L5-S1 Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Research Articles

One-Level versus Two-Level Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (ALIF) from L4-S1: Comparison of Complications, Alignment, and Patient Outcomes.

Retrospective cohort study. Compare outcomes in patients undergoing one-level or two-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) at L4-S1. Although ALIF may deliver restoration of lumbar lordosis and improvement in clinical outcomes, it also carries risk of complications including major vascular injury. Whether one-level and two-level ALIF offers similar outcomes is not known. Adults who underwent one-level L4-L5 or L5-S1 ALIF and two-level L4-S1 ALIF at a single academic institution were identified. Patient demographics, procedural characteristics, improvement in spinopelvic alignment, and one-year postoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and complications were compared. Multivariate regression analyses, accounting for age, gender, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), were also performed. In total, 158 ALIF patients (111 one-level and 47 two-level) were included, with mean age of 51.4 years, 57.0% female, mean CCI of 1.2, and mean follow-up of 27.0 months. Surgical time (147.3min vs. 124.6min, P=0.002) and hospital length of stay (3.5d vs. 2.9d, P=0.036) were higher for two-level ALIF. One-year postoperatively, two-level ALIF patients had more caudal apex of lordosis (P=0.016) and 4.1mm (P=0.002) and 2.0mm (P=0.019) higher L4-L5 anterior and posterior disc heights, respectively. PROMs were not statistically different across groups (P>0.05). Finally, two-level ALIF patients were 10.9 times more likely to have in-hospital complications (P=0.040), such as intraoperative vascular injury (11.1% vs. 1.5%, P=0.040) or postoperative ileus (7.4% vs. 0.0%, P=0.027), than one-level ALIF patients. In this investigation with greater than one-year follow-up, two-level ALIF in the L4-S1 spine had higher procedural time, length of stay, and approach-related complications than one-level ALIF. Although there were minor improvements in alignment with two-level ALIF, PROMs were comparable with improvements from baseline to last follow-up. These findings may help surgeons carefully weigh the risks and benefits of one- versus two-level ALIF when determining surgical plans for patients. IV.

Sequential correction of sagittal vertical alignment and lumbar lordosis in adult flatback deformity

BackgroundFlatback deformity, or lumbar hypolordosis, can cause sagittal imbalance, causing back pain, fatigue, and functional limitation. Surgical correction through osteotomies and interbody fusion techniques can restore sagittal balance and relieve pain. This study investigated sagittal vertical alignment (SVA) and lumbar lordosis correction achieved through sequential procedures on human spine specimens. MethodsHuman T10-sacrum specimens were stratified into 2 groups: degenerative flatback specimens had smaller L1-S1 lordosis compared to the iatrogenic group (26.1°±15.0° vs. 47.8°±19.3°, p<.05). Specimens were mounted in the apparatus in simulated standing posture with a nominal sacral slope of 45 degrees and subjected to a 400N compressive follower preload. Sequential correction of degenerative lumbar flatback deformity involved: anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) at L5-S1, ALIF at L4-5, lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) at L2-3 and L3-4, and posterior column osteotomy (PCO) at L2-3 and L3-4. In iatrogenic specimens, flatback deformity was created by performing a posterior in-situ immobilization using pedicle screw instrumentation at L4-L5-S1 followed by distraction across the pedicle screws. We then performed LLIF at L2-3 and L3-4, followed by PCO at L2-3 and L3-4. ResultsStatistically significant incremental corrections were noted in SVAs and lordosis after L5-S1 ALIF, L4-5 ALIF, and PCO in degenerative flatback specimens. For the iatrogenic group, statistically significant worsening was noted in measures of standing alignment after L4-L5-S1 hypolordotic fusion. Subsequent LLIF at L2-3 and L3-4 did not significantly improve sagittal alignment. However, after PCO at L2-3 and L3-4, final alignment parameters were not significantly different than preoperative baseline values prior to hypolordotic fusion. ConclusionsALIF cages in the lower lumbar segments significantly improved sagittal alignment in degenerative flatback specimens. In the upper lumbar segments, LLIF cages alone were ineffective at enhancing lumbar lordosis. LLIF cages in conjunction with PCO improved alignment parameters in degenerative and iatrogenic flatback deformities.

Reciprocal Changes in Sagittal Spinal Alignment After L5-S1 Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine decrease lumbar lordosis (LL). Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) at the L5-S1 disc space improves segmental lordosis, LL, and sagittal balance. This study investigated reciprocal changes in spinopelvic alignment after L5-S1 ALIF. A retrospective chart review identified patients who underwent L5-S1 ALIF with or without posterior fixation at a single institution (November 1, 2016-October 1, 2021). Changes in pelvic tilt, sacral slope, proximal LL (L1-L4), distal LL (L4-S1), total LL (L1-S1), segmental lordosis, pelvic incidence-LL mismatch, thoracic kyphosis, cervical lordosis, and sagittal vertical axis were measured on preoperative and postoperative radiographs. Forty-eight patients were identified. Immediate postoperative radiographs were obtained at a mean (SD) of 17 (20) days after surgery; delayed radiographs were obtained 184 (82) days after surgery. After surgery, patients had significantly decreased pelvic tilt (15.71° [7.25°] vs 17.52° [7.67°], p=0.003) and proximal LL (11.86° [10.67°] vs 16.03° [10.45°], p<0.001) and increased sacral slope (39.49° [9.27°] vs 36.31° [10.39°], p<0.001), LL (55.35° [13.15°] vs 51.63° [13.38°], p=0.001), and distal LL (43.17° [9.33°] vs 35.80° [8.02°], p<0.001). Segmental lordosis increased significantly at L5-S1 and decreased significantly at L2-3, L3-4, and L4-5. Lordosis distribution index increased from 72.55 (19.53) to 81.38 (22.83) (p<0.001). L5-S1 ALIF was associated with increased L5-S1 segmental lordosis accompanied by pelvic anteversion and a reciprocal decrease in proximal lumbar lordosis. These changes may represent a reversal of compensatory mechanisms, suggesting an overall relaxation of spinopelvic alignment after L5-S1 ALIF.

The Impact of Posterior Intervertebral Osteophytes on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After L5-S1 Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Retrospective cohort study. (1) To develop a reliable grading system to assess the severity of posterior intervertebral osteophytes and (2) to investigate the impact of posterior intervertebral osteophytes on clinical outcomes after L5-S1 decompression and fusion through anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and minimally-invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). There is limited evidence regarding the clinical implications of posterior lumbar vertebral body osteophytes for ALIF and MIS-TLIF surgeries and there are no established grading systems that define the severity of these posterior lumbar intervertebral osteophytes. A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing L5-S1 ALIF or MIS-TLIF was performed. Preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcome measures of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and leg Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at 2-week, 6-week, 12-week, and 6-month follow-up time points were assessed. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for ODI of 14.9 and VAS leg of 2.8 were utilized. Osteophyte grade was based on the ratio of osteophyte length to foraminal width. "High-grade" osteophytes were defined as a maximal osteophyte length >50% of the total foraminal width. A total of 70 consecutive patients (32 ALIF and 38 MIS-TLIF) were included in the study. There were no significant differences between the two cohorts in patient-reported outcome measures or achievement of MCID for Leg VAS or ODI preoperatively or at any follow-ups. On multivariate analysis, neither the surgical approach nor the presence of high-grade foraminal osteophytes was associated with leg VAS or ODI scores at any follow-up time point. In addition, neither the surgical approach nor the presence of high-grade foraminal osteophytes was associated with the achievement of MCID for leg VAS or ODI at 6 months. ALIF and MIS-TLIF are both valid options for treating degenerative spine conditions and lumbar radiculopathy, even in the presence of high-grade osteophytes that significantly occupy the intervertebral foramen. 3.

Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes After Stand-Alone Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Symptomatic L5-S1 Retrolisthesis.

Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis is associated with significant pain and disability. The literature on the treatment options and clinical outcomes for lumbar anterolisthesis is robust, but very few reports specifically evaluate lumbar retrolisthesis. This study investigated surgical outcomes for symptomatic L5-S1 retrolisthesis treated with stand-alone L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). All patients with symptomatic L5-S1 retrolisthesis treated with stand-alone L5-S1 ALIF at a single institution over a 7-year period were identified. Exhaustive nonoperative management had failed for all patients. Patients with previous lumbar fusion were excluded. Preoperative and postoperative radiographic images and patient-reported outcome measures for 20 patients (14 males and 6 females; mean [SD] age, 50.3 [13.7] years) were analyzed. The mean (SD) follow-up was 43.0 (23.7) months (range, 12.1-102.5 months). Patients experienced postoperative improvements in L5-S1 retrolisthesis (P = .048), L5-S1 disk height and angle (P < .001), L5 foraminal height (P < .001), L5-S1 lordosis (P < .001), and lumbar lordosis (P = .01). There were no significant changes in spinopelvic parameters. At the most recent follow-up, minimal clinically important differences in Oswestry Disability Index score, 36-Item Short-Form Survey (SF-36), and numerical rating scale score for leg pain were achieved in 11 of 20 (55%), 7 of 14 (50%), and 7 of 13 (54%) patients, respectively. All patients demonstrated fusion with no graft subsidence at up to 32 months. No patient experienced intraoperative complications, was readmitted, or required a subsequent posterior decompression or fusion because of refractory symptoms. In our cohort, stand-alone L5-S1 ALIF was associated with radiographic and clinical improvement in patients with symptomatic L5-S1 retrolisthesis.

The Effect of Changes in Segmental Lordosis on Global Lumbar and Adjacent Segment Lordosis After L5-S1 Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Retrospective Cohort Study. Restoration of lordosis in lumbar fusion reduces low back pain, decreases adjacent segment degeneration, and improves postoperative outcomes. However, the potential effects of changes in segmental lordosis on adjacent-level and global lordosis remain less understood. This study aims to examine the relationships between segmental (SL), adjacent-level, and global lumbar lordosis following L5-S1 Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (ALIF). 80 consecutive patients who underwent single-level L5-S1 ALIF were divided into 3 groups based on the degree of change (∆) in index-level segmental lordosis: <5° (n = 23), 5°-10° (n = 29), >10° (n = 28). Radiographic parameters measured included global lumbar, segmental, and adjacent level lordosis, sacral slope, pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, and PI-LL mismatch. Patients with ∆SL 5°-10° or ∆SL >10° both showed significant increases in global lumbar lordosis from preoperative to final follow-up. However, patients with ∆SL >10° showed statistically significant losses in adjacent level lordosis at both immediate postoperative and final follow-up compared to preoperative. When comparing patients with ∆SL >10° to those with ∆SL 5-10°, there were no significant differences in global lumbar lordosis at final follow-up, due to significantly greater losses of adjacent level lordosis in these patients. The degree of compensatory loss of lordosis at the adjacent level L4-L5 correlated with the extent of segmental lordosis creation at the index L5-S1 level. This may suggest that the L4 to S1 segment acts as a "harmonious unit," able to accommodate only a certain amount of lordosis and further increases in segmental lordosis may be mitigated by loss of adjacent-level lordosis.

Selective thoracolumbar fusion in adult spinal deformity double curves with circumferential minimally invasive surgery: 2-year minimum follow-up.

Selection of the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) level for adult spinal deformity (ASD) remains controversial. Although selective fusion attempts have been described for fractional curves or adolescent curves, no authors have described selective thoracolumbar fusion performance for ASD with double curves. This study evaluated the clinical impact of selective fusion constructs within the lower thoracic and/or lumbar spine on ASD with double curves. A retrospective review was performed on an ASD (Cobb angle > 20°, sagittal vertical axis [SVA] > 50 mm, and pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis mismatch [PI-LL] > 10°) database consisting of 438 patients who underwent correction with circumferential minimally invasive surgery (CMIS) between 2007 and 2020. The inclusion criteria were ASD double curves (lumbar Cobb angle > 35° and thoracic Cobb angle > 30°), 4 or more levels fused, and minimum 2-year follow-up. Analyses were performed on spinopelvic data and clinical outcome scores. Complications were recorded, specifically the need for revision surgery and hardware-related complications. Twenty-one ASD double curve patients underwent selective correction with a mean ± SD (range) follow-up of 91 ± 43 (24-174) months. A total of 141 levels were fused with a mean of 6.7 ± 1.3 (4-8) levels. T10 was the most proximal and most common UIV (10/21 [48%]). Pelvic fixation was performed in 12 patients (57%). Significant improvements in lumbar Cobb angle, thoracic Cobb angle, coronal balance, lumbar lordosis, thoracic kyphosis, SVA, and PI-LL were achieved. The uninstrumented thoracic spine demonstrated 14.5° of mean coronal correction and a mean increase of 9.4° in kyphosis. Significant improvements in visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were observed. Four patients required revision for the following reasons: 1) superficial wound infection requiring irrigation and debridement; 2) bilateral L5 pars fractures requiring L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion and pelvic fixation; 3) adjacent-segment degeneration at L5-S1 requiring anterior lumbar interbody fusion and pelvic fixation; and 4) proximal junctional kyphosis requiring revision fusion to include the entire thoracic curve. There were no instances of hardware failure such as rod breakage or screw loosening. Selective thoracolumbar fusion with CMIS for ASD double curves can provide significant clinical improvements. Despite limiting fusion constructs to within the lower thoracic and/or lumbar spine, significant correction can be observed in the uninstrumented thoracic curve. The rate of mechanical complications was low, and the 2-year follow-up results suggested that limited fusion constructs are viable options for ASD double curve patients.

Postoperative Radiculitis After L5-S1 Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Retrospective chart review. This study aimed to examine postoperative radiculitis after isolated L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), determine which factors contribute to its development, and investigate the comparative outcomes of patients with versus without postoperative radiculitis. Both standalone and traditionalALIF are common and safe lumbar spine fusion techniques. Although optimal safety and effectiveness are achieved through appropriate patient selection, postoperative radiculitis after L5-S1 ALIF is a potential complication that seems to be the least predictable in the absence of iatrogenic injury. All adult patients (18-80 yr) with preoperative radiculopathies who underwent L5-S1 ALIF by 9 board-certified spine surgeons at a single academic institution from January 2016 to December 2021 with a minimum of 3 months follow-up were included. Patient records were assessed for data on clinical characteristics and patient-reported outcome scores (patient-reported outcome measures). All patient records were evaluated to determine whether postoperative radiculitis developed. Radiographic measurements using x-rays were completed using all available pre and postoperative imaging. Multivariable logistic regressions were performed utilizing radiculitis as the dependent variable and various independent predictor variables. One hundred forty patients were included, 48 (34%) patients developed postoperative radiculitis, with symptom onset and resolution occurring at 14.5 and 83 days, respectively. The two groups had no differences in preoperative or postoperative radiographic parameters. Multivariable regression showed 3 independent predictors of postoperative radiculitis: methylprednisolone use [OR: 6.032; (95% CI: 1.670-25.568)], increased implant height [OR: 1.509; (95% CI: 1.189-1.960)], and no posterior fixation [OR: 2.973; (95% CI: 1.353-0.806)]. Of the 34% of patients who developed postoperative radiculitis after L5-S1 ALIF, it resolved on average within 3 months of surgery. These findings may help reduce the risk of undue short-term morbidity after isolated L5-S1 ALIF by informing preoperative counseling and intraoperative decision-making.

Case Report-Traumatic L5-S1 Instability: Are Upright Radiographs Potentially Dangerous?

Traumatic lumbosacral instability is a rare but potentially devastating injury. These injuries are frequently associated with neurologic injury and often result in long-term disability. Despite their severity, radiographic findings can be subtle, and multiple reports exist in which these injuries were not recognized on initial imaging. Transverse process fractures, high-energy mechanisms, and other injury features have been suggested as indications for advanced imaging, which has a high degree of sensitivity in detecting unstable injuries. A 21-year-old man presented to our level I trauma center after being ejected in a rollover motor vehicle collision. He sustained multiple injuries, including multiple lumbar transverse process fractures and a unilateral superior articular facet fracture of S1. Initial supine computed tomography (CT) images showed no displacement of the fracture and no listhesis or instability. Subsequent upright imaging in a brace, however, demonstrated significant displacement of the fracture with dislocation of the contralateral L5-S1 facet joint and significant anterolisthesis. The patient underwent open posterior reduction and stabilization of L4-S1 followed by L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion. The patient demonstrated excellent alignment on postoperative imaging. At 3 months postoperatively, he had returned to work, was ambulating without assistance, and reported minimal back discomfort and no lower extremity pain, numbness, or weakness. This case serves as a warning that supine CT imaging alone may not be sufficient to rule out unstable lumbar spine injuries, such as traumatic L5-S1 instability, and that upright radiographs in these potentially unstable injuries may represent a hazard to patients. Fractures involving the pedicle, pars, or facet joints as well as multiple transverse process fractures and/or a high-energy mechanism of injury should all raise suspicion of instability and warrant additional imaging. This article provides guidance on approaching treatment for patients with potential traumatic lumbosacral instability.

High-Frequency Cervical and High Thoracic Spinal Cord Stimulation to Treat Refractory Failed Back Surgery Syndrome in a Patient with Chronic Neck and Low Back Pain: Case Report

BACKGROUND: Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) is defined as lumbar spinal pain of unknown origin that persists following surgical intervention or newly presents after spine surgery (1). This pain may originate from surgery, or the surgery may worsen or insufficiently reduce prior pain (1). From 2004 to 2015, the volume of lumbar fusion surgery increased by 62.3% (2). With the frequency of lumbar fusion surgery comes an increased propensity to develop FBSS. The risk of developing FBSS in patients who have undergone lumbar spine surgery is as high as 50% (3). Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a well-established, safe, and effective treatment modality for refractory neuropathic pain conditions such as FBSS (4). CASE REPORT: A 47-year-old patient presented to the clinic with a history of cervical radiculopathy status post C4-C7 posterior spinal fusion, lumbar radiculopathy, lumbar spinal stenosis, congenital spondylolisthesis status post L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion complicated by a malpositioned screw at the L4-L5 level, L4-L5 retrolisthesis, L5-S1 pseudoarthrosis with subsequent T10 to pelvis fusion, which was later extended to T8 after a fall. The patient developed FBSS resulting in debilitating neck and low back pain. Permanent SCS with leads at C7-T3 were placed without complication. The SCS implant resulted in successful treatment of FBSS with an 80% reduction in pain scores, 86% reduction in MME consumption, and an improvement in performance of activities of daily living. CONCLUSION: This case highlights the use of SCS leads placed over the low cervical and high thoracic levels for the treatment of cervical and lumbar back pain. Due to the complex surgical history of the patient, a unique lead implantation location spanning C7-T3 was required. This lead location is significantly cephalad to the typical lead implantation location of T8-L1 for the treatment of chronic lumbar back pain, as the T8-L1 levels are where neurons responsible for back pain are most heavily concentrated (5). This case highlights the effectiveness of SCS therapy implanted at an atypical location for the treatment of FBSS. KEY WORDS: Atypical cervical and thoracic spinal cord stimulation, case report, chronic refractory neck and low back pain, failed back surgery syndrome, neuromodulation

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.

Single-Position Anterior and Lateral Lumbar Fusion in the Supine Position: A Novel Technique for Multilevel Arthrodesis

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion are common techniques that typically require staged procedures when performed in combination. Interest is emerging in single-position surgery to increase operative efficiency. We report a novel surgical technique, supine extended reach lateral fusion, to perform ALIF and lateral lumbar interbody fusion with the patient in a single supine position. A man in his fifties presented with degenerative levoscoliosis, spondylolisthesis, sagittal plane deformity, and progressive low back pain. He was offered L3-S1 anterolateral fusion. With the patient supine, a left abdominal paramedian incision was performed to gain anterior retroperitoneal access, and standard L5-S1 and L4-5 ALIFs were performed. The anterior incision was used for direct visualization, retraction, and bimanual dissection. A left lateral incision was then made to perform an L3-4 lateral lumbar interbody fusion. He subsequently underwent a second-stage L3-S1 posterior percutaneous fixation. The patient tolerated the procedures well, without complications. His postoperative radiograph findings confirmed acceptable implant positioning. He was discharged home in stable condition and was doing well at follow-up. This case description is the first report of the supine extended reach technique, which allows incorporation of anterior and lateral fusion constructs at adjacent levels without changing patient positioning. Many surgeons believe the ALIF to be the most powerful technique for achieving lordosis, and this technique enables concomitant lateral access in a supine position. It can also be used as an alternative strategy when anterior access to the disc space is unobtainable. Further clinical investigation of this technique is warranted.

Assessment of L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion stability in the setting of lengthening posterior instrumentation constructs: a cadaveric biomechanical study.

Excessive stress and motion at the L5-S1 level can lead to degenerative changes, especially in patients with posterior instrumentation suprajacent to L5. Attention has turned to utilization of L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) to stabilize the lumbosacral junction. However, questions remain regarding the effectiveness of stand-alone ALIF in the setting of prior posterior instrumented fusions terminating at L5. The purpose of this study was to assess the biomechanical stability of an L5-S1 ALIF with increasing lengths of posterior thoracolumbar constructs. Seven human cadaveric spines (T9-sacrum) were instrumented with pedicle screws from T10 to L5 and mounted to a 6 degrees-of-freedom robot. Posterior fusion construct lengths (T10-L5, T12-L5, L2-5, and L4-5) were instrumented to each specimen, and torque-fusion level relationships were determined for each construct in flexion-extension, axial rotation, and lateral bending. A stand-alone L5-S1 ALIF was then instrumented, and L5-S1 motion was measured as increasing pure moments (2 to 12 Nm) were applied. Motion reduction was calculated by comparing L5-S1 motion across the ALIF and non-ALIF states. The average motion at L5-S1 in axial rotation, flexion-extension, and lateral bending was assessed for each fusion construct with and without ALIF. After adding ALIF to a posterior fusion, L5-S1 motion was significantly reduced relative to the non-ALIF state in all but one fused surgical condition (p < 0.05). Longer fusions with ALIF produced larger L5-S1 motions, and in some cases resulted in motions higher than native state motion. Posterior fusion constructs up to L4-5 could be appropriately stabilized by a stand-alone L5-S1 ALIF when using a nominal threshold of 80% reduction in native motion as a potential positive indicator of fusion. The results of this study allow conclusions to be drawn from a biomechanical standpoint; however, the clinical implications of these data are not well defined. These findings, when taken in appropriate clinical context, can be used to better guide clinicians seeking to treat L5-S1 pathology in patients with prior posterior thoracolumbar constructs.

Postoperative spinal alignment comparison of lateral versus supine patient position L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Over the past decade, alternative patient positions for the treatment of the anterior lumbar spine have been explored in an effort to maximize the benefits of direct anterior column access while minimizing the inefficiencies of single or multiple intraoperative patient repositionings. The lateral technique allows for access from L1 to L5 through a retroperitoneal, muscle-splitting, transpsoas approach with placement of a large intervertebral spacer than can reliably improve segmental lordosis, though its inability to be used at L5-S1 limits its overall adoption, as L5-S1 is one of the most common levels treated and where high levels of lordosis are optimal. Recent developments in instrumentation and techniques for lateral-position treatment of the L5-S1 level with a modified anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) approach have expanded the lateral position to L5-S1, though the positional effect on L5-S1 lordosis is heretofore unreported. The purpose of this study was to compare local and regional alignment differences between ALIFs performed with the patient in the lateral (L-ALIF) versus supine position (S-ALIF). Retrospective, multi-center data and radiographs were collected from 476 consecutive patients who underwent L5-S1 L-ALIF (n = 316) or S-ALIF (n = 160) for degenerative lumbar conditions. Patients treated at L4-5 and above with other single-position interbody fusion and posterior fixation techniques were included in the analysis. Baseline patient characteristics were similar between the groups, though L-ALIF patients were slightly older (58 vs. 54years), with a greater preoperative mean L5-S1 disk height (7.8 vs. 5.8mm), and with less preoperative slip (6.6 vs. 8.5mm), respectively. 262 patients were treated with only L-ALIF or S-ALIF at L5-S1 while the remaining 214 patients were treated with either L-ALIF or S-ALIF at L5-S1 along with fusions at other thoracolumbar levels. Lumbar lordosis (LL), L5-S1 segmental lordosis, L5-S1 disk space height, and slip reduction in L5-S1 spondylolisthesis were measured on preoperative and postoperative lateral X-ray images. LL was only compared between single-level ALIFs, given the variability of other procedures performed at the levels above L5-S1. Mean pre- to postoperative L5-S1 segmental lordosis improved 39% (6.6°) and 31% (4.9°) in the L-ALIF and S-ALIF groups, respectively (p = 0.063). Mean L5-S1 disk height increased by 6.5mm (89%) in the L-ALIF and 6.4mm (110%) in the S-ALIF cohorts, (p = 0.650). Spondylolisthesis, in those patients with a preoperative slip, average reduction in the L-ALIF group was 1.5mm and 2.2mm in the S-ALIF group (p = 0.175). In patients treated only at L5-S1 with ALIF, mean segmental alignment improved significantly more in the L-ALIF compared to the S-ALIF cohort (7.8 vs. 5.4°, p = 0.035), while lumbar lordosis increased 4.1° and 3.6° in the respective groups (p = 0.648). Use of the lateral patient position for L5-S1 ALIF, compared to traditional supine L5-S1 ALIF, resulted in at least equivalent alignment and radiographic outcomes, with significantly greater improvement in segmental lordosis in patients treated only at L5-S1. These data, from the largest lateral ALIF dataset reported to date, suggest that-radiographically-the lateral patient position can be considered as an alternative to traditional ALIF positional techniques.

Two- and three-year outcomes of minimally invasive and hybrid correction of adult spinal deformity.

Previous studies have demonstrated the short-term radiographic and clinical benefits of circumferential minimally invasive surgery (cMIS) and hybrid (i.e., minimally invasive anterior or lateral interbody fusion with an open posterior approach) techniques to correct adult spinal deformity (ASD). However, it is not known if these benefits are maintained over longer periods of time. This study evaluated the 2- and 3-year outcomes of cMIS and hybrid correction of ASD. A multicenter database was retrospectively reviewed for patients undergoing cMIS or hybrid surgery for ASD. Patients were ≥ 18 years of age and had one of the following: maximum coronal Cobb angle (CC) ≥ 20°, sagittal vertical axis (SVA) > 5 cm, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI-LL) ≥ 10°, or pelvic tilt (PT) > 20°. Radiographic parameters were evaluated at the latest follow-up. Clinical outcomes were compared at 2- and 3-year time points and adjusted for age, preoperative CC, levels operated, levels with interbody fusion, presence of L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion, and upper and lower instrumented vertebral level. Overall, 197 (108 cMIS, 89 hybrid) patients were included with 187 (99 cMIS, 88 hybrid) and 111 (60 cMIS, 51 hybrid) patients evaluated at 2 and 3 years, respectively. The mean (± SD) follow-up duration for cMIS (39.0 ± 13.3 months, range 22-74 months) and hybrid correction (39.9 ± 16.8 months, range 22-94 months) were similar for both cohorts. Hybrid procedures corrected the CC greater than the cMIS technique (adjusted p = 0.022). There were no significant differences in postoperative SVA, PI-LL, PT, and sacral slope (SS). At 2 years, cMIS had lower Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores (adjusted p < 0.001), greater ODI change as a percentage of baseline (adjusted p = 0.006), less visual analog scale (VAS) back pain (adjusted p = 0.006), and greater VAS back pain change as a percentage of baseline (adjusted p = 0.001) compared to hybrid techniques. These differences were no longer significant at 3 years. At 3 years, but not 2 years, VAS leg pain was lower for cMIS compared to hybrid techniques (adjusted p = 0.032). Those undergoing cMIS had fewer overall complications compared to hybrid techniques (adjusted p = 0.006), but a higher odds of pseudarthrosis (adjusted p = 0.039). In this review of a multicenter database for patients undergoing cMIS and hybrid surgery for ASD, hybrid procedures were associated with a greater CC improvement compared to cMIS techniques. cMIS was associated with superior ODI and back pain at 2 years, but this difference was no longer evident at 3 years. However, cMIS was associated with superior leg pain at 3 years. There were fewer complications following cMIS, with the exception of pseudarthrosis.

Minimally Invasive Deformity Correction Technique: Initial Case Series of Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion at L5–S1 for Multilevel Lumbar Interbody Fusion in a Lateral Decubitus Position

Many surgical options exist for multilevel lumbar interbody fusion, including anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). While current technique of repositioning patients between supine ALIF and lateral decubitus LLIF offers many benefits, intraoperative repositioning can be cumbersome. We present a novel approach that accomplishes both multilevel LLIF and L5-S1 ALIF in a lateral decubitus position. This case series retrospectively enrolled 12 consecutive patients who underwent L5-S1 ALIF in the lateral decubitus position and anterior-to-psoas LLIF at more cranial levels as part of a multilevel lumbar interbody fusion surgery between September 2020 and December 2021. All surgeries were performed by a single spine-focused neurosurgeon at an urban academic hospital. Radiographic imaging analysis demonstrated significant changes in coronal Cobb angle (-5.43°±3.81°; P=0.0029), global lumbar lordosis (6.77°±12.04°; P=0.0049), segmental lumbar lordosis (8.91°±10.21°; P=0.0005), spinopelvic mismatch (-7.93°±7.91°; P=0.0010), average disc height (5.30±1.64mm; P=0.0005), and L5-S1 disc height (6.68±2.10mm; P=0.0005). Two patients developed postoperative complications including wound dehiscence and grade I graft subsidence at L4-L5. This case series demonstrated that a combined lateral decubitus L5-S1 ALIF and LLIF at more cranial levels is a safe, efficient approach to multilevel lumbar interbody fusions. This technique significantly restored spinopelvic alignments with a low complication rate and no patient repositioning. Efficacy of this minimally invasive deformity correction technique should be further investigated through a multicenter trial.

Preliminary experience using S1-alar iliac fixation with navigation: technical note.

Traditional iliac screws and S2-alar iliac (S2-AI) screws are common methods used for pelvic fixation, and many surgeons advocate pelvic fixation for long-segment fixation to the sacrum. However, in patients without severe deformities and only degenerative conditions, many surgeons may choose S1 screws only. Moreover, even with S2-AI screws, there is more muscular dissection than with using S1 screws, and the rod connection can be cumbersome in both S2-AI fixation and placing iliac screws. Using a surgical video, artist's illustration, and intraoperative photographs, the authors describe the S1-AI screw fixation technique that allows for single-screw sacral and iliac fixation, requires less distal dissection of the sacrum, allows for easier rod connection, and may be an option in degenerative conditions needing pelvic fixation. However, this is a preliminary feasibility study, and in long fusion constructs, this type of fixation has only been used in conjunction with L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), and there are no long-term data on the use of this screw fixation technique without ALIF. In short-segment revision fusions, this technique may be considered for salvage in cases of large halos in the sacrum from loosened S1 screw fixation.

Multicenter assessment of outcomes and complications associated with transforaminal versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion for fractional curve correction.

Few studies have compared fractional curve correction after long fusion between transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) for adult symptomatic thoracolumbar/lumbar scoliosis (ASLS). The objective of this study was to compare fractional correction, health-related quality of life (HRQL), and complications associated with L4-S1 TLIF versus those of ALIF as an operative treatment of ASLS. The authors retrospectively analyzed a prospective multicenter adult spinal deformity database. Inclusion required a fractional curve ≥ 10°, a thoracolumbar/lumbar curve ≥ 30°, index TLIF or ALIF performed at L4-5 and/or L5-S1, and a minimum 2-year follow-up. TLIF and ALIF patients were propensity matched according to the number and type of interbody fusion at L4-S1. Of 135 potentially eligible consecutive patients, 106 (78.5%) achieved the minimum 2-year follow-up (mean ± SD age 60.6 ± 9.3 years, 85% women, 44.3% underwent TLIF, and 55.7% underwent ALIF). Index operations had mean ± SD 12.2 ± 3.6 posterior levels, 86.6% of patients underwent iliac fixation, 67.0% underwent TLIF/ALIF at L4-5, and 84.0% underwent TLIF/ALIF at L5-S1. Compared with TLIF patients, ALIF patients had greater cage height (10.9 ± 2.1 mm for TLIF patients vs 14.5 ± 3.0 mm for ALIF patients, p = 0.001) and lordosis (6.3° ± 1.6° for TLIF patients vs 17.0° ± 9.9° for ALIF patients, p = 0.001) and longer operative duration (6.7 ± 1.5 hours for TLIF patients vs 8.9 ± 2.5 hours for ALIF patients, p < 0.001). In all patients, final alignment improved significantly in terms of the fractional curve (20.2° ± 7.0° to 6.9° ± 5.2°), maximum coronal Cobb angle (55.0° ± 14.8° to 23.9° ± 14.3°), C7 sagittal vertical axis (5.1 ± 6.2 cm to 2.3 ± 5.4 cm), pelvic tilt (24.6° ± 8.1° to 22.7° ± 9.5°), and lumbar lordosis (32.3° ± 18.8° to 51.4° ± 14.1°) (all p < 0.05). Matched analysis demonstrated comparable fractional correction (-13.6° ± 6.7° for TLIF patients vs -13.6° ± 8.1° for ALIF patients, p = 0.982). In all patients, final HRQL improved significantly in terms of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score (42.4 ± 16.3 to 24.2 ± 19.9), physical component summary (PCS) score of the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (32.6 ± 9.3 to 41.3 ± 11.7), and Scoliosis Research Society-22r score (2.9 ± 0.6 to 3.7 ± 0.7) (all p < 0.05). Matched analysis demonstrated worse ODI (30.9 ± 21.1 for TLIF patients vs 17.9 ± 17.1 for ALIF patients, p = 0.017) and PCS (38.3 ± 12.0 for TLIF patients vs 45.3 ± 10.1 for ALIF patients, p = 0.020) scores for TLIF patients at the last follow-up (despite no differences in these parameters at baseline). The rates of total complications were similar (76.6% for TLIF patients vs 71.2% for ALIF patients, p = 0.530), but significantly more TLIF patients had rod fracture (28.6% of TLIF patients vs 7.1% of ALIF patients, p = 0.036). Multiple regression analysis demonstrated that a 1-mm increase in L4-5 TLIF cage height led to a 2.2° reduction in L4 coronal tilt (p = 0.011), and a 1° increase in L5-S1 ALIF cage lordosis led to a 0.4° increase in L5-S1 segmental lordosis (p = 0.045). Operative treatment of ASLS with L4-S1 TLIF versus ALIF demonstrated comparable mean fractional curve correction (66.7% vs 64.8%), despite use of significantly larger, more lordotic ALIF cages. TLIF cage height had a significant impact on leveling L4 coronal tilt, whereas ALIF cage lordosis had a significant impact on restoration of lumbosacral lordosis. The advantages of TLIF may include reduced operative duration and hospitalization; however, associated HRQL was inferior and more rod fractures were detected in the TLIF patients included in this study.

Single and Multilevel Lumbar Total Disc Replacement Adjacent to L5-S1 ALIF (Lumbar Hybrid): 6 Years of Follow-up

Single and multilevel lumbar arthroplasty has had excellent results, but the L5-S1 level frequently has pathology that precludes arthroplasty. This study evaluated clinical outcomes and sagittal range of motion (ROM) of operated levels and adjacent motion segments in single- and multiple-level ProDisc-L above a simultaneous L5-S1 fusion (hybrid) after a 2- to 6-year follow-up. In this prospective cohort study, 46 patients underwent simultaneous lumbar total disc replacement (TDR) at one to three levels and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) at L5-S1. Twenty-three patients had L5-S1 ALIF + L4-5 TDR, 19 patients had L5-S1 ALIF + two-level TDR, and 4 patients had L5-S1 ALIF + three-level TDR. Oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual analog scores (VAS) of patient satisfaction (VAS-S) and pain (VAS-P) were recorded. Sagittal motion on pre- and postoperative lumbar radiographs at each operative segment and adjacent segment was acquired. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and annually for 24 to 72 months postoperatively. For clinical results, there were no differences among the groups for age, gender, body mass index, tobacco use, or worker's compensation status. At 2-6 years postoperation, all patients had significant reductions in ODI and VAS scores. For radiographic results, at the nonsurgical level adjacent to the TDR + ALIF constructs, the mean preoperative ROM was 9.40 ± 1.80° compared with 10.50 ± 2.25° postoperatively. The mean preoperative ROM at levels undergoing TDR was 10.4 ± 2.71° versus 12.6 ± 2.25° postoperatively. There was no statistically significant difference in ROM at each prosthetic motion segment between patients receiving one-, two-, or three-level TDR. The mean preoperative ROM at the L5-S1 segment to undergo fusion was 2.4 ± 2.44°, with all patients having a postoperative ROM of 0.00°. Multilevel TDR above an L5-S1 ALIF (hybrid procedure) preserves ROM at the individual TDR levels and does not reduce the fusion rate of the L5-S1 fused level. Most significantly, the nonoperative adjacent level maintains its preoperative ROM at 2-6 years postoperatively.

P83. Fractional curve correction using TLIF vs ALIF in adult scoliosis

<h3>BACKGROUND CONTEXT</h3> Few studies investigate fractional curve correction after long fusion with transforaminal (TLIF) vs anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) for adult symptomatic thoracolumbar/lumbar scoliosis (ASLS). <h3>PURPOSE</h3> Our objective was to compare fractional correction, health-related quality-of-life (HRQL), and complications associated with L4-S1 TLIF vs ALIF in ASLS operative treatment. <h3>STUDY DESIGN/SETTING</h3> Retrospective review of a prospectively collected multicenter consecutive case registry. <h3>PATIENT SAMPLE</h3> Database enrollment required age ≥18 years, scoliosis ≥20º, sagittal vertical axis (SVA) ≥5cm, pelvic tilt ≥25º, or thoracic kyphosis ≥60º. <h3>OUTCOME MEASURES</h3> Radiographic correction (including L4-S1 fractional curve), HRQL (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], Short Form-36 [SF-36] scores, Scoliosis Research Society-22 [SRS-22r] scores), and complications. <h3>METHODS</h3> Prospective multicenter data was reviewed. Study inclusion required fractional curve ≥10°, thoracolumbar/lumbar curve ≥30°, index TLIF vs ALIF at L4-L5 and/or L5-S1, and minimum 2-year follow-up. TLIF and ALIF patients were propensity-matched using number and type of interbody fusion at L4-S1. <h3>RESULTS</h3> Of 135 potentially eligible consecutive patients, 106 (78.5%) achieved minimum 2-year follow-up (age=60.6±9.3years, women=85.8%, TLIF=44.3%, ALIF=55.7%). Index operations had 12.2±3.6 posterior levels, iliac fixation=86.8%, and TLIF/ALIF at L4-L5 (67.0%) and L5-S1 (84.0%). ALIF had greater cage height (10.9±2.1 vs 14.5±3.0mm, p=0.001) and lordosis (6.3°±1.6° vs 17.0°±9.9°, p=0.001) and longer operative duration (6.7±1.5 vs 8.9±2.5hrs, p<0.001). Final alignment improved significantly (p<0.05): fractional curve (20.2°±7.0° to 6.9°±5.2°), maximum coronal Cobb (55.0°±14.8° to 23.9°±14.3°), C7-sagittal vertical axis (5.1±6.2 to 2.3±5.4cm), pelvic tilt (24.6°±8.1° to 22.7°±9.5°), and lumbar lordosis (32.3°±18.8° to 51.4°±14.1°). Matched analysis demonstrated comparable fractional correction (TLIF=–13.6°±6.7° vs ALIF=–13.6°±8.1°, p=0.982). Final HRQL improved significantly (p<0.05): ODI (42.4±16.3 to 24.2±19.9), SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS, 32.6±9.3 to 41.3±11.7), SRS-22r (2.9±0.6 to 3.7±0.7). Matched analysis demonstrated worse ODI (30.9±21.1 vs 17.9±17.1, p=0.017) and PCS (38.3±12.0 vs 45.3±10.1, p=0.020) for TLIF at last follow-up (despite no difference in these parameters at baseline). Total complication rate per patient was not different (TLIF=76.6% vs ALIF=71.2%, p=0.530), but significantly more TLIF patients had rod fractures (RF) (TLIF=28.6% vs ALIF=7.1%, p=0.036). Multiple regression demonstrated 1-mm increase in L4-L5 TLIF cage height lead to 2.2° reduction in L4 coronal tilt (p=0.011), and 1° increase in L5-S1 ALIF cage lordosis lead to 0.4° increase in L5-S1 segmental lordosis (p=0.045). <h3>CONCLUSIONS</h3> Operative ASLS treatment with L4-S1 TLIF vs ALIF demonstrated comparable fractional curve correction (66.7% vs 64.8%) despite significantly larger, more lordotic ALIF cages. TLIF cage height had significant impact on leveling L4 coronal tilt, whereas ALIF cage lordosis had significant impact on lumbosacral lordosis restoration. Advantages of TLIF may include reduced operative duration; however, associated HRQL was inferior and more RFs were detected in this study. <h3>FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS</h3> This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.