Simple Prediction of Reasonable Lumbar Lordosis Based on Patient's Postoperative Quality of Life Score

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chunlei Wang ◽  
Xianzhong Meng ◽  
Jiangnan Wu ◽  
Hengrui Chang ◽  
Chang Liu
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Lumbar Lordosis ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Surgery ◽  
Good Hrqol

Abstract Background: Scarce information exists on the relationship between lumbar lordosis (LL) and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) after lumbar surgery. The aim of this study was to derive a predictive equation for lordosis using pelvic incidence and to establish a simple lumbar lordosis prediction method to improve the quality of life after surgery.Methods: A number of 146 patients with lumbar surgery were included in the study. Spinopelvic parameters and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were measured at the final follow-up. At the 75th percentile cut-off value, patients with ODI were assigned to a good HRQOL group. Stepwise multiple regression analysis was used to analyze the correlation between parameters and ODI, and simple linear regression analysis was conducted to deduce the predictive equation for the recovery of reasonable LL by posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF).Results: In the good HRQOL group, we included 108 patients with an ODI score less than 29 (75% cut-off value) at the last follow-up. All patients had had completed their posterior lumbar interbody fusion (L4-S1) by the same experienced surgeon. Multiple regression analysis revealed that LL (P < 0.001) was significantly associated with ODI as radiological parameters. The close relationship between PI and LL is highly evident from the value of the regression coefficient (r = 0.765, P < 0.001). Based on the correlation established between the above parameters, the following prediction equation for PI and LL was derived: LL = 0.59 × PI + 12 (r = 0.765, P < 0.001). Conclusions: This simple calculation method can provide a more effective and simple prediction of lumbar lordosis in the Chinese population. This approach can be used as a decision-making tool for restoring LL in lumbar correction surgery and plays an important role in improving the quality of life of patients after lumbar surgery.

Risk Factors for Poor Patient-Reported Quality of Life Outcomes After Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Spine ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (19) ◽  
pp. 1502-1510 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takahiro Makino ◽  
Takashi Kaito ◽  
Hiroyasu Fujiwara ◽  
Hirotsugu Honda ◽  
Yusuke Sakai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Life Outcomes ◽  
Poor Patient ◽  
Quality Of Life Outcomes ◽  
Patient Reported

The impact of increasing interbody fusion levels at the fractional curve on lordosis, curve correction, and complications in adult patients with scoliosis

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Dominic Amara ◽  
Praveen V. Mummaneni ◽  
Shane Burch ◽  
Vedat Deviren ◽  
Christopher P. Ames ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Revision Surgery ◽  
Lumbar Lordosis ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Pelvic Incidence ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Curve Correction ◽  
Surgery Rates

OBJECTIVERadiculopathy from the fractional curve, usually from L3 to S1, can create severe disability. However, treatment methods of the curve vary. The authors evaluated the effect of adding more levels of interbody fusion during treatment of the fractional curve.METHODSA single-institution retrospective review of adult patients treated for scoliosis between 2006 and 2016 was performed. Inclusion criteria were as follows: fractional curves from L3 to S1 > 10°, ipsilateral radicular symptoms concordant on the fractional curve concavity side, patients who underwent at least 1 interbody fusion at the level of the fractional curve, and a minimum 1-year follow-up. Primary outcomes included changes in fractional curve correction, lumbar lordosis change, pelvic incidence − lumbar lordosis mismatch change, scoliosis major curve correction, and rates of revision surgery and postoperative complications. Secondary analysis compared the same outcomes among patients undergoing posterior, anterior, and lateral approaches for their interbody fusion.RESULTSA total of 78 patients were included. There were no significant differences in age, sex, BMI, prior surgery, fractional curve degree, pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, pelvic incidence − lumbar lordosis mismatch, sagittal vertical axis, coronal balance, scoliotic curve magnitude, proportion of patients undergoing an osteotomy, or average number of levels fused among the groups. The mean follow-up was 35.8 months (range 12–150 months). Patients undergoing more levels of interbody fusion had more fractional curve correction (7.4° vs 12.3° vs 12.1° for 1, 2, and 3 levels; p = 0.009); greater increase in lumbar lordosis (−1.8° vs 6.2° vs 13.7°, p = 0.003); and more scoliosis major curve correction (13.0° vs 13.7° vs 24.4°, p = 0.01). There were no statistically significant differences among the groups with regard to postoperative complications (overall rate 47.4%, p = 0.85) or need for revision surgery (overall rate 30.7%, p = 0.25). In the secondary analysis, patients undergoing anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) had a greater increase in lumbar lordosis (9.1° vs −0.87° for ALIF vs transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion [TLIF], p = 0.028), but also higher revision surgery rates unrelated to adjacent-segment pathology (25% vs 4.3%, p = 0.046). Higher ALIF revision surgery rates were driven by rod fracture in the majority (55%) of cases.CONCLUSIONSMore levels of interbody fusion resulted in increased lordosis, scoliosis curve correction, and fractional curve correction. However, additional levels of interbody fusion up to 3 levels did not result in more postoperative complications or morbidity. ALIF resulted in a greater lumbar lordosis increase than TLIF, but ALIF had higher revision surgery rates.

Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using an En-Bloc Resected Lamina as an Interbody Spacer in Combination with Spinal Instruments

1998 ◽  
Vol 02 (04) ◽  
pp. 325-332
Author(s):  
Shigeru Hirabayashi ◽  
Kiyoshi Kumano ◽  
Takeshi Uchida
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Spinous Process ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Spinal Instrumentation ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Bony Union ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Time Of Operation

We developed a new method of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) using an en-bloc resected lamina with or without a hydroxyapatite block as an interbody spacer instead of auto-iliac bone, in combination with rigid-type spinal instrumentation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of our method. There were 23 patients (13 males, 10 females, age at the time of operation: 21–71 years, mean 50.5 years; follow-up: 1–4 years, mean 2 years and 3 months). In 10 patients with spondylolitic spondylolisthesis and 3 patients with spondylolysis, the floating lamina was resected enbloc by mid-line splitting. In 7 patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis and 3 patients with unstable spine, a cleavage was made at the isthmus and then the complex of lamina and inferior spinous process was resected en-bloc. Seventeen patients with olisthesis underwent reduction. PLIF was performed at the L4/L5 level in 10 patients and the L5/S1 level in 13 patients. Sixteen patients with preoperative low back pain recovered, except for one patient with instability at the adjacent vertebra. All of the seven patients with preoperative gait disturbance recovered. The ratio of olisthesis changed from preoperative 30% to postoperative 18% on average. Good bony union was obtained in both the patients with and those without a hydroxyapatite spacer. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using an en-bloc resected lamina as an interbody spacer in combination with rigid-type spinal instrumentation was useful.

Outcomes of 2-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion for 2-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 90-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hironobu Sakaura ◽  
Tomoya Yamashita ◽  
Toshitada Miwa ◽  
Kenji Ohzono ◽  
Tetsuo Ohwada
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Sagittal Alignment ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Single Level ◽  
The Mean

Object A systematic review concerning surgical management of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) showed that a satisfactory clinical outcome was significantly more likely with adjunctive spinal fusion than with decompression alone. However, the role of adjunctive fusion and the optimal type of fusion remain controversial. Therefore, operative management for multilevel DS raises more complicated issues. The purpose of this retrospective study was to elucidate clinical and radiological outcomes after 2-level PLIF for 2-level DS with the least bias in determination of operative procedure. Methods Since 2005, all patients surgically treated for lumbar DS at the authors' hospital have been treated using posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with pedicle screws, irrespective of severity of slippage, patient age, or bone quality. The authors conducted a retrospective review of 20 consecutive cases involving patients who underwent 2-level PLIF for 2-level DS and had been followed up for 2 years or longer (2-level PLIF group). They also analyzed data from 92 consecutive cases involving patients who underwent single-level PLIF for single-level DS during the same time period and had been followed for at least 2 years (1-level PLIF group). This second group served as a control. Clinical status was assessed using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score. Fusion status and sagittal alignment of the lumbar spine were assessed by comparing serial plain radiographs. Surgery-related complications and the need for additional surgery were evaluated. Results The mean JOA score improved significantly from 12.8 points before surgery to 20.4 points at the latest follow-up in the 2-level PLIF group (mean recovery rate 51.8%), and from 14.2 points preoperatively to 22.5 points at the latest follow-up in the single-level PLIF group (mean recovery rate 55.3%). At the final follow-up, 95.0% of patients in the 2-level PLIF group and 96.7% of those in the 1-level PLIF group had achieved solid spinal fusion, and the mean sagittal alignment of the lumbar spine was more lordotic than before surgery in both groups. Early surgery-related complications, including transient neurological complications, occurred in 6 patients in the 2-level PLIF group (30.0%) and 11 patients in the 1-level PLIF group (12.0%). Symptomatic adjacent-segment disease was found in 4 patients in the 2-level PLIF group (20.0%) and 10 patients in the 1-level PLIF group (10.9%). Conclusions The clinical outcome of 2-level PLIF for 2-level lumbar DS was satisfactory, although surgery-related complications including symptomatic adjacent-segment disease were not negligible.

scholarly journals Comparison of (Partial) economic evaluations of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in adults with lumbar spondylolisthesis: A systematic review

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. e0245963
Author(s):  
Inge J. M. H. Caelers ◽  
Suzanne L. de Kunder ◽  
Kim Rijkers ◽  
Wouter L. W. van Hemert ◽  
Rob A. de Bie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Introduction The demand for spinal fusion surgery has increased over the last decades. Health care providers should take costs and cost-effectiveness of these surgeries into account. Open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) are two widely used techniques for spinal fusion. Earlier research revealed that TLIF is associated with less blood loss, shorter surgical time and sometimes shorter length of hospital stay, while effectiveness of both techniques on back and/or leg pain are equal. Therefore, TLIF could result in lower costs and be more cost-effective than PLIF. This is the first systematic review comparing direct and indirect (partial) economic evaluations of TLIF with PLIF in adults with lumbar spondylolisthesis. Furthermore, methodological quality of included studies was assessed. Methods Searches were conducted in eight databases for reporting on eligibility criteria; TLIF or PLIF, lumbar spondylolisthesis or lumbar instability, and cost. Costs were converted to United States Dollars with reference year 2020. Study quality was assessed using the bias assessment tool of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, the Level of Evidence guidelines of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine and the Consensus Health Economic Criteria (CHEC) list. Results Of a total of 693 studies, 16 studies were included. Comparison of TLIF and PLIF could only be made indirectly, since no study compared TLIF and PLIF directly. There was a large heterogeneity in health care and societal perspective costs due to different in-, and exclusion criteria, baseline characteristics and the use of costs or charges in calculations. Health care perspective costs, calculated with hospital costs, ranged from $15,867-$43,217 in TLIF-studies and $32,662 in one PLIF-study. Calculated with hospital charges, it ranged from $8,964-$51,469 in TLIF-studies and $21,838-$93,609 in two PLIF-studies. Societal perspective costs and cost-effectiveness, only mentioned in TLIF-studies, ranged from $5,702/QALY-$48,538/QALY and $50,092/QALY-$90,977/QALY, respectively. Overall quality of studies was low. Conclusions This systematic review shows that TLIF and PLIF are expensive techniques. Moreover, firm conclusions about the preferable technique, based on (partial) economic evaluations, cannot be drawn due to limited studies and heterogeneity. Randomized prospective trials and full economical evaluations with direct TLIF and PLIF comparison are needed to obtain high levels of evidence. Furthermore, development of guidelines to perform adequate economic evaluations, specified for the field of interest, will be useful to minimize heterogeneity and maximize transferability of results. Trial registration Prospero-database registration number: CRD42020196869.

scholarly journals Feasibility of Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion through the Posterior Paraspinal Approach: Technical Note and Preliminary Result

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyeun-Sung Kim ◽  
Harshavardhan Dilip Raorane ◽  
Pang Hung Wu ◽  
Dong Hwa Heo ◽  
Yeon Jin Yi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Lordosis ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Plain Radiograph ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Disc Height ◽  
Graft Material ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Paraspinal Approach ◽  
Segmental Lordosis

Abstract Background: The implement of endoscopic spinal surgery into degenerative spinal disease has minimized the requirement of fusion procedures. However, it is still necessary to develop endoscopic spine surgery in certain patients requiring fusion such as instability. We performed a full-endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion(eTLIF) through a conventional paraspinal approach. The feasibility of procedure and early outcome were evaluated.Materials and Methods: eighteen consecutive patients with degenerative lumbar disease underwent eTLIF through a conventional paraspinal approach. Their clinical outcomes were evaluated with visual analog scale(VAS) leg pain score, Oswestry Disability Index(ODI) and the MacNab's criteria; radiological outcome measured with segmental lordosis, global lumbar lordosis, disc height on plain radiograph and percentage of potential fusion mass on CT scan at pre-operative, post-operative and final follow up period. intra operative and post-operative complications noted.Results: Mean age was 63. 71 years and Mean follow-up periods was 7.78 months. According to the level, L2-3 (1 case), L3-4 (4 cases), L4-5 (13 cases) and L5-S1 (2 cases). In the X-ray result, mean segmental lordosis angle(SLA) improved in pre-operative/post-operative/follow-up period 9.87±2.74 degree/ 11.79±3.74 degree/ 10.56±3.69 degree (p > 0.01); mean lumbar lordosis angle(LLA) improved 37.1±7.04 degree/ 39.2±7.13 degree/ 35.7±7.25 degree(p > 0.01). Mean preoperative disc height(DH) improved from 8.97±1.49 mm/ 12.34±1.39 mm/ 11.44±1.98 mm (p < 0.01). In the CT result, Average percentage of fusion mass was 42.61%. VAS was improved significantly, 7.67 / 3.39 / 2.5 and ODI was improved significantly, 74.9 / 34.56 / 27.76 by each preoperative / postoperative / final follow-up. In the clinical result, excellent was 5 cases and good was 13 cases. Conclusion: According to the results of this study, eTLIF was competent enough to perform as open TLIF. and good results were obtained in the form of endplate preservation, disc height restoration, minimal blood loss and post-operative pain with early mobilization. In addition, the fusion volume including the cage and the bone graft material occupies 40% to 50% of disc space is expected to give sufficient fusion by using 3D printed cages which gives the high fusion rate. In conclusion, eTLIF is considered to be a viable surgical procedure.

The Impact of Emergency Surgery versus Self-expanding Metallic Stents on Anal Function and Quality of Life in Patients with Complete Obstructing Left-sided Colon Cancer

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
GanBin Li ◽  
Tao Yu ◽  
Hao-Yu Zhang ◽  
Zhen-Jun Wang ◽  
Guang-Hui Wei ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Colon Cancer ◽  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Anal Function ◽  
Eortc Qlq C30 ◽  
Eortc Qlq ◽  
Better Than

Abstract Background: Emergence surgery (ES) and self-expanding metallic stents (SEMS) are traditional approaches for complete obstructing left-sided colon cancer. A strategy of “stents-chemotherapy-surgery” was applied in our center recently. Studies assessing the anal function and quality of life of patients with complete obstructing left-sided colon cancer are still lacking.Methods: Patients with complete obstructing left-sided colon cancer were included, and three treatment strategies were used, including ES, SEMS, and SEMS followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for patients with complete obstructing left-sided colon cancer. The Wexner, Vaizey, and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) scores were used to assess anal function and the EORTC QLQ C30 score was used to assess quality of life. Logistic regression analysis was used to detect risk factors affecting short-term anal function of patients.RESULTS: The Wexner scores were similar among the groups during the follow-up period. The Vaizey (H=18.415, P=0.001) and LARS scores (H=3.660, P=0.04) both revealed that anal function among patients receiving SEMS and NACwas significantly better than patients who underwent ES at the 1-month post-operative follow-up evaluation; no significant difference existed at the 6- and 12-month follow-up evaluations. The EORTC QLQ C30 score revealed that social function of patients receiving SEMS and NAC was also significantly better than patients undergoing ES (H=7.035, P=0.03). Logistic regression analysis suggested that a one-stage stoma in an emergent setting is an independent risk factor for short-term reduction of anal function among patients with complete obstructing left-sided colon cancer (OR=5.238, 95% CI: 1.569~17.484, P=0.007).Conclusion: Compared to ES, SEMS might be able to improve the quality of life and short-term anal function in patients with complete obstructing left-sided colon cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document