scholarly journals Efficacy and radiographic analysis of oblique lumbar interbody fusion in treating adult spinal deformity

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e0257316
Author(s):  
Dae-Jean Jo ◽  
Eun-Min Seo
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Deformity ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adult Spinal Deformity ◽  
Deformity Correction ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Spinal Fixation ◽  
Invasive Approach ◽  
Radiographic Parameters ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Adult spinal deformity (ASD) is usually rigid and requires a combined anterior–posterior approach for deformity correction. Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) allows direct access to the disc space and placement of a large interbody graft. A larger interbody graft facilitates correction of ASD. However, an anterior approach carries significant risks. Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) through a minimally invasive approach has recently been used for ASD. The present study was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) in the treatment of ASD. We performed a retrospective study utilizing the data of 74 patients with ASD. The inclusion criteria were lumbar coronal Cobb angle > 20°, pelvic incidence (PI)–lumbar lordosis (LL) mismatch > 10°, and minimum follow–up of 2 years. Patients were divided into two groups: ALIF combined with posterior spinal fixation (ALIF+PSF) (n = 38) and OLIF combined with posterior spinal fixation (OLIF+PSF) (n = 36). The perioperative spinal deformity radiographic parameters, complications, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes were assessed and compared between the two groups. The preoperative sagittal vertical axis (SVA), LL, PI–LL mismatch, and lumbar Cobb angles were similar between the two groups. Patients in the OLIF+PSF group had a slightly higher mean number of interbody fusion levels than those in the ALIF+PSF group. At the final follow–up, all radiographic parameters and HRQoL scores were similar between the two groups. However, the rates of perioperative complications were higher in the ALIF+PSF than OLIF+PSF group. The ALIF+PSF and OLIF+PSF groups showed similar radiographic and HRQoL outcomes. These observations suggest that OLIF is a safe and reliable surgical treatment option for ASD.

Strategies for prevention of rod fracture in adult spinal deformity: cobalt chrome rod, accessory rod technique, and lateral lumbar interbody fusion

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Ki Young Lee ◽  
Jung-Hee Lee ◽  
Kyung-Chung Kang ◽  
Sang-Kyu Im ◽  
Hae Seong Lim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Deformity ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Sagittal Alignment ◽  
Adult Spinal Deformity ◽  
Deformity Correction ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Patient Factors ◽  
Rod Fracture ◽  
Cobalt Chrome

OBJECTIVERestoring the proper sagittal alignment in adult spinal deformity (ASD) can improve radiological and clinical outcomes, but pseudarthrosis including rod fracture (RF) is a common problematic complication. The purpose of this study was to analyze the methods for reducing the incidence of RF in deformity correction of ASD.METHODSThe authors retrospectively selected 178 consecutive patients (mean age 70.8 years) with lumbar degenerative kyphosis (LDK) who underwent deformity correction with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients were classified into the non-RF group (n = 131) and the RF group (n = 47). For predicting the crucial factors of RF, patient factors, radiographic parameters, and surgical factors were analyzed.RESULTSThe overall incidence of RF was 26% (47/178 cases), occurring in 42% (42/100 cases) of pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO), 7% (5/67 cases) of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) with posterior column osteotomy, 18% (23/129 cases) of cobalt chrome rods, 49% (24/49 cases) of titanium alloy rods, 6% (2/36 cases) placed with the accessory rod technique, and 32% (45/142 cases) placed with the 2-rod technique. There were no significant differences in the incidence of RF regarding patient factors between two groups. While both groups showed severe sagittal imbalance before operation, lumbar lordosis (LL) was more kyphotic and pelvic incidence (PI) minus LL (PI-LL) mismatch was greater in the RF group (p < 0.05). Postoperatively, while LL and PI-LL did not show significant differences between the two groups, LL and sagittal vertical axis correction were greater in the RF group (p < 0.05). Nonetheless, at the last follow-up, the two groups did not show significant differences in radiographic parameters except thoracolumbar junctional angles. As for surgical factors, use of the cobalt chrome rod and the accessory rod technique was significantly greater in the non-RF group (p < 0.05). As for the correction method, PSO was associated with more RFs than the other correction methods, including LLIF (p < 0.05). By logistic regression analysis, PSO, preoperative PI-LL mismatch, and the accessory rod technique were crucial factors for RF.CONCLUSIONSGreater preoperative sagittal spinopelvic malalignment including preoperative PI-LL mismatch was the crucial risk factor for RF in LDK patients 65 years or older. For restoring and maintaining sagittal alignment, use of the cobalt chrome rod, accessory rod technique, or LLIF was shown to be effective for reducing RF in ASD surgery.

scholarly journals Navigated oblique lumbar interbody fusion for adult spinal deformity

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. V7
Author(s):  
Chih-Chang Chang ◽  
Joshua Rivera ◽  
Brenton Pennicooke ◽  
Dean Chou ◽  
Praveen V. Mummaneni
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Deformity ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adult Spinal Deformity ◽  
Deformity Correction ◽  
Computer Assisted ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Disease Entity ◽  
Assisted Navigation ◽  
Reduce Radiation Exposure ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Adult spinal deformity (ASD) is an increasing disease entity as the population ages. An emerging minimally invasive surgery (MIS) option for the treatment of ASD is the oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF), which allows indirect foraminal decompression of stenosis as well as segmental deformity correction (DiGiorgio et al., 2017). The authors utilize computer-assisted navigation with OLIF to reduce radiation exposure and improve time efficiency. The authors present a video of navigated oblique lumbar interbody fusion at L3–5 followed by open posterior screw-rod fixation.The video can be found here: https://youtu.be/zKDT7PhMYf8.

Preliminary report on the flexible rod technique for prevention of proximal junctional kyphosis following long-segment fusion to the sacrum in adult spinal deformity

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 703-710 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ki Young Lee ◽  
Jung-Hee Lee ◽  
Kyung-Chung Kang ◽  
Won-Ju Shin ◽  
Sang Kyu Im ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Deformity ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adult Spinal Deformity ◽  
Gradual Transition ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Proximal Junctional Kyphosis ◽  
Hybrid Techniques ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Junctional Kyphosis

OBJECTIVEThe incidence of proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) after long-segment fixation in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) has been reported to range from 17% to 61.7%. Recent studies have reported using “hybrid” techniques in which semirigid fixation is introduced between the fused and flexible segments at the proximal level to allow a more gradual transition. The authors used these hybrid techniques in a clinical setting and analyzed PJK to evaluate the usefulness of the flexible rod (FR) technique.METHODSThe authors retrospectively selected 77 patients with lumbar degenerative kyphosis (LDK) who underwent sagittal correction and long-segment fixation and had follow-up for > 1 year. An FR was used in 30 of the 77 patients. PJK development and spinal sagittal changes were analyzed in the FR and non-FR groups, and the predictive factors of PJK between a PJK group and a non-PJK group were compared.RESULTSThe patient population comprised 77 patients (75 females and 2 males) with a mean (± SD) follow-up of 32.0 ± 12.7 months (36.7 ± 9.8 months in the non-FR group and 16.8 ± 4.7 months in the FR group) and mean (± SD) age of 71.7 ± 5.1 years. Sagittal balance was well maintained at final follow-up (10.5 and 1.5 mm) in the non-FR and FR groups, respectively. Thoracic kyphosis (TK) and lumbar lordosis (LL) were improved in both groups, without significant differences between the two (p > 0.05). PJK occurred in 28 cases (36.4%) in total, 3 (10%) in the FR and 25 (53.2%) in the non-FR group (p < 0.001). Postoperatively, PJK was observed at an average of 8.9 months in the non-FR group and 1 month in the FR group. No significant differences in the incidence of PJK regarding patient factors or radiological parameters were found between the PJK group and non-PJK group (p > 0.05). However, FR (vs non-FR) and interbody fusion except L5–S1 using oblique lumbar interbody fusion (vs non–oblique lumbar interbody fusion), demonstrated a significantly lower PJK prevalence (p < 0.001 and p = 0.044) among the surgical factors.CONCLUSIONSPJK was reduced after surgical treatment with the FR in the patients with LDK. Solid long-segment fixation and the use of the FR may become another surgical option for spine surgeons who plan and make decisions regarding spine reconstruction surgery for patients with ASD.

scholarly journals Lateral interbody fusion combined with open posterior surgery for adult spinal deformity

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 697-705 ◽  
Author(s):  
Russell G. Strom ◽  
Junseok Bae ◽  
Jun Mizutani ◽  
Frank Valone ◽  
Christopher P. Ames ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Deformity ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adult Spinal Deformity ◽  
Deformity Correction ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Sagittal Imbalance ◽  
Hybrid Strategy ◽  
Lateral Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lateral Interbody

OBJECTIVE Lateral interbody fusion (LIF) with percutaneous screw fixation can treat adult spinal deformity (ASD) in the coronal plane, but sagittal correction is limited. The authors combined LIF with open posterior (OP) surgery using facet osteotomies and a rod-cantilever technique to enhance lumbar lordosis (LL). It is unclear how this hybrid strategy compares to OP surgery alone. The goal of this study was to evaluate the combination of LIF and OP surgery (LIF+OP) for ASD. METHODS All thoracolumbar ASD cases from 2009 to 2014 were reviewed. Patients with < 6 months follow-up, prior fusion, severe sagittal imbalance (sagittal vertical axis > 200 mm or pelvic incidence-LL > 40°), and those undergoing anterior lumbar interbody fusion were excluded. Deformity correction, complications, and outcomes were compared between LIF+OP and OP-only surgery patients. RESULTS LIF+OP (n = 32) and OP-only patients (n = 60) had similar baseline features and posterior fusion levels. On average, 3.8 LIFs were performed. Patients who underwent LIF+OP had less blood loss (1129 vs 1833 ml, p = 0.016) and lower durotomy rates (0% vs 23%, p = 0.002). Patients in the LIF+OP group required less ICU care (0.7 vs 2.8 days, p < 0.001) and inpatient rehabilitation (63% vs 87%, p = 0.015). The incidence of new leg pain, numbness, or weakness was similar between groups (28% vs 22%, p = 0.609). All leg symptoms resolved within 6 months, except in 1 OP-only patient. Follow-up duration was similar (28 vs 25 months, p = 0.462). LIF+OP patients had significantly less pseudarthrosis (6% vs 27%, p = 0.026) and greater improvement in visual analog scale back pain (mean decrease 4.0 vs 1.9, p = 0.046) and Oswestry Disability Index (mean decrease 21 vs 12, p = 0.035) scores. Lumbar coronal correction was greater with LIF+OP surgery (mean [± SD] 22° ± 13° vs 14° ± 13°, p = 0.010). LL restoration was 22° ± 13°, intermediately between OP-only with facet osteotomies (11° ± 7°, p < 0.001) and pedicle subtraction osteotomy (29° ± 10°, p = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS LIF+OP is an effective strategy for ASD of moderate severity. Compared with the authors' OP-only operations, LIF+OP was associated with faster recovery, fewer complications, and greater relief of pain and disability.

scholarly journals Prevalence and location of endplate fracture and subsidence after oblique lumbar interbody fusion for adult spinal deformity

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gen Inoue ◽  
Wataru Saito ◽  
Masayuki Miyagi ◽  
Takayuki Imura ◽  
Eiki Shirasawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Deformity ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Sagittal Plane ◽  
Adult Spinal Deformity ◽  
Major Complication ◽  
Global Alignment ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Cage Subsidence ◽  
Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Abstract Background Recently, Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) is commonly indicated to correct the sagittal and coronal alignment in adult spinal deformity (ASD). Endplate fracture during surgery is a major complication of OLIF, but the detailed location of fracture in vertebral endplate in ASD has not yet been determined. We sought to determine the incidence and location of endplate fracture and subsidence of the OLIF cage in ASD surgery, and its association with fusion status and alignment. Methods We analyzed 75 levels in 27 patients were analyzed using multiplanar CT to detect the endplate fracture immediately after surgery and subsidence at 1 year postoperatively. The prevalence was compared between anterior and posterior, approach and non-approach sides, and concave and convex side. Their association with fusion status, local and global alignment, and complication was also investigated. Results Endplate fracture was observed in 64 levels (85.3%) in all 27 patients, and the incidence was significantly higher in the posterior area compared with the anterior area (85.3 vs. 68.0%, p=0.02) of affected vertebra in the sagittal plane. In the coronal plane, there was no significant difference in incidence between left (approach) and right (non-approach) sides (77.3 and 81.3%, respectively), or concave and convex sides (69.4 and 79.6%) of wedged vertebra. By contrast, cage subsidence at 1 year postoperatively was noted in 14/75 levels (18.7%), but was not associated with endplate fracture. Fusion status, local and global alignment, and complications were not associated with endplate fracture or subsidence. Conclusion Endplate fracture during OLIF procedure in ASD cases is barely avoidable, possibly induced by the corrective maneuver with ideal rod counter and cantilever force, but is less associated with subsequent cage subsidence, fusion status, and sustainment of corrected alignment in long fusion surgery performed even for elderly patients.

scholarly journals Surgical Outcomes of Multilevel Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion versus Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Correction of Adult Spinal Deformity: A Comparative Clinical Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 421-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masayoshi Iwamae ◽  
Akira Matsumura ◽  
Takashi Namikawa ◽  
Minori Kato ◽  
Yusuke Hori ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Treatment ◽  
Spinal Deformity ◽  
Surgical Outcomes ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adult Spinal Deformity ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
The Mean

Study Design: A retrospective case control study.Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes of multilevel lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) and multilevel posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in the surgical treatment of adult spinal deformity (ASD) and to evaluate the sagittal plane correction by combining LIF with posterior-column osteotomy (PCO).Overview of Literature: The surgical outcomes between multilevel LIF and multilevel PLIF in ASD patients remain unclear.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 31 ASD patients who underwent multilevel LIF combined with PCO (LIF group, n=14) or multilevel PLIF (PLIF group, n=17) and with a minimum 2-year follow-up. In the comparison between LIF and PLIF groups, their mean age at surgery was 69.4 vs. 61.8 years while the mean follow-up period was 29.2 vs. 59.3 months. We evaluated the transition of pelvic incidence–lumbar lordosis (PI–LL) and disc angle (DA) in the LIF group, in fulcrum backward bending (FBB), after LIF and after posterior spinal fusion (PSF) with PCO. The spinopelvic radiographic parameters were compared between LIF and PLIF groups.Results: Compared with the PLIF group, the LIF group had less blood loss and comparable surgical outcomes with respect to radiographic data, health-related quality of life scores and surgical time. In the LIF group, the mean DA and PI–LL were unchanged after LIF (DA, 5.8°; PI–LL, 15°) compared with the values using FBB (DA, 4.3°; PI–LL, 15°) and improved significantly after PSF with PCO (DA, 8.1°; PI–LL, 0°).Conclusions: In the surgical treatment of ASD, multilevel LIF is less invasive than multilevel PLIF and combination of LIF and PCO would be necessary for optimal sagittal correction in patients with rigid deformity.

Comparison of rod fracture rates in long spinal deformity constructs after transforaminal versus anterior lumbar interbody fusions: a single-institution analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-49
Author(s):  
Owoicho Adogwa ◽  
Jacob M. Buchowski ◽  
Lawrence G. Lenke ◽  
Maksim A. Shlykov ◽  
Mostafa El Dafrawy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Incidence Rate ◽  
Spinal Deformity ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Deformity Correction ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Single Institution ◽  
Patient Groups ◽  
Clinical Records ◽  
Rod Fracture

OBJECTIVEPseudarthrosis is a common complication of long-segment fusions after surgery for correction of adult spinal deformity (ASD). Interbody fusions are frequently used at the caudal levels of long-segment spinal deformity constructs as adjuncts for anterior column support. There is a paucity of literature comparing rod fracture rates (proxy for pseudarthrosis) in patients undergoing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) at the caudal levels of the long spinal deformity construct. In this study the authors sought to compare rod fracture rates in patients undergoing surgery for correction of ASD with TLIF versus ALIF at the caudal levels of long spinal deformity constructs.METHODSWe reviewed clinical records of patients who underwent surgery for correction of ASD between 2008 and 2014 at a single institution. Data including demographics, comorbidities, and indications for surgery, as well as postoperative variables, were collected for each patient. All patients had a minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients were dichotomized into two groups for comparison on the basis of undergoing a TLIF versus an ALIF procedure at the caudal levels of long spinal deformity constructs. The primary outcome of interest was the rate of rod fractures.RESULTSA total of 198 patients (TLIF 133 patients; ALIF 65 patients) underwent a long-segment fusion to the sacrum with iliac fixation. The mean ± standard deviation follow-up period was 62.23 ± 29.26 months. Baseline demographic variables were similar in both patient groups. There were no significant differences between groups in the severity of the baseline sagittal plane deformity (i.e., baseline lumbar-pelvic parameters) or the final deformity correction achieved. Mean total recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 (rhBMP-2) dose for L1–sacrum fusion was significantly higher in the ALIF (100 mg) than in the TLIF (62 mg) group. The overall rod failure rate (cases with rod fracture/total cases) within this case series was 19.19% (38/198); 10.60% (21/198) were unilateral rod fractures and 8.58% (17/198) were bilateral rod fractures. At last clinical follow-up, there were no statistically significant differences in bilateral rod fracture rates between the group of patients who had a TLIF procedure and the group who had an ALIF procedure at the caudal levels of the long spinal deformity constructs (TLIF 10.52% vs ALIF 4.61%, p = 0.11). However, the incidence rate (cases per patient follow-up years) for bilateral rod fractures was significantly higher in the TLIF than in the ALIF cohort (TLIF 2.20% vs ALIF 0.70%, p < 0.0001). The reoperation rate for rod fractures was similar between the patient groups (p = 0.40).CONCLUSIONSAlthough both ALIF and TLIF procedures at the caudal levels of long spinal deformity constructs achieved similar and satisfactory deformity correction, ALIFs were associated with a lower rod fracture incidence rate. There were no differences between groups in the prevalence of rod fracture or revision surgery, however, and both groups had low bilateral rod fracture prevalence and incidence rates. One technique is not clearly superior to the other.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document