Risk factors for cage subsidence and clinical outcomes after transforaminal and posterior lumbar interbody fusion

被引:48
作者
Amorim-Barbosa, Tiago [1 ]
Pereira, Catarina [1 ]
Catelas, Diogo [1 ]
Rodrigues, Claudia [1 ]
Costa, Paulo [1 ]
Rodrigues-Pinto, Ricardo [1 ]
Neves, Pedro [1 ]
机构
[1] Ctr Hosp Univ Porto, Dept Orthopaed, P-4099001 Porto, Portugal
关键词
Cage subsidence; Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion; Posterior lumbar interbody fusion; BONE-MINERAL DENSITY; X-RAY ABSORPTIOMETRY; HOUNSFIELD UNITS; DIAGNOSTIC CT; SPINE; ANTERIOR; DESIGN; PLIF;
D O I
10.1007/s00590-021-03103-z
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Cage subsidence is a very common complication after lumbar interbody fusion. It may compromise vertebral interbody fusion through progressive spinal deformity and consequently cause compression of neural elements. Clinical relevance remains, however, unclear, with few studies on this subject and even less information regarding its correlation with clinical findings. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for cage subsidence and clinical evaluation after transforaminal (TLIF) and posterior (PLIF) lumbar interbody fusion. Methods A retrospective study in patients submitted to TLIF and PLIF between 2008 and 2017 was conducted. Results A total of 165 patients were included (123 TLIF and 42 PLIF). Univariate analysis showed an increased risk of cage subsidence in spondylolisthesis comparing with degenerative disk disease (p = 0.007). A higher preoperative lumbar lordosis angle (p = 0.014) and cage placement in L2-L3 (p = 0.012) were associated with higher risk of subsidence. The posterior cage positioning on vertebral endplate was associated with a higher risk of subsidence (p = 0.028) and significant subsidence (p = 0.005), defined as cage migration > 50% of cage height. PLIF presented a higher risk when comparing with TLIF (p = 0.024). Hounsfield unit (HU) values < 135 (OR6; 95% CI [1.95-34]) and posterior positioning (OR7; 95% CI [1.7-27.3]) were independent risk factors for cage subsidence and significant subsidence, respectively, in multivariate analysis. There was a tendency for significant subsidence in degrees >= 2 of Meyerding spondylolisthesis (OR4; 95% CI [0.85-21.5]). Significant cage subsidence was not associated with worse clinical results. Other analyzed factors, such as age (p = 0.008), low bone mineral density (BMD) (p = 0.029) and type of surgery (TLIF) (p = 0.004), were associated with worse results. Conclusion The present study shows that lower BMD and posterior cage positioning are relevant risk factors for lumbar cage subsidence. Low BMD is also a predictor of poor clinical results, so it must be properly evaluated and considered, through HU values measurement in CT scan, a feasible and reliable tool in perioperative planning.
引用
收藏
页码:1291 / 1299
页数:9
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]   The influence of cage positioning and cage type on cage migration and fusion rates in patients with monosegmental posterior lumbar interbody fusion and posterior fixation [J].
Abbushi, Alexander ;
Cabraja, Mario ;
Thomale, Ulrich-Wilhelm ;
Woiciechowsky, Christian ;
Kroppenstedt, Stefan Nikolaus .
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2009, 18 (11) :1621-1628
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1994, World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser, V843, P1
[3]   Subsidence after anterior lumbar interbody fusion using paired stand-alone rectangular cages [J].
Choi, JY ;
Sung, KH .
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2006, 15 (01) :16-22
[4]   Diagnostic efficacy of Hounsfield units in spine CT for the assessment of real bone mineral density of degenerative spine: correlation study between T-scores determined by DEXA scan and Hounsfield units from CT [J].
Choi, Man Kyu ;
Kim, Sung Min ;
Lim, Jae Kwan .
ACTA NEUROCHIRURGICA, 2016, 158 (07) :1421-1427
[5]   Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
de Kunder, Suzanne L. ;
van Kuijk, Sander M. J. ;
Rijkers, Kim ;
Caelers, Inge J. M. H. ;
van Hemert, Wouter L. W. ;
de Bie, Rob A. ;
van Santbrink, Henk .
SPINE JOURNAL, 2017, 17 (11) :1712-1721
[6]   Survey of spine surgeons on attitudes regarding osteoporosis and osteomalacia screening and treatment for fractures, fusion surgery, and pseudoarthrosis [J].
Dipaola, Christian P. ;
Bible, Jesse E. ;
Biswas, Debdut ;
Dipaola, Matthew ;
Grauer, Jonathan N. ;
Rechtine, Glenn R. .
SPINE JOURNAL, 2009, 9 (07) :537-544
[7]   Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Patients with Osteoporosis [J].
Formby, Peter M. ;
Kang, Daniel G. ;
Helgeson, Melvin D. ;
Wagner, Scott C. .
GLOBAL SPINE JOURNAL, 2016, 6 (07) :660-664
[8]   EVALUATION OF DUAL-ENERGY X-RAY ABSORPTIOMETRY BONE-MINERAL MEASUREMENT COMPARISON OF A SINGLE-BEAM AND FAN-BEAM DESIGN - THE EFFECT OF OSTEOPHYTIC CALCIFICATION ON SPINE BONE-MINERAL DENSITY [J].
FRANCK, H ;
MUNZ, M ;
SCHERRER, M .
CALCIFIED TISSUE INTERNATIONAL, 1995, 56 (03) :192-195
[9]   Influence of PLIF cage size on lumbar spine stability [J].
Goh, JCH ;
Wong, HK ;
Thambyah, A ;
Yu, CS .
SPINE, 2000, 25 (01) :35-39
[10]   Mapping the structural properties of the lumbosacral vertebral endplates [J].
Grant, JP ;
Oxland, TR ;
Dvorak, MF .
SPINE, 2001, 26 (08) :889-896