBs were applied at L2 and tightened around the rods extending above the L3 pedicle screws. After being mounted on a testing frame, the spines were loaded at L1 to 6 Nm in all 3 planes, i.e., flexion/extension, right and left lateral bending, and right and left axial rotation. Motion and intradiscal pressures (IDPs) at L2-3 were measured for 5 conditions: intact, instrumentation (L3-S1), band tension (BT) 30%, BT 50%, and BT 100%. There was significant increase in motion at L2-3 with L3-S1 instrumentation compared with the intact spine in flexion/extension (median 8.78°, range 4.07°-10.81°, vs median 7.27°, range 1.63°-9.66°; p = 0.016). When compared with instrumentation, BT 100% reduced motion at L2-3 in flexion/extension (median 8.78°, range 4.07°-10.81°, vs median 3.61°, range 1.11°-9.39°; p < 0.001) and lateral bending (median 6.58°, range 3.67°-8.59°, vs median 5.62°, range 3.28°-6.74°; p = 0.001). BT 50% reduced motion at L2-3 only in flexion/extension when compared with instrumentation (median 8.78°, range 4.07°-10.81°, vs median 5.91°, range 2.54°-10.59°; p = 0.027). There was no significant increase of motion at L1-2 with banding when compared with instrumentation, although an increase was seen from the intact spine with BT 100% in flexion/extension (median 5.14°, range 2.47°-9.73°, vs median 7.34°, range 4.22°-9.89°; p = 0.005). BT 100% significantly reduced IDP at L2-3 from 25.07 psi (range 2.41-48.08 psi) before tensioning to 19.46 psi (range -2.35 to 29.55 psi) after tensioning (p = 0.016). In this model, the addition of L2 SBs reduced motion and IDP at L2-3 after the L3-S1 instrumentation. There was no significant increase in motion at L1-2 in response to band tensioning compared with instrumentation alone. The application of SBs may have a clinical application in reducing the incidence of ASD.

Efficacy of platelet-rich plasma impregnation for unidirectional porous β-tricalcium phosphate in lateral lumbar interbody fusion: study protocol for a prospective controlled trial

BackgroundThe use of platelet-rich plasma has been increasing in spinal fusion surgery. However, the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma in lateral lumbar interbody fusion is unclear. In Japan, Affinos,® (Kuraray Co., Tokyo, Japan), a β-tricalcium phosphate artificial bone, has been increasingly used for spinal fusion. The purpose of this trial is to demonstrate whether Affinos® impregnated with platelet-rich plasma can achieve a higher fusion rate and better clinical outcomes than Affinos® alone.MethodsThe current study is a prospective randomized controlled trial. This trial will include consecutive patients scheduled for lateral lumbar interbody fusion. An intervertebral cage for lateral lumbar interbody fusion has two spaces for bone grafts. As a consequence, two bone grafts are inserted at each intervertebral level. In this study, an artificial bone with platelet-rich plasma will be inserted into one space, and an artificial bone without platelet-rich plasma will be inserted into the other space. We will compare the fusion rates between the bone grafts with and without platelet-rich plasma. Our primary endpoint will be the interbody fusion rate at 1 year after surgery.DiscussionThis trial will verify the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma with Affinos® for bony fusion in lateral lumbar interbody fusion. It will also provide substantial evidence for the effectiveness and safety of platelet-rich plasma in spinal fusion surgery.Trial registrationJapan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT) jRCTb032200199. First registered on 13 November 2020. jRCT is approved as a member of the Primary Registry Network of WHO ICTRP.

Biomechanical Comparison of Subsidence Between Patient-Specific and Non-Patient-Specific Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cages.

Biomechanical study. Several strategies to improve the surface of contact between an interbody device and the endplate have been employed to attenuate the risk of cage subsidence. 3D-printed patient-specific cages have been presented as a promising alternative to help mitigate that risk, but there is a lack of biomechanical evidence supporting their use. We aim to evaluate the biomechanical performance of 3D printed patient-specific lumbar interbody fusion cages in relation to commercial cages in preventing subsidence. A cadaveric model is used to investigate the possible advantage of 3D printed patient-specific cages matching the endplate contour using CT-scan imaging in preventing subsidence in relation to commercially available cages (Medtronic Fuse and Capstone). Peak failure force and stiffness were analyzed outcomes for both comparison groups. PS cages resulted in significantly higher construct stiffness when compared to both commercial cages tested (>59%). PS cage peak failure force was 64% higher when compared to Fuse cage (P < .001) and 18% higher when compared to Capstone cage (P = .086). Patient-specific cages required higher compression forces to produce failure and increased the cage-endplate construct' stiffness, decreasing subsidence risk.

Titanium-coated PEEK Versus Uncoated PEEK Cages in Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trial.

Systematic review and meta-analysis. This study was performed to compare the fusion and subsidence rate of titanium-coated polyetheretherketone (Ti-PEEK) versus polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages after lumbar fusion and to investigate the clinical effect on patient-reported outcomes (PROMs). Ti-PEEK cages have been developed to combine the advantages of both titanium alloy and PEEK, but whether they are superior to uncoated PEEK cages in bone fusion is still inconclusive. PubMed, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, CENTRAL, and CNKI were searched to identify randomized controlled trials that compared the efficacy of Ti-PEEK and PEEK cages in lumbar fusion. Difference in fusion rate and subsidence rate was indicated by risk ratio and its associated 95% confidence interval (95% confidence interval). Mean difference was calculated for Oswestry Disability Index and visual analogue scale for low back pain. Subgroup analysis was performed by time course after the surgery. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to evaluate the certainty of evidence. Four randomized controlled trials involving 325 patients (160 patients in Ti-PEEK group and 165 patients in PEEK group) that underwent lumbar fusion were included by our current study. Low to moderate evidence suggested that Ti-PEEK and PEEK cages exhibited equivalent fusion rate and subsidence rate at any follow-up time. Low to moderate evidence suggested that there was no difference in PROMs except for visual analogue scale measured at 6 months (mean difference: -0.57, 95% confidence interval -0.94, -0.21; P =0.002) but the difference was not clinically relevant according to the minimal clinically important difference. Low to moderate evidence showed that Ti-PEEK and PEEK had equivalent effect in bone fusion and cages subsidence at any follow-up time after lumbar fusion surgeries. Low to moderate evidence showed no clinically important difference in PROMs.

Static versus Expandable Interbody Fusion Devices: A Comparison of 1-Year Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Retrospective cohort study. To compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes of static versus expandable interbody cages in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using minimally invasive surgery (MIS-TLIF). Expandable interbody cages may potentially improve radiographic and clinical outcomes following MIS-TLIF compared to static pages, but at a potentially higher cost and increased rates of subsidence. A retrospective chart review of 1- and 2-level MIS-TLIFs performed from 2014 to 2020 was reviewed. Radiographic measurements were obtained preoperatively, 6 weeks postoperatively, and at final follow-up. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including the Oswestry Disability Index, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) back, and VAS leg were evaluated. Multivariate linear regression analysis determined the effect of cage type on the change in PROMs, controlling for demographic characteristics. Alpha was set at 0.05. A total of 221 patients underwent MIS-TLIF including 136 static and 85 expandable cages. Expandable cages had significantly greater anterior (static: 11.41 mm vs. expandable: 13.11 mm, p <0.001) and posterior disk heights (static: 7.22 mm vs. expandable: 8.11 mm, p <0.001) at 1-year follow-up. Expandable cages offered similar improvements in segmental lordosis at 6 weeks (static: 1.69° vs. expandable: 2.81°, p =0.243), but segmental lordosis was better maintained with expandable cages leading to significant differences at 1-year follow-up (static: 0.86° vs. expandable: 2.45°, p =0.001). No significant differences were noted in total complication (static: 12.5% vs. expandable: 16.5%, p =0.191) or cage subsidence rates (static: 19.7% vs. expandable: 22.4%, p =0.502) groups at 1-year follow-up. Expandable devices provide greater improvements in radiographic measurements including anterior disk height, posterior disk height, and segmental lordosis, but this did not lead to significant improvements in PROMs, complication rates, subsidence rates, or subsidence distance.

Biomechanical analysis of stand-alone lumbar interbody cages versus 360° constructs: an in vitro and finite element investigation.

Low fusion rates and cage subsidence are limitations of lumbar fixation with stand-alone interbody cages. Various approaches to interbody cage placement exist, yet the need for supplemental posterior fixation is not clear from clinical studies. Therefore, as prospective clinical studies are lacking, a comparison of segmental kinematics, cage properties, and load sharing on vertebral endplates is needed. This laboratory investigation evaluates the mechanical stability and biomechanical properties of various interbody fixation techniques by performing cadaveric and finite element (FE) modeling studies. An in vitro experiment using 7 fresh-frozen human cadavers was designed to test intact spines with 1) stand-alone lateral interbody cage constructs (lateral interbody fusion, LIF) and 2) LIF supplemented with posterior pedicle screw-rod fixation (360° constructs). FE and kinematic data were used to validate a ligamentous FE model of the lumbopelvic spine. The validated model was then used to evaluate the stability of stand-alone LIF, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) cages with and without supplemental posterior fixation at the L4-5 level. The FE models of intact and instrumented cases were subjected to a 400-N compressive preload followed by an 8-Nm bending moment to simulate physiological flexion, extension, bending, and axial rotation. Segmental kinematics and load sharing at the inferior endplate were compared. The FE kinematic predictions were consistent with cadaveric data. The range of motion (ROM) in LIF was significantly lower than intact spines for both stand-alone and 360° constructs. The calculated reduction in motion with respect to intact spines for stand-alone constructs ranged from 43% to 66% for TLIF, 67%-82% for LIF, and 69%-86% for ALIF in flexion, extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. In flexion and extension, the maximum reduction in motion was 70% for ALIF versus 81% in LIF for stand-alone cases. When supplemented with posterior fixation, the corresponding reduction in ROM was 76%-87% for TLIF, 86%-91% for LIF, and 90%-92% for ALIF. The addition of posterior instrumentation resulted in a significant reduction in peak stress at the superior endplate of the inferior segment in all scenarios. Stand-alone ALIF and LIF cages are most effective in providing stability in lateral bending and axial rotation and less so in flexion and extension. Supplemental posterior instrumentation improves stability for all interbody techniques. Comparative clinical data are needed to further define the indications for stand-alone cages in lumbar fusion surgery.

Do Obliquity and Position of the Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cage Influence the Degree of Indirect Decompression of Foraminal Stenosis?

ObjectiveOblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) is a surgical technique that utilizes a large interbody cage to indirectly decompress neural elements. The position of the cage relative to the vertebral body could affect the degree of foraminal decompression. Previous studies determined the position of the cage using plain radiographs, with conflicting results regarding the influence of the position of the cage to the degree of neural foramen decompression. Because of the cage obliquity, computed tomography (CT) has better accuracy than plain radiograph for the measurement of the obliquely inserted cage. The objective of this study is to find the correlation between the position of the OLIF cage with the degree of indirect decompression of foraminal stenosis using CT and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MethodsWe review imaging of 46 patients who underwent OLIF from L2-L5 for 68 levels. Segmental lordosis (SL) was measured in a plain radiograph. The positions of the cage were measured in CT. Spinal canal cross-sectional area (SCSA), and foraminal crosssectional area (FSCA) measurements using MRI were taken into consideration. ResultsPatients’ mean age was 69.7 years. SL increases 3.0±5.1 degrees. Significant increases in SCSA (33.3%), FCSA (43.7% on the left and 45.0% on the right foramen) were found (p<0.001). Multiple linear regression analysis shows putting the cage in the more posterior position correlated with more increase of FSCA and decreases SL correction. The position of the cage does not affect the degree of the central spinal canal decompression. Obliquity of the cage does not result in different degrees of foraminal decompression between right and left side neural foramen. ConclusionCage position near the posterior part of the vertebral body increases the decompression effect of the neural foramen while putting the cage in the more anterior position correlated with increases SL.

Expandable versus Static Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cages: 1-year Radiographic Parameters and Patient-Reported Outcomes

Expandable transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) cages capable of multidirectional in situ expansion have gained popularity as they increase axial surface area for fusion and may enhance lordotic correction through a traditional minimally invasive surgery (MIS) surgical corridor. We evaluated and compared the radiographic and clinical outcomes between a novel expandable versus static minimally invasive surgery TLIF cage for the treatment of degenerative disk disease. A single-center retrospective review of 120 consecutive adult patients undergoing 1- or 2-level MIS TLIF with an expandable (n= 60) or static cage was performed between 2015 and 2019. Preoperative and 1-year postoperative radiographic and clinical outcomes were assessed by upright flexion/extension radiographs and serial confidential surveys. One-hundred twenty patients (mean age 63.5 years, 60.0% female) undergoing 1- and 2-level MIS TLIF met inclusion criteria. A statistically significant reduction of spondylolisthesis, restoration of foraminal height as well as anterior and posterior disk height was achieved in both cohorts, however was greater in the expandable cage cohort (ECC) (all P < 0.05). Comparable rates of fusion, 93% and 91%, were observed in the ECC and static cage cohort. A significant reduction in Numeric Pain Rating Scale back and Oswestry Disability Index scores were observed in both cohorts but were more pronounced in the ECC (5.9 ± 2.4 to 2.2 ± 1.9 and 37.3 ± 16.2 to 17.1 ± 15.2) versus static cage cohort (6.2 ± 2.8 to 3.2 ± 2.5 and 41.8 ± 16.1 to 24.3 ± 17.5) (P < 0.05). One instance of cage migration requiring reoperation occurred in the ECC. Taken together, these radiographic and clinical findings suggest an expandable cage placed through an MIS corridor represents a safe, equitable, and efficacious alternative to a static TLIF in adults with degenerative lumbar pathology.

Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Expandable Cages: Increased Risk of Late Postoperative Subsidence Without a Real Improvement of Perioperative Outcomes: A Clinical Monocentric Study

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is one of several approaches to lumbar interbody fusion that has proven to be a safe and effective treatment for symptomatic lumbar degenerative disease The clinical outcomes of MIS-TLIF are generally favorable, but there is still controversy regarding its ability to restore sagittal alignment. For this reason, expandable transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cages have been developed and designed to improve ability to restore disc height and segmental lordosis. The use of expandable cages in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion has increased drastically; however, it is not clear how effective cage expansion is in regard to disc space lordosis, distraction, and long-term outcome. We reviewed a cohort of patients with symptomatic lumbar degenerative disc pathology who underwent MIS-TLIF at our institution. We compared clinical and radiographic outcomes of expandable versus nonexpandable cage use in MIS-TLIF focusing on mean changes in segmental lordosis, disc height, and postoperative complications. The results were compared with other studies reported in the international literature. Mean change in segmental lordosis was not significantly different between the 2 groups. A significantly higher rate of postoperative subsidence was demonstrated in the expandable cage group. This study established that expandable cage use in single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion did not reduce the rate of postoperative complications, but rather significantly increased a patient's risk of postoperative subsidence. Expandable cages do not presently demonstrate improved clinical outcomes or improved sagittal alignment compared with static cages.

P136. PEEK versus titanium cages in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: A 2-year follow-up study with clinical and radiological outcomes

<h3>BACKGROUND CONTEXT</h3> Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has evolved as a treatment option for addressing various lumbar degenerative disorders and is now an established, widely performed technique owing to high fusion rates. However, successful fusion is limited by the properties inherent to the interbody devices utilized. Despite widespread application, concern over the use of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages have been raised due to their intrinsic hydrophobicity and a lack of osteoconductivity. In contrast, superior rates of fusion and clinical outcomes have been reported in patient cohorts treated with titanium (Ti) cages, considering metal's bioactivity in the role of spinal fusion. Furthermore, it has been hypothesized that the increased stiffness of Ti cages may result in a higher risk of subsidence. Current studies examining the utility of metal versus PEEK cages exist but describe small sample sizes with relatively short follow-up; thus, further investigation is warranted. To justify the utilization of Ti over PEEK cages in TLIF and to confirm prior hypotheses, we must compare the revision rate, graft subsidence rate, prevalence of fusion and functional outcomes of patients treated with both cage types. <h3>PURPOSE</h3> To compare 2-year clinical and radiological outcomes of PEEK versus Ti cages in TLIF. <h3>STUDY DESIGN/SETTING</h3> Retrospective Cohort Study. <h3>PATIENT SAMPLE</h3> A total of 320 consecutive patients from 2013-2018 with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. There were 137 that underwent TLIF with a Ti cage and 183 underwent TLIF with a PEEK cage. <h3>OUTCOME MEASURES</h3> (1) Revision rate and average time to revision. (2) Graft subsidence and fusion rates. (3) Functional outcome scores including Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale for leg (VAS-l) and back (VAS-b) pain. <h3>METHODS</h3> A retrospective review was performed to identify all patients between 2013-2018 who underwent open or minimally invasive (MI) TLIF and received either a Ti or PEEK cage with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Demographic data was recorded and compared between both cohorts. Revision rates, time to revision, graft subsidence and fusion rates in each group were also compared. Graft subsidence was defined as cage migration into one vertebral endplate >3mm on plain radiographic measurement. Bony fusion was defined as the absence of a radiolucent gap between the cages and endplates and the presence of trabeculation and bony bridging between cages and adjacent endplates. Functional outcomes were assessed with ODI, VAS-l and VAS-b measurements at follow-up visits. All intraoperative complications were reviewed. Standard binomial and categorical comparative analyses were performed. <h3>RESULTS</h3> A total of 320 consecutive patients were included, 137 (42 open, 95 MI) in the Ti cohort and 183 (53 open, 130 MI) in the PEEK cohort. Mean follow-up of the PEEK and Ti cohorts were 44.2 and 40.8 months, respectively. Complication rates were 2.7% and 3.7% for the PEEK and Ti cohort, respectively (p= 0.04). The most common complication was durotomy. The overall revision rates were 10.4% for the PEEK cohort and 2.9% for the Ti cohort (p= 0.01). Mean time to revision was 375.4 and 346.6 days for the Ti and PEEK groups, respectively (p=0.48). The graft subsidence rate for the PEEK cohort at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively was 2.7%, 5.5%, 7.7% and 9.8%, respectively. Subsidence in the Ti group was more favorable overall, showing 2.9%, 5.1%, 6.6% and 8.0% subsidence at the same time points. Successful spinal fusion at 24 months was 94.9% and 92.9% in the Ti and PEEK groups, respectively (p=0.5). There were 112 males and 71 females in the PEEK cohort compared to 77 males and 60 females in the Ti cohort (p= 0.4). Both groups experienced significant improvements in their functional outcome scores (ODI, VAS-leg, VAS- back) compared to their preoperative values. There were no statistically significant differences in complication rate, revision rate, graft subsidence, or spinal fusion rates between minimally invasive and open techniques within groups. <h3>CONCLUSIONS</h3> The Ti cohort in this study demonstrated a higher rate of fusion, lower rates of revision and subsidence, and similar improvements in functional outcome scores as the PEEK cohort at the 2-year timepoint. Further studies should consist of randomized controlled trials with blinded assessments to definitively conclude the advantages of Ti cages for TLIF. <h3>FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS</h3> This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.