Application of oblique lateral interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration in patients with Modic change and endplate sclerosis / 中国骨伤

OBJECTIVE@#To explore the feasibility and clinical effect of Stand-alone oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) in the treatment of lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration with Modic changes and endplate sclerosis.@*METHODS@#A retrospective analysis was performed on 16 cases with lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration with Modic changes and endplate sclerosis admitted to three medical centers from January 2015 to December 2018. There were 6 males and 10 females, the age ranged from 45 to 67 years old with an average of (55.48±8.07) years old, the medical history ranged from 36 to 240 months with an average of (82.40±47.68) months. The lesion sites included L2,3 in 2 cases, L3,4 in 5 cases, and L4,5 in 9 cases. All patients presented with chronic low back pain with lower limb neurological symptoms in 3 cases. All patients were treated by Stand-alone oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion. Clinical and radiological findings and complications were observed.@*RESULTS@#There was no vascular injury, endplate injury and vertebral fracture during the operation. The mean incision length, operation time, and intraoperative blood loss were(4.06±0.42) cm, (45.12±5.43) min, (33.40±7.29) ml, respectively. The mean visual analogue scale (VAS) of the incision pain was (1.14±0.47) at 72 hours after operation. There was no incision skin necrosis, poor incision healing or infection in patients. Sympathetic chain injury occurred in 1 case, anterolateral pain and numbness of the left thigh in 2 cases, and weakness of the left iliopsoas muscle in 1 case, all of which were transient injuries with a complication rate of 25%(4/16). All 16 patients were followed up from 12 to 36 months with an average of (20.80±5.46) months. The intervertebral space height was significantly recovered after operation, with slight lost during the follow-up. Coronal and sagittal balance of the lumbar spine showed good improvement at the final follow-up. There was no obvious subsidence or displacement of the cage, and the interbody fusion was obtained. At the final follow-up, Japanese Orthopaedic Association(JOA) score and Oswestry disability index(ODI) were significantly improved.@*CONCLUSION@#As long as the selection of case is strict enough and the preoperative examination is sufficients, the use of Stand-alone OLIF in the treatment of lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration with Modic changes and endplate sclerosis has a good results, with obvious clinical advantages and is a better surgical choice.

Analysis of the causes and clinical results of vertebral fracture during oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion / 中国骨伤

OBJECTIVE@#To analyze the causes of vertebral fracture during oblique lateral interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar spondylopathy, summarize the clinical results, and propose preventive measures.@*METHODS@#Retrospective analysis was made on the data of 8 cases of lumbar spondylopathy and vertebral fracture treated by oblique lateral interbody fusion in three medical centers from October 2014 to December 2018. All were female, aged from 50 to 81 years with an average of 66.4 years. Disease types included 1 case of lumbar degenerative disease, 3 cases of lumbar spinal stenosis, 2 cases of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis and 2 cases of lumbar degenerative scoliosis. Preoperative dual energy X-ray bone mineral density test showed that 2 cases had T-value >-1 SD, 2 cases had T-value -1 to -2.5 SD, and 4 cases had T-value <-2.5 SD. Single segment fusion was in 5 cases, two segment fusion in 1 case and three segment fusion in 2 cases. Four cases were treated with OLIF Stand-alone and 4 cases were treated with OLIF combined with posterior pedicle screw fixation. Postoperative imaging examination showed vertebral fracture, and all of them were single vertebral fracture. There were 2 cases of right lower edge fracture of upper vertebral body at fusion segment, 6 cases of lower vertebral body fracture at fusion segment, and 6 cases with endplate injury and fusion cage partially embedded in vertebral body. Three cases of OLIF Stand-alone were treated with pedicle screw fixation via posterior intermuscular approach, while one case of OLIF Stand-alone and four cases of OLIF combined with posterior pedicle screw fixation were not treated specially.@*RESULTS@#The 5 cases of initial operation and 3 cases of reoperation did not show wound skin necrosis or wound infection. The follow-up time was from 12 to 48 months with an average of 22.8 months. Visual analogue scale (VAS) of low back pain was preoperative decreased from 4 to 8 points (averagely 6.3 points) and postoperative 1 to 3 points (averagely 1.7 points) at the final follow-up. Oswestry disability index (ODI) was preoperative 39.7% to 52.4% (averagely 40.2%), and postoperative 7.9% to 11.2% (averagely 9.5%) at the final follow-up. During the follow-up, there was no loosening or fracture of the pedicle screw system, and no lateral displacement of the fusion cage;however, the fusion cage at the vertebral fracture segment had obvious subsidence. The intervertebral space height of vertebral fracture segment was preoperaive 6.7 to 9.2 mm (averagely 8.1 mm), and postoperative 10.5 to 12.8 mm (averagely 11.2 mm). The improvement rate after operation was 37.98% compared to preoperative. The intervertebral space height at final follow-up was 8.4 to 10.9 mm (averagely 9.3 mm), and the loss rate was 16.71% compared with that after operation. At the final follow-up, interbody fusion was achieved in all cases except for one that could not be identified.@*CONCLUSION@#The incidence of vertebral fracture during oblique lateral interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar spondylopathy is lower, and there are many reasons for fracture, including preoperative bone loss or osteoporosis, endplate injury, irregular shape of endplate, excessive selection of fusion cage, and osteophyte hyperplasia at the affected segment. As long as vertebral fracture is found in time and handled properly, the prognosis is well. However, it still needs to strengthen prevention.

Different interbody fustion cages and combined fixation through intermuscular approach for lumbar diseases:a case control study / 中国骨伤

OBJECTIVE@#To explore the clinical effect of combined fixation and interbody bone grafting through intermuscular approach with different fusion cages in the treatment of single segment lumbar diseases.@*METHODS@#From June 2014 to December 2016, the clinical data of 123 cases of single segment lumbar diseases were analyzed retrospectively, including 44 males and 79 females, aged 22 to 60 years old, with the diseases course of 6 to 84 months. The disease types involved lumbar disc degeneration in 65 cases, lumbar spinal stenosis in 30 cases, MeyerdingⅠslip in 21 cases, giant lumbar disc herniation in 7 cases. Lesions was L in 5 cases, L in 101 cases, LS in 17 cases. According to the application of different interbody fusion cage, patients were divided into single common cage group, double common cage group and banana type cage group. The operation time, intraoperative hemorrhage, postoperative incision drainage fluid and incision length were observed in three groups; VAS score of lumbar incision and JOA score of preoperative and final follow up were recorded 72 hours after operation;the intervertebral space height, Cobb angle of lumbar coronal and sagittal plane before and after operation, and interbody fusion 12 months after operation were observed by imaging data.@*RESULTS@#There was no significant difference in incision length, operation time, intraoperative bleeding volume, postoperative drainage volume and VAS score of lumbar incision 72 hours after operation among three groups (>0.05). All cases were followed up for 12 to 36 (23.70±4.52) months. The height of intervertebral space in three groups recovered significantly (banana type fusion cage group>double common fusion cage group. At the last follow-up, the Cobb angle in the coronaland sagittal planes of the three groups were significantly improved (<0.05). During the follow-up, there were 42 cases of fusion cage subsidence, including 26 cases in the single common cage group, 5 cases in the double common cage group, 11 cases in the banana cage group, the difference was statistically significant (<0.05). At 12 months after operation, the interbody fusion rate was 83% in the single common cage group, 95% in the double common cage group and 90% in the banana cage group, the interbody fusion rate in the two common cage group and the banana cage group was better than that in the single common cage group. No obvious degeneration was observed in the adjacent segments. At the last follow-up, the JOA scores of the three groups were statistically significant (<0.05). The incidence of single common fusion cage group was 10%(4 / 42), that of double common fusion cage group was 9%(4 / 43), and that of banana fusion cage group was 10%(4 / 39). There was no significant difference among the three groups.@*CONCLUSION@#Through the intermuscular approach, single pedicle screw and contralateral facet screw were used for fixation, and single common fusion cage, double common fusion cage or banana type fusion cage were used for interbody grafting to treat single segment lumbar disease. Although the application of different fusion cage could not increase the axial strength of fixed segment, the speed of fusion was accelerated by increasing the contact area, and the quality of the fusion cage reduces the settlement of the cage and the loss of the height of the intervertebral space. Therefore, two interbody fusion cages implanted in one side are of positive clinical significance for the fixation of unilateral pedicle screw combined with contralateral facet screw, without prolonging the operation time and increasing the complications.

Case control study on two different surgical approaches combined fixation with lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of single segmental lumbar vertebra diseases / 中国骨伤

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To discuss the advantages and disadvantages of two different surgical approaches combined fixation with lumbar interbody fusion in treating single segmental lumbar vertebra diseases.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>The clinical data of 86 patients with single segmental lumbar vertebra diseases treated from June 2011 to June 2013 was retrospectively analyzed. There were 33 males and 53 females, aged from 28 to 76 years old with an average of 53.0 years. Among them, there were 39 cases of lumbar disc degeneration, 22 cases of lumbar disc herniation complicated with spinal canal stenosis, 9 cases of huge lumbar disc herniation and 16 cases of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (Meyerding degree I ). Lesion sites contained L3, 4 in 5 cases, L4, 5 in 70 cases and L5S1 in 11 cases. All the patients were treated with internal fixation and lumbar interbody fusion with 45 cases by midline incision approach (median incision group) and the other 41 cases by channel-assisted by muscle-splitting approach(channel group). Incision length, operation time, intraoperative bleeding and postoperative drainage were recorded in two groups. Visual analogue scale(VAS) was used to assess lumbar incision pain 72 h after operation. Depended on imaging results to compare the changes of the disc space height in lesion in preoperative, postoperative and final follow-up, the coronal and sagittal Cobb angle in preoperative and final follow-up, the area of multifidus and the degree of multifidus fat deposition before and after operation between two groups. Loosening or fragmentation of internal fixation, displacement of intervertebral cage and interbody fusion were observed in each group. Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scoring system was used to evaluate the function before operation and at the final follow-up.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>The channel group was superior to the median incision group in incision length and postoperative drainage while the median incision group was less than the channel group in the operation time and intraoperative bleeding. The average VAS score of lumbar incision 72 h after operation was 1.50 points in median incision group and 0.97 points in channel group, and there was significant difference between two groups(<0.05). No incision infection was found, but there were 4 cases of incisional epidermal necrosis, 1 case of incision healed badness, and 3 cases of nerve injury in channel group. The incidence of cacothesis of pedicle screw were 5.0% and 3.6% in median incision group and channel group respectively, and there was no significant difference between two groups(>0.05). The incidence of cacothesis of translaminar facet screw were 6.6% and 12.2% in median incision group and channel group respectively, and there was significant difference between two groups(<0.05). All the patients were followed up for 12 to 36 months with a mean of 22.8 months. The changes of disc space height had statistical difference between preoperative and postoperative(<0.05) in all patients, but there was no significant difference between postoperative and final follow-up(>0.05), however, there was no significant difference 3 days after operation and final follow-up between two groups(>0.05). At final follow-up, coronal and sagittal Cobb angle were obviously improved in all patients(<0.05), but there was no significant difference between two groups(>0.05). One year after operation, the area of multifidus in median incision group was (789.00±143.15) mm² less than preoperative(1 066.00±173.55) mm² (<0.05), and in channel group, was(992.00±156.75) mm² at 1 year after operation and(1 063.00±172.13) mm² preoperatively, there was no significant difference between them(>0.05), however, there was significant difference one year after operation between two groups (<0.05) . About the degree of multifidus fat deposition, there was significant difference between one year after operation and preoperation in median incision group (<0.05), but there was no significant difference between one year after operation and preoperation in channel group (>0.05), and there was significant difference at one year after operation between two groups(<0.05). During the follow-up period, neither pedicle screw and/or translaminar facet screw loosening, displacement or fragmentation nor displacement of intervertebral cage were found. The lumbar interbody fusion rate was 95.6% in median incision group and was 95.1% in channel group, and there was no significant difference between two groups(>0.05). No obvious adjacent segmental degeneration was observed in fixed position. JOA score in median incision group was significantly increased from 8-16 points (average: 12.77±2.56) preoperative to 21-29 points (average: 25.20±2.43) at final follow-up(<0.05); and in channel group was significantly increased from 8-16 points (average: 12.64±2.37) preoperative to 23-29 points(average: 26.7±1.82) at final follow-up(<0.05); there was also significant difference between two groups at final follow-up.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>Compared to the median incision approach, unilateral pedicle screw combined with contralateral translaminar facet screw fixation using channel-assisted by muscle-splitting approach has advantages of small incision, less trauma, fast recovery and so on. However, it also has shortages such as high surgical complications incidence, especially in cases that.</p>

Two different fixation methods combined with lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of two-level lumbar vertebra diseases: a clinical comparison study / 中国骨伤

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To investigate the advantages and disadvantages of unilateral pedicle screw fixation combined with contralateral translaminar facet screw fixation and interbody fusion with cages in the treatment of two-level lumbar vertebra diseases, by comparing bilateral pedicle screw fixation and interbody fusion with cages.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Forty-nine patients with two-level lumbar diseases who received treatments from June 2009 to December 2011 were included in this study. Among these patients, 23 patients received unilateral pedicle screw fixation combined with contralateral translaminar facet screw fixation and interbody fusion with cages (combined fixation group) and the remaining 26 patients underwent bilateral pedicle screw fixation and interbody fusion with cages (bilateral fixation group). These patients consisted of 17 males and 32 females, ranging in age from 29 to 68 years old. Among these patients, lumbar intervertebral disc herniation accompanied by the spinal canal stenosis was found in 29 patients, degenerative lumbar disc diseases in 17 patients and lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (degree I) in 3 patients. The lesions occurred at L2,3 and L3,4 segments in 1 patient, at L3,4 and L4,5 segments in 30 patients, and at L4,5 segment and L5S1 segment in 18 patients. Wound length, operation time, intraoperative blood loss and postoperative wound drainage were compared between two groups. Intervertebral space height in the lesioned segment before and during surgery and at the latest follow up was also compared between two groups. Before surgery and at the latest follow-up, the Cobb angle of the coronal plane and sagittal plane of the lumbar spine, loosening or breakage of internal fixations, the dislocation of intervertebral cages, and interbody fusion were all evaluated in each group. The visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to measure lumbar incision pain. The Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scoring system was used to evaluate the function before surgery and at the latest follow-up.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>No wound infection or skin necrosis was observed after surgery in all patients. No cerebrospinal fluid leakage, nerve root injury, cauda equia injury or worsened neural function in the lower limb occurred in all patients during and after surgery. Wound length, operation time, intraoperative blood loss and postoperative wound drainage in the combined fixation group were superior to those in the bilateral fixation group. At postoperative 72 hours, the VAS score in the combined fixation group (1 to 4 points, mean 2.35±1.20) was significantly lower than that in the bilateral fixation group (2 to 5 points, mean 3.11±1.00; P<0.05). All the patients were followed up for 12 to 48 months, with a mean of 29 months. After surgery, intervertebral space height was well recovered in each patient and it was well maintained at the latest follow-up, and there was no significant difference between two groups (P>0.05). During follow-up, pedicle screw and translaminar facet screw loosening, dislocation or breakage and dislocation of intervertebral cages were all not found. At the latest follow-up, the Cobb angle of the coronal plane and sagittal plane of the lumbar spine was obviously improved and was not significantly different between two groups (P>0.05). The lumbar interbody fusion rate was 93.5% and 96.2% in the combined fixation group and bilateral fixation group, respectively, and there was no significant difference between them (P>0.05). There was a significant difference in JOA score between before surgery and at the latest follow-up in each patient (P<0.05), and at the latest follow-up, significant difference in JOA score was found between two groups (P<0.05).</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>Compared to bilateral pedicle screw fixation and lumbar interbody fusion with cages, unilateral pedicle screw fixation combined with contralateral translaminar facet screw fixation and lumbar interbody fusion with cages shows advantages including small skin incision, minimal invasion, ease of operation, highly reliable stability, high interbody fusion rate, rapid recovery in the treatment of two-level lumbar vertebra diseases and therefore can be preferred as a treatment method of this disease.</p>