Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Research Articles

Surgical Management of Thoracolumbar Adjacent Segment Disease: Techniques and Outcomes in 107 Patients Undergoing Surgical Intervention.

Adjacent segment disease (ASD) is a known sequela of thoracolumbar instrumented fusions. Various surgical options are available to address ASD in patients with intractable symptoms who have failed conservative measures. However, the optimal treatment strategy for symptomatic ASD has not been established. We examined several clinical outcomes utilizing different surgical interventions for symptomatic ASD. A retrospective review was performed for a consecutive series of patients undergoing revision surgery for thoracolumbar ASD between October 2011 and February 2022. Patients were treated with endoscopic decompression (N = 17), microdiscectomy (N = 9), lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF; N = 26), or open laminectomy and fusion (LF; N = 55). The primary outcomes compared between groups were re-operation rates and numeric pain scores for leg and back at 2 weeks, 10 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months postoperation. Secondary outcomes included time to re-operation, estimated blood loss, and length of stay. Of the 257 patients who underwent revision surgery for symptomatic ASD, 107 patients met inclusion criteria with a minimum of 1-year follow-up. The mean age of all patients was 67.90 ± 10.51 years. There was no statistically significant difference between groups in age, gender, preoperative American Society of Anesthesiologists scoring, number of previously fused levels, or preoperative numeric leg and back pain scores. The re-operation rates were significantly lower in LF (12.7%) and LLIF cohorts (19.2%) compared with microdiscectomy (33%) and endoscopic decompression (52.9%; P = 0.005). Only LF and LLIF cohorts experienced significantly decreased pain scores at all 4 follow-up visits (2 weeks, 10 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months; P < 0.001 and P < 0.05, respectively) relative to preoperative scores. Symptomatic ASD often requires treatment with revision surgery. Fusion surgeries (either stand-alone lateral interbody or posterolateral with instrumentation) were most effective and durable with respect to alleviating pain and avoiding additional revisions within the first 12 months following revision surgery. This study emphasizes the importance of risk-stratifying patients to identify the least invasive approach that treats their symptoms and reduces the risk of future surgeries.

[Efficacy analysis of OLIF combined with posterior percutaneous internal fixation in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis with or without redundant nerve roots].

To investigate the clinical efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion(OLIF) combined with posterior percutaneous internal fixation in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis with or without redundant nerve roots(RNRs). A retrospective analysis of 92 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis treated by oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion combined with posterior percutaneous internal fixation from June 2019 to June 2022 was performed. There were 32 males and 60 females, aged from 44 to 82 years old with an average of (63.67±9.93) years old. All patients were divided into RNRs positive group and RNRs negative group according to redundancy or not before operation. There were 38 patients in RNRs positive group, including 15 males and 23 females. The age ranged from 45 to 82 years old with an average of (65.45±10.37) years old. The disease duration was 24.00(12.00, 72.00) months. There were 54 patients in RNRs negative group, including 17 males and 37 females. The age ranged from 44 to 77 years old with an average of (62.42±9.51) years old. The disease duration was 13.50(9.00, 36.00) months. The general data of patients were recorded, including operation time, intraoperative blood loss and complications. The imaging parameters before and after operation were observed, including the number of stenosis segments, intervertebral space height, lumbar lordosis angle and dural sac area. The visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate the back and lower extremity pain, and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) was used to evaluate the activities of daily living. All patients were followed up for 8 to 18 months with an average of (11.04±3.61) months, and no complications were found during the follow-up period.The number of stenosis segments in RNRs positive group (1.71±0.46) was more than that in RNRs negative group(1.17±0.38). In RNRs positive group, intervertebral space height, dural sac area, low back pain VAS, lower extremity pain VAS, ODI score were (1.11±0.19) cm, (0.46±0.17) cm2, (5.39±1.00) scores, (5.05±1.01) points, (55.74±4.05) points, respectively. RNRs negative groups respectively (0.97±0.23) cm, (0.69±0.26) cm2, (4.50±0.77) scores, (4.00±0.58) scores, (47.33±3.43) %. In RNRs positive group, intervertebral space height, dural sac area, low back pain VAS, leg pain VAS, ODI score were (1.60±0.19) cm, (0.74±0.36) cm2, (3.39±0.72) scores, (3.05±1.01) scores, (46.74±4.82) scores, respectively. RNRs negative groups respectively (1.48±0.25) cm, (1.12±0.35) cm2, (3.00±0.82) scores, (3.00±0.82) scores, (37.67±3.58) %. The postoperative intervertebral space height, dural sac area, low back pain VAS score, lower extremity pain VAS and ODI score of the patients in the RNRs positive group and the negative group were significantly improved compared with those before operation, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). There were statistically significant differences in the number of stenosed segments, preoperative intervertebral space height, dural sac area, low back pain VAS, lower extremity pain VAS, and ODI between the two groups(P<0.05). There were significant differences in postoperative intervertebral space height and postoperative ODI between the two groups(P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in intervertebral space height before and after operation and ODI score before and after operation(P>0.05). There were significant differences in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative dural sac area, difference of dural sac area before and after operation, postoperative low back pain VAS, difference of low back pain VAS score before and after operation, difference of lower extremity pain VAS before and after operation between the two groups(P<0.05). OLIF combined with posterior percutaneous internal fixation has a good effect on patients with or without RNRs. Multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis and decreased dural sac area may lead to the occurrence of RNRs, and LSS patients with RNRs have more severe symptoms. LSS patients with RNRs have worse surgical outcomes than those without RNRs.

Clinical efficacy and imaging analysis of oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of different types of lumbar intervertebral foramen stenosis

PurposeTo analyze and study the clinical efficacy and imaging indexes of oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) in the treatment of lumbar intervertebral foramen stenosis(LFS) caused by different causes.Method33 patients with LFS treated with OLIF from January 2018 to May 2022 were reviewed. Oswestry Dysfunction Index (ODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) were calculated before and after operation. Segmental lordotic angle (SLA), lumbar lordotic angle (LLA) and segmental scoliosis angle (SSA), disc height (DH), posterior disc height (PDH), lateral disc height (LDH), foraminal height (FH), foramen width (FW) and foraminal cross-sectional area (FSCA) were measured before and after operation.ResultThe VAS and ODI after operation were significantly improved as compared with those before operation. Compared with pre-operation, the DH, PHD increased by 67.6%, 94.6%, LDH increased by 107.4% (left), 101.7% (right), and FH increased by 30.2% (left), 34.5% (right). The FSCA increased by 93.1% (left), 89.0% (right), and the FW increased by 137.0% (left), 149.6% (right). The postoperative SSA was corrected by 74.5%, the postoperative SLA, LLA were corrected by 70.2%, 38.1%, respectively. All the imaging indexes were significantly improved (p < 0.01).ConclusionThe clinical efficacy and imaging data of OLIF in the treatment of LFS caused by low and moderate lumbar spondylolisthesis, intervertebral disc bulge and reduced intervertebral space height, degenerative lumbar scoliosis, articular process hyperplasia or dislocation have been well improved. OLIF may be one of the better surgical treatments for LFS caused by the above conditions.

474 Comparing the Reciprocal Changes of Single Level Transforaminal Interbody Fusions Versus Lateral Interbody Fusions: A Radiographic Analysis for Sagittal Alignment and Spinopelvic Parameters

INTRODUCTION: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) are two techniques that are widely used to treat single-level pathology at L4-5. To date, no studies have compared the two techniques in terms of their ability to address disc space pathology, such as loss of height and spondylolisthesis, and achieve spinopelvic alignment goals. METHODS: After IRB approval, this study retrospectively reviewed the records of 203 patients who underwent single-level L4-L5 TLIFs and single-level L4-L5 LLIFs between 2017 to 2022. Preoperative and postoperative scoliosis films were collected and analyzed using an automated calibrated radiographic tool to measure pre-postoperative SA and SPs. Two blinded readers measured the pre-postoperative variables. Independent Sample T-tests were used to analyze the radiographic outcomes between the two groups. RESULTS: This study evaluated the results of 203 single-level TLIFs and LLIFs (109 L4-L5 TLIFs, and 94 L4-L5 LLIFs). Among the surgeries analyzed, 90 were MIS TLIFs, 19 open TLIFs, 16 standalone LLIs, and 78 LLIFs with posterior instrumentation. Postoperative scoliosis films were taken at a median of 0.28 (± 0.4) months. The analysis focused on comparing the reciprocal changes between both procedures. Significant statistical differences was found for ΔGTilt (p = 0.036), ΔLPA (p = 0.12), ΔADH (p = 0.03), ΔPDH (p = 0.04), ΔFH (p = 0.001), and ΔS% (p = 0.01) in the LLIF group, among all the variables included in the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: L4-5 LLIF and TLIF resulted in statistically similar amounts of lordosis restoration and reciprocal change at proximal and distal lumbar levels. LLIF was found to be superior in restoration of anterior disc height, posterior disc height, and foraminal height compared to TLIF. LLIF was also superior in percentage reduction of spondylolisthesis.

Single Position Lateral versus Prone Transpsoas Lateral Interbody Fusion Inclusive of L4-L5: A single surgeon experience examining early post-operative outcomes

The transpsoas lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) procedure is a minimally invasive lumbar spine approach that provides indirect neural decompression, improved sagittal alignment, and a high fusion rate. Typically accompanied by posterior pedicle screw insertion, there has been interest in performing LLIF in a single position to decrease cost and time under anesthesia. However, there is a paucity of direct comparisons between single-position LLIF via prone versus lateral decubitus positioning. Therefore, this stud aims to compare the outcomes of a single surgeon performing prone versus lateral single-position LLIF, inclusive of the L4-L5 level. A retrospective review was performed of a consecutive case series of patients who underwent either prone or lateral, single-position LLIF by a single surgeon All cases involved the L4-L5 level. Demographic data, perioperative details, clinical outcomes, and pre- and postoperative lumbar lordosis were recorded. 63 patients underwent lateral, and 16 patients underwent prone single-position LLIF. Demographics and average interbody size were similar between groups. Operative time, change in lumbar lordosis, and length of hospital stay did not differ between the two positions. Both groups performed similarly in terms of pre- and postoperative VAS pain score, and complications. Patients who underwent lateral position LLIF ambulated farther on postoperative day 1 (250 vs. 200 feet, p=0.015). Average time to follow up was 53 weeks. This study demonstrates promising preliminary results indicating that single-position LLIF performs well, even at the L4-L5 level, in both the prone and lateral positions.

284 CT-Based Assessment of Prone Versus Lateral Pedicle Screw Placement Accuracy: A Retrospective Single-surgeon Study

INTRODUCTION: Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) including the anterior-to-psoas oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) has conventionally relied on pedicle screw placement (PSP) for construct stabilization. Single-position surgery with lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) in the lateral decubitus position with concomitant PSP has been associated with increased operative efficiency. What remains unclear is the accuracy of PSP with robotic guidance when compared to the more familiar prone patient positioning. METHODS: We identified all consecutive patients treated with interbody fusion and PSP in the prone or lateral position by a single surgeon between January 2019 and October 2022. All pedicle screws placed were analyzed using CT imaging to determine appropriate positioning according to the Gertzbein-Robbins Classification Grading System. Multivariate logistic regression models were constructed to identify risk factors for the occurrence of a radiographically significant breach. RESULTS: 89 consecutive patients were included (n = 690 screws), of whom 46 were treated in the prone position (n = 477 screws) and 43 in the lateral decubitus position (n = 213 screws). There were fewer breaches in the prone (n = 13; 2.7%) versus lateral decubitus group (n = 15; 7.0%; p = 0.012). Nine (1.9%) radiographically significant breaches occurred in the prone group compared to 10 (4.7%) in the lateral decubitus group (p = 0.019), for a prone vs. lateral decubitus pedicle screw accuracy rate of 98.1% vs. 95.3%. There were no significant differences in BMI between prone vs. lateral decubitus cohorts (30.1 vs. 29.6) or breached patients vs. non-breached patients (31.2 vs. 29.5). In multivariate models, prone position was the only significant protective factor for screw accuracy; we did not identify any other significant risk factors for screw breach. CONCLUSIONS: The present data suggest pedicle screws placed with robotic assistance have higher placement accuracy in the prone position.

Transabdominal motor evoked potential neuromonitoring of lumbosacral spine surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXTTranscranial Motor Evoked Potentials (TcMEPs) can improve intraoperative detection of femoral plexus and nerve root injury during lumbosacral spine surgery. However, even under ideal conditions, TcMEPs are not completely free of false-positive alerts due to the immobilizing effect of general anesthetics, especially in the proximal musculature. The application of transcutaneous stimulation to activate ventral nerve roots directly at the level of the conus medularis (bypassing the brain and spinal cord) has emerged as a method to potentially monitor the motor component of the femoral plexus and lumbosacral nerves free from the blunting effects of general anesthesia. PURPOSETo evaluate the reliability and efficacy of transabdominal motor evoked potentials (TaMEPs) compared to TcMEPs during lumbosacral spine procedures. DESIGNWe present the findings of a single-center 12-month retrospective experience of all lumbosacral spine surgeries utilizing multimodality intraoperative neuromonitoring (IONM) consisting of TcMEPs, TaMEPs, somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs), electromyography (EMG), and electroencephalography. PATIENT SAMPLETwo hundred and twenty patients having one, or a combination of lumbosacral spine procedures, including anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), posterior spinal fusion (PSF), and/or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). OUTCOME MEASURESIntraoperative neuromonitoring data was correlated to immediate post-operative neurologic examinations and chart review. METHODSBaseline reliability, false positive rate, true positive rate, false negative rate, area under the curve at baseline and at alerts, and detection of pre-operative deficits of TcMEPs and TaMEPs were compared and analyzed for statistical significance. The relationship between transcutaneous stimulation voltage level and patient BMI was also examined. RESULTSTaMEPs were significantly more reliable than TcMEPs in all muscles except abductor hallucis. Of the 27 false positive alerts, 24 were TcMEPs alone, and 3 were TaMEPs alone. Of the 19 true positives, none were detected by TcMEPs alone, 3 were detected by TaMEPs alone (TcMEPs were not present), and the remaining 16 true positives involved TaMEPs and TcMEPs. TaMEPs had a significantly larger area under the curve (AUC) at baseline than TcMEPs in all muscles except abductor hallucis. The percent decrease in TcMEP and TaMEP AUC during LLIF alerts was not significantly different. Both TcMEPs and TaMEPs reflected three pre-existing motor deficits. Patient BMI and TaMEP stimulation intensity were found to be moderately positively correlated. CONCLUSIONSThese findings demonstrate the high reliability and predictability of TaMEPs and the potential added value when TaMEPs are incorporated into multimodality IONM during lumbosacral spine surgery.

Is Direct Decompression Necessary for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion (LLIF)? A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Direct and Indirect Decompression With LLIF in Selected Patients.

To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes following lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) between direct and indirect decompression in the treatment of patients with degenerative lumbar diseases. Patients who underwent single-level LLIF were randomized into 2 groups: direct decompression (group D) and indirect decompression (group I). Clinical outcomes including the Oswestry Disability index and visual analogue scale of back and leg pain were collected. Radiographic outcomes including cross-sectional area (CSA) of thecal sac, disc height, foraminal height, foraminal area, fusion rate, segmental, and lumbar lordosis were measured. Twenty-eight patients who met the inclusion criteria were eligible for the analysis, with a distribution of 14 subjects in each group. The average age was 66.1 years. Postoperatively, significant improvements were observed in all clinical parameters. However, these improvements did not show significant difference between both groups at all follow-up periods. All radiographic outcomes were not different between both groups, except for the increase in CSA which was significantly greater in group D (77.73 ± 20.26 mm2 vs. 54.32 ± 35.70 mm2, p = 0.042). Group I demonstrated significantly lower blood loss (68.13 ± 32.06 mL vs. 210.00 ± 110.05 mL, p < 0.005), as well as shorter operative time (136.35 ± 28.07 minutes vs. 182.18 ± 42.67 minutes, p = 0.002). Overall complication rate was not different. Indirect decompression through LLIF results in comparable clinical improvement to LLIF with additional direct decompression over 1-year follow-up period. These findings suggest that, for an appropriate candidate, direct decompression in LLIF might not be necessary since the ligamentotaxis effect achieved through indirect decompression appears sufficient to relieve symptoms while diminishing blood loss and operative time.

The Optimal Patient Position on the Surgical Table for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Adult Spinal Deformity Using Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography: A Retrospective Study.

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) techniques have been extensively used in adult spinal deformity surgery. Preoperative knowledge of the optimal position of the patient on the surgical table is essential for a safe procedure. Therefore, this study aims to determine the optimal angle for positioning the patient on the surgical table during LLIF using three-dimensional computed tomography (3DCT). Data from 59 patients (2 males, 57 females, mean age 66.3±8.6 years) with adult spinal deformities treated by performing corrective spinal surgery were included in this observational retrospective study. Simulated fluoroscopic images were obtained using 3DCT images rotated from the reference position with the spinous process of S1 as the midline to the position with the spinous process in the center of the bilateral pedicle of T12-L5. The rotation angle of each vertebra was measured and defined as the optimal rotation angle (ORA). The angle that bisected the angle between the maximum and minimum ORA was defined as the optimal mean angle of the maximum and minimum ORA (OMA) and considered the optimal angle for the patient's position on the surgical table, as this position could minimize the rotation angle of the surgical table during surgery. A multiple regression analysis was performed to predict OMA. Multiple regression analysis revealed the following equation: OMA=1.959+(0.238×lumbar coronal Cobb angle)+(-0.208×sagittal vertical axis). When the patient is placed on the surgical table by rotating them at the OMA, the rotation of the surgical table can be reduced, ensuring a safe and efficient surgical procedure.

Comparison of the Medium-term Outcomes of Anterior Lumbar Discectomy and Fusion with Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Lumbar degenerative diseases (LDDs) with huge herniation in the left lateral recess or central canal present challenges for oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) or endoscope-assisted OLIF procedures. Currently, minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is the primary approach for this issue. This study aims to provide a standardized technical description of the anterior lumbar discectomy and fusion (ALDF) and evaluate the medium-term clinical effectiveness of both ALDF and MIS-TLIF techniques. A retrospective review was performed on LDDs who underwent ALDF and MIS-TLIF surgery from January 2018 to January 2020. The evaluation encompassed various clinical outcomes, such as the visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for back pain and leg pain (VAS-back, VAS-leg), the Oswestry disability index (ODI), the 36-item short-form health survey mental component summary (SF-36 MCS), and the physical component summary (SF-36 PCS). Additionally, radiological parameters, including disc height (DH), segmental disk angle (SDA), lumbar lordosis (LL), and cross-sectional area (CSA), were assessed. Data including radiculopathy, estimated blood loss, operation time, time of getting out of bed, fusion rate, and complications were recorded. Student's independent samples t test and Pearson's chi-square test were used to compare the differences between groups. In total, 47 patients were treated by ALDF and 48 patients were treated by MIS-TLIF. The ALDF group exhibited statistically significant lower estimated blood loss and earlier time of getting out of bed compared to the MIS-TLIF group (p < 0.05). The ALDF group demonstrated lower VAS-back scores and a higher remission rate of low back pain 3 years after the surgery (p < 0.05). During the entire follow-up period, the ALDF group exhibited higher increases in DH and SDA compared to the MIS-TLIF group (p < 0.05). At 6 months, the fusion rate in the ALDF group was significantly higher than in the MIS-TLIF group (p < 0.05). The comparison revealed no statistically significant differences in complication rates between the two groups (p > 0.05). The ALDF could be considered as a viable surgical alternative for the treatment of LDDs that necessitate ventral neural direct decompression. ALDF exhibited favorable medium-term outcomes in patients with LDDs, displaying advantages in facilitating expedited recovery, enhancing radiographic outcomes, and elevating the remission rate of low back pain. Although ALDF presents slightly higher complication rates compared to MIS-TLIF, it does not adversely affect clinical outcomes.

Coronal vertical fracture of vertebral body following minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion: risk factor analysis in consecutive case series.

To investigate the incidence and risk factors of coronal vertical vertebral body fracture (CV-VBF) during lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) for degenerative lumbar disease. Clinical data, including age, sex, body mass index, and bone mineral density, were reviewed. Radiological assessments, such as facet joint arthrosis, intervertebral disc motion, index disc height, and cage profiles, were conducted. Posterior instrumentation was performed using either a single or staged procedure after LLIF. Demographic and surgical data were compared between patients with and without VBF. Out of 273 patients (552 levels), 7 (2.6%) experienced CV-VBF. Among the 552 levels, VBF occured in 7 levels (1.3%). All VBF cases developed intraoperatively during LLIF, with no instances caused by cage subsidence during the follow-up period. Sagittal motion in segments adjacent to VBF was smaller than in others (4.6° ± 2.6° versus 6.5° ± 3.9°, P = 0.031). The average grade of facet arthrosis was 2.5 ± 0.7, indicating severe facet arthrosis. All fractures developed due to oblique placement of a trial or cage into the index disc space, leading to a nutcracker effect. These factors were not related to bone quality. CV-VBF after LLIF occurred in 2.6% of patients, accounting for 1.3% of all LLIF levels. A potential risk factor for VBF involves the nutcracker-impinging effect due to the oblique placement of a cage. Thorough preoperative evaluations and surgical procedures are needed to avoid VBF when considering LLIF in patients with less mobile spine.

Evaluating the Efficacy of IL-6 as Predictors of Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Success: Insights From Pain Scores and JOABPEQ Assessments.

A prospective study. This study aims to explore the correlation between interleukin (IL)- 6 levels in intervertebral disc (IVD) tissue and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing lumbar surgery for lumbar degenerative disease (LDD). This prospective study analyzed 32 patients (22 men and 10 women, average age 69.6 years) who underwent lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). IL-6 gene expression in IVD tissues collected during surgery was measured and correlated with pre- and postoperative clinical outcomes, including pain intensity assessed via Numeric Rating Scales (NRS) and quality of life (QOL) evaluated through the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ). IL-6 levels showed statistical correlations with postoperative intensity of low back pain (LBP) and several JOABPEQ domains. Patients with higher expression of IL-6 levels experienced more severe postoperative LBP and lower scores in lumbar function, walking ability, social life function, and mental health. The effectiveness rate of JOABPEQ scores was exceptionally high for low back pain (.548), walking ability (.677), and social functioning (.563), demonstrating the effectiveness of LLIF. The average operation time was 105.6 minutes, and the estimated blood loss was 85.6mL. The study underscores IL-6 as a potential biomarker for predicting surgical outcomes in LDD. High IL-6 levels correlate with worse postoperative LBP and lower QOL scores. Integrating molecular markers like IL-6 with patient-reported outcomes could provide a more comprehensive approach to postoperative care in spinal disorders, aiming to improve the overall QOL for LDD patients undergoing LLIF surgery.

[Comparative study of percutaneous transfacet screw and pedicle screw in oblique lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of single-level lumbar spinal stenosis].

Objective: To conduct a comparative study of radiological and clinical outcomes between percutaneous transfacet screw (TFS) and pedicle screw (BPS) in oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) for single-level lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods: A retrospective cohort study. Patients who underwent OLIF with TFS or BPS for the treatment of single-level lumbar spinal stenosis at Beijing Jishuitan Hospital from January 2019 to June 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Radiological parameters and clinical indicators were compared between the two groups. Radiological parameters included preoperative, immediate postoperative (within 5 days), and 1-year postoperative measurements of disc height and segmental lordosis angle, as well as interbody fusion status at 1 year postoperatively. Clinical indicators included operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for back pain, and leg pain before and 1 year after surgery. Results: Four male and 10 female patients with an average age of (61.0±11.2) years underwent OLIF with TFS, while 9 male and 12 female patients underwent OLIF with BPS, with a mean age of (60.9±6.7) years. There was no statistically significant difference in preoperative disc height between the TFS and BPS groups (P>0.05). The immediate postoperative disc height was (12.9±2.1) mm and it was (10.4±1.7) mm at 1-year follow-up in the TFS group; in the BPS group, it was (12.9±2.1) mm immediately postoperatively and (11.9±2.1) mm at 1-year follow-up; there was statistically significant difference between the two groups at 1-year follow-up (P=0.037). The segmental lordosis angle showed no significant differences within each group or between the two groups at preoperative, immediate postoperative, or 1-year postoperative follow-up (all P>0.05). At 1-year postoperative follow-up, the fusion rates was 92.9%(13/14) in the TFS group and 95.2%(20/21) in the BPS group, with no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). The TFS group had a significantly shorter operative time and less blood loss compared to the BPS group [(164.3±33.9) minutes vs (191.7±31.8) minutes and (74.3±46.9) ml vs (124.8±54.0) ml, respectively] (both P<0.05). Both groups showed significant improvement in ODI and VAS scores at 1 year postoperatively compared to those preoperatively, but with no statistically significant difference was found between the groups (both P>0.05). Conclusions: OLIF with TFS fixation can effectively restore disc height and alleviate back and leg pain in patients with single-level lumbar spinal stenosis. Compared to the OLIF with BPS procedure, OLIF with TFS has shorter operative time and less blood loss.

Oblique anterior column realignment with a mini-open posterior column osteotomy for minimally invasive adult spinal deformity correction: illustrative case.

Adult spinal deformity (ASD) occurs from progressive anterior column collapse due to disc space desiccation, compression fractures, and autofusion across disc spaces. Anterior column realignment (ACR) is increasingly recognized as a powerful tool to address ASD by progressively lengthening the anterior column through the release of the anterior longitudinal ligament during lateral interbody approaches. Here, we describe the application of minimally invasive ACR through an oblique antepsoas corridor for deformity correction in a patient with adult degenerative scoliosis and significant sagittal imbalance. A 65-year-old female with a prior history of L4-5 transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and morbid obesity presented with refractory, severe low-back and lower-extremity pain. Preoperative radiographs showed significant sagittal imbalance. Computed tomography showed a healed L4-5 fusion and a vacuum disc at L3-4 and L5-S1, whereas magnetic resonance imaging was notable for central canal stenosis at L3-4. The patient was treated with a first-stage L5-S1 lateral anterior lumbar interbody fusion with oblique L2-4 ACR. The second-stage posterior approach consisted of a robot-guided minimally invasive T10-ilium posterior instrumented fusion with a mini-open L2-4 posterior column osteotomy (PCO). Postoperative radiographs showed the restoration of her sagittal balance. There were no complications. Oblique ACR is a powerful minimally invasive tool for sagittal plane correction. When combined with a mini-open PCO, substantial segmental lordosis can be achieved while eliminating the need for multilevel PCO or invasive three-column osteotomies.

Short-Term Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Patients Treated With Expandable and Static Interbody Spacers Following Lumbar Lateral Interbody Fusion

ObjectiveThe goal of this study was to evaluate, using computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), patients who underwent oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) using either expandable or static interbody spacers. MethodsThirty-five patients with degenerative disc disease were surgically treated with one-level OLIF and were followed up for more than six months. The Static group consisted of 22 patients, and 13 patients were in the Expandable group. Intraoperative findings included operative time (min), blood loss (ml), and cage size.Low back pain, leg pain, and leg numbness were measured using the Japanese Orthopedic Association score, visual analogue score, and the Roland–Morris Disability Questionnaire. Radiological evaluation using CT and MRI allowed measurement of cage subsidence, cross-sectional area (CSA) of the dural sac, disc height, segmental lordosis, foraminal height, and foraminal CSA preoperatively and six months postoperatively. ResultsThe Expandable group had significantly larger cage height and lordosis than the Static group (p < 0.05). The Expandable group also had greater dural sac area expansion and enlargement of the intervertebral foramen, as well as better correction of vertebral body slip (p < 0.05). Cage subsidence was significantly lower in the Expandable group (p < 0.05). JOA score and VAS for leg numbness were significantly better in the Expandable group (p < 0.05). ConclusionsCompared with static spacers, expandable spacers significantly enlarged the dural sac area, corrected vertebral body slippage, expanded the intervertebral foramen, and achieved good indirect decompression while reducing cage subsidence, resulting in improvement in clinical symptoms.

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.

A retrospective analysis of perioperative complications of lateral approach lumbar interbody fusion in patients with prior abdominal surgery or a history of colonic inflammatory disease

BACKGROUND CONTEXTLateral approaches for lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) allow for access to the lumbar spine and disk space by passing through a retroperitoneal corridor either pre- or trans-psoas. A contraindication for this approach is the presence of retroperitoneal scarring that may occur from prior surgical intervention in the retroperitoneal space or from inflammatory conditions with fibrotic changes and pose challenges for the mobilization and visualization needed in this approach. However, there is a paucity of evidence on the prevalence of surgical complications following lateral fusion surgery in patients with a history of abdominal surgery. PURPOSEThe primary aim of this study is to describe the association between surgical complications following lateral interbody fusion surgery and prior abdominal surgical. STUDY DESIGNRetrospective study. PATIENT SAMPLEPatients over the age of 18 who underwent lateral lumbar interbody fusion at a large, tertiary care center between 2011 and 2019 were included in the study. OUTCOME MEASURESThe primary outcome included medical, surgical, and thigh-related complications either in the intraoperative or 90-day postoperative periods. Additional outcome metrics included readmission rates, length of stay, and operative duration. METHODSThe electronic health records of 250 patients were reviewed for demographic information, surgical data, complications, and readmission following surgery. The association of patient and surgical factors to complication rate was analyzed using multivariable logistic regression. Statistical analysis was performed using R statistical software (R, Vienna, Austria). RESULTSOf 250 lateral interbody fusion patients, 62.8% had a prior abdominal surgery and 13.8% had a history of colonic disease. The most common perioperative complication was transient thigh or groin pain/sensory changes (n=62, 24.8%). A multivariable logistic regression considering prior abdominal surgery, age, BMI, history of colonic disease, multilevel surgery, and the approach relative to psoas found no significant association between surgical complication rates and colonic disease (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.02–2.22) or a history of prior abdominal surgeries (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.20–1.55). Further, the invasiveness of prior abdominal surgeries showed no association with overall spine complication rate, lateral-specific complications, or readmission rates (p>.05). CONCLUSIONThough retroperitoneal scarring is an important consideration for lateral approaches to the lumbar spine, this study found no association between lateral lumbar approach complication rates and prior abdominal surgery. Further study is needed to determine the impact of inflammatory colonic disease on lateral approach spine surgery.

Face, content, and construct validity of a novel VR/AR surgical simulator of a minimally invasive spine operation.

Mixed-reality surgical simulators are seen more objective than conventional training. The simulators' utility in training must be established through validation studies. Establish face-, content-, and construct-validity of a novel mixed-reality surgical simulator developed by McGill University, CAE-Healthcare, and DePuy Synthes. This study, approved by a Research Ethics Board, examined a simulated L4-L5 oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLLIF) scenario. A 5-point Likert scale questionnaire was used. Chi-square test verified validity consensus. Construct validity investigated 276 surgical performance metrics across three groups, using ANOVA, Welch-ANOVA, or Kruskal-Wallis tests. A post-hoc Dunn's test with a Bonferroni correction was used for further analysis on significant metrics. Musculoskeletal Biomechanics Research Lab, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. DePuy Synthes, Johnson & Johnson Family of Companies, research lab. Thirty-four participants were recruited: spine surgeons, fellows, neurosurgical, and orthopedic residents. Only seven surgeons out of the 34 were recruited in a side-by-side cadaver trial, where participants completed an OLLIF surgery first on a cadaver and then immediately on the simulator. Participants were separated a priori into three groups: post-, senior-, and junior-residents. Post-residents rated validity, median > 3, for 13/20 face-validity and 9/25 content-validity statements. Seven face-validity and 12 content-validity statements were rated neutral. Chi-square test indicated agreeability between group responses. Construct validity found eight metrics with significant differences (p < 0.05) between the three groups. Validity was established. Most face-validity statements were positively rated, with few neutrally rated pertaining to the simulation's graphics. Although fewer content-validity statements were validated, most were rated neutral (only four were negatively rated). The findings underscored the importance of using realistic physics-based forces in surgical simulations. Construct validity demonstrated the simulator's capacity to differentiate surgical expertise.

The Evolution of Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Journey from Past to Present.

Lumbar interbody fusion procedures have seen a significant evolution over the years, with various approaches being developed to address spinal pathologies and instability, including posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). LLIF, a pivotal technique in the field, initially emerged as extreme/direct lateral interbody fusion (XLIF/DLIF) before the development of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). To ensure comprehensive circumferential stability, LLIF procedures are often combined with posterior stabilization (PS) using pedicle screws. However, achieving this required repositioning of the patient during the surgical procedure. The advent of single-position surgery (SPS) has revolutionized the procedure by eliminating the need for patient repositioning. With SPS, LLIF along with PS can be performed either in the lateral or prone position, resulting in significantly reduced operative time. Ongoing research endeavors are dedicated to further enhancing LLIF procedures making them even safer and easier. Notably, the integration of robotic technology into SPS has emerged as a game-changer, simplifying surgical processes and positioning itself as a vital asset for the future of spinal fusion surgery. This literature review aims to provide a succinct summary of the evolutionary trajectory of lumbar interbody fusion techniques, with a specific emphasis on its recent advancements.

Single-Position Prone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Technique Guide: Surgical Tips and Tricks.

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is a popular technique as it allows for the placement of a large interbody implant through a retroperitoneal, transpsoas working corridor. Historically, the interbody is placed with the patient in lateral decubitus and then repositioned to prone for the posterior instrumentation. While this has been an effective and successful technique, removing the interoperative flip would improve the efficiency of these cases. This has led to modified LLIF approaches including single-position prone LLIF (pLLIF). This modification has shown to be an efficient and powerful technique; however, learning to navigate the LLIF approach in the prone position has its own challenges. The purpose of this article is to provide a detailed description of our pLLIF technique while simultaneously introducing surgical tips to overcome the challenges of the approach and optimize the implantation of the interbody device.