Risk Factors of Cage Subsidence in Patients Received Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

被引:95
|
作者
Yao, Yu-Cheng [1 ]
Chou, Po-Hsin [1 ,2 ]
Lin, Hsi-Hsien [1 ,2 ]
Wang, Shih-Tien [1 ,2 ]
Liu, Chien-Lin [1 ,2 ]
Chang, Ming-Chau [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Taipei Vet Gen Hosp, Dept Orthoped & Traumatol, 201,Sect 2,Shih Pai Rd, Taipei 112, Taiwan
[2] Natl Yang Ming Univ, Sch Med, Dept Surg, Taipei, Taiwan
关键词
body mass index; bone mineral density; cage position; cage subsidence; complication; disc height; fusion rate; minimally invasive surgery; patient-reported outcome; transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion;
D O I
10.1097/BRS.0000000000003557
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design. A retrospective cohort study. Objective. To determine the risk factors of cage subsidence in patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) and its correlation with patientreported outcomes. Summary of Background Data. Cage subsidence is among the cage-related complications after TLIF and may lead to poor outcomes. Few studies have addressed the incidence of cage subsidence in MI-TLIF. Methods. This retrospective study of a prospectively collected database was conducted from October 2015 to October 2017. All patients received MI-TLIF with a minimum of 2-year followup. All levels were separated into the cage subsidence (CS group) and no cage subsidence (non-CS group) groups. Cage subsidence was evaluated using lateral radiographs and defined as more than 2mm migration of the cage into the endplate of adjacent vertebral body. Patient demographics, perioperative details, and radiographic parameters were recorded. Cagerelated parameters were cage height, cage insertion level, and cage position. Cage position was recorded using central point ration (CPR). Patient-reported outcome was analyzed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) questionnaire and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively. Results. Ninety-three patients (126 levels) were included. Mean age was 66.5 years with an average follow-up of 36.9 months. Overall incidence of cage subsidence was 34.1%. The CS group had significantly higher body mass index, less bone mineral density (BMD), shorter disc height, and higher CPR than the nonCS group. BMD, disc height, and CPR were significantly negatively correlated with depth of cage subsidence. ODI improvement was significantly lesser in the CS group than in the non-CS group. Fusion rate and complications were unrelated to cage subsidence. Conclusion. The BMD, disc height, and cage position were the most significant risk factors that were negatively correlated with depth of cage subsidence. Placing a TLIF cage anteriorly if possible may reduce the risk of cage subsidence.
引用
收藏
页码:E1279 / E1285
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Risk factors for cage subsidence and clinical outcomes after transforaminal and posterior lumbar interbody fusion
    Amorim-Barbosa, Tiago
    Pereira, Catarina
    Catelas, Diogo
    Rodrigues, Claudia
    Costa, Paulo
    Rodrigues-Pinto, Ricardo
    Neves, Pedro
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND TRAUMATOLOGY, 2022, 32 (07) : 1291 - 1299
  • [2] Risk factors for cage subsidence and clinical outcomes after transforaminal and posterior lumbar interbody fusion
    Tiago Amorim-Barbosa
    Catarina Pereira
    Diogo Catelas
    Cláudia Rodrigues
    Paulo Costa
    Ricardo Rodrigues-Pinto
    Pedro Neves
    European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology, 2022, 32 : 1291 - 1299
  • [3] Comparison of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and midline lumbar interbody fusion in patients with spondylolisthesis
    Wang, Yang-Yi
    Chung, Yu-Hsuan
    Huang, Chun-Hsien
    Hu, Ming-Hsien
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH, 2024, 19 (01)
  • [4] Risk Factors for Pseudarthrosis in Minimally-Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Emami, Arash
    Faloon, Michael
    Sahai, Nikhil
    Dunn, Conor J.
    Issa, Kimona
    Thibaudeau, Daniel
    Sinha, Kumar
    Hwang, Ki Soo
    ASIAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2018, 12 (05) : 830 - 838
  • [5] Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
    Hoffmann, Christoph-Heinrich
    Kandziora, Frank
    OPERATIVE ORTHOPADIE UND TRAUMATOLOGIE, 2020, 32 (03): : 180 - 191
  • [6] Risk factors for cage migration and cage retropulsion following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
    Park, Man-Kyu
    Kim, Kyoung-Tae
    Bang, Woo-Seok
    Cho, Dae-Chul
    Sung, Joo-Kyung
    Lee, Young-Seok
    Lee, Chang Kyu
    Kim, Chi Heon
    Kwon, Brian K.
    Lee, Won-Kee
    Han, Inbo
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2019, 19 (03) : 437 - 447
  • [7] Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Lateral Interbody Fusion
    Stadler, James A., III
    Dandaleh, Nader S.
    Smith, Zachary A.
    Koski, Tyler R.
    NEUROSURGERY CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2014, 25 (02) : 377 - +
  • [8] The value of Hounsfield units in predicting cage subsidence after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
    Xie, Fang
    Yang, Zhiwei
    Tu, Zhipeng
    Huang, Peipei
    Wang, Zhe
    Luo, Zhuojing
    Hu, Xueyu
    BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS, 2022, 23 (01)
  • [9] Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Multilevel: Comparison with Conventional Transforaminal Interbody Fusion
    Lee, Won-chul
    Park, Jeong-Yoon
    Kim, Kyung Hyun
    Kuh, Sung Uk
    Chin, Dong Kyu
    Kim, Keun Su
    Cho, Yong Eun
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2016, 85 : 236 - 243
  • [10] Risk Factors for Subsidence Following Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion
    Zavras, Athan G.
    Federico, Vincent
    Nolte, Michael T.
    Butler, Alexander J.
    Dandu, Navya
    Munim, Mohammed
    Harper, Daniel E.
    Lopez, Gregory D.
    DeWald, Christopher J.
    An, Howard S.
    Singh, Kern
    Phillips, Frank M.
    Colman, Matthew W.
    GLOBAL SPINE JOURNAL, 2024, 14 (01) : 257 - 264