Restoration Of Lumbar Lordosis Research Articles

Clinical & Radiological Outcomes of Posterior Decompression & Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) among Patients with Lumbar Spondylolisthesis – A Prospective Study

Introduction: Lumbar spondylolisthesis, a condition characterized by the displacement of one vertebra over another, often leads to chronic back pain and functional impairment. Posterior decompression and TLIF are used as surgical options for patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis. Aim of the Study: The aim of this study was to assess the clinical & radiological outcomes of posterior decompression & transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) among patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis. Methods: This prospective observational study was carried out at NITOR, Dhaka, Bangladesh, during the period from January 2020 to December 2021. Total 30 patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis were included in this study. Result: In this study, majority of participants were aged 41-50 (47%), predominantly female (60%). Clinical outcomes showed significant improvements post-treatment: low back pain and leg pain, measured by VAS, decreased substantially, and disability scores (ODI and Roland-Morris) also improved markedly. Quality of life, assessed by SF-36, showed notable enhancements in both physical and mental scores. Radiologically, there were significant improvements in disc and foraminal height, reduction in spondylolisthesis severity, and restoration of lumbar lordosis and spinal stability. The average surgery time was around 147.5 minutes, with a mean blood loss of 382.7 mL and an average hospital stay of 7.1 days. A 90% fusion rate was achieved at 1-year follow-up, with dural tears being the most common complication. Despite some complications, the majority of surgeries were completed safely. Conclusion: Posterior decompression and TLIF appear to be effective in treating lumbar spondylolisthesis, as evidenced by improved clinical and radiological outcomes.

Lumbar lordosis restoration by minimally invasive short-segment fusion with anterior column realignment for adult spinal deformity: minimum 2-year follow-up.

The efficacy of anterior column realignment (ACR) remains relatively unclear, possibly because some safety concerns have limited its adoption and extensive evaluation. The authors aimed to study whether a minimally invasive surgery (MIS) triad consisting of ACR, lateral lumbar interbody fusion, and percutaneous pedicle screw fixation in a select group of adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients helps shorten fusion length without compromising clinical and radiographic outcomes over a minimum 2-year follow-up period. A series of 61 ASD patients (mean age 72.8 years) with pelvic incidence (PI) - lumbar lordosis (LL) (PI-LL) mismatch > 10° underwent the short-segment MIS triad (mean fusion length 3.0 levels) as a single-stage operation with a mean operative time and estimated blood loss of 157 minutes and 127 mL, respectively. Exclusion criteria were 1) thoracic scoliosis as the main deformity, 2) thoracolumbar junction kyphosis > 25°, 3) ankylosed facet joints, and 4) previous spinal fusion surgery. Seven patients, who needed fusion to be extended to S1, underwent mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at L5-S1. The segmental disc angle at the ACR level more than quintupled, averaging from 2.9° preoperatively to 18.9° at the latest follow-up (p < 0.0001). LL, in turn, nearly doubled from 17.0° to 32.8° (p < 0.0001) and PI-LL decreased by nearly half from 28.8° to 13.2° (p < 0.0001). At the same time, other spinopelvic deformity parameters as well as Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores significantly improved. Patients were divided into two groups at the latest postoperative evaluation: 36 patients whose PI-LL improved to < 10° and 25 patients who maintained a PI-LL mismatch > 10°. Binary logistic regression revealed preoperative PI-LL mismatch as the only factor that significantly influenced this dichotomous separation postoperatively. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis identified the critical preoperative mismatch of 26.4° with 68% sensitivity and 84% specificity. Despite this different radiographic consequence, the two groups had an equally successful clinical outcome with no significant difference in ODI scores. As long as the ASD characteristics are consistent with the authors' exclusion criteria, the short-segment MIS triad served as an excellent surgical option in the patients with preoperative PI-LL mismatch < 26.4°, but the technique also worked well even in those with a mismatch > 26.4°, although ideal spinopelvic alignment targets were not necessarily achieved in these patients.

Surgical treatment of spondylolisthesis by oblique lumbar interbody fusion and transpedicular screw fixation: Comparison between conventional double position versus navigation-assisted single lateral position.

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) procedures involve anterior insertion of interbody cage in lateral position. Following OLIF, insertion of pedicle screws and rod system is performed in a prone position (OLIF-con). The location of the cage is important for restoration of lumbar lordosis and indirect decompression. However, inserting the cage at the desired location is difficult without reduction of spondylolisthesis, and reduction after insertion of interbody cage may limit the amount of reduction. Recent introduction of spinal navigation enabled both surgical procedures in one lateral position (OLIF-one). Therefore, reduction of spondylolisthesis can be performed prior to insertion of interbody cage. The objective of this study was to compare the reduction of spondylolisthesis and the placement of cage between OLIF-one and OLIF-con. We retrospectively reviewed 72 consecutive patients with spondylolisthesis for this study; 30 patients underwent OLIF-one and 42 underwent OLIF-con. Spinal navigation system was used for OLIF-one. In OLIF-one, the interbody cage was inserted after reducing spondylolisthesis, whereas in OLIF-con, the cage was inserted before reduction. The following parameters were measured on X-rays: pre- and postoperative spondylolisthesis slippage, reduction degree, and the location of the cage in the disc space. Both groups showed significant improvement in back and leg pains (p < .05). Transient motor or sensory changes occurred in three patients after OLIF-con and in two patients after OLIF-one. Pre- and postoperative slips were 26.3±7.7% and 6.6±6.2% in OLIF-one, and 23.1±7.0% and 7.4±5.8% in OLIF-con. The reduction of slippage was 74.4±6.3% after OLIF-one and 65.4±5.7% after OLIF-con, with a significant difference between the two groups (p = .04). The cage was located at 34.2±8.9% after OLIF-one and at 42.8±10.3% after OLIF-con, with a significant difference between the two groups (p = .004). Switching the sequence of surgical procedures with OLIF-one facilitated both the reduction of spondylolisthesis and the placement of the cage at the desired location.

Assessing Alignment Using GAP Score and Complications for Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy Revision Surgeries for Sagittal Deformity in Previously Fused Spines Using a Satellite Rod Technique

Pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) is a surgical technique to restore lumbar lordosis in patients with rigid sagittal deformity. Herein, we report on outcomes of a surgical technique utilizing a 4-rod PSO with satellite rods. A retrospective study was performed for a cohort of patients who underwent 4-rod PSO revision surgery for sagittal deformity. Procedures were performed by one surgeon at 2 different academic centers between 2004-2018. Alignment outcomes and complications specifically for revision surgeries in previously fused spines were assessed. 40 patients underwent PSO with the satellite rod technique (n= 29 at L3, 72.5%; n= 7 at L4, 17.5%). Mean PSO angle was 28.7 ± 7.6°. Two patients (5%) had rod fracture necessitating revision surgery at 32 and 34months. Three patients (7.5%) developed proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK), but none required revision. No patients developed pseudoarthrosis. Mean preoperative sagittal vertical axis (SVA) was 13.5 ± 7.3cm, which decreased to 4.8 ± 7.3cm (P= 0.002) postoperatively. Mean preoperative pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch improved from 35.9 ± 16.6° preoperatively to 11.8 ± 14.6° postoperatively (P < 0.001). Mean preoperative pelvic tilt (PT) improved from 34.7 ± 9.8° preoperatively to 30.1 ± 9.0° (P= 0.026) postoperatively. Mean global alignment and proportion (GAP) score improved from 10 ± 2 preoperatively to 8 ± 2 postoperatively (P < 0.001), which was still considered severely disproportioned. Rod failure rate after PSO with the 4-rod satellite configuration was low. SVA, PI-LL mismatch, and PT significantly improved for these previously-fused patients. Mean GAP score also improved, but was still considered severely disproportioned, likely due to the inability of PSO to correct low LL or PT in previously-fused spines.

Effectiveness of intraoperative table modification for achieving lumbar lordosis in multilevel lumbar fusion surgery: a propensity score-matched study

Background In multilevel posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with posterior screw fixation, obtaining sufficient lumbar lordosis (LL) is difficult, especially in patients with osteoporosis. We performed intraoperative table modification (TM) using gravitational dropping of the patient’s lumbar spine, to improve restoration of LL. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent three- or four-level PLIF between 2005 and 2019. One hundred eleven patients were enrolled, with 96 patients receiving non-TM-PLIF and 15 patients receiving TM-PLIF. Radiological parameters, including segmental lordosis (SL), LL, sacral slope (SS), pelvic incidence, and pelvic tilt, were measured. Clinical outcomes were measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS) for the back and leg preoperatively and at the last follow-up. Additionally, the correlation between the bone mineral density (BMD) and the radiological parameters was calculated for TM-PLIF. We performed propensity score matching between the groups to control the baseline difference. Results We found a statistically better correction between immediate and last follow-up postoperative SL (p = 0.04), as well as between preoperative and last follow-up SL (p < 0.01) in the TM-PLIF group compared to that in the non-TM-PLIF group. VAS for the back and leg were not significantly different between the two groups. Additionally, the efficacy of lordosis correction in the TM-PLIF group showed a statistically significant negative correlation between BMD and the SS change both before and after the surgery (rho = −0.60, p = 0.02). Conclusion Whilst further study is required to conclusively establish its efficacy, TM-PLIF (table modification using gravitational dropping) shows potential advantages for restoring and maintaining LL in multilevel lumbar fusion, particularly in cases with low BMD.

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using banana-shaped and straight cages: meta-analysis of clinical and radiological outcomes.

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgery rate increased over the last decade. There is no consensus about the better shape of cage to use in TLIF. This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the shape focusing on bony union, lordosis restoration as well as perioperative complications. PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar (page 1-20) were searched till September 2022. The clinical outcomes consisted of the bony union, segmental and lumbar lordosis restoration, quality of life, and operation-related outcomes. Only 5 studies were included in this meta-analysis. Straight-shaped cages tended to have a lower subsidence rate compared to banana-shaped cages (p = 0.10), had a better restoration of segmental lordosis (p < 0.0001), better disc height restoration (p = 0.01), as well as a higher Oswestry Disability Index decrease (p = 0.0002). Straight-shaped cages had a better restoration of lumbar lordosis, disc height, and a lower subsidence rate when compared to banana-shaped cages. This may be explained by the absence of the optimal placement of the curved cages, which is at the most anterior part of the disc space. Better conducted randomized controlled trial could strengthen these findings.

Utility of Expandable Interbody Cages in Open Transforaminal Interbody Fusions: A Comparison With Static Cages.

Background Expandable interbody cages, while popular in minimally invasive fusions due to their slim profile and increased ease of insertion, have not been widely explored in open surgery. The benefits of expandable cages may also extend to open fusions through their potential to achieve a greater restoration of lumbar lordosis while minimizing intraoperative complications. To highlight these benefits, we present a case series of adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients treated with an open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) using expandable cages and compare outcomes to those of patients treated with static cages from the literature. Methods A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent a deformity correction procedure and TLIF with expandable interbody cages at Brigham and Women's Hospital between 2018 and 2022 was conducted. Patient demographics, complications, and pre- and postoperative radiographic parameters of spinopelvic alignment were collected. A literature search was completed to identify studies employing static cages. T-tests were performed to compare postoperative changes in radiographic parameters by cage type. Results Forty-five patients (mean age of 62.6 years) with an average of 2.1 cages placed met the inclusion criteria. Patients experienced five intraoperative complications and 23 neurologic deficits (from minor to major), while nine patients required a revision operation. Lumbar lordosis increased by 9.8° ± 14.5° (p < 0.0001), the sagittal vertical axis (SVA) decreased by 25.5 mm ± 56.7 mm (p = 0.0048), and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch decreased by 13.3° ± 17.5° (p < 0.0001) with the use of expandable cages. Expandable cages yielded similar changes in lumbar lordosis to 15° and 8° cagesbut improved the lumbar lordosis generated from rectangular and 4° cages. When compared to static cages, expandable cages mildly reduced intraoperative complications. Conclusions Expandable interbody cages are an effective means of restoring spinopelvic alignment in ASD that have the potential to improve patient outcomes in open fusions compared to standard static cages. Especially when compared to rectangular and 4° static cages, expandable cages provide a clear benefit in the correction of lumbar lordosis. The impact of open spinal fusions with expandable cages on outcomes should continue to be explored in other cohorts.

A Comparison of Radiographic Alignment between Bilateral and Unilateral Interbody Cages in Patients Undergoing Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Retrospective cohort study. To compare radiographic outcomes between unilateral and bilateral cage placement in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIF) and to determine if the rate of fusion at the 1-year postoperative point was different in patients who received bilateral versus unilateral cages. There is no clear evidence to dictate whether bilateral or unilateral cages promote superior radiographic or surgical outcomes in TLIF. Patients >18 years old who underwent primary one- or two-level TLIFs at our institution were identified and propensitymatched in a 3:1 fashion (unilateral:bilateral). Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, and radiographic outcomes, including vertebral endplate obliquity, segmental lordosis, subsidence, and fusion status, were compared between groups. Of the 184 patients included, 46 received bilateral cages. Bilateral cage placement was associated with greater subsidence (1.06±1.25 mm vs. 0.59±1.16 mm, p=0.028) and enhanced restoration of segmental lordosis (5.74°±14.1° vs. -1.57°±10.9°, p=0.002) at the 1-year postoperative point, while unilateral cage placement was associated with an increased correction of endplate obliquity (-2.02°±4.42° vs. 0.24°±2.81°, p<0.001). Bilateral cage placement was significantly associated with radiographic fusion on bivariate analysis (89.1% vs. 70.3%, p=0.018) and significantly predicted radiographic fusion on multivariable regression analysis (estimate, 1.35; odds ratio, 3.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.51-12.05; p=0.010). Bilateral interbody cage placement in TLIF procedures was associated with restoration of lumbar lordosis and increased fusion rates. However, endplate obliquity correction was significantly greater for patients who received a unilateral cage.

Reduction of spondylolisthesis and restoration of lumbar lordosis after anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF)

BackgroundAnterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is a well-established surgical treatment option for various diseases of the lumbar spine, including spondylolisthesis. This study aimed to evaluate the postoperative correction of spondylolisthesis and restoration of lumbar and segmental lordosis after ALIF.MethodsPatients with spondylolisthesis who underwent ALIF between 2013 and 2019 were retrospectively assessed. We assessed the following parameters pre-and postoperatively (6-months follow-up): Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), L4/S1 lordosis, and degree of spondylolisthesis.Results96 patients were included. In 84 cases (87.50%), additional dorsal instrumentation was performed. The most frequent diagnosis was isthmic spondylolisthesis (73.96%). VAS was reduced postoperatively, from 70 to 40, as was ODI (50% to 32%). LL increased from 59.15° to 64.45°, as did SL (18.95° to 28.55°) and L4/S1 lordosis (37.90° to 44.00°). Preoperative spondylolisthesis was 8.90 mm and was reduced to 6.05 mm postoperatively. Relative spondylolisthesis was 21.63% preoperatively and 13.71% postoperatively. All clinical and radiological improvements were significant (all p < 0.001). No significant difference considering the lordosis values nor spondylolisthesis was found between patients who underwent ALIF surgery without dorsal instrumentation and patients who received additional dorsal instrumentation. Venous laceration was the most frequent complication (10.42%).ConclusionsWith ALIF, good clinical results and safe and effective reduction of spondylolisthesis and restoration of lordosis can be achieved. Additional dorsal instrumentation does not significantly affect postoperative lordosis or spondylolisthesis. Individual vascular anatomy must be reviewed preoperatively before considering ALIF.

Does vacuum phenomenon at non-fused discs affect the postoperative course after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in patients showing a positive value of difference in lumbar lordosis?

IntroductionPreoperative difference in lumbar lordosis (DiLL) was associated with surgical outcomes after single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Patients with DiLL>0 (DiLL (+)) tended to show worse clinical outcomes and postoperative greater restoration of lumbar lordosis (LL). However, some patients with DiLL (+) showed relatively good outcomes and no postoperative LL restration. This study aimed to elucidate whether the lumbar intervertebral disc vacuum phenomenon (VP) influences clinical course after single-level TLIF in patients with DiLL (+) and DiLL (−). MethodsPatients with lumbar spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis treated with single-level TLIF were included. Pre- and postoperative LL were measured, and postoperative LL improvement was calculated. Preoperative DiLL was calculated as preoperative supine LL minus standing LL. Severity of VP at the non-fused discs (SVP (non-FS)) was evaluated using preoperative reconstructed computed tomography imaging. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Oswestry disability index, visual analogue scale (VAS; low back pain (LBP), lower-extremity pain, numbness, and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire. Patients were stratified by the median preoperative SVP (non-FS) score into severe and mild VP groups in patients with DiLL (+) or DiLL (−), and their surgical outcomes were compared. ResultsOverall, 89 patients were included. In patients with DiLL (+) (n = 37), patients with severe VP showed worse clinical outcomes, particulary for LBP and DiLL (+) patients with mild VP showed greater LL improvement (6.5° ± 10.0°). In patients with DiLL(−) (n = 52), patients with severe VP showed worse clinical outcomes, particularly for LBP and no differences in preoperative, postoperative, and improvement of LL were observed between two groups. ConclusionPatients with DiLL (+) and DiLL (−) showed different clinical courses depending on VP severity at the non-fused discs after single-level TLIF.

Lumbar Lordosis Distribution in Asymptomatic Adult Volunteers: A Systematic Review.

Restoring lumbar lordosis is important for adult spinal deformity surgery. Several reports have suggested that lumbar lordosis distribution has a significant impact on the outcome of surgery, including lumbar distribution index (LDI), proximal lumbar lordosis (PLL), and distal lumbar lordosis (DLL). The features of lumbar lordosis distribution are inconclusive in asymptomatic adults. We sought to evaluate the variation of lumbar lordosis distribution (LDI, PLL, and DLL) and to identify associated factors in asymptomatic adult volunteers. We performed a systematic review of the Embase and Medline databases to identify studies in asymptomatic adult volunteers to evaluate lumbar lordosis distribution including LDI, PLL, and DLL. Twelve articles met eligibility criteria and were included in our review. The respective pooled estimates of mean and variance, respectively, were 65.10% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 62.61-67.58) and 13.70% in LDI, 16.51° (95% CI: 5.54-27.49) and 11.46° in PLL, and 35.47° (95% CI: 32.79-38.18) and 9.10° in DLL. Lumbar lordosis distribution was associated with race, age, sex, body mass index, pelvic incidence, and Roussouly classification. This systematic review found that despite a wide variation in LDI and PLL, DLL is maintained in a narrower range in asymptomatic adult volunteers, especially in white populations. Distal lumbar lordosis may be a more reliable radiographic parameter to restore the lumbar lordosis distribution in preoperative planning.

Correlation between surgical restoration of lumbar lordosis and the change in global tilt (GT) in adult spinal deformity

Correlation between surgical restoration of lumbar lordosis and the change in global tilt (GT) in adult spinal deformity

Efficacy of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of double-level lumbar spondylolisthesis with sagittal imbalance

ObjectiveTo analyze the clinical efficacy of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in the treatment of continuous double-level lumbar spondylolisthesis with sagittal imbalance.MethodsThe clinical data of 36 patients with double-level spondylolisthesis treated with TLIF were included and divided into L3/L4 double spondylolisthesis group and L4/L5 double spondylolisthesis group according to the site of spondylolisthesis. The sagittal parameters of the patients were measured by standing anteroposterior and lateral X-rays of the whole spine, and the visual analogue scale (VAS) for lumbar and lower limb pain, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were recorded. The imaging parameters and clinical parameters of the patients before surgery, after surgery, and at the last follow-up were compared and statistically analyzed.ResultsA total of 36 patients were included in the study and all had sagittal imbalance. Among them, there were 21 cases of L3 and L4 spondylolisthesis, 6 males and 15 females, with an average age of 64.7 ± 9.4 years; there were 15 cases of L4 and L5 spondylolisthesis, 4 males and 11 females, with an average age of 66.5 ± 8.0 years. 36 patients completed the operation, the operation time was 190.28 ± 6.12 min, and intraoperative blood loss was 345 ± 11 ml. Compared with preoperative, there were significant differences in SVA, TPA, T1-SPi, LL, PT, SS, PI-LL, SD, SA, and SP between patients after surgery and at the last follow-up (P < 0.05). Compared with preoperative, VAS score, JOA score, and ODI index of waist and lower limbs were significantly improved after the operation and at the last follow-up, and there was a significant difference (P < 0.05).ConclusionTLIF can effectively relieve the symptoms of patients with continuous double-level lumbar spondylolisthesis, restore lumbar lordosis and sagittal spinal sequence, and improve the quality of life of patients.

Surgical sequence in anterior column realignment with posterior osteotomy is important for degree of adult spinal deformity correction: advantages and indications for posterior to anterior sequence

BackgroundWe hypothesized that posterior osteotomy prior to ACR (Anterior column realignment) through P-A-P surgical sequence would permit a greater correction for deformity corrective surgery than the traditional A-P sequence without posterior osteotomy. This study aimed to determine the impact of the P-A-P sequence on the restoration of lumbar lordosis (LL) compared to the A-P sequence in deformity corrective surgery for adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients and to identify the characteristics of patients who require this sequence. MethodsBetween 2017 and 2019, 260 ASD patients who had undergone combined corrective surgery were reviewed retrospectively. This study included 178 patients who underwent posterior osteotomy before the ACR (P-A group) and 82 patients who underwent the A-P sequence (A-P group). Sagittal spinopelvic parameters were determined from pre- and postoperative whole-spine radiographs and compared between the groups. To find better indications for the P-A-P sequence, we conducted additional analysis on postoperative outcomes of patients in the A-P group. ResultsThe P-A group showed a significantly higher change in LL (53.7° vs. 44.3°, p < 0.001), C7 sagittal vertical axis (C7 SVA: 197.4 mm vs. 146.1 mm, p = 0.021), segmental lordosis (SL) L2/3 (16.2° vs. 14.4°, p = 0.043), SL L3/4 (16.2° vs. 13.8°, p = 0.004), and SL L4/5 (15.1° vs. 11.3°, p = 0.001) compared to the A-P group. At the final follow-up, pelvic incidence (PI) minus LL mismatch (PI − LL mismatch) was significantly higher in the A-P group (13.4° vs. 2.9°, p < 0.001). Stepwise logistic regression analysis showed that age ≥ 75 years (odds ratio [OR] = 2.151; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.414–3.272; p < 0.001), severe osteoporosis (OR = 2.824; 95% CI, 1.481–5.381; p = 0.002), rigid lumbar curve with dynamic changes in LL < 10° (OR = 5.150; 95% CI, 2.296–11.548; p < 0.001), and severe facet joint osteoarthritis (OR = 4.513; 95% CI, 1.958–10.402; p < 0.001) were independent risk factors for PI − LL mismatch ≥ 10° after A-P surgery.ConclusionP-A-P sequence for deformity corrective surgery in ASD offers greater LL correction than the A-P sequence. Indications for the procedure include patients aged ≥ 75 years, severe osteoporosis, rigid lumbar curve with dynamic change in LL < 10°, or more than four facet joints of Pathria grade 3 in the lumbar region.

Radiographic and MRI evidence of indirect neural decompression after the anterior column realignment procedure for adult spinal deformity.

The anterior column realignment (ACR) procedure, which consists of sectioning the anterior longitudinal ligament/annulus and placing a hyperlordotic interbody cage, has emerged as a minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for achieving aggressive segmental lordosis enhancement to address adult spinal deformity (ASD). Although accumulated evidence has revealed indirect neural decompression after lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), whether ACR serves equally well for neural decompression remains to be proven. The current study intended to clarify this ambiguous issue. A series of 36 ASD patients with spinopelvic mismatch, defined as pelvic incidence (PI) minus lumbar lordosis (LL) > 10°, underwent a combination of ACR, LLIF, and percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) fixation. This "MIS triad" procedure was applied over short segments with mean fusion length of 3.3 levels, and most patients underwent single-level ACR. The authors analyzed full-length standing radiographs, CT and MRI scans, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores in patients with minimum 1 year of follow-up (mean [range] 20.3 [12-39] months). Compared with the preoperative values, the radiographic and MRI measurements of the latest postoperative studies changed as follows. Segmental disc angle more than quadrupled at the ACR level and LL nearly doubled. MRI examinations at the ACR level revealed a significant (p < 0.0001) increase in the area of the dural sac that was accompanied by significant (p < 0.0001) decreases in area and thickness of the ligamentum flavum and in thickness of the disc bulge. The corresponding CT scans demonstrated significant (all p < 0.0001) increases in disc height to 280% of the preoperative value at the anterior edge, 224% at the middle edge, and 209% at the posterior edge, as well as in pedicle-to-pedicle distance to 122%. Mean ODI significantly (p < 0.0001) decreased from 46.3 to 26.0. The CT-based data showing vertebral column lengthening across the entire ACR segment with an increasingly greater degree anteriorly suggest that the corrective action of ACR relies on a lever mechanism, with the intact facet joints acting as the fulcrum. Whole-segment spine lengthening at the ACR level reduced the disc bulge anteriorly and the ligamentum flavum posteriorly, with eventual enlargement of the dural sac. ACR plays an important role in not only LL restoration but also stenotic spinal canal enlargement for ASD surgery.

Multisegment transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) combined with Ponte osteotomy in degenerative lumbar scoliosis (DLS) surgery: a minimum of five years’ follow-up

PurposeTo evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes of degenerative lumbar scoliosis (DLS) with the administration of multisegment transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) combined with Ponte osteotomy long-level fixation fusion, as well as to identify the factors affecting health-related quality of life (HRQOL).MethodsThis was a retrospective single-centre study involving comprehensive clinical data. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) outcomes, and Scoliosis Research Society (SRS-22) questionnaire were recorded to assess HRQOL. A correlation analysis was performed to determine the association between HRQOL and radiographic parameters.ResultsA total of 41 consecutive patients (15 males and 26 females) met the inclusion criteria with a follow-up of 8.62 ± 1.20 years. Factors associated with HRQOL were significantly improved post-operation. Global sagittal parameters, including the sagittal vertebral axis (SVA) and T1 pelvic angle (TPA), and local parameters, including apical vertebral translation (AVT) and apical vertebral rotation (AVR), were significantly improved at the last follow-up. Significantly strong correlations between each clinical and radiographic parameter were demonstrated. Moreover, a multiple linear regression analysis demonstrated that the differences in AVT and AVR were significantly correlated with the difference in lumbar lordosis (LL), which was significantly correlated with the differences in SVA and TPA.ConclusionThe surgical treatment of DLS with multisegment TLIF accompanied by Ponte osteotomy and long-level fixations improved the quality of life of patients with a long-term effect. AVR correction is an important factor for LL restoration that significantly correlates with improvements in the sagittal balance parameters SVA and TPA, which are key factors for guaranteeing good HRQOL.

Does the anterior column realignment technique influences the stresses on posterior instrumentation in sagittal imbalance correction? A biomechanical, finite-element analysis of L5-S1 ALIF and L3-4 lateral ACR.

Biomechanical finite-element study. To directly compare the biomechanical effects of two different techniques for sagittal plane correction of adult spine deformity based on the anterior longitudinal ligament (ALL) resection and use of hyperlordotic cages, namely, the anterior column realignment (ACR) in L3-4, and ALIF in L5-S1 in terms of primary stability and rod stresses using finite-element models. A finite-element model of the thoracolumbar spine was used to perform the analysis. Starting from this "intact" model, three further models were constructed through the insertion of spinal instrumentation, i.e., pedicle screws, rods and cages: 1) posterior instrumentation between T9 and S1 (referred to as "T9-S1"); 2) posterior instrumentation T9-S1 + Hyperlordotic (26°) ALIF cage in L5-S1 ("ALIF"); 3) posterior instrumentation T9-S1 + Hyperlordotic (30°) ACR cage in L3-4 ("ACR"). These models were studied by simulations applying, alternately, a pure moment of 7.5 Nm between the three planes of motion (flexion, extension, lateral bending, and bilateral axial rotation), uniformly distributed over the upper surface of the T9 thoracic vertebra. A total of 24 simulations were performed (6 per models). All models presented a significant reduced ROM when compared to the intact model; the ROM reduction was higher both at L3-4 in the ACR model and at L5-S1 in the ALIF model. At L3-4, the ACR model had, in all cases, the lowest maximum values of Von Mises stresses on the rods, especially in flexion-extension. At L4-5, the ALIF model had the lowest stresses during flexion-extension and axial rotation, while the ACR model had the lowest stresses during lateral bending. At L5-S1, the ALIF model had, in all cases, the lowest stresses on the rods. This finite-element study showed how both ACR at L3-4 and ALIF-ACR at L5-S1 are effective in restoring lumbar lordosis (LL), stabilizing the spine and reducing stress on posterior rods at the index level when compared to a simple fixation model. Interestingly, ALIF-ACR reduces rod stress even at L4-5 in flexion-extension and axial rotation, possibly due to a better distribution of LL, especially on the lower arch, while ACR reduces the stress at L4-5 in lateral bending, possibly thanks to the larger footprint of the cage that increases the area of contact with the lateral side of the endplates.

58. Comparing outcomes for patients undergoing thoracolumbar fusions to either S1 or the pelvis with a prior total hip arthroplasty

58. Comparing outcomes for patients undergoing thoracolumbar fusions to either S1 or the pelvis with a prior total hip arthroplasty

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is a common technique for treating a variety of lumbar spine disorders. Although used predominantly to obtain fusion, it is also excellent for restoring lumbar lordosis and can be used for indirect decompression, especially in the setting of foraminal stenosis.4 The technique is used predominantly at L4-5 and L5-S1, but can be used at L3-4 and even L2-3. ALIF provides an excellent biomechanical environment for arthrodesis. The anterior longitudinal ligament resection allows for excellent restoration of lordosis. ALIF can be performed as an isolated procedure or combined with posterior approaches. Although there are major risks associated with the required abdominal approach, ALIF has reached popularity for its reliability and versatility. With good knowledge of anatomical hazards, the properly indicated patient has much to gain with an ALIF surgery.

Radiographic comparison of lordotic and hyperlordotic implants in L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) used at the lumbosacral junction provides arthrodesis for several indications. The anterior approach allows restoration of lumbar lordosis, an important goal of surgery. With hyperlordotic ALIF implants, several options may be employed to obtain the desired amount of lordosis. In this study, the authors compared the degree of radiographic lordosis achieved with lordotic and hyperlordotic ALIF implants at the L5-S1 segment. All patients undergoing L5-S1 ALIF from 2 institutions over a 4-year interval were included. Patients < 18 years of age or those with any posterior decompression or osteotomy were excluded. ALIF implants in the lordotic group had 8° or 12° of inherent lordosis, whereas implants in the hyperlordotic group had 20° or 30° of lordosis. Upright standing radiographs were used to determine all radiographic parameters, including lumbar lordosis, segmental lordosis, disc space lordosis, and disc space height. Separate analyses were performed for patients who underwent single-segment fixation at L5-S1 and for the overall cohort. A total of 204 patients were included (hyperlordotic group, 93 [45.6%]; lordotic group, 111 [54.4%]). Single-segment ALIF at L5-S1 was performed in 74 patients (hyperlordotic group, 27 [36.5%]; lordotic group, 47 [63.5%]). The overall mean ± SD age was 61.9 ± 12.3 years; 58.3% of patients (n = 119) were women. The mean number of total segments fused was 3.2 ± 2.6. Overall, 66.7% (n = 136) of patients had supine surgery and 33.3% (n = 68) had lateral surgery. Supine positioning was significantly more common in the hyperlordotic group than in the lordotic group (83.9% [78/93] vs 52.3% [58/111], p < 0.001). After adjusting for differences in surgical positioning, the change in lumbar lordosis was significantly greater for hyperlordotic versus lordotic implants (3.6° ± 7.5° vs 0.4° ± 7.5°, p = 0.048) in patients with single-level fusion. For patients receiving hyperlordotic versus lordotic implants, changes were also significantly greater for segmental lordosis (12.4° ± 7.5° vs 8.4° ± 4.9°, p = 0.03) and disc space lordosis (15.3° ± 5.4° vs 9.3° ± 5.8°, p < 0.001) after single-level fusion at L5-S1. The change in disc space height was similar for these 2 groups (p = 0.23). Hyperlordotic implants provided a greater degree of overall lumbar lordosis restoration as well as L5-S1 segmental and disc space lordosis restoration than lordotic implants. The change in disc space height was similar. Differences in lateral and supine positioning did not affect these parameters.