Restoration Of Lumbar Lordosis Research Articles

Correlation of spinopelvic parameters with functional outcomes in surgically managed cases of lumbar spinal tuberculosis- A retrospective study

BackgroundThe advanced stage of vertebral involvement in spinal tuberculosis (STB) can cause vertebral body collapse, which leads to kyphotic deformity and paraplegia in severe cases. Surgery is indicated in patients having disabling back pain, progressive neurological deficit, and instability in spine despite conservative management. The derangement of lumbar parameters, especially the loss of lumbar lordosis has been found to cause functional deterioration in patients. With the current evidences in place, this study was done to evaluate the correlation between the restoration of lumbar lordosis, pelvic parameters, and functional outcome when posterior only approach was used to manage the lumbar STB. MethodsActive Tuberculosis of lumbar vertebra (L1-S1) confirmed by radiology (X-ray, MRI) and histopathological examination were included. All the cases scheduled for surgery underwent radiographs, CT scan, and MRI scans. Lumbar lordosis and other pelvic parameters were calculated on X-rays. VAS scores and ODI scores were documented during the follow-up to assess functional well-being. ResultsA total of 33 (22 M:11 F) patients were included in the study. The mean lumbar lordosis pre-operatively was −22.84 ± 11.19° which was corrected to −37.03 ± 9.02° (p < 0.05) post-operatively. The pelvic tilt pre-operatively was 25.33 ± 6.75° which was corrected to 19.63 ± 5.84° (p < 0.05) post-operatively. The mean ODI improved from 84.33 ± 11.84 to 26.93 ± 8.74 (p < 0.05) at the final follow-up. The mean VAS score pre-operatively was 8.06 ± 1.27 which improved to 2.45 ± 0.93 (p < 0.05) in the post-operative period. ConclusionThe study found a strong negative correlation between ODI scores and lumbar lordosis and a strong positive correlation between pelvic tilt and ODI scores. But the correlation needs to be further studied and evaluated by a well-constructed study especially with a control group treated conservatively.

Contribution of Multilevel Transformainal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery to Restoration of Lumbar Lordosis in Patients with Degenerative Spine: Comparison of Long and Short Level Fusion.

To investigate the effect of multilevel transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures in lumbar degenerative spine conditions on the restoration of lumbar lordosis (LL) in patients with short- and long-level fusion, and to examine the associated radiological results. This retrospective study reviewed patients with degenerative spinal diseases who underwent lumbar fusion using a multilevel TLIF procedure. Patients with three or fewer segments involved in fusion were assigned to the shortlevel fusion group and those with more than three segments involved in fusion were assigned to the long-level fusion group. The anteroposterior and lateral spine radiographs of the patients were used to measure LL, distal lumbar lordosis and radiological parameters. The study included 47 patients who met the inclusion criteria, with a mean age of 60.4 ± 12.2 years. The mean follow-up time of our patients was 18.3 ± 11 months. Thirty-five (74.5%) patients were women and 12 (25.5%) were men. Overall, 12 patients underwent 3-level and 35 patients underwent 2-level TLIF. Long-level fusion was performed in 24 patients and short-level fusion was performed in 23 patients. Multilevel TLIF can be used to correct spinopelvic alignment when applied with the appropriate indications and techniques in patients with degenerative spinal disorders. Multilevel TLIF is associated with substantial improvements in LL, distal lumbar lordosis, and SVA (sagittal vertical axis). It also helps to correct the correlation between PI and LL.

Postoperative change in lumbopelvic alignment after short-segment transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion is related to preoperative postural difference in lumbar lordosis

BackgroundPostoperative changes in lumbar lordosis (LL) after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and the related factors are not well-understood. Recently, the preoperative difference in LL between standing and supine positions (DiLL) was proposed as a factor for predicting postoperative radiologic outcomes after short-segment TLIF. This study investigated the influence of DiLL on mid-term radiological outcomes after short-segment TLIF. MethodsSixty-six patients with lumbar degenerative disease treated with short-segment TLIF (1–2 levels) who underwent lumbar spine standing radiographs at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, and 5 years postoperatively were divided into DiLL (+) and DiLL (−) groups (preoperative DiLL ≥0° and <0°, respectively). Associations between the postoperative change in LL and DiLL and clinical outcomes (Oswestry disability index (ODI) and Nakai score) were evaluated. ResultsTemporary restoration of LL (+4.5°) until 1 year postoperatively and a subsequent decrease in LL from 1 to 5 years postoperatively (−5.3°) was observed in the DiLL (+) group. No postoperative change in LL was observed in the DiLL (−) group. Postoperative changes in LL were mainly observed in non-fused segments. The postoperative change in LL (ΔLL) until 1 year postoperatively had a significant positive association with DiLL (p = 0.00028), whereas ΔLL from 1 to 5 years postoperatively showed a significant negative association with DiLL (p = 0.010) and a positive association with Nakai score (p = 0.028). ΔLL until 5 years postoperatively showed a significant positive association with postoperative ODI improvement (p = 0.011). ConclusionsDiLL (+) patients showed a specific time course with temporary LL restoration until 1 year postoperatively and a subsequent decrease in LL from 1 to 5 years postoperatively. Patients with larger postoperative increase in LL until 5 years postoperatively and lesser decrease in LL from 1 to 5 years postoperatively tended to show better mid-term clinical outcomes.

Are the Choice of Frame and Intraoperative Patient Positioning Associated With Radiologic and Clinical Outcomes in Long-instrumented Lumbar Fusion for Adult Spinal Deformity?

Previous studies of patient positioning during spinal surgery evaluated intraoperative or immediate postoperative outcomes after short-instrumented lumbar fusion. However, patient positioning during long-instrumented fusion for an adult spinal deformity (ASD) might be associated with differences in intraoperative parameters such as blood loss and longer-term outcomes such as spine alignment, and comparing types of surgical tables in the context of these larger procedures and evaluating longer-term outcome scores seem important. (1) Do blood loss and the number of transfusions differ between patients who underwent multi-level spinal fusion with a Wilson frame and those with a four-poster frame? (2) Does restoration of lumbar lordosis and the sagittal vertical axis differ between patients who underwent surgery with the use of one frame or the other? (3) Do clinical outcomes as determined by Numeric Rating Scale and Oswestry Disability Index scores differ between the two groups of patients? (4) Are there differences in postoperative complications between the two groups? Among 651 patients undergoing thoracolumbar instrumented fusion between 2015 and 2018, 129 patients treated with more than four levels of initial fusion for an ASD were identified. A total of 48% (62 of 129) were eligible; 44% (57 of 129) were excluded because of a history of fusion, three-column osteotomy, or surgical indications other than degenerative deformity, and another 8% (10 of 129) were lost before the minimum 2-year follow-up period. Before January 2017, one surgeon in this study used only a Wilson frame; starting in January 2017, the same surgeon consistently used a four-poster frame. Forty patients had spinal fusion using the Wilson frame; 85% (34 of 40) of these had follow-up at least 2 years postoperatively (mean 44 ± 13 months). Thirty-two patients underwent surgery using the four-poster frame; 88% (28 of 32) of these were available for follow-up at least 2 years later (mean 34 ± 6 months). The groups did not differ in terms of age, gender, BMI, type of deformity, or number of fused levels. Surgical parameters such as blood loss and the total amount of blood transfused were compared between the two groups. Estimated blood loss was measured by the amount of suction drainage and the amount of blood that soaked gauze. The decision to transfuse blood was based on intraoperative hemoglobin values, a protocol that was applied equally to both groups. Radiologic outcomes including sagittal parameters and clinical outcomes such as the Numerical Rating Scale score for back pain (range 0-10; minimal clinically important difference [MCID] 2.9) and leg pain (range 0-10; MCID 2.9) as well as the Oswestry Disability Index score (range 0-100; MCID 15.4) were also assessed through a longitudinally maintained database by two spine surgeons who participated in this study. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to compare selected radiologic outcomes between the two groups over time. Blood loss and the total amount of transfused blood were greater in the Wilson frame group than in the four-poster frame group (2019 ± 1213 mL versus 1171 ± 875 mL; mean difference 848 [95% CI 297 to 1399]; p = 0.003 for blood loss; 1706 ± 1003 mL versus 911 ± 651 mL; mean difference 795 [95% CI 353 to 1237]; p = 0.001 for transfusion). Lumbar lordosis and the sagittal vertical axis were less restored in the Wilson frame group than in the four-poster frame group (7° ± 10° versus 18° ± 14°; mean difference -11° [95% -17° to -5°]; p < 0.001 for lumbar lordosis; -22 ± 31 mm versus -43 ± 27 mm; mean difference 21 [95% CI 5 to 36]; p = 0.009 for the sagittal vertical axis). Such differences persisted at 2 years of follow-up. The proportion of patients with the desired correction was also greater in the four-poster frame group than in the Wilson frame group immediately postoperatively and at 2 years of follow-up (50% versus 21%, respectively; odds ratio 3.9 [95% CI 1.3 to 11.7]; p = 0.02; 43% versus 12%, respectively; odds ratio 5.6 [95% CI 1.6 to 20.3]; p = 0.005). We found no clinically important differences in postoperative patient-reported outcomes including Numeric Rating Scale and Oswestry Disability Index scores, and there were no differences in postoperative complications at 2 years of follow-up. The ideal patient position during surgery for an ASD should decrease intra-abdominal pressure and induce lordosis as the abdomen hangs freely and hip flexion is decreased. The four-poster frame appears advantageous for long-segment fusions for spinal deformities. Future studies are needed to extend our analyses to different types of spinal deformities and validate radiologic and clinical outcomes with follow-up for more than 2 years. III, therapeutic study.

Systematic Review of Reciprocal Changes after Spinal Reconstruction Surgery : Do Not Miss the Forest for the Trees.

The purpose of this review was to synthesize the research on global spinal alignment and reciprocal changes following cervical or thoracolumbar reconstruction surgery. We carried out a search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library for studies through May 2020, and ultimately included 11 articles. The optimal goal of a truly balanced spine is to maintain the head over the femoral heads. When spinal imbalance occurs, the human body reacts through various compensatory mechanisms to maintain the head over the pelvis and to retain a horizontal gaze. Historically, deformity correction has focused on correcting scoliosis and preventing scoliotic curve progression. Following substantial correction of a spinal deformity, reciprocal changes take place in the flexible segments proximal and distal to the area of correction. Restoration of lumbar lordosis following surgery to correct a thoracolumbar deformity induces reciprocal changes in T1 slope, cervical lordosis, pelvic shift, and lower extremity parameters. Patients with cervical kyphosis exhibit different patterns of reciprocal changes depending on whether they have head-balanced or trunk-balanced kyphosis. These reciprocal changes should be considered to in order to prevent secondary spine disorders. We emphasize the importance of evaluating the global spinal alignment to assess postoperative changes.

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus oblique lateral interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disease: a meta-analysis

BackgroundMinimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) are widely used in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. In the present study, a meta-analysis was conducted to compare the clinical and radiographic efficacy of these two procedures.MethodsA systematic literature review was performed, and the quality of retrieved studies was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Clinical outcomes, including operation time, intraoperative blood loss, improvement in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), improvement in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) effectiveness rate and complications, in addition to radiographic outcomes, including restoration of disc height, disc angle, overall lumbar lordosis, fusion rate and subsidence, were extracted and input into a fixed or random effect model to compare the efficacy of MIS-TLIF and OLIF.ResultsSeven qualified studies were included. Clinically, OLIF resulted in less intraoperative blood loss and shorter operation time than MIS-TLIF. Improvement of VAS for leg pain was more obvious in the OLIF group (P < 0.0001), whereas improvement of VAS for back pain (P = 0.08) and ODI (P = 0.98) as well as JOABPEQ effectiveness rate (P = 0.18) were similar in the two groups. Radiographically, OLIF was more effective in restoring disc height (P = 0.01) and equivalent in improving the disc angle (P = 0.18) and lumbar lordosis (P = 0.48) compared with MIS-TLIF. The fusion rate (P = 0.11) was similar in both groups, while the subsidence was more severe in the MIS-TLIF group (P < 0.00001).ConclusionsThe above evidence suggests that OLIF is associated with a shorter operation time (with supplementary fixation in the prone position) and less intraoperative blood loss than MIS-TLIF and can lead to better leg pain alleviation, disc height restoration and subsidence resistance. No differences regarding back pain relief, functional recovery, complications, disc angle restoration, lumbar lordosis restoration and fusion rate were found. However, due to the limited number of studies, our results should be confirmed with high-level studies to fully compare the therapeutic efficacy of MIS-TLIF and OLIF.Trial registrationPROSPERO ID: CRD42020201903.

Segmental Artery Injury During Anterior Column Realignment: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

Background: Anterior column realignment (ACR) is a minimally invasive technique used to restore lumbar lordosis and improve sagittal balance. The most feared complication from ACR includes injury to the great vessels. Segmental artery injuries are also a possible complication though sparsely reported. We report such a case.&#x0D; Case Description: During anterior longitudinal ligament release at L3-4, the L3 segmental artery was injured. Intraoperative angiogram and coiling was performed. Our patient remained hemodynamically stable though during the postoperative period his hemoglobin fell five points. Discussion: This patient was at risk for this complication due to the tortuosity of his vessels and his osteophytes. This injury can be treated concurrently with endovascular embolization if equipment and personnel are readily available. Ultimately, segmental artery injury does not appear to be as morbid as great vessel injury if addressed emergently.

Optimal Correction of Adult Spinal Deformities Requires Restoration of Distal Lumbar Lordosis.

Purpose The aim of this study is to analyze results according to postoperative pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch in the management of adult spine deformity (ASD) patients. Recently, it has been reported that in addition to lumbar lordosis amount, lordosis repartition between its proximal and distal parts was crucial. Methods We enrolled 77 consecutive ASD patients who underwent posterior spinal fusion and deformity correction between 2015 and 2018. On preoperative and 1-year follow-up radiographs, we analyzed different parameters such as L1-S1 lumbar lordosis, L1-L4 proximal lordosis (PLL), L4-S1 distal lordosis (DLL), pelvic tilt (PT), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), and PI-LL mismatch. Comparisons were performed according to postoperative PI-LL mismatch (defined as “aligned” when PI-LL was <10°). The relationship between lordosis distribution and postoperative alignment status was investigated. Results On the whole series, average lumbar lordosis, SVA, and PI-LL improved (28.2° vs.43.5°, 82 vs. 51 mm, and 26°vs. 14°, all p < 0.001, respectively). On the other hand, PT remained unchanged (30° vs. 28°, p > 0.05). 35 patients were classified as “aligned” and 42 as “not aligned.” Patients from the “aligned” group had a significantly lower PI than patients from the “not aligned” group (52° vs. 61°, p=0.009). Postoperative PLL was not different between groups (18° vs. 16° p > 0.05), whereas DLL was significantly higher in the “aligned” group (31° vs. 22°, p=0.003). PI-LL was significantly correlated to DLL (rho = 0.407, p < 0.001) but not with PLL (rho = 0.110, p=0.342). Conclusions Our results revealed that in ASD patients, postoperative malalignment was associated with a lack of DLL restoration. “Not aligned” patients had also a significantly higher pelvic incidence. Specific attention must be paid to restore optimal distal lumbar lordosis in order to set the amount and the distribution of optimal postoperative lumbar lordosis.

Hybrid Anterior Column Realignment—Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy for Severe Rigid Sagittal Deformity

Recently, a hybrid anterior column realignment-pedicle subtraction osteotomy (ACR-PSO) approach has been conceived for patients with severe rigid sagittal deformity, the clinical and radiographic outcomes of which require further investigation compared with ACR only. A single-center, retrospective chart review identified patients undergoing a combination of hyperlordotic lateral lumbar interbody grafting (ACR) and concurrent Schwab grade 3 three-column osteotomy and propensity-matched patients undergoing ACR only in the same time frame. Anterior longitudinal ligament was directly released or partially sectioned in all patients. Chart data included demographics, Oswestry Disability Index scores, ACR and osteotomy locations, cage dimensions, fusion length, and complications. Radiographic measurements included lumbar lordosis, sagittal vertical axis, pelvic tilt (PT), and proximal junctional kyphosis. Fourteen patients were enrolled in the ACR+ PSO group and 36 in the ACR-only group. Mean ages were 68.5 and 63.9 years, 64% and 67% were female, average body mass index was 27.9 and 29.2, and cardiopulmonary comorbidities were 21% and 17%, respectively. There was no difference in complications (P= 0.347). The average follow-up for the ACR+ PSO and ACR-only groups were 22 and 18 months, respectively. Excluding 2 mortalities, fusion occurred in all patients. Average change in lumbar lordosis measured-40.8 ± 9.2 degrees and-19.1 ± 15.7 degrees (P= 0.0006), and PT correction measured 10.5 ± 3.4 degrees and 27.3 ± 1.6 degrees (P < 0.0001), respectively. For patients with severe rigid sagittal deformity, the hybrid ACR-PSO approach offers significant restoration of lumbar lordosis compared with ACR only, with similar complications but reduced PT correction.

Predictors of Spontaneous Restoration of Lumbar Lordosis after Single-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Diseases.

Introduction Preoperative factors that predict postoperative restoration of lumbar lordosis (LL) are not well understood. To investigate whether preoperative postural correction of LL, sagittal malalignment, or lumbar flexibility are associated with the postoperative restoration of LL in patients treated with a single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), a retrospective cohort study was conducted. Methods We enrolled 104 patients (mean age: 67.5±10.7 years old; 47 men and 57 women) with lumbar degenerative diseases treated with a single-level TLIF. The pre- and postoperative LL were examined using lateral radiographs in the standing position and computed tomography (CT) images in the supine position. The correlation between postoperative LL restoration and preoperative postural correction of LL (difference in LL between the standing and supine positions: D-LL), sagittal imbalance (pelvic incidence minus LL: PI-LL), and lumbar flexibility (difference in LL between the flexion and extension postures) were analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups according to the D-LL (D-LL≥0° and D-LL<0°). The rates of postoperative LL restoration (postoperative LL-preoperative LL in standing) were compared between the two groups. Results Multiple regression analysis performed after adjustment for age, gender, body mass index, and cage angle revealed that postoperative LL restoration was significantly correlated with D-LL (p<0.001), but not with PI-LL, and lumbar flexibility. Patients with a preoperative D-LL≥0° showed a significantly greater increase of LL after TLIF (7.1°±11.2°) than those with D-LL<0° (1.4°±6.6°) (p=0.003). Conclusions A preoperative evaluation of a lateral radiograph or CT taken in the supine position is useful in predicting postoperative improvement of sagittal alignment. Postoperative improvement of sagittal spinopelvic alignment would be expected when LL is corrected in the supine position preoperatively. Surgeons should pay attention to the postural correction of LL when performing short-segment fusion surgery for lumbar degenerative disease with sagittal malalignment.

Surgical Planning for Adult Spinal Deformity: Anticipated Sagittal Alignment Corrections According to the Surgical Level.

Study Design:Retrospective cohort study.Objectives:Establish simultaneous focal and regional corrective guidelines accounting for reciprocal global and pelvic compensation.Methods:433 ASD patients (mean age 62.9 yrs, 81.3% F) who underwent corrective realignment (minimum L1-pelvis) were included. Sagittal parameters, and segmental and regional Cobb angles were assessed pre and post-op. Virtual postoperative alignment was generated by combining post-op alignment of the fused spine with the pre-op alignment on the unfused thoracic kyphosis and the pre-op pelvic retroversion. Regression models were then generated to predict the relative impact of segmental (L4-L5) and regional (L1-L4) corrections on PT, SVA (virtual), and TPA.Results:Baseline analysis revealed distal (L4-S1) lordosis of 33 ± 15°, flat proximal (L1-L4) lordosis (1.7 ± 17°), and segmental kyphosis from L2-L3 to T10-T11. Post-op, there was no mean change in distal lordosis (L5-S1 decreased by 2°, and L4-L5 increased by 2°), while the more proximal lordosis increased by 18 ± 16°. Regression formulas revealed that Δ10° in distal lordosis resulted in Δ10° in TPA, associated with Δ100 mm in SVA or Δ3° in PT; Δ10° in proximal lordosis yielded Δ5° in TPA associated with Δ50 mm in SVA; and finally Δ10° in thoraco-lumbar junction yielded Δ2.5° in TPA associated with Δ25 mm in SVA and no impact on PT correction.Conclusions:Overall impact of lumbar lordosis restoration is critically determined by location of correction. Distal correction leads to a greater impact on global alignment and pelvic retroversion. More specifically, it can be assumed that 1° L4-S1 lordosis correction produces 1° change in TPA / 10 mm change in SVA and 0.5° in PT.

Comparison of Outcomes Between Single-level Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review.

This is a meta-analysis and systematic review of the available literature. This study aims to compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes of single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) with single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). In the treatment of adult spinal deformity, LLIF allows interbody fusion while avoiding complications associated with an anterior or transforaminal approach, although the clinical outcomes of LLIF compared with other approaches have not been well established. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus for 385 unique studies. On the basis of our exclusion criteria, 8 studies remained for our systematic review. Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.3 using Mantel-Haenszel statistics and random effect models. This study identified self-reported Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index, length of stay, blood loss, complication rate, and radiologic parameters (disk height, lumbar lordosis, segmental lordosis). Our meta-analysis showed that LLIF contributed to decreased blood loss [mean difference (MD)=-67.62 mL, 95% confidence interval (CI): -104 to -30.90, P<0.001], superior restoration of segmental lordosis (MD=1.91 degrees, 95% CI: 0.71-3.10, P=0.002), lumbar lordosis (MD=1.95 degrees, 95% CI: 0.15-3.74, P=0.03), and disk height (MD=2.18 mm, 95% CI: 1.18-3.17, P<0.001) when compared with TLIF. However, current data suggests no significant difference in clinical outcomes between LLIF and TLIF based on overall complication rates (P=0.22), length of hospital stay (P=0.65), postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (P=0.13), postoperative VAS Back Pain (P=0.47) and VAS Leg Pain (P=0.16). LLIF is an increasingly popular option for single-level anterior column reconstruction. When compared with single-level TLIF, single-level LLIF is associated with greater changes in lumbar lordosis and disk height. The single-level LLIF is a viable alternative to TLIF, demonstrating comparable clinical outcomes and better restoration of spinopelvic parameters. Level III.

Can posterior stand-alone expandable cages safely restore lumbar lordosis? A minimum 5-year follow-up study

BackgroundLumbar lordosis (LL) can be restored, and screw-related complications may be avoided with the stand-alone expandable cage method. However, the long-term spinopelvic changes and safety remain unknown. We aimed to elucidate the long-term radiologic outcomes and safety of this technique.MethodsData from patients who underwent multi-level stand-alone expandable cage fusion and 80 patients who underwent screw-assisted fusion between February 2007 and December 2012, with at least 5 years of follow-up, were retrospectively analyzed. Segmental angle and translation, short and whole LL, pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, sacral slope (SS), sagittal vertical axis, thoracic kyphosis, and presence of subsidence, pseudoarthrosis, retropulsion, cage breakage, proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK), and screw malposition were assessed. The relationship between local, lumbar, and spinopelvic effects was investigated. The implant failure rate was considered a measure of procedure effectiveness and safety.ResultsIn total, 69 cases were included in the stand-alone expandable cage group and 150 cases in the control group. The stand-alone group showed shorter operative time (58.48 ± 11.10 vs 81.43 ± 13.75, P = .00028), lower rate of PJK (10.1% vs 22.5%, P = .03), and restoration of local angle (4.66 ± 3.76 vs 2.03 ± 1.16, P = .000079) than the control group. However, sagittal balance (0.01 ± 2.57 vs 0.50 ± 2.10, P = .07) was not restored, and weakness showed higher rate of subsidence (16.31% vs 4.85%, P = .0018), pseudoarthrosis (9.92% vs 2.42%, P = .02), cage, and retropulsion (3.55% vs 0, P = .01) than the control group.ConclusionsStand-alone expandable cage fusion can restore local lordosis; however, global sagittal balance was not restored. Furthermore, implant safety has not yet been proven.

Postoperative spino-pelvic stereoradiography to predict adjacent segment disease

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to identify sagittal spinopelvic parameters predictive of adjacent segment disease (ASD) on postoperative whole spine weight-bearing stereoradiography. Materials and methodsA total of 84 patients with previous spinal fusion surgery and documented radiological follow-up with early weight-bearing postoperative whole spine stereoradiography (EOS® Imaging System) were retrospectively included. A pathological group of 42 patients (9 men, 33 women; mean age, 63.1±11.5 [SD] years) who developed documented ASD (mean follow-up, 76.75 months; range: 31.5–158.5 months) was compared with a control group of 42 asymptomatic patients (7 men, 35 women; mean age, 60.9±11.8 [SD] years) (mean follow-up, 115 months; range: 60–197 months) based on sagittal balance evaluation and routinely used spino-pelvic parameters. Comparisons were made using uni- and multivariate analyses. ResultsAt univariate analysis, patients with ASD had an anteriorly displaced sagittal vertical axis (CAM plumb line) and an inadequate lumbar lordosis (LL) in reference to pelvic incidence (PI) compared to controls. They also had higher C7 slope and C2-C7 offset. At multivariate analysis, C2-C7 offset (OR=1.152; 95% CI: 1.056–1.256; P=0.001) and a lack of LL (OR=5.063; 95% CI: 1.139–22.498; P=0.033) were significantly associated with ASD. ConclusionAnterior cervical imbalance, reflected by an increase in C2-C7 offset and insufficient restoration of LL are postoperative predictive factors of ASD on stereoradiography.

Clinical and Short-Term Radiographic Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Expandable Lordotic Devices.

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is a well-accepted procedure for the treatment of degenerative lumbar disease. However, its ability to restore lumbar lordosis has been limited. Development of expandable lordotic interbody devices has challenged this limitation, furthering the scope of minimally invasive surgery. To evaluate the radiographic and clinical effects of expandable lordotic interbody devices placed through an MIS-TLIF approach. We conducted a retrospective review of 32 1-level and 18 2-level MIS-TLIFs performed using lordotic expandable interbody devices. Lumbar radiographic measurements, Oswestry Disability Index scores (ODI), and Visual Analogue Scale scores (VAS) were obtained at preoperative, 6 wk follow up, and last follow up time points. Last follow up occurred at a mean of 11.5±7.6 mo (mean±SD). At 6-wk follow-up, segmental lordosis, disc height, and foraminal height increased by an average of 3.4°, 6.4 mm, and 4.4 mm, respectively. Only the 2-level group showed a significant increase in lumbar lordosis of 5.8°. No significant changes occurred in sacral slope, pelvic tilt, or pelvic incidence. Average ODI and VAS decreased by -12.0 and -4.5, respectively. Postoperative lumbar lordosis inversely correlated with preoperative lordosis in patients with an initial Pelvic Incidence to Lumbar Lordosis mismatch (PI-LL) of >10°, (r=-0.5, P=.009). When applied across 2-levels, MIS-TLIF using expandable lordotic interbody devices produced a significant increase in lumbar lordosis. Preoperative lumbar lordosis was found to be a predictor of postoperative lumbar lordotic change in patients with sagittal imbalance.

Interbody Fusions in the Lumbar Spine: A Review.

Lumbar interbody fusion is among themost common types of spinal surgery performed. Over time, the term has evolved to encompass a number of different approaches to the intervertebral space, as well as differing implant materials. Questions remain over which approaches and materials are best for achieving fusion and restoring disc height. We reviewed the literature on the advantages and disadvantages of various methods and devices used to achieve and augment fusion between the disc spaces in the lumbar spine. Using search terms specific to lumbar interbody fusion, we searched PubMed and Google Scholar and identified 4993 articles. We excluded those that did not report clinical outcomes, involved cervical interbody devices, were animal studies, or were not in English. After exclusions, 68 articles were included for review. Posterior approaches have advantages, such as providing 360° support through a single incision, but can result in retraction injury and do not always restore lordosis or correct deformity. Anterior approaches allow for the largest implants and good correction of deformities but can result in vascular, urinary, psoas muscle, or lumbar plexus injury and may require a second posterior procedure to supplement fixation. Titanium cages produce improved osteointegration and fusion rates but also increase subsidence caused by the stiffness of titanium relative to bone. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) has an elasticity closer to that of bone and shows less subsidence than titanium cages, but as an inert compound PEEK results in lower fusion rates and greater osteolysis. Combination PEEK-titanium coating has not yet achieved better results. Expandable cages were developed to increase disc height and restore lumbar lordosis, but the data on their effectiveness have been inconclusive. Three-dimensionally (3D)-printed cages have shown promise in biomechanical and animal studies at increasing fusion rates and reducing subsidence, but additive manufacturing options are still in their infancy and require more investigation. All of the approaches to spinal fusion have plusses and minuses that must be considered when determining which to use, and newer-technology implants, such as PEEK with titanium coating, expandable, and 3D-printed cages, have tried to improve upon the limitations of existing grafts but require further study.

Differences in lumbar segment angle among Roussouly types of global sagittal alignment in asymptomatic adult subjects.

A radiological study. To examine lumbar segment angle according to the Roussouly type of global sagittal alignment and to determine the reference disc angles in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for adult spinal deformity. Optimal restoration of lumbar lordosis (LL) in adult spinal deformity surgery includes achieving the ideal shape of LL as well as the amount of LL. However, the distribution of lumbar segment angles by the Roussouly type has yet to be elucidated. Forty sets of whole spine lateral radiographs covering the four Roussouly types (N = 160) were obtained from a database of asymptomatic adult subjects. Global and spinopelvic parameters were measured. Disc and vertebral angles at each lumbar level were compared among the Roussouly types. There were 75 (46.9%) men with a mean age of 32.8 ± 8.9years among the total of 160 study subjects. A significant difference was found in spino-sacral angle, sacral slope, pelvic incidence, LL, and lower arc of LL (L4S1) among the Roussouly types (all P < 0.001). The ratio of the lower arc of LL (L4S1) to LL was 83.4% in Roussouly type 1, 65.2% in type 2, 64.7% in type 3, and 61.5% in type 4. The disc angles at the L1-2 and L2-3 levels in Roussouly type 1 were significantly smaller than in the other types. The disc angle at the L5-S1 level in Roussouly type 1 was significantly larger than that in type 2. Roussouly type 4 had a larger disc angle at the L2-3 and L4-5 levels than types 1 and 2. The results of this study showed that the disc angle distribution differs among Roussouly types. The configuration of LL as well as the amount of LL should be considered in adult spinal deformity surgery. Level IV.

Restoring lumbar lordosis: a systematic review of controlled trials utilizing Chiropractic Bio Physics® (CBP®) non-surgical approach to increasing lumbar lordosis in the treatment of low back disorders.

[Purpose] To systematically review controlled trial evidence for the use of lumbar extension traction by Chiropractic BioPhysics® methods for the purpose of increasing lumbar lordosis in those with hypolordosis and low back disorders. [Methods] Literature searches were performed in Pubmed, PEDro, CINAHL, Cochrane, and ICL databases. Search terms included iterations related to the lumbar spine, low back pain and extension traction rehabilitation. [Results] Four articles detailing 2 randomized and 1 non-randomized trial were located. Trials demonstrated increases in radiographic measured lordosis of 7–11°, over 10–12 weeks, after 30–36 treatment sessions. Randomized trials demonstrated traction treated groups mostly maintained lordosis correction, pain relief, and disability after 6-months follow-up. The non-randomized trial showed lordosis and pain intensity were maintained with periodic maintenance care for 1.5 years. Importantly, control/comparison groups had no increase in lumbar lordosis. Randomized trials showed comparison groups receiving physiotherapy-less the traction, had temporary pain reduction during treatment that regressed towards baseline levels as early as 3-months after treatment. [Conclusion] Limited but good quality evidence substantiates that the use of extension traction methods in rehabilitation programs definitively increases lumbar hypolordosis. Preliminarily, these studies indicate these methods provide longer-term relief to patients with low back disorders versus conventional rehabilitation approaches tested.

MIS lateral ACR for spinal deformity correction: technique and complication avoidance.

Deformity correction using minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques can be challenging. Here the authors present a case in which an anterior column resection was performed using an MIS lateral approach to restore lumbar lordosis and improve sagittal balance. The authors demonstrate the technique and discuss potential complications and how they may be avoided.The video can be found here: https://youtu.be/XjOdDeKrKEE.

Unilateral Versus Bilateral Facetectomy and its Effect on Segmental Lordosis and Disc Height in MIS TLIF

Background: Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) techniques have allowed for improved recovery and other metrics compared to its open counterpart. Our expanding literature has increasingly demonstrated the importance of spinopelvic parameters. One of the concerns with MIS TLIF is that the limited exposure and existing technology make it difficult to restore lumbar lordosis at the degenerative level requiring surgery. We hypothesize that bilateral facetectomy with MIS techniques will allow for increased ability to restore segmental lumbar lordosis versus traditional unilateral facetectomy. Methods: This is a retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent single level MIS TLIF between 2017 and 2018. We collected baseline characteristics and reviewed operative records to determine whether unilateral or bilateral facetectomies were performed. We used intraoperative CT (O-Arm) sagittal reformatted images to measure segmental lordosis as well as anterior, middle, and posterior disc heights. Results: Forty patients were identified. Eighteen underwent bilateral facetectomy, and 22 had unilateral facetectomy. We found a significantly increased middle disc height in the bilateral facetectomy group of 3.6 mm vs 2.8 mm in the unilateral group (p=0.04). We also found increased lordosis (4.4 vs. 3.7, respectively) as well as anterior (4.5 vs 3.5) disc height in the bilateral facetectomy group but neither reached statistical significance. Conclusion: Bilateral facetectomy is a tool that can help achieve maximal lordosis and disc height restoration in MIS TLIF surgery. Benefits besides lordosis and disc height restoration include increased autograft for fusion. Across various papers there seems to be a trend toward greater lordosis and disc height restoration, however most papers including ours have been underpowered to find significance.