Effect of Cage Material and Size on Fusion Rate and Subsidence Following Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

OBJECTIVE: Biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (BE-TLIF) is an emerging, minimally invasive technique performed under biportal endoscopic guidance. However, concerns regarding cage subsidence and sufficient fusion during BE-TLIF necessitate careful selection of an appropriate interbody cage to improve surgical outcomes. This study compared the fusion rate, subsidence, and other radiographic parameters according to the material and size of the cages used in BE-TLIF. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, patients who underwent single-segment BE-TLIF between April 2019 and February 2023 were divided into 3 groups: group A, regular-sized three-dimensionally (3D)-printed titanium cages; group B, regular-sized polyetheretherketone cages; and group C, large-sized 3D-printed titanium cages. Radiographic parameters, including lumbar lordosis, segmental lordosis, anterior and posterior disc heights, disc angle, and foraminal height, were measured before and after surgery. The fusion rate and severity of cage subsidence were compared between the groups. RESULTS: No significant differences were noted in the demographic data or radiographic parameters between the groups. The fusion rate on 1-year postoperative computed tomography was comparable between the groups. The cage subsidence rate was significantly lower in group C than in group A (41.9% vs. 16.7%, p=0.044). The severity of cage subsidence was significantly lower in group C (0.93±0.83) than in groups A (2.20±1.84, p=0.004) and B (1.79±1.47, p=0.048). CONCLUSION: Cage materials did not affect the 1-year postoperative outcomes of BE-TLIF; however, subsidence was markedly reduced in large cages. Larger cages may provide more stable postoperative segments.

Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: How to Improve Fusion Rate?

BACKGROUND: Biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (BE-TLIF) is a minimally invasive surgical technique for treating degenerative lumbar spine conditions. It offers advantages such as reduced soft tissue trauma and lower infection rates, but certain technical aspects may be challenging. The current study aims to identify strategies to enhance the fusion rate in BE-TLIF by addressing these specific challenges. METHODS: A literature review was conducted on techniques to improve fusion rates in BE-TLIF. RESULTS: The review suggests that lateral-based portals supplemented with medial portals allowed for safe insertion of interbody cages with large footprint. Direct visualization of the disc space with a 30° endoscope assisted with better disc space preparation. Facetectomies performed with osteotomes, rather than burrs, ensured maximum retrieval of autologous bone graft. Utilizing bone morphogenetic proteins with sustained release carriers such as hydroxyapatite can be useful to increase fusion rates of BE-TLIF. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, the current literature is the first comprehensive review of strategies to enhance fusion rates in BE-TLIF. The proposed techniques and biological adjuncts are effective means to address key challenges associated with the procedure, and such strategies would potentially shorten the learning curve and improve clinical outcomes. Further clinical studies are required to validate these findings and establish standardized protocols. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These findings provide practical solutions to overcome common challenges in BE-TLIF. The suggested techniques would reduce the incidence of pseudarthrosis, improve patient outcomes, and ultimately offer a safer and more reliable option for lumbar interbody fusion patients.

Effect of electrical stimulation on the fusion rate after spinal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Electrical stimulation is an important adjuvant therapy for spinal surgery, but whether receiving electrical stimulation can improve the fusion rate after spinal surgery is still controversial. The purpose of this study was to analyse and evaluate the effect of electrical stimulation on the fusion rate after spinal surgery. We systematically searched for related articles published in the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases on or before September 30, 2023. The odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) and the fusion rates of the experimental group and the control group were calculated by a random-effects meta-analysis model. The analysis showed that receiving electrical stimulation significantly increased the probability of successful spinal fusion (OR 2.66 [95% CI 1.79-3.97]), and the average fusion rate of the electrical stimulation group (86.8%) was significantly greater than that of the control group (73.7%). The fusion rate in the direct current (DC) stimulation group was 2.33 times greater than that in the control group (OR 2.33 [95% CI 1.37-3.96]), and that in the pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) group was 2.60 times greater than that in the control group (OR 2.60 [95% CI 1.29-5.27]). Similarly, the fusion rate in the capacitive coupling (CC) electrical stimulation group was 3.44 times greater than that in the control group (OR 3.44 [95% CI 1.75-6.75]), indicating that regardless of the type of electrical stimulation, the fusion rate after spinal surgery improved to a certain extent. Electrical stimulation as an adjuvant therapy seems to improve the fusion rate after spinal surgery to a certain extent, but the specific effectiveness of this therapy needs to be further studied.

Autologous rib grafts for craniocervical junction surgery in children: a clinical application.

OBJECTIVE: Autologous iliac bone is commonly used as a bone graft material to achieve solid fusion in craniocervical junction (CVJ) surgery. However, the developing iliac bone of children is less than ideal as a bone graft material. The matured rib bone of children presents a potential substitute material for iliac bone. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of autologous rib grafts for craniocervical junction surgery in children. METHODS: The outcomes of 10 children with abnormalities of the craniocervical junction who underwent craniocervical junction surgery between January 2020 and December 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. All patients underwent posterior fusion and internal fixation surgery with autologous rib grafts. Pre- and post-operative images were obtained and clinical follow-ups were conducted to evaluate neurological function, pain level, donor site complications, and bone fusion rates. RESULTS: All surgeries were successful. During the 8- to 24-month follow-up period, all patients achieved satisfactory clinical results. Computed tomography at 3-6 months confirmed successful bone fusion and regeneration of the rib defect in all patients with no neurological or donor site complications. CONCLUSION: Autologous rib bone is a safe and effective material for bone grafting in craniocervical junction fusion surgery for children that can reduce the risks of donor site complications and increase the amount of bone graft, thereby achieving a higher bone fusion rate.

A comparison of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) cage material on fusion rates: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Background: A wide variety of materials are used for lumbar interbody fusion, but there is no unified consensus on the superiority of one material over another. The aim of this systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) is to compare and rank the various TLIF interbody materials based on fusion rates. Methods: We queried PubMed, EMBASE and Scopus from inception until August 2023, in which 2135 studies were identified. Inclusion criteria were applied based on the PRISMA guidelines. The fusion assessment employed the Bridwell's criteria with a length of follow-up of at least 12 months. The NMA was conducted to compare multiple approaches from multiple studies using the frequentist framework with STATA16. Results: In total, 13 TLIF studies involving 1919 patients with 1981 lumbar interbody levels fulfilled our eligibility criteria. Seven different cage materials were utilized: polyetheretherketone (PEEK, as the reference), allograft, autograft, PEEK with titanium coating (TiPEEK), titanium, carbon/carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP) and 3D-printed titanium. The average patient age was 60.9 (SD = 7.5) years old. When compared to PEEK, the other six materials did not have a significantly different rate of lumbar fusion. However, the SUCRA number of the 3D-printed titanium, TiPEEK, Ti, allograft, autograft, CFRP, and PEEK were 0.8, 0.6, 0.5, 0.5, 0.4, 0.4, and 0.3 consecutively. Conclusions: Based on a network meta-analysis within the confines of our clinical study, 3D-printed titanium interbody cage may promote the highest success rate of fusion while PEEK may be the material with the least success rate of fusion in TLIF.

Comparison of Fusion Rate and Clinical Outcomes in Minimally Invasive and Conventional Posterior Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The fusion rate, clinical efficacy, and complications of minimally invasive fusion surgery and open fusion surgery in the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease are still unclear. METHODS: We conducted a literature search using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and WANFANG databases. RESULTS: This study included 38 retrospective studies involving 3097 patients. Five intervention modalities were considered: unilateral biportal endoscopic-lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-LIF), percutaneous endoscopic-lumbar interbody fusion (PE-LIF), minimally invasive-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF), transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Quality assessment indicated that each study met acceptable quality standards. PE-LIF demonstrated reduced low back pain (Odds Ratio = 0.50, Confidence Interval: 0.38-0.65) and lower complication rate (Odds Ratio = 0.46, Confidence Interval: 0.25-0.87) compared to PLIF. However, in indirect comparisons, PE-LIF showed the lowest fusion rates, with the ranking as follows: UBE-LIF (83.2%) > MIS-TLIF (59.6%) > TLIF (44.3%) > PLIF (39.8%) > PE-LIF (23.1%). With respect to low back pain relief, PE-LIF yielded the best results, with the order of relief as follows: PE-LIF (96.4%) > MIS-TLIF (64.8%) > UBE-LIF (62.6%) > TLIF (23.0%) > PLIF (3.2%). Global and local consistency tests showed satisfactory results, and heterogeneity tests indicated good stability. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to conventional open surgery, minimally invasive fusion surgery offered better scores for low back pain and Oswestry Disability Index, lower complication rates, reduced bleeding, and shorter hospital stays. However, minimally invasive fusion surgery did not show a significant advantage in terms of fusion rate and had a longer operative time.

Fusion rate and complications of oblique lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases: a meta-analysis.

Background: There currently exists some controversy about the efficacy of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. Aim: This study compares the application effects of OLIF and TLIF in lumbar degenerative diseases by reviewing the literature and using meta-analysis. Methods: We included randomized controlled trials and cohort studies comparing TLIF and OLIF in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. We searched for words such as "intervertebral disc degeneration," "spinal fusion," and "lumbar vertebrae" in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. The search date was set from the establishment date of the database to October 2023. Two authors independently conducted document screening, data abstraction, and qualitative assessment. A meta-analysis was performed and adapted to RevMan5.3 software. The odds ratio (OR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and 95% CI were calculated by adopting a fixed-effect model (FEM) or a random-effect model (REM). Results: A total of 18 cohort studies were included with 1,550 patients, of whom 806 patients underwent TLIF (TLIF group) and 744 patients underwent OLIF (OLIF group). There were no significant differences found in the fusion rate [OR = 1.58 (0.95, 2.64), P = 0.08], complication rate [OR = 1.25 (0.93, 1.68), P = 0.14], and visual analog scale for back pain (VAS-BP) [WMD = 0.00 (-0.13, 0.14), P = 0.96] between the two groups. Compared with the TLIF group, the OLIF group had a lower Oswestry disability index (ODI) [WMD = -0.62 (-1.03, -0.20), P = 0.003], a higher foramen height (FH) [WMD = 2.03 (1.42, 2.46), P < 0.001], a higher disc height (DH) [WMD = 1.69 (1.17, 2.22), P < 0.001], and a shorter length of stay (LOS) [WMD = -1.80 (-2.55, -1.05), P < 0.001]. Conclusion: In the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases, compared with TLIF, OLIF has more advantages in terms of improving the lumbar function, restoring the FH and DH, and shortening the LOS. Both methods have comparable fusion rates, complication rates, and lumbar pain improvements. Due to the small amount of research and unclear assessment of the risk of bias, high-quality, large-sample randomized controlled studies are required to prove it.

Do modic changes affect the fusion rate in spinal interbody fusion surgery? A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the fusion rates of spinal interbody fusion in patients with modic changes (MCs). METHODS: This meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO, and the project number was CRD42024538023. This network meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA 2020 statement. The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, ClinicalTrials.gov and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to March 28, 2024 for potential studies. STATA 13.0 and Review Manager 5.3 were used to perform the meta-analysis. RESULTS: Seven studies with a total of 1162 patients or segments assigned to four groups according to MCs grade were identified. The fusion rate in the non-modic changes (NMCs) was significantly greater than that in the MCs at the 3-month (p = 0.0001) and 6-month (p = 0.002) follow-ups. No significant difference was detected in the fusion rate at 12-month (p = 0.34) and final follow-ups (p = 0.41). No significant difference was found in cervical fusion (p = 0.88) or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) (p = 0.51). The fusion rate of NMCs was significantly greater than that of MCs in posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) (p < 0.00001). No significant differences were identified among the four groups in the overall comparison, cervical fusion or TLIF subgroups. The fusion rate in the NMCs was significantly greater than that in the MCs-2 and MCs-3 in the PLIF. CONCLUSION: MCs decreased the fusion rate at the 3- and 6-month follow-ups. MCs-2 and MCs-3 decrease the fusion rate in PLIF.

Knee Arthrodesis for Periprosthetic Knee Infection: Fusion Rate, Complications, and Limb Salvage-A Systematic Review.

The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the outcomes of knee arthrodesis (KA) after periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee. Differences in clinical outcomes and complication rates among the intramedullary nailing (IMN), external fixation (EF), and compression plating (CP) procedures were compared. A total of 23 studies were included. Demographics, microbiological data, types of implants, surgical techniques with complications, reoperations, fusion, and amputation rates were reported. A total of 787 patients were evaluated, of whom 601 (76.4%), 166 (21%), and 19 (2.4%) underwent IMN, EF, and CP, respectively. The most common causative pathogen was coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (CNS). Fusion occurred in 71.9%, 78.8%, and 92.3% of the patients after IMN, EF, and CP, respectively, and no statistically significant difference was found. Reinfection rates were 14.6%, 15.1%, and 10.5% after IMN, EF, and CP, respectively, and no statistically significant difference was found. Conversion to amputation occurred in 4.3%, 5%, and 15.8% of patients after IMN, EF, and CP, respectively; there was a higher rate after CP than after EF. The IMN technique is the most common option used for managing PJI with KA. No differences in terms of fusion, reinfection, or conversion-to-amputation rates were reported between IMN and EF. CP is rarely used, and the high amputation rate represents an important limitation of this technique.

Evaluation of the Fusion Rate and Safety of Escherichia coli-Derived rhBMP-2 in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Patients with Degenerative Lumbar Disease: A Prospective, Multicenter, Single-Arm Trial.

Background: Few studies have documented the viability of E. coli-derived recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). This study aimed to assess the safety and fusion rate of rhBMP-2 in TLIF. Methods: The study was conducted as a prospective, multicenter, single-arm trial, and 30 patients needing one- or two-level TLIF were enrolled. Fusion rate was assessed using the 12-month interbody fusion rate on CT. Postoperative problems, including seroma, radiculitis, and ectopic bone formation, which have been documented as risks associated with rhBMP-2 in prior studies, were recorded. Results: The study demonstrated fusion outcomes in all instances at 52 and 104 weeks post-surgery. Significant improvements were observed in clinical outcomes, with ODI, SF-36, and VAS scores, all achieving statistical significance (p < 0.0001). No perioperative adverse events requiring reoperation were reported, and there were no incidences of seroma, radiculitis, cage migration, grafted bone extrusion, postoperative neurologic deficit, or deep wound infection. Conclusions: The study demonstrates the high safety and efficacy in inducing bone fusion of E. coli-derived rhBMP-2 in TLIF, with a notable absence of adverse postoperative complications. Trial registration: This study protocol was registered at Korea Clinical Research Information Service (number identifier: KCT0004738) on July 2020.

Comparison of facet fusion rates and clinical outcomes between cortical bone trajectory screw and percutaneous pedicle screw fixation for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screws have been introduced as an alternative technique for pedicle screw (PS) insertion because they have greater contact with the cortex and a greater uniaxial pullout load than traditional PS. CBT screwing can also minimize muscle dissection. However, CBT screws and traditional PSs have not yet been compared in terms of fusion rates and clinical outcomes for particular operative procedures. PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the fusion rate and clinical outcomes of facet fusion (FF) fixed with CBT screws (CBT-FF) and to compare them with those of FF fixed with percutaneous PS (PPS-FF). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Records of 68 patients who underwent CBT-FF for single-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) with at least 1 year of follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. The control group comprised 143 patients who underwent PPS-FF under the same conditions. OUTCOME MEASURES: Computed tomography was performed to confirm fusion. Therapeutic effectiveness was assessed as a clinical outcome using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ), Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and visual analog scale (VAS) preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. The rate of revision surgery was also calculated. Intraoperative blood loss was measured. METHODS: Fusion rate, clinical outcomes, revision surgery rate, and intraoperative blood loss of CBT-FF and PPS-FF were compared. RESULTS: The CBT-FF and PPS-FF fusion rates were 91.2% and 90.1%, respectively. The JOABPEQ category scores demonstrated therapeutic effectiveness in 74.5% and 77.1% of the patients for low back pain; the corresponding proportions for walking ability were 84.7% and 89.3%, respectively. No significant differences in therapeutic effectiveness were observed for any category, including the RMDQ and VAS scores for buttock and lower limb pain. Three patients required revision surgery for adjacent segment disease between 6 months and 3.5 years after CBT-FF (revision surgery rate, 4.4%), whereas the revision surgery rate for PPS-FF was 6.3% (9/143 cases). Average intraoperative blood loss was significantly less in the CBT-FF group than in the PPS-FF group. CONCLUSIONS: Both procedures were equally useful in terms of fusion rate and clinical outcomes for DLS management.

Comparison of Fusion Rates among Various Demineralized Bone Matrices in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Background and Objectives: Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) plays a crucial role in addressing various spinal disorders. The success of PLIF is contingent upon achieving bone fusion, as failure can lead to adverse clinical outcomes. Demineralized bone matrix (DBM) has emerged as a promising solution for promoting fusion due to its unique combination of osteoinductive and osteoconductive properties. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of three distinct DBMs (Exfuse®, Bongener®, and Bonfuse®) in achieving fusion rates in PLIF surgery. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on 236 consecutive patients undergoing PLIF between September 2016 and February 2019. Patients over 50 years old with degenerative lumbar disease, receiving DBM, and following up for more than 12 months after surgery were included. Fusion was evaluated using the Bridwell grading system. Bridwell grades 1 and 2 were defined as 'fusion', while grades 3 and 4 were considered 'non-fusion.' Clinical outcomes were assessed using visual analog scale (VAS) scores for pain, the Oswestry disability index (ODI), and the European quality of life-5 (EQ-5D). Results: Fusion rates were 88.3% for Exfuse, 94.3% for Bongener, and 87.7% for Bonfuse, with no significant differences. All groups exhibited significant improvement in clinical outcomes at 12 months after surgery, but no significant differences were observed among the three groups. Conclusions: There were no significant differences in fusion rates and clinical outcomes among Exfuse, Bongener, and Bonfuse in PLIF surgery.

The Use of Osteobiologics in Single versus Multi-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Systematic Review.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic literature review. OBJECTIVES: In this study we assessed evidence for the use of osteobiologics in single vs multi-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients with cervical spine degeneration. The primary objective was to compare fusion rates after single and multi-level surgery with different osteobiologics. Secondary objectives were to compare differences in patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and complications. METHODS: After a global team of reviewers was selected, a systematic review using different repositories was performed, confirming to PRISMA and GRADE guidelines. In total 1206 articles were identified and after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 11 articles were eligible for analysis. Extracted data included fusion rates, definition of fusion, patient reported outcome measures, types of osteobiologics used, complications, adverse events and revisions. RESULTS: Fusion rates ranged from 87.7% to 100% for bone morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP-2) and 88.6% to 94.7% for demineralized bone matrix, while fusion rates reported for other osteobiologics were lower. All included studies showed PROMs improved significantly for each osteobiologic. However, no differences were reported when comparing osteobiologics, or when comparing single vs multi-level surgery specifically. CONCLUSION: The highest fusion rates after 2-level ACDF for cervical spine degeneration were reported when BMP-2 was used. However, PROMs did not differ between the different osteobiologics. Further blinded randomized trials should be performed to compare the use of BMP-2 in single vs multi-level ACDF specifically.

The fusion rates at different times of cortical iliac crest autograft or allograft compared with cages after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The cortical iliac crest autograft (CICA)/structural allograft (SA) has still been recognized as the gold standard for the ACDF technique for its high degree of histocompatibility and osteoinduction ability though the flourishing and evolving cage development. However, there was no further indication for using CICA/SA in ACDF based on basic information of inpatients. Our operative experience implied that applying CICA/SA has an advantage on faster fusion but not the long-term fusion rate. Therefore, our study aimed to compare the fusion rates between CICA and cage, between SA and cage, and between CICA/CA and cage. METHODS: Based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), a comprehensive literature search of electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science was conducted to identify these clinical trials that investigated the postoperative 3, 6, 12 and 24 months fusion rates of CICA/structural SA versus cage. Assessment of risk of bias, data extraction and statistical analysis were then carried out by two independent authors with the resolve-by-consensus method. The primary outcome was fusion rate at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. The secondary outcomes were also meta-analyzed such as hardware complications, operative duration and hospitalization time. Our meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (Identifier: CRD42022345247). RESULT: A total of 3451 segments (2398 patients) derived from 34 studies were included after the screening of 3366 articles. The segmental fusion rates of CICA were higher than cages at 3 (P = 0.184, I2 = 40.9%) and 6 (P = 0.147, I2 = 38.8%) months postoperatively, but not 12 (P = 0.988, I2 = 0.0%) and 24 (P = 0.055, I2 = 65.6%) months postoperatively. And there was no significant difference in segmental fusion rates between SA and cage at none of 3 (P = 0.047, I2 = 62.2%), 6 (P = 0.179, I2 = 41.9%) and 12 (P = 0.049, I2 = 58.0%) months after operations. As for secondary outcomes, the CICA was inferior to cages in terms of hardware complications, operative time, blood loss, hospitalization time, interbody height, disk height and Odom rating. The hardware complication of using SA was significantly higher than the cage, but not the hospitalization time, disk height, NDI and Odom rating. CONCLUSION: Applying CICA has an advantage on faster fusion than using a cage but not the long-term fusion rate in ACDF. Future high-quality RCTs regarding the hardware complications between CICA and cage in younger patients are warranted for the deduced indication.

Clinical role of crosslink augmentation during short-segment posterior lumbar interbody fusion with total facetectomy: A propensity score-matched analysis.

We investigated the clinical role of crosslink augmentation during PLIF with total facetectomy. We retrospectively reviewed 376 patients who underwent one- or two-segment PLIF with unilateral or bilateral total facetectomy between January 2017 and March 2022. The patients were categorized into two groups based on whether a crosslink was instrumented or not. Radiological outcome measurements included fusion status and implant failure rates on 12-month postoperative computed tomography. Patient-reported outcome measures included the Numerical Rating Scale for lower back pain, Oswestry Disability Index, and Short Form-12 Physical Component Summary scores, which were assessed preoperatively and at 12 months postoperatively. Surgery-related complications included surgical site infection, symptomatic implant failure, and epidural hematoma. Propensity score matching was performed to compare both groups after adjusting for confounding factors, including baseline and surgical procedural characteristics. A total of 200 cases were included in the propensity score calculation, and one-to-one matching was performed, resulting in 56 pairs with and without a crosslink. The fusion status (88.7 % vs. 85.5 %), screw loosening (14.3 % vs. 14.3 %), cage subsidence (17.9 % vs. 16.1 %), and cage dislodgement (5.4 % vs. 0 %) showed no significant difference between those with and without a crosslink, respectively. No significant differences were observed in the patient-reported outcomes or surgery-related complication rates between the groups. Crosslink augmentation during PLIF with total facetectomy is not recommended because it does not provide any radiological or clinical benefit and is associated with avoidable expenses.

Anterior Column Reconstruction of Destructive Vertebral Osteomyelitis at the Thoracolumbar Spine with an Expandable Vertebral Body Replacement Implant: A Retrospective, Monocentric Radiological Cohort Analysis of 24 Cases.

BACKGROUND: Vertebral osteomyelitis (VO) often necessitates surgical intervention due to bone loss-induced spinal instability. Anterior column reconstruction, utilizing expandable vertebral body replacement (VBR) implants, is a recognized approach to restore stability and prevent neurological compromise. Despite various techniques, clinical evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of these implants in VO remains limited. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis, spanning 2000 to 2020, was conducted on 24 destructive VO cases at a Level 1 orthopedic trauma center. Diagnosis relied on clinical, radiological, and microbiological criteria. Patient demographics, clinical presentation, surgical interventions, and radiological outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: The study included 24 patients (62.5% male; mean age 65.6 ± 35.0 years), with 58% having healthcare-associated infections (HAVO). The mean radiological follow-up was 137.2 ± 161.7 weeks. Surgical intervention significantly improved the bi-segmental kyphotic endplate angle (BKA) postoperatively (mean -1.4° ± 13.6°). However, a noticeable loss of correction was observed over time. The study reported a mortality rate of 1/24. CONCLUSIONS: Anterior column reconstruction using expandable VBR effectively improved local spinal alignment in destructive VO. However, the study underscores the necessity for prolonged follow-up and continuous research to refine surgical techniques and postoperative care. Addressing long-term complications and refining surgical approaches will be pivotal as the field progresses.

Comparison of Lumbar Interbody Fusion with 3D-Printed Porous Titanium Cage Versus Polyetheretherketone Cage in Treating Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety and radiological effectiveness of lumbar interbody fusion with a 3D-printed porous titanium (3D-PPT) cage versus a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease. METHODS: This study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023461511). We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases for related studies from inception to September 3, 2023. Review Manager 5.3 was used to conduct this meta-analysis. The reoperation rate, complication rate, fusion rate, and subsidence rate were assessed using relative risk and 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Ten articles reporting 9 studies comparing lumbar interbody fusion with 3D-PPT cages versus PEEK cages for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease were included. The subsidence rate at the 1-year follow-up in the 3D-PPT cage was significantly lower than that in the PEEK cage. The fusion rate in the 3D-PPT cage was significantly higher than that in the PEEK cage at the 6-month follow-up. No significant difference was identified between the 2 groups at the 12-month follow-up. No significant difference was identified between the 2 groups in terms of the complication rate and reoperation rate. There was a trend toward a lower complication rate and reoperation rate with the 3D-PPT cage. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the PEEK cage, the 3D-PPT cage may be a safer implant. The 3D-PPT cage was associated with a higher fusion rate and lower subsidence rate. The 3D-PPT cage may accelerate the intervertebral fusion process, improve the quality of fusion and prevent the occurrence of subsidence.

Hangman's Fracture in Geriatric Population: A Nationwide Multicenter Study in Japan.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective multicenter study. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the treatments of the geriatric population with hangman's fractures using a multicenter database under the Japan Association of Spine Surgeons with Ambition (JASA). METHODS: The multicenter database included data from 1512 patients. We employed the Levine and Edwards classification for categorizing hangman's fractures. The study incorporated epidemiological data, including the prevalence of hangman's fractures, patient age, and follow-up duration. Bony fusion rates and length of hospitalization were recorded for Type I and Type II fractures, and the degree of neurological impairment was assessed. RESULTS: Hangman's fractures represented 62 cases, accounting for 7.4% of all cervical spine injuries. The patients had an average age of 76.6 ± 6.5 years, and the mean duration of follow-up was 21.5 ± 23.6 months. The study found that the bony fusion rate for hangman's fractures in the geriatric population was 88.9%. Surgical treatment was associated with a shorter hospitalization period for Type II fractures compared to conservative treatment. Thirteen cases of hangman's fractures in the geriatric population, accounting for 21%, were complicated by spinal cord injury. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study to date on hangman's fractures in geriatric population ≥65 years. Type I and Type II fractures, according to the Levine and Edwards classification, had a bony fusion rate of up to 90%. In patients with Type II fractures, surgical treatment led to a shorter initial hospital stay. Geriatric patients are at risk of spinal cord injury due to hangman's fractures.

Oblique lateral interbody fusion combined with unilateral versus bilateral posterior fixation in patients with osteoporosis.

PURPOSE: To compare the clinical efficacy of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) combined with unilateral (UPSF) and bilateral pedicle screw internal fixation (BPSF) in patients with osteoporosis. METHODS: Clinical data of 57 patients who underwent single-segment OLIF surgery with a clear diagnosis of osteoporosis from December 2018 to May 2021 were retrospectively analyzed, of which 27 patients underwent OLIF + UPSF and 30 patients underwent OLIF + BPSF. Surgical technique-related indexes were recorded, including operative time, operative blood loss and postoperative hospital stay; clinical outcome-related indexes included postoperative complications, Visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) at preoperative, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 12 months postoperative follow-up; and imaging outcome-related indexes included the measurement of preoperative and postoperative segmental lordosis (SL), and observation of the degree of cage subsidence and bone graft fusion. RESULTS: The surgery was successfully performed in 57 patients, and there was no statistical difference in operative blood loss and postoperative hospital stay between UPSF group and BPSF group (P > 0.05). In terms of operative time, there was a significant difference (UPSF group: 92.30 ± 11.03 min, BPSF group: 119.67 ± 16.41, P < 0.05). Postoperative VAS and ODI scores exhibited significant improvement (P < 0.05). At the 12 months postoperative follow-up, the VAS and ODI scores in the BPSF group were significantly better than those in the UPS group (P < 0.05). Compared with the preoperative images, the SL was significantly improved in both groups after surgery (P < 0.05). At 6 months postoperatively, the fusion rate in the UPSF group was significantly lower than that in the BPSF group (P < 0.05). At 1 year postoperatively, the fusion rate in the UPSF group was not significantly different from that in the BPSF group (P > 0.05). At 1 year postoperatively, the rate and degree of cage subsidence was higher in the UPSF group than in the BPSF group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In the long term, OLIF combined with bilateral posterior fixation applied to the osteoporosis patients is superior to OLIF surgery combined with unilateral posterior fixation in terms of clinical and imaging outcomes. It is effective in improving pain relief and functional improvement, accelerating bone graft fusion, and reducing cage subsidence compared with UPSF.

Analysis of risk factors for non-fusion of bone graft in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A clinical retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Bone graft fusion is a major concern among surgeons after Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion (ACDF) surgery as non-fusion may lead to further physical and drug therapies. METHODS: The related risk elements of non-fusion of bone graft in ACDF surgery were retrospectively assessed. Patients receiving ACDF operation in our hospital from January 2015 to December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the criteria, 107 study subjects were recruited with a total of 164 surgical segments. The general information of patients, bone graft materials, imaging parameters, and clinical efficacy was recorded. T-test, chi-square test and binary logistic regression evaluation were employed to explore the risk factors of bone graft nonunion. RESULTS: Low housefield unit (HU) value, diabetes, allogeneic bone, and hydroxyapatite (HA) artificial bone could be risk factors for bone graft fusion in ACDF surgery. Further multivariate analysis was performed and confirmed those related factors of bone graft non-fusion including low HU value (non-fusion rate: 32.53% [27/83], OR = 5.024, p = 0.025), diabetes (non-fusion rate: 53.33% [8/15], OR = 4.776, p = 0.031), allogeneic bone (18.57% [13/70], OR = 3.964, p = 0.046), and artificial bone (68.29% [28/41], OR = 50.550, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: By looking at bone graft fusion, selecting autologous iliac bone is an ideal selection to avoid non-fusion of bone graft in ACDF. Diabetes was more important predictor of bone graft nonunion than low HU value. Larger sample size and longer follow-up are required to further confirm these findings in the future.