ObjectiveTo investigate the correlation between CT value and Cage subsidence in patients with lumbar degenerative disease treated with stand-alone oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). MethodsThe clinical data of 35 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases treated with stand-alone OLIF between February 2016 and October 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 15 males and 20 females; the age ranged from 29 to 81 years, with an average of 58.4 years. There were 39 operative segments, including 32 cases of single-segment, 2 cases of double-segment, and 1 case of three-segment. Preoperative lumbar CT was used to measure the CT values of the axial position of L1 vertebral body, the axial and sagittal positions of L1-4 vertebral body, surgical segment, and the axial position of upper and lower vertebral bodies as the bone mineral density index, and the lowest T value was recorded by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. The visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores were recorded before operation and at last follow-up. At last follow-up, the lumbar interbody fusion was evaluated by X-ray films of the lumbar spine and dynamic position; the lumbar lateral X-ray film was used to measure the subsidence of the Cage, and the patients were divided into subsidence group and nonsubsidence group. The univariate analysis on age, gender, body mass index, lowest T value, CT value of vertebral body, disease type, and surgical segment was performed to initially screen the influencing factors of Cage subsidence; further the logistic regression for multi-factor analysis was used to screen fusion independent risk factors for Cage subsidence. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and area under curve (AUC) were used to analyze the CT value and the lowest T value to predict the Cage subsidence. Spearman correlation analysis was used to determine the correlation between Cage subsidence and clinical results. Results All the 35 patients were followed up 27-58 months, with an average of 38.7 months. At last follow-up, the VAS and ODI scores were significantly decreased when compared with preoperative scores (t=32.850, P=0.000; t=31.731, P=0.000). No recurrent lower extremity radiculopathy occurred and no patient required revision surgery. Twenty-seven cases (77.1%) had no Cage subsidence (nonsubsidence group); 8 cases (22.9%) had at least radiographic evidence of Cage subsidence, the average distance of Cage subsidence was 2.2 mm (range, 1.1-4.2 mm) (subsidence group). At last follow-up, there was 1 case of fusion failure both in the subsidence group and the nonsubsidence group, there was no significant difference in the interbody fusion rate (96.3% vs. 87.5%) between two groups (P=0.410). Univariate analysis showed that the CT value of vertebral body (L1 axial position, L1-4 axial and sagittal positions, surgical segment, and upper and lower vertebral bodies axial positions) and the lowest T value were the influencing factors of Cage subsidence (P<0.05). According to ROC curve analysis, compared with AUC of the lowest T value [0.738, 95%CI (0.540, 0.936)], the AUC of the L1-4 axis CT value was 0.850 [95%CI (0.715, 0.984)], which could more effectively predict Cage subsidence. Multivariate analysis showed that the CT value of L1-4 axis was an independent risk factor for Cage subsidence (P<0.05). Conclusion The CT value measurement of the vertebral body based on lumbar spine CT before stand-alone OLIF can predict the Cage subsidence. Patients with low CT values of the lumbar spine have a higher risk of Cage subsidence. However, the Cage subsidence do not lead to adverse clinical results.
Objective To compare the therapeutic effect of conventional discectomy, posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF), and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) on the recurrent lumbar disc protrusion (RLDP). Methods From January 2000 to January 2008, 65 patients with RLDP underwent different surgical procedures, namely conventional discectomy (group A, 25 cases), PLIF (group B, 22 cases), and TLIF (group C, 18 cases). There were 44 males and 21 females aged 26-65 years old (average 41 years old). All the patients were single-level protrusion, including 33 cases at the L4, 5 level and 32 cases at the L5, S1 level. The primary procedure included laminectomy discectomy in 39 patients, unilateral hemilaminectomy discectomy in 15 patients, and bilateral laminectomy and total laminectomy discectomy in 11patients. The recurrent time to the primary operation was 13-110 months (average 64 months). The location of recurrent disc protrusion was at the ipsilateral side in 47 cases and the contralateral side in 18 cases. No significant differences among three groups were evident in terms of basel ine data (P gt; 0.05). Results The incision all healed by first intention. The incidence of perioperative compl ication in group A (24.0%) and group B (22.3%) was significantly higher than that of group C (5.6%) (P lt; 0.05), and there was no significant difference between group A and group B (P gt; 0.05). The operation time and bleed loss during operation of group B were obviously higher than that of group A and group C (P lt; 0.05), and there was no significant difference between group A and group C (P gt; 0.05). There were no significant differences among three groups in terms of the length of hospital ization (P gt; 0.05). Six-one patients were followed up for 12-36 months (average 20 months). At 1 week after operation, the satisfied rate of patients was 84.0% in group A, 81.8% in group B, and 88.9% in group C (P gt; 0.05). All the patients in group B and group C achieved fusion uneventfully. There were no significant differences among three groups in terms of visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disabil ity index (ODI) when compared the preoperative value with the final follow-up value (P gt; 0.05). There was significant difference within group A, B, and C in terms of VAS and ODI when compared the preoperative value with the final follow-up value (P lt; 0.05), but there were no significant differences among three groups in the improvement rate (P gt; 0.05). The intervertebral space grading method proposed by Roberts et al. was adopted to evaluate the intervertebral space height (ISH), the preoperative value was 2.04 ± 0.93 in group A, 2.18 ± 0.91 in group B, and 2.11 ± 0.90 in group C, andat the final follow-up, the value was 2.64 ± 0.58 in group A, 1.05 ± 0.59 in group B, and 1.06 ± 0.42 in group C. There were significant differences among three groups in the ISH when compared the properative value with the final follow-up value (P lt; 0.05). Conclusion All of the three surgical procedures are effective for RLDP, but conventional discectomy and PLIF have more compl ications than TLIF. Conventional discectomy may result in the further narrow of the intervertebral space and the occurrence of segment instabil ity, whereas TLIF is safer, more effective, and one of the ideal methods to treat RLDP.
ObjectiveTo analyze the restoration of intervertebral height and lordosis of fusion segment after open-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Open-TLIF) and minimally invasive-TLIF (MIS-TLIF).MethodsBetween January 2013 and February 2016, patients who treated with TLIF due to lumbar degenerative diseases and met the selection criteria were selected as the study objects. Among them, 41 patients were treated with open-TLIF (Open-TLIF group), 34 patients were treated with MIS-TLIF (MIS-TLIF group). There was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05) in gender, age, body mass index, disease type, disease duration, pathological segment, and other general data. The intraoperative bleeding volume, hospital stay, visual analogue scale (VAS) score of waist and leg, and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were recorded before and after operation. The anterior disc height (ADH), posterior disc height (ADH), and segmental lordosis (SL) of fusion segment were measured by X-ray film before and at 6 months after operation. The differences of ADH, PDH, and SL between pre- and post-operation were calculated.ResultsThe intraoperative bleeding volume and hospital stay in Open-TLIF group were significantly higher than those in MIS-TLIF group (t=14.619, P=0.000; t=10.021, P=0.000). All incisions healed by first intention without early complications. All patients were followed up 6-24 months (mean, 12.6 months) in Open-TLIF group and 6-24 months (mean, 11.5 months) in MIS-TLIF group. The preoperative VAS scores of waist and leg and ODI of the two groups significantly improved (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in VAS scores and ODI between the two groups before operation and at 2 weeks and 6 months after operation (P>0.05). Imaging examination showed the good intervertebral fusion. There was no significant difference in ADH, PDH, and SL between the two groups before operation and at 6 months after operation (P>0.05). The differences of ADH, PDH, and SL between the two groups were not significant (P>0.05). The ADH, PDH, and SL after operation significantly increased in the two groups (P<0.05).ConclusionOpen-TLIF and MIS-TLIF show similar effectiveness and radiological change in the treatment of single lumbar degenerative diseases and the improved intervertebral height and lordosis, but MIS-TLIF can significantly reduce hospital stay and intraoperative blood loss.
Objective To investigate the effectiveness of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) assisted with microscope for lumbar degenerative disease. Methods Retrospective analysis was made on the clinical data of 82 patients with lumbar degenerative disease (minimally invasive group) undergoing minimally invasive TLIF assisted with microscope between January 2010 and June 2011, which was compared with those of 76 patients (traditional group) undergoing traditional open TLIF. There was no significant difference in age, gender, disease duration, disease type, lesion level, preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS), and preoperative Oswestry disability index (ODI) between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The perioperative related parameters, radiography index, and effectiveness were documented and compared. Results There was no significant difference in operation time and intraoperative radiological exposure time between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05), but intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage volume in the minimally invasive group were significantly less than those in the traditional group (P lt; 0.05). Dural tear occurred in 2 patients of the traditional group. Superficial infection of incision occurred in 1 case in each group, respectively; and primary healing of incision was obtained in the other patients. All patients were followed up 12-28 months (mean, 18 months). No failure of internal fixation occurred. Radiological analysis showed that the bone graft fusion rate was 96.1% (73/76) in the traditional group and 95.1% (78/82) in the minimally invasive group at last follow-up, showing no significant difference (χ2= 0.012 2, P= 0.912 0). The postoperative ODI and VAS score were significantly improved when compared with preoperative ones in 2 groups (P lt; 0.05); the ODI of the minimally invasive group were significantly better than those of the traditional group at 3 months (t= — 11.941 1, P=0.000 0), and the VAS score of the minimally invasive group was significantly lower than that of the traditional group at 1 day and 3 months (P lt; 0.05); but no significant difference was found in ODI and VAS score between 2 groups at 1 year and last follow-up (P gt; 0.05). Conclusion Minimally invasive TLIF is an effective method to treat lumbar degenerative disease. This procedure is safe and reliable because it has less injury, less blood loss, and milder pain than the traditional open TLIF, and the short-term effectiveness is comparable in 2 procedures.
Objective To compare the effectiveness of posterolateral approach lumbar interbody fusion assisted by one-hole split endoscope (OSE) and traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in the treatment of L4, 5 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). Methods The clinical data of 58 patients with DLS who met the selection criteria admitted between February 2020 and March 2022 were retrospectively analyzed, of which 26 were treated with OSE-assisted posterolateral approach lumbar interbody fusion (OSE group) and 32 were treated with PLIF (PLIF group). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of gender, age, body mass index, Meyerding grade, lower limb symptom side, decompression side, stenosis type, and preoperative low back pain visual analogue scale (VAS) score, leg pain VAS score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and the height of the anterior and posterior margins of the intervertebral space (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and complications were compared between the two groups. The low back pain and leg pain VAS scores and ODI before operation, at 1 month, 6 months after operation, and last follow-up, the height of anterior and posterior margins of the intervertebral space before operation, at 6 months after operation, and last follow-up, the modified MacNab criteria at last follow-up after operation were used to evaluate the effectiveness; and the Bridwell method at last follow-up was used to evaluate the interbody fusion. Results Both groups successfully completed the operation. Compared with the PLIF group, the OSE group showed a decrease in intraoperative blood loss and postoperative hospital stay, but an increase in operation time, with significant differences (P<0.05). In the OSE group, no complication such as nerve root injury and thecal sac tear occurred; in the PLIF group, there were 1 case of thecal sac tear and 1 case of epidural hematoma, which were cured after conservative management. Both groups of patients were followed up 13-20 months with an average of 15.5 months. There was no complication such as loosening, sinking, or displacement of the fusion cage. The low back pain and leg pain VAS scores, ODI, and the height of anterior and posterior margins of the intervertebral space at each time point after operation in both groups were significantly improved when compared with those before operation (P<0.05). Except for the VAS score of lower back pain in the OSE group being significantly better than that in the PLIF group at 1 month after operation (P<0.05), there was no significant difference in all indicators between the two groups at all other time points (P>0.05). At last follow-up, both groups achieved bone fusion, and there was no significant difference in Bridwell interbody fusion and modified MacNab standard evaluation between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion OSE-assisted posterolateral approach lumbar interbody fusion for L4, 5 DLS, although the operation time is relatively long, but the postoperative hospitalization stay is short, the complications are few, the operation is safe and effective, and the early effectiveness is satisfactory.
ObjectiveTo study the anatomical characteristics of blood vessels in the lateral segment of the vertebral body through the surgical approach of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) using MRI imaging, and evaluate its potential vascular safety zone. Methods The lumbar MRI data of 107 patients with low back and leg pain who met the selection criteria between October 2019 and November 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The vascular emanation angles, vascular travel angles, and the length of vessels in the lateral segments of the left vertebral body of L1-L5, as well as the distance between the segmental vessels in different Moro junctions of the vertebral body and their distances from the edges of the vertebrae in the same sequence (bottom marked as I, top as S) were measured. The gap between the large abdominal vessels and the lateral vessels of the vertebral body was set as the lateral vascular safe zones of the lumbar spine, and the extent of the safe zones (namely the area between the vessels) was measured. The anterior 1/3 of the lumbar intervertebral disc was taken as the simulated puncture center, and the area with a diameter of 22 mm around it as the simulated channel area. The proportion of vessels in the channel was further counted. In addition, the proportions of segmental vessels at L5 without a clear travel and with an emanation angel less than 90° were calculated. Results Except for the differences in the vascular emanation angles between L4 and L5, the vascular travel angles between L1, L2 and L4, L5, and the length of vessels in the lateral segments of the vertebral body among L1-L4 were not significant (P>0.05), the differences in the vascular emanation angles, vascular travel angles, and the length of vessels between the rest segments were all significant (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the distance between vessels of L1, L2 and L2, L3 at Moro Ⅰ-Ⅳ junctions (P>0.05), in L3, L4 and L4, L5 at Ⅱ and Ⅲ junction (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the vascular distance of L2, L3 between Ⅱ, Ⅲ junction and Ⅲ, Ⅳ junction, and the vascular distance of L3, L4 between Ⅰ, Ⅱ junction and Ⅲ, Ⅳ junction (P>0.05). The vascular distance of the other adjacent vertebral bodies was significant different between different Moro junctions (P<0.05). Except that there was no significant difference in the distance between L2I and L3S at Ⅰ, Ⅱ junction, L3I and L4S at Ⅱ, Ⅲ junction, and L2I and L3S at Ⅲ, Ⅳ junction (P>0.05), there was significant difference of the vascular distance between the bottom of one segment and the top of the next in the other segments (P<0.05). Comparison between junctions: Except for the L3S between Ⅰ, Ⅱ junction and Ⅱ, Ⅲ junction, and L5S between Ⅰ, Ⅱ junction and Ⅱ, Ⅲ and Ⅲ, Ⅳ junctions had no significant difference (P>0.05), there were significant differences in the distance between the other segmental vessels and the vertebral edge of the same sequence in different Moro junctions (P<0.05). The overall proportion of vessels in the simulated channels was 40.19% (43/107), and the proportion of vessels in L1 (41.12%, 44/107) and L5 (18.69%, 20/107) was higher than that in the other segments. The proportion of vessels in the channel of Moro zone Ⅰ (46.73%, 50/107) and zone Ⅱ (32.71%, 35/107) was higher than that in the zone Ⅲ, while no segmental vessels in L1 and L2 were found in the channel of zone Ⅲ (χ2=74.950, P<0.001). Moreover, 26.17% (28/107) of the segmental vessels of lateral L5 showed no movement, and 27.10% (29/107) vascular emanation angles of lateral L5 were less than 90°. Conclusion L1 and L5 segmental vessels are most likely to be injured in Moro zones Ⅰ and Ⅱ, and the placement of OLIF channels in L4, 5 at Ⅲ, Ⅳ junction should be avoided. It is usually safe to place fixation pins at the vertebral body edge on the cephalic side of the intervertebral space, but it is safer to place them on the caudal side in L1, 2 (Ⅰ, Ⅱ junction), L3, 4 (Ⅲ, Ⅳ junction), and L4, 5 (Ⅱ, Ⅲ, Ⅳ junctions).
Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of posterior unilateral pedicle screw fixation plus lumbar interbody fusion in treatment of degenerative lumbar instability. Methods Between February 2008 and December 2011, 33 patients with degenerative lumbar instability were treated with posterior unilateral pedicle screw fixation plus lumbar interbody fusion, including 14 cases of lumbar disc protrusion with instability, 15 cases of lumbar spinal stenosis with instability, 3 recurrent cases of lumbar disc protrusion at 1 year after discectomy, and 1 case of extreme lateral lumbar disc protrusion. There were 20 males and 13 females with an average age of 47.2 years (range, 39-75 years). The average disease duration was 12.8 months (range, 6-25 months). Single-segment-fixation was performed in 28 cases (L4, 5 in 21 cases, L5, S1 in 6 cases, and L5, 6 in 1 case), and double-segment-fixation was performed in 5 cases (L3, 4 and L4, 5). The clinical results were evaluated by using Oswestry disability index (ODI) and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score for low back pain. Results Infection occurred in 1 case, and was cured after dressing change; primary healing was obtained in the other patients. Thirty-one patients were followed up 32.3 months on average (range, 15-53 months). Cage displacement occurred in 1 case who received bilateral pedicle screw fixation plus lumbar interbody fusion; no screw breaking, Cage displacement, or pseudoarthrosis was observed in the others. X-ray films showed bone fusion in the other patients except 1 case of bone fusion failure. ODI and JOA score at last follow-up were significantly improved when compared with the ones before operation and at 2 weeks after operation (P lt; 0.05); the improvement rates were 74.0% ± 10.1% and 83.6% ± 9.4%, respectively. Conclusion Posterior unilateral pedicle screw fixation plus lumbar interbody fusion is an effective and reliable method for patients with degenerative lumbar instability because it has the advantages of simple operation and less trauma.
ObjectiveTo investigate the effect and safety of tranexamic acid sequential rivaroxaban on perioperative blood loss and preventing thrombosis for elderly patients during lumbar interbody fusion (LIF) with a prospective randomized controlled study.MethodsBetween April and October 2019, the elderly patients with lumbar degenerative diseases requiring LIF were included in the study, among which were 80 patients met the selection criteria. According to the antifibrinolysis and anticoagulation protocols, they were randomly divided into a tranexamic acid sequential rivaroxaban group (trial group) and a simple rivaroxaban group (control group) on average. Finally, 69 patients (35 in the trial group and 34 in the control group) were included for comparison. There was no significant difference in general data (P>0.05) such as gender, age, body mass index, disease duration, diseased segment, type of disease, and preoperative hemoglobin between the two groups. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, drainage within 3 days after operation, perioperative total blood loss, and proportion of blood transfusion patients were compared between the two groups, as well as postoperative venous thrombosis of lower extremities, pulmonary embolism, and bleeding-related complications.ResultsThe operations of the two groups completed successfully, and there was no significant difference in the operation time (P>0.05); the intraoperative blood loss, drainage within 3 days after operation, and perioperative total blood loss in the trial group were significantly lower than those in the control group (P<0.05). The proportion of blood transfusion patients in the trial group was 25.71% (9/35), which was significantly lower than that in the control group [52.94% (18/34)] (χ2=5.368, P=0.021). Postoperative incision bleeding occurred in 4 cases of the trial group and 3 cases of the control group, and there was no significant difference in bleeding-related complications between the two groups (P=1.000). There was 1 case of venous thrombosis of the lower extremities in each group after operation, and there was no significant difference in the incidence between the two groups (P=1.000). Besides, no pulmonary embolism occurred in the two groups.ConclusionPerioperative use of tranexamic acid sequential rivaroxaban in elderly LIF patients can effectively reduce the amount of blood loss and the proportion of blood transfusion patients without increasing the risk of postoperative thrombosis.
Objective To compare the clinical outcomes of posterior lumbar interbody fusion（PLIF） using simple cage alone fusion with pedicle screw fixationand autogenous bone grafting and cage fusion with pedicle screw fixation in adult spondylolisthesis. Methods From March 2003 to March 2004，Twenty-seven patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis were divided in two groups. In group A, 15 patients were treated by PLIF using simple cage alone fusion with pedicle screw fixation, including 4 males and 11 females, aging 53-68 years. Isthmic defectswere located at L4 in 9 cases, at L5 in 6 cases. Four patients were smokers.Thepreoperative mean disc space height was 5.4±2.3 mm, the mean percentage of slip was 36.8％±7.2%. In group B, 12 patients were treated by PLIF using autogenous bone grafting and cage fusion with pedicle screw fixation, including 3 males and 9 females, aging 56 years. Isthmic defects were located at L4 in 8 cases, atL5 in 4 cases. Five patients were smokers. The preoperative mean disc space height was 5.7±2.5 mm, the mean percentage of slip was 37.8%±6.2%. Two groupswere compared in the amount of blood loss, duration of hospitalization, back pain, radiating pain, fusion rate, the intervertebral disc space height, the postoperative degree of slip and the fusion rate. Results All patientswere followed up for 24-38 months. The mean follow-up was 29(24-36) months in group A and26(24-38) months in group B. There were no statistically significant differences infollow-up period, age,sex, the location of isthmic defects, smoking, the preoperative disc space height and the percentage of slip between two groups (Pgt;0.05).There were no statistically significant differences in the amount of blood loss, the duration of hospitalization, the fusion time between two groups(Pgt;0.05). But there were statistically significant differences in the back pain score, the radiating pain score and the fusion rate between two groups(Plt;0.05).Thepo stoperative disc space height and the degree of slip of the last follow-up were5.8±2.2 mm and 25.6％±7.2% in group A, 6.2±2.5 mm and 24.1％±7.4 % ingroupB, showing statistically significant difference (Plt;0.05). Conclusion The PLIF using autogenous bone grafting and cage fusion with pedicle screw fixations ismore beneficial to improving the fusion rate and preventing longterm instabilities than simple cage alone fusion with pedicle screw fixation in adult spondylolisthesis.
Objective To explore the occurrence condition of the neck axial symptom (AS) after cervical Bryan artificial disc replacement combined with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (Hybrid surgery) and traditional anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF surgery) to treat the two-level cervical disease, and to do contrastive analysis. Methods Between August 2006 and March 2010, 18 patients underwent Hybrid surgery (group A) and 30 patients underwent two-level ACDF surgery (group B). There was no significant difference in age, gender, disease duration, type, and operated segment between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, neck disability index (NDI) score, cervical curvature of the operated segment, total range of motion (ROM) of C2-7, ROM of the adjacent segment, and incidence of neck AS were recorded and compared between before operation and at last follow-up. Results All the patients were followed up 18-34 months (24.1 months on average). In both groups, the JOA and NDI scores at last follow-up had significantly improvement when compared with preoperative scores (P lt; 0.01), but there was no significant difference between 2 groups at preoperation and last follow-up (P gt; 0.05). The kyphosis incidence of the operated segment in group B was significantly higher than that in group A (χ2=5.333, P=0.021). There was no significant difference in the total ROM of C2-7 between at preoperation and last follow-up in group A (t=0.410, P=0.685); the total ROM of C2-7 at last follow-up was significantly lower than that at preoperation in group B (t=3.007, P=0.006); and significant difference was found between 2 groups at last follow-up (t=2.664, P=0.013). At last follow-up, ROM of the superior and inferior adjacent segments in group B increased obviously (P lt; 0.05) and was significantly higher than that in group A (t=2.252, P=0.033; t=2.203, P=0.037). The incidence of neck AS were 16.7% in group A and 46.7% in group B, showing significant difference at last follow-up (χ2=4.427, P=0.035). Conclusion Compared with two-level ACDF surgery, Hybrid surgery has good outcomes. At the same time, it can maintain the curvature of operated segments and total ROM, avoid excessive increased ROM of the adjacent segments, and reduce the incidence of neck AS.