Changes in Segmental and Lumbar Lordosis After Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Different Lordotic Cage Angulations

被引:12
作者
Bakare, Adewale A. [1 ]
Fessler, David R. [1 ]
Wewel, Joshua T. [2 ]
Fontes, Ricardo B., V [1 ]
Fessler, Richard G. [1 ]
O'Toole, John E. [1 ]
机构
[1] Rush Univ, Dept Neurosurg, Med Ctr, Rush Profess Off Bldg,1725 W Harrison St, Chicago, IL 60612 USA
[2] Atlanta Brain & Spine, Piedmont Healthcare, Atlanta, GA USA
关键词
lateral lumbar interbody fusion; LLIF; segmental lordosis; SL; lumbar lordosis; LL; standard lordotic cages; transpsoas; cage dimension; cage angulation; 6 degrees cage; 108 degrees cage; 12 degrees cage; NONSURGICAL TREATMENT; SPINAL STENOSIS; OUTCOMES; SUBSIDENCE; NAVIGATION; FIXATION; TLIF;
D O I
10.14444/8066
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) affords a wide operative corridor to allow for a large interbody cage implantation for segmental reconstruction. There is a paucity of data describing segmental lordosis (SL) achieved with lordotic implants of varying angles. Here we compare changes in SL and lumbar lordosis (LL) after implantation of 6 degrees, 10 degrees, and 12 degrees cages. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed LLIF cases over a 5.5-year period. We derived SL and LL using the standard cobb angle measurement from a standing lateral radiograph. We analyzed mean changes in SL and LL over time using the linear mixed effect model to estimate these longitudinal changes. Results: The most frequently treated level was L3-4, followed by L4-5. Significant increases in mean SL were found at each follow-up time point for all the cohorts. In an intercohort comparison, the mean changes in SL at immediate postoperative and last follow-up were significantly greater in the 10 degrees cohort than 6 degrees ([7.4 degrees versus 3.1 degrees, P =.004], [6.1 degrees versus 2.3 degrees, P =.025] respectively). The 12 degrees cohort had higher mean change in SL at last follow-up than the 6 degrees cohort (5.9 degrees versus 2.3 degrees, P =.022). There was no difference in mean change in SL between the 10 degrees and 12 degrees cohorts. No difference in overall mean LL over time was found. In terms of mean change in LL, no difference was observed except at immediate and 6-month postoperative in the 10 degrees cohort ([9.6 degrees, P =.001], [8.5, P =.003] respectively). By comparing mean change in LL, no difference existed except between the 108 and 68 immediately after surgery (9.6 degrees versus 0.2 degrees, P =.006). Conclusions: LLIF cages significantly improve SL at the index level. However, this increase in SL is greater for 10 degrees and 12 degrees cages than the standard 6 degrees cage. Use of 10 degrees cages also resulted in overall improved LL than 6 degrees cages.
引用
收藏
页码:440 / 448
页数:9
相关论文
共 30 条
[1]   Short-term outcomes of lateral lumbar interbody fusion without decompression for the treatment of symptomatic degenerative spondylolisthesis at L4-5 [J].
Campbell, Peter G. ;
Nunley, Pierce D. ;
Cavanaugh, David ;
Kerr, Eubulus ;
Utter, Philip Andrew ;
Frank, Kelly ;
Stone, Marcus .
NEUROSURGICAL FOCUS, 2018, 44 (01)
[2]   The effect of surgical and nonsurgical treatment on longitudinal outcomes of lumbar spinal stenosis over 10 years [J].
Chang, YC ;
Singer, DE ;
Wu, YA ;
Keller, RB ;
Atlas, SJ .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY, 2005, 53 (05) :785-792
[3]   Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion and in Situ Screw Fixation for Rostral Adjacent Segment Stenosis of the Lumbar Spine [J].
Choi, Young Hoon ;
Kwon, Shin Won ;
Moon, Jung Hyeon ;
Kim, Chi Heon ;
Chung, Chun Kee ;
Park, Sung Bae ;
Heo, Won .
JOURNAL OF KOREAN NEUROSURGICAL SOCIETY, 2017, 60 (06) :755-762
[4]   Comparison of low back fusion techniques: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) or posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) approaches [J].
Cole C.D. ;
McCall T.D. ;
Schmidt M.H. ;
Dailey A.T. .
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine, 2009, 2 (2) :118-126
[5]   Surgery Versus Nonsurgical Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis A Randomized Trial [J].
Delitto, Anthony ;
Piva, Sara R. ;
Moore, Charity G. ;
Fritz, Julie M. ;
Wisniewski, Stephen R. ;
Josbeno, Deborah A. ;
Fye, Mark ;
Welch, William C. .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2015, 162 (07) :465-U120
[6]   Use of 3D CT-based navigation in minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion [J].
Joseph, Jacob R. ;
Smith, Brandon W. ;
Patel, Rakesh D. ;
Park, Paul .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2016, 25 (03) :339-344
[7]  
Kim Shin Jae, 2014, Korean J Spine, V11, P145, DOI 10.14245/kjs.2014.11.3.145
[8]  
Kotwal S, 2015, J SPINAL DISORD TECH, V28, P119, DOI 10.1097/BSD.0b013e3182706ce7
[9]   The Effect of the Retroperitoneal Transpsoas Minimally Invasive Lateral Interbody Fusion on Segmental and Regional Lumbar Lordosis [J].
Le, Tien V. ;
Vivas, Andrew C. ;
Dakwar, Elias ;
Baaj, Ali A. ;
Uribe, Juan S. .
SCIENTIFIC WORLD JOURNAL, 2012,
[10]   Subsidence of Polyetheretherketone Intervertebral Cages in Minimally Invasive Lateral Retroperitoneal Transpsoas Lumbar Interbody Fusion [J].
Le, Tien V. ;
Baaj, Ali A. ;
Dakwar, Elias ;
Burkett, Clinton J. ;
Murray, Gisela ;
Smith, Donald A. ;
Uribe, Juan S. .
SPINE, 2012, 37 (14) :1268-1273