Single-level Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Research Articles

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.

Graft subsidence and reoperation after lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a propensity score-matched and cost analysis of polyetheretherketone versus 3D-printed porous titanium interbodies.

Lumbar interbody cage subsidence has a multifactorial etiology. Cage material, although well studied after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion, has not been investigated as a contributing factor to subsidence after lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). In this study the authors compared rates of subsidence and reoperation after LLIF between polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and 3D-printed porous titanium (pTi) in an institutional propensity score-matched and cost analysis. This is a retrospective observational cohort analysis of adult patients who underwent LLIF with pTi versus PEEK between 2016 and 2020. Demographic, clinical, and radiographic characteristics were collected. Propensity scores were calculated and 1:1 matching without replacement of surgically treated levels was performed. The primary outcome of interest was subsidence. The Marchi subsidence grade was determined at the time of last follow-up. Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests were used to compare subsidence and reoperation rates between lumbar levels treated with PEEK versus pTi. Modeling and cost analysis were performed using TreeAge Pro Healthcare. The authors identified a total of 192 patients; 137 underwent LLIF with PEEK (212 levels) and 55 had LLIF with pTi (97 levels). After propensity score matching, a total of 97 lumbar levels remained in each treatment group. After matching, there were no statistically significant differences between groups in baseline characteristics. Levels treated with pTi were significantly less likely to exhibit subsidence (any grade) compared to those treated with PEEK (8% vs 27%, p = 0.001). Five (5.2%) levels treated with PEEK required reoperation for subsidence, but only 1 (1.0%) level treated with pTi required reoperation for subsidence (p = 0.12). Given subsidence and revision rates experienced in the cohorts in this study, the pTi interbody device is economically superior to PEEK in a single-level LLIF as long as its cost is at least $1185.94 lower than that of PEEK. The pTi interbody device was associated with less subsidence, but statistically similar revision rates after LLIF. pTi is potentially a superior economic choice at this study's reported revision rate.

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) reduces total lifetime cost compared with posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) for single-level lumbar spinal fusion surgery: a cost-utility analysis in Thailand

BackgroundLumbar interbody fusion techniques treat degenerative lumbar diseases effectively. Minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) decreases soft tissue disruption and accelerates recovery better than standard open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). However, the material cost of LLIF is high, especially in Thailand. The cost-effectiveness of LLIF and PLIF in developing countries is unclear. This study compared the cost-utility and clinical outcomes of LLIF and PLIF in Thailand.MethodsData from patients with lumbar spondylosis who underwent single-level LLIF and PLIF between 2014 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative and 1-year follow-up EuroQol-5D-5L and healthcare costs were collected. A cost-utility analysis with a lifetime time horizon was performed using a societal perspective. Outcomes are reported as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. A Thai willingness-to-pay threshold of 5003 US dollars (USD) per QALY gained was used.ResultsThe 136 enrolled patients had a mean age of 62.26 ± 11.66 years. Fifty-nine patients underwent LLIF, while 77 underwent PLIF. The PLIF group experienced greater estimated blood loss (458.96 vs 167.03 ml; P < 0.001), but the LLIF group had a longer operative time (222.80 vs 194.62 min; P = 0.007). One year postoperatively, the groups’ Oswestry Disability Index and EuroQol-Visual Analog Scale scores were improved without statistical significance. The PLIF group had a significantly better utility score than the LLIF group (0.89 vs 0.84; P = 0.023). LLIF’s total lifetime cost was less than that of PLIF (30,124 and 33,003 USD). Relative to PLIF, LLIF was not cost-effective according to the Thai willingness-to-pay threshold, with an ICER of 19,359 USD per QALY gained.ConclusionsLLIF demonstrated lower total lifetime cost from a societal perspective. Regard to our data, at the 1-year follow-up, the improvement in patient quality of life was less with LLIF than with PLIF. Additionally, economic evaluation modeling based on the context of Thailand showed that LLIF was not cost-effective compared with PLIF. A strategy that facilitates the selection of patients for LLIF is required to optimize patient benefits.

Subsidence after lateral lumbar interbody fusion using a 3D-printed porous titanium interbody cage: single-institution case series.

Cage subsidence is a well-known phenomenon after lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), occurring in 10%-20% of cases. A 3D-printed porous titanium (pTi) cage has a stiffness that mimics the modulus of elasticity of native vertebrae, which reduces stress at the bone-hardware interface, lowering the risk of subsidence. In this study, the authors evaluated their institutional rate of subsidence and resultant reoperation in patients who underwent LLIF using a 3D-printed pTi interbody cage. This is a retrospective case series of consecutive adult patients who underwent LLIF using pTi cages from 2018 to 2020. Demographic and clinical characteristics including age, sex, bone mineral density, smoking status, diabetes, steroid use, number of fusion levels, posterior instrumentation, and graft size were collected. The Marchi subsidence grade was determined at the time of last follow-up. Outcome measures of interest were subsidence and resultant reoperation. Univariable logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the extent to which clinical and operative characteristics were associated with Marchi grade I-III subsidence. Significance was assessed at p < 0.05. Fifty-five patients (38 with degenerative disc disease and 17 with adult spinal deformity) were treated with 97 pTi interbody cages with a mean follow-up of 18 months. The mean age was 63.6 ± 10.1 years, 60% of patients were female, and 36% of patients had osteopenia or osteoporosis. Patients most commonly underwent single-level LLIF (58.2%). Sixteen patients (29.1%) had posterior instrumentation. The subsidence grade distribution was as follows: 89 (92%) grade 0, 5 (5%) grade I, 2 (2%) grade II, and 1 (1%) grade III. No patients who were active or prior smokers and no patients with posterior instrumentation experienced graft subsidence. No clinical or operative characteristics were significantly associated with graft subsidence. One patient (1.8%) required reoperation because of subsidence. In this institutional case series, subsidence of pTi intervertebral cages after LLIF occurred in 8% of operated levels, 3% of which were grade II or III. Only 1 patient required reoperation. These reported rates are lower than those reported for polyetheretherketone implants. Further studies are necessary to compare the impact of these cage materials on subsidence after LLIF.

Rates of Postoperative Complications and Approach-related Neurological Symptoms After L4-L5 Lateral Transpsoas Lumbar Interbody Fusion Compared With Upper Lumbar Levels.

This was a retrospective comparative study. To compare the likelihood of approach-related complications for patients undergoing single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) at L4-L5 to those undergoing the procedure at upper lumbar levels. LLIF has been associated with a number of advantages when compared with traditional interbody fusion techniques. However, potential risks with the approach include vascular or visceral injury, thigh dysesthesias, and lumbar plexus injury. There are concerns of a higher risk of these complications at the L4-L5 level compared with upper lumbar levels. A retrospective cohort review was completed for consecutive patients undergoing single-level LLIF between 2004 and 2019 by a single surgeon. Indication for surgery was symptomatic degenerative lumbar stenosis and/or spondylolisthesis. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts: LLIF at L4-L5 versus a single level between L1 and L4. Baseline characteristics, intraoperative complications, postoperative approach-related neurological symptoms, and patient-reported outcomes were compared and analyzed between the cohorts. A total of 122 were included in analysis, of which 58 underwent LLIF at L4-L5 and 64 underwent LLIF between L1 and L4. There were no visceral or vascular injuries or lumbar plexus injuries in either cohort. There was no significant difference in the rate of postoperative hip pain, anterior thigh dysesthesias, and/or hip flexor weakness between the cohorts (53.5% L4-L5 vs. 37.5% L1-L4; P =0.102). All patients reported complete resolution of these symptoms by 6-month postoperative follow-up. LLIF surgery at the L4-L5 level is associated with a similar infrequent likelihood of approach-related complications and postoperative hip pain, thigh dysesthesias, and hip flexor weakness when compared with upper lumbar level LLIF. Careful patient selection, meticulous use of real-time neuromonitoring, and an understanding of the anatomic location of the lumbar plexus to the working corridor are critical to success.

Comparative Study of Cage Subsidence in Single-Level Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

We investigated the incidence and clinical features of cage subsidence after single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). We studied a retrospective cohort of 59 patients (34 males, 25 females; mean age, 68.9 years) who received single-level LLIF. Patients were classified into subsidence and no-subsidence groups. Cage subsidence was defined as any violation of either endplate, classified using radiographs and computed tomography (CT) images. After one year, we compared patient characteristics, surgical parameters, radiological findings, pain scores, and fusion status. We also compared the Hounsfield unit (HU) endplate value obtained on CT preoperatively. Twenty patients (33.9%) had radiographic evidence of interbody cage subsidence. There were significant differences between the subsidence and no-subsidence groups in sex, cage height, fusion rate, and average HU value of both endplates (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in age, height, weight, or body mass index. Moreover, there were no significant differences in global alignment and Numerical Rating Scale change in low back pain, leg pain, and numbness. Despite suggestions that patients with lower HU values might develop cage subsidence, our results showed that cage subsidence after single-level LLIF was not associated with low back pain, leg pain, or numbness one year post-operation.

Computed Tomography Hounsfield Units as a Predictor of Reoperation and Graft Subsidence After Standalone and Multilevel Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Standalone single and multilevel lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) have been increasingly applied to treat degenerative spinal conditions in a less invasive fashion. Graft subsidence following LLIF is a known complication and has been associated with poor bone mineral density (BMD). Previous research has demonstrated the utility of computed tomography (CT) Hounsfield units (HUs) as a surrogate for BMD. In the present study, we investigated the relationship between the CT HUs and subsidence and reoperation after standalone and multilevel LLIF. A prospectively maintained single-institution database was retrospectively reviewed for LLIF patients from 2017 to 2020, including single and multilevel standalone cases with and without supplemental posterior fixation. Data on demographics, graft parameters, BMD determined by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry, preoperative mean segmental CT HUs, and postoperative subsidence and reoperation were collected. We used 36-in. standing radiographs to measure the preoperative global sagittal alignment and disc height and subsidence at last follow-up. Subsidence was classified using the Marchi grading system corresponding to disc height loss: grade 0, 0%-24%; grade I, 25%-49%; grade II, 50%-74%; and grade III, 75%-100%. A total of 89 LLIF patients had met the study criteria, with a mean follow-up of 19.9 ± 13.9 months. Of the 54 patients who had undergone single-level LLIF, the mean segmental HUs were 152.0 ± 8.7 for 39 patients with grade 0 subsidence, 136.7 ± 10.4 for 9 with grade I subsidence, 133.9 ± 23.1 for 3 with grade II subsidence, and 119.9 ± 30.9 for 3 with grade III subsidence (P= 0.032). Of the 96 instrumented levels in the 35 patients who had undergone multilevel LLIF, 85, 9, 1, and 1 level had had grade 0, grade I, grade II, and grade III subsidence, with no differences in the HU levels. On multivariate logistic regression, increased CT HU levels were independently associated with a decreased risk of reoperation after both single-level and multilevel LLIF (odds ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.97-0.99; P= 0.044; and odds ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-0.99; P= 0.017, respectively). Overall, the BMD determined using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry was not associated with graft subsidence or reoperation. Using a receiver operating characteristic curve to separate the patients who had and had not required reoperation, the threshold HU level determined for single-level and multilevel LLIF was 131.4 (sensitivity, 0.62; specificity 0.65) and 131.0 (sensitivity, 0.67; specificity, 0.63), respectively. Lower CT HUs were independently associated with an increased risk of graft subsidence after single-level LLIF. In addition, lower CT HUs significantly increased the risk of reoperation after both single and multilevel LLIF with a critical threshold of 131 HUs. The determination of the preoperative CT HUs might provide a more robust gauge of local bone quality and the likelihood of graft subsidence requiring reoperation following LLIF than overall BMD.

Radiographic and clinical evaluation of single-level lateral interbody fusion in patients with severe stenosis analyzed using cluster analysis.

This study was a retrospective review of patients treated in a single institution. We performed a cluster analysis of the degree of preoperative stenosis to investigate the effect of indirect neural decompression in single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). Surgery is generally indicated for patients with severe stenosis. On the other hand, severe lumbar spinal stenosis is a relative contraindication to LLIF and is excluded in most studies. If LLIF, which is less invasive to treatment, can be applied to severe stenosis patients, it may help treatment. Cluster analysis classified 80 patients into 3 groups based on preoperative central canal area (CCA), preoperative canal diameter (CD), and preoperative Schizas grade: group 1 with severe stenosis (n = 43); group 2 with moderate stenosis (n = 27); and group 3 with mild stenosis (n = 10). Preoperative and immediately postoperative CCA and CD in magnetic resonance imaging were compared between groups. Disc angle (DA) and anterior, posterior, and average disc heights (AvDH) (anterior disc height, posterior disc height, average disc height AvDH) were measured using standing lateral plain radiographs. For clinical analysis, a numeric rating scale was used to evaluate clinical outcomes. DA, anterior disc height, posterior disc height, and AvDH increased significantly after the operation in all groups, but the average changes in these factors did not differ. Mean midsagittal CD and axial CCA on MRI magnetic resonance imaging increased significantly in all groups, but as with DA and DH, the changes in axial CCA and midsagittal CD did not differ between groups. The numeric rating scale score did not differ between groups at any time. The cluster analysis results suggested that postoperative changes in indirect neural decompression for severe stenosis after LLIF similar for moderate and mild stenosis and that pain did not differ according to the severity of stenosis after surgery.

Effects of Total Psoas Area Index on Surgical Outcomes of Single-Level Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion

We evaluated the effect of the total psoas area index (TPAI= total psoas muscle area [cm2]/height squared [m2]) on neurological complications and clinical outcomes after lateral lumbar interbody fusion and identified the appropriate TPAI to achieve a substantial clinical benefit (SCB). A consecutive series of 123 patients who had undergone single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion at a single center with ≥2 years of follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. The patient characteristics and operative data were evaluated. The neurological complications were classified as transient and persistent symptoms. The visual analog scale score for back pain was assessed preoperatively and at 1 and 2 years postoperatively. The present study included 31 men and 92 women. The mean TPAI was 8.97 cm2/m2 for the men and 5.04 cm2/m2 for the women. The mean TPAI was not significantly different between the patients with and without perioperative neurological complications. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that solid interbody fusion was the most significant factor for achieving an SCB regarding back pain in men (odds ratio [OR], 2.453; P= 0.019) and women (OR, 2.906; P= 0.042). The TPAI was one of the predictors for achieving an SCB in men (OR, 1.251; P= 0.038) and women (OR, 1.795; P= 0.023). The optimal cutoff point of the TPAI for an SCB was 8.18 cm2/m2 for the men and 4.43 cm2/m2 for the women. The TPAI had little effect on the incidence of perioperative neurological complications. However, the TPAI was identified as one of the predictors for achieving an SCB regarding back pain.

Radiographs assessment of changes in the psoas muscle at L4-L5 level after single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion in patients with postoperative motor weakness

The purposes of this study were (1) to investigate postoperative changes in cross-sectional area (CSA) and signal intensity (SI) of the psoas muscle (PS) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and (2) to compare the CSA and SI of the PS between patients with and without motor weakness after single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) at level L4–L5. Sixty patients were divided into two groups—those with postoperative motor weakness and those without—and the two groups were compared. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics, such as operation time and blood loss, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications, were recorded. The CSA and SI of the PS were obtained from the MRI regions of interest defined by manual tracing. Patients who developed motor weakness after surgery were significantly older (p = 0.040). The operation time (p = 0.868), LLIF operative time (p = 0.476), and estimated bleeding loss (p = 0.168) did not differ significantly between groups. In both groups, the CSA and SI of the left and right PS increased after surgery. The change in the CSA of the left PS was significantly higher in patients with weakness (247.6 ± 155.2 mm2) than without weakness (152.2 ± 133.1 mm2) (p = 0.036). The change in SI of the left PS did not differ between the two groups (p = 0.530). To prevent postoperative motor weakness regardless of the operation time, surgeons should be aware of the potential for surgical invasive of the PS during LLIF in older people.

Intraoperative Radiographs in Single-level Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Can Predict Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes of Follow-up 2 Years After Surgery.

Some of the improvements in DH, FH, and SLL achieved intraoperatively during lateral lumbar interbody fusion surgery were lost by the postoperative 1-week follow-up. An intraoperative radiograph can predict radiographic and clinical outcomes of the 2-year follow-up. The difference between preoperative DH and intraoperative DH should be >4.18 mm.

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.

Cluster analysis to predict factors associated with sufficient indirect decompression immediately after single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion

ObjectiveChanges in indirect decompression using lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) were classified into three clusters based on cluster analysis. We investigated cage variables and position to assess the effects of single-level LLIF on indirect decompression. MethodsCluster analysis was used to classify patients into three groups based on the change in the axial cross-sectional spinal canal area (ΔCSA): group 1 with slight postoperative indirect decompression (n = 35); group 2 with average indirect decompression (n = 19); and group 3 with marked indirect decompression (n = 13). Preoperative and immediately postoperative imaging data were compared between groups. ResultsPostoperative segmental lordosis, anterior, posterior, and average disc height increased significantly in each group, but the differences between groups were not significant. Cage length (p = 0.251) and cage height (p = 0.709) did not differ, but cage position differed significantly between groups (p < 0.05). ΔCSA correlated significantly with cage position for all 67 levels (r = 0.411, p < 0.01), but this association was not significant in group 2 (r = − 0.367, p = 0.122) or group 3 (r = − 0.005, p = 0.986). ΔCSA correlated with cage height in group 2 (r = 0.645, p < 0.01) and with cage width in group 3 (r = 0.644, p < 0.05). ConclusionsThe cluster analysis results suggest that placing the cage in the posterior position might be effective for expanding the CSA, but other factors, such as cage height or width, may also influence the sufficiency of LLIF.

The association between lower Hounsfield units on computed tomography and cage subsidence after lateral lumbar interbody fusion

One vexing problem after lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) surgery is cage subsidence. Low bone mineral density (BMD) may contribute to subsidence, and BMD is correlated with Hounsfield units (HUs) on CT. The authors investigated if lower HU values correlated with subsidence after LLIF. A retrospective study of patients undergoing single-level LLIF with pedicle screw fixation for degenerative conditions at the University of California, San Francisco, by 6 spine surgeons was performed. Data on demographics, cage parameters, preoperative HUs on CT, and postoperative subsidence were collected. Thirty-six-inch standing radiographs were used to measure segmental lordosis, disc space height, and subsidence; data were collected immediately postoperatively and at 1 year. Subsidence was graded using a published grade of disc height loss: grade 0, 0%-24%; grade I, 25%-49%; grade II, 50%-74%; and grade III, 75%-100%. HU values were measured on preoperative CT from L1 to L5, and each lumbar vertebral body HU was measured 4 separate times. After identifying 138 patients who underwent LLIF, 68 met the study inclusion criteria. All patients had single-level LLIF with pedicle screw fixation. The mean follow-up duration was 25.3 ± 10.4 months. There were 40 patients who had grade 0 subsidence, 15 grade I, 9 grade II, and 4 grade III. There were no significant differences in age, sex, BMI, or smoking. There were no significant differences in cage sizes, cage lordosis, and preoperative disc height. The mean segmental HU (the average HU value of the two vertebrae above and below the LLIF) was 169.5 ± 45 for grade 0, 130.3 ± 56.2 for grade I, 100.7 ± 30.2 for grade II, and 119.9 ± 52.9 for grade III (p < 0.001). After using a receiver operating characteristic curve to establish separation criteria between mild and severe subsidence, the most appropriate threshold of HU value was 135.02 between mild and severe subsidence (sensitivity 60%, specificity 92.3%). After univariate and multivariate analysis, preoperative segmental HU value was an independent risk factor for severe cage subsidence (p = 0.017, OR 15.694, 95% CI 1.621-151.961). Lower HU values on preoperative CT are associated with cage subsidence after LLIF. Measurement of preoperative HU values on CT may be useful when planning LLIF surgery.

Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of Multilevel Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Adult Degenerative Scoliosis.

Retrospective review of prospective data. The objective of this study was to describe the clinical, radiographic, and complication-related outcomes through ≥1-year of 27 patients who underwent lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) with posterior instrumentation to treat ≥3 contiguous levels of degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Multilevel disease has traditionally been treated with open posterior fusion. Literature on multilevel LLIF is limited. We present our experience with utilizing LLIF to treat multilevel degenerative scoliosis. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using VAS, SF-12, and ODI. Radiographic outcomes included pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, lumbar lordosis, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch, Cobb angle, and cage subsidence. Perioperative and long-term complications through the ≥1-year final-postoperative visit were reviewed; transient neurological disturbances were assessed independently. Demographic, comorbidity, operative, and recovery variables, including opioid use, were explored for association with primary outcomes. Mean time to final-postoperative visit was 22.5 months; levels treated with LLIF per patient, 3.7; age, 66 years; and lateral operative time, 203 minutes. EBL was ≤100 mL in 74% of cases. Clinical outcomes remained significantly improved at ≥1-year. Cobb angle was corrected from 21.1 to 7.9 degrees (P<0.001), lordosis from 47.3 to 52.6 degrees (P<0.001), and mismatch from 11.4 to 6.4 degrees (P=0.003). High-grade subsidence occurred in 3 patients. Subsidence did not significantly impact primary outcomes. In total, 11.1% returned to the operating room for complication-related intervention over nearly 2-years; 37% experienced complications. Experiencing a complication was associated with having an open-posterior portion (P=0.048), but not with number of LLIF levels treated, or with clinical or radiographic outcomes. No patients experienced protracted neurological deficits; psoas weakness was associated with increased lateral operative time (P=0.049) and decreased surgeon experience (P=0.028). Patients who underwent multilevel LLIF with adjunctive posterior surgery had significant clinical and radiographic improvements. Complication rates were similar compared to literature on single-level LLIF. LLIF is a viable treatment for multilevel degenerative scoliosis.

Comparison of Segmental Lordosis and Global Spinopelvic Alignment After Single-Level Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion or Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) has steadily increased in popularity. Compared with the traditional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), LLIF is thought to allow for greater improvement in lordosis. However, there are limited direct comparison data on the degree of regional and global alignment change after single-level LLIF and TLIF procedures. This study compared the changes in spinal sagittal alignment in patients who underwent either procedure. A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent LLIF or TLIF for lumbar degenerative disease at a single institution was performed. Twenty patients who underwent single-level LLIF were matched to 20 patients who underwent single-level TLIF by gender and level of interbody fusion. All included patients had preoperative and postoperative standing scoliosis radiographs. Changes in segmental lordosis (SL) at the fused level, lumbar lordosis (LL), sagittal vertical axis, and pelvic incidence-LL mismatch (PI-LL) were measured. Statistical analysis was performed using paired and unpaired Student's t-tests. Means were reported with standard error. Within each group, 2, 4, and 14 patients had cages placed at L2-3, L3-4, and L4-5, respectively. The LLIF group demonstrated significantly increased SL compared with the TLIF group (+4.9° ± 3.0 vs.+2.6° ± 1.7, P= 0.01). LL, sagittal vertical axis, and PI-LL changes did not differ significantly between groups. LLIF achieved greater improvements in SL than TLIF. However, regionally and globally, there were no significant differences with either procedure after a single-level intervention. The increased lordosis from LLIF compared with TLIF may be more impactful globally in multilevel fusions.

Mini-Open Access for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Indications, Technique, and Outcomes.

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is a relatively new procedure. It was established as a minimally invasive alternative to traditional open interbody fusion. LLIF allows the surgeon to access the disc space via a retroperitoneal transpsoas muscle approach. Theoretical advantages of the LLIF technique include preservation of the longitudinal ligaments, augmentation of disc height with indirect decompression of neural elements, and insertion of large footprint cages spanning the dense apophyseal ring bilaterally1,2. The original 2-incision LLIF technique described by Ozgur et al., in 2006, had some inherent limitations3. First, it substantially limited direct visualization of the surgical field and may have endangered nerve and vascular structures. Additionally, it often required multiple separated incisions for multilevel pathologies. Finally, for surgeons with experience in traditional open retroperitoneal surgery, utilization of their previously acquired skills may have been difficult with this approach. To overcome these limitations, we adopted the mini-open lateral approach, which allows for visualization, palpation, and electrophysiologic neurologic confirmation during the procedure4. As detailed below, the patient is positioned in the lateral decubitus position and a single incision is carried out centered between the target discs. For single-level LLIF, the incision spans approximately 3 cm and can be lengthened in small increments for multilevel procedures. After blunt dissection, the retroperitoneal space is entered. The psoas muscle is split under direct visualization, carefully avoiding the traversing nerves with neurosurveillance5. A self-retaining retractor is used, and after thorough discectomy, the disc space is sized with trial components. The implant is filled with bone graft materials and is introduced using intraoperative fluoroscopy. The 2-incision LLIF technique or traditional anterior or posterior lumbar spine interbody fusion techniques might be used instead. LLIF offers the reported advantages of minimally invasive surgery, such as reduced tissue trauma during the approach, low blood loss, shorter length of stay, decreased recovery time, and less postoperative pain. LLIF allows for the placement of a relatively larger interbody cage spanning the dense apophyseal ring bilaterally. The lateral approach preserves the anterior longitudinal ligament and posterior longitudinal ligament. These structures allow for powerful ligamentotaxis and provide extra stability for the construct. Compared with other approaches, LLIF has a reduced risk of visceral and vascular injuries, incidental dural tears, and perioperative infections. Although associated with approach-related complications such as motor and sensory deficits, LLIF can be a safe and versatile procedure1,2.

Early clinical and radiological results of unilateral posterior pedicle instrumentation through a Wiltse approach with lateral lumbar interbody fusion.

To assess the clinical outcomes of 44 patients who underwent single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) with unilateral pedicle screw instrumentation through a paramedian Wiltse approach. Demographic, comorbidity, clinical assessment, peri-operative, and complication data were assessed. Visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and short form-12 (SF-12) were used to assess clinical outcomes. Post-operative plain radiographs were assessed for subsidence, cage migration, and fusion. Average age of patients at surgery was 60.8±10.6 years (range, 32-79 years), with 15 males and 29 females. Recombinant human bone morphogenic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) was used in 32 cases (73%) and 13 posterolateral fusions (30%). Average duration of surgery was 195.2±36.9 minutes (range: 111-295 minutes), with an estimated blood loss of 159.3±90.8 cc (range, 50-500 cc). There were no intra-operative complications. Average length of hospital stay was 4.2±2.5 days (range, 2-13 days). Four patients (9%) experienced neurological deficit, 2 of which resolved by 3-month follow-up and 2 of which improved but did not resolve by final follow-up at 11 and 16 months. There was significant improvement in VAS (P<0.001), ODI (P<0.001), and SF-12 physical component (P<0.001), but not for SF-12 mental component (P=0.053). Patients with minimum 6 months radiographic follow-up demonstrated successful fusion in 90% of cases (35/39), with 2 cases of grade 1 (5%) subsidence of the adjacent cranial vertebra, and no cases higher than grade 0 subsidence of the adjacent caudal vertebra. Unilateral pedicle screw instrumentation following LLIF was associated with significant improvement in clinical outcomes and favorable radiographic outcomes.

Single-Level Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Adjacent Segment Disease: A Retrospective Two-Center Study.

A retrospective case series. The aim of this study was to assess the postoperative outcome after single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) for adjacent segment disease (ASD). Although there is a plethora of literature on ASD following traditional arthrodesis techniques, literature on ASD following LLIF is limited. Vice versa, the surgical outcome after LLIF for the treatment of ASD remains to be elucidated. Patients who underwent single-level LLIF for ASD at two institutions (March 2006-April 2012) were included, and the medical records, operative reports, radiographic imaging studies, and office records reviewed. Out of 523 LLIF patients, 52 met the inclusion criteria, and were postoperatively followed for 16.1 ± 9.8 months (range: 5-44). When comparing the pre-operative data with both the first and most recent follow-up postoperatively, LLIF resulted in a reduction in back pain (P < 0.001, and P < 0.001, respectively) and leg pain (P < 0.001, and P < 0.001, respectively), increase in segmental lordosis (P = 0.003, and P = 0.014, respectively), decrease in segmental coronal angulation (P < 0.001, and P = 0.003, respectively), and increase in intervertebral height (P < 0.001, and P < 0.001, respectively) at the surgical level. The reoperation rate related to the LLIF procedure was 21.2% (11/52), which was performed after an average of 14.6 ± 10.1 months (range: 3.3-31.0). Eight out of 11 patients (72.7%) in the reoperation subgroup underwent standalone LLIF, whereas only 23 out of 41 patients (56.1%) without a reoperation underwent standalone LLIF (P = 0.491). There was a trend toward a higher fusion rate in patients who underwent circumferential fusion than the standalone subgroup (87.5% vs. 53.8%; P = 0.173). LLIF may be an effective surgical treatment option for ASD with regard to both the clinical and radiographic outcome in a large proportion of cases. Although standalone LLIF is associated with a narrower spectrum of adverse effects than circumferential fusion, posterior instrumentation may be necessary to increase segmental stability. 4.