Comparison of CD HORIZON SPIRE spinous process plate stabilization and pedicle screw fixation after anterior lumbar interbody fusion

Object The authors present the early clinical results obtained in patients who underwent SPIRE spinous process plate fixation following anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). Methods Between May 2003 and January 2005, 32 patients underwent titanium cage and bone morphogenetic protein–augmented ALIF and subsequent SPIRE (21 cases) or bilateral pedicle screw (BPS; 11 cases) fixation. Pedicle screws were implanted using either the open approach (three cases) or using a tubular retractor (eight cases). Patients’ charts were reviewed for operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), hospital length of stay (LOS), and evidence of pseudarthrosis or hardware failure. In SPIRE plate–treated patients, the median EBL (75 ml) was lower than in BPS-treated patients (open BPS [150 ml]; tubular BPS [125 ml]). The median operative time in SPIRE plate–treated patients was also shorter (164 minutes compared with 239 and 250 minutes in the open and tubular BPS, respectively). The median LOS was 3 days for both the SPIRE and tubular BPS groups, but 4 days in the open BPS group. There were no instances of major surgery-induced complication, pseudarthrosis, or hardware failure during mean follow-up periods of 5.5, 7.2, and 4.9 months in the SPIRE, open PS, and tubular BPS groups, respectively. Conclusions The SPIRE plate is easy to implant and is associated with minimal operative risk. Compared with BPS/rod constructs, SPIRE plate fixation leads to less EBL and shorter operative time, without an increase in the rate of pseudarthrosis. Hospital LOS was also shorter in SPIRE plate–treated patients, which is consistent with the goals of minimal access spinal technologies.