Oblique lumbar interbody fusion combined with anterolateral screw fixation and stress endplate augmentation for treating degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with osteoporosis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes of Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF)combined with anterolateral screw fixation (AF) and Stress Endplate Augmentation(SEA) versus OLIF-AF in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS)with osteoporosis (OP). METHODS: 30 patients underwent OLIF-AF-SEA (SEA group) were matched with 30 patients received OLIF-AF (control group), in terms of sex, age, body mass index (BMI) and bone mineral density (BMD). Clinical outcomes including visual analog scale (VAS) score of the lower back pain (VAS-LBP), leg pain (VAS-LP), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were evaluated at different postoperative intervals and comparedwith their preoperative counterparts. Radiographic outcomes such as disk height (DH), slip distance (SD), lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), cage subsidence (CS) rate and fusion rate were evaluated at different postoperative intervals and compared with their preoperative counterparts. RESULTS: SEA group presented to be better at 3-month and 12-month follow-up, the VAS-LBP, VAS-LP and ODI scores of the SEA group were significantly lower than the control group (3-month SEA vs control: 2.30±0.70 vs 3.30±0.75, 2.03±0.72 vs 2.90±0.76,15.60±2.36 vs 23.23±3.07, respectively, all p<0.05. VAS-LBP and ODI 12-month SEA vs control: 1.27±0.74 vs 1.93±0.58, 12.20±1.88 vs 14.43±1.89,respectively, all p<0.05). At 24-month follow-up, both groups showed no difference in fusion rate (83.33% vs 90.00%, p=0.45), while SEA group showed a lower CS rate (13.33% vs 53.33%, p<0.05). CONCLUSION: OLIF-AF-SEA was safe with no adverse effects and resulted in lower CS rate and better sagittal balance. OLIF-AF-SEA is a promising surgical method for treating patients with DLS-OP.

Biomechanical changes of oblique lumbar interbody fusion with different fixation techniques in degenerative spondylolisthesis lumbar spine: a finite element analysis.

OBJECTIVE: There is a dearth of comprehensive research on the stability of the spinal biomechanical structure when combining Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) with internal fixation methods. Hence, we have devised this experiment to meticulously examine and analyze the biomechanical changes that arise from combining OLIF surgery with different internal fixation techniques in patients diagnosed with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS: Seven validated finite element models were reconstructed based on computed tomography scan images of the L3-L5 segment. These models included the intact model, a stand-alone (S-A) OLIF model, a lateral screw rod (LSR) OLIF model, a bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) OLIF model, an unilateral pedicle screw (UPS) OLIF model, a bilateral CBT (BCBT) OLIF model, and an unilateral CBT(UCBT) OLIF model. The range of motion (ROM), as well as stress levels in the cage, L4 lower endplate, L5 upper endplate, and fixation constructs were assessed across these different model configurations. RESULTS: S-A model had the highest average ROM of six motion modes, followed by LSR, UPS, UCBT, BPS and BCBT. The BCBT model had a relatively lower cage stress than the others. The maximum peak von Mises stress of the fixation constructs was found in the LSR model. The maximum peak von Mises stress of L4 lower endplate was found in the S-A model. The peak von Mises stress on the L4 lower endplate of the rest surgical models showed no significant difference. The maximum peak von Mises stress of the L5 upper endplate was found in the S-A model. The minimum peak von Mises stress of the L5 upper endplate was found in the BCBT model. No significant difference was found for the peak von Mises stress of the L5 upper endplate among LSR, BPS, UPS and UCBT models. CONCLUSION: Among the six different fixation techniques, BCBT exhibited superior biomechanical stability and minimal stress on the cage-endplate interface. It was followed by BPS, UCBT, UPS, and LSR in terms of effectiveness. Conversely, S-A OLIF demonstrated the least stability and resulted in increased stress on both the cage and endplates. Combining OLIF with BCBT fixation technique enhanced biomechanical stability compared to BPS and presented as a less invasive alternative treatment for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

The Research on Spinopelvic Parameters and Clinical Outcomes of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Complex Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the improvement of spinopelvic parameters and therapeutic efficacy in the treatment of complex degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (CDLS) after oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). METHODS: From January 2018 to December 2020, 71 patients with CDLS underwent OLIF or TLIF at the same hospital: 31 in the OLIF group and 40 in the TLIF group. The spinopelvic parameters, perioperative data, and clinical outcomes were elected and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: There were no statistic differences in demographic perioperative complication rates and preoperative spinopelvic parameters between the two groups. OLIF group showed lower serum C-reactive protein in the early postoperative stage, shorter length of stay, less estimated blood loss and larger slippage correction rate (88.05 vs. 62.37%) (all P ＜ 0.05). There was no significant difference in the visual analog scale and Oswestry disability index scores before operation and three and six months after surgery, but OLIF group was better in the long-term with visual analog scale and Oswestry disability index (1.7/13.2 vs. 2.3/16.5). And it was significantly different in the lumbar lordosis angle, segmental lordosis angle, pelvic tilt, sacral slope (46.0°/9.3°/18.2°/35.9° vs. 40.4°/7.2°/23.9°/31.1°), and sagittal vertical axis (21.6 vs. 31.7mm) after surgery between OLIF and TLIF groups (all P ＜ 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In the therapy of CDLS, OLIF can better reduce pelvic tilt, L1 axis S1 distance, and sagittal vertical axis, and increase lumbar lordosis angle and sacral slope, showing advantages over TLIF in improving and maintaining spinopelvic parameters. Although there was no difference in complication rates between OLIF and TLIF, OLIF was more minimally invasive, had less tissue damage, had faster recovery, and had better long-term outcomes.

Meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of OLIF and TLIF in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the difference in clinical efficacy between two surgical approaches, oblique lateral approach and intervertebral foraminal approach, in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS: English databases, including PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science, were systematically searched using keywords such as "oblique lumbar interbody fusion" and "transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion." Concurrently, Chinese databases, including CNKI, WanFang data, VIP, and CBM, were also queried using corresponding Chinese terms. The search spanned from January 2014 to February 2024, focusing on published studies in both Chinese and English that compared the clinical efficacy of OLIF and TLIF. The literature screening was conducted by reviewing titles, abstracts, and full texts. Literature meeting the inclusion criteria underwent quality assessment, and relevant data were extracted. Statistical analysis and a meta-analysis of the observational data for both surgical groups were performed using Excel and RevMan 5.4 software. Findings revealed a total of 14 studies meeting the inclusion criteria, encompassing 877 patients. Of these, 414 patients were in the OLIF group, while 463 were in the TLIF group. Meta-analysis of the statistical data revealed that compared to TLIF, OLIF had a shorter average surgical duration (P < 0.05), reduced intraoperative bleeding (P < 0.05), shorter average hospital stay (P < 0.05), better improvement in postoperative VAS scores (P < 0.05), superior enhancement in postoperative ODI scores (P < 0.05), more effective restoration of disc height (P < 0.05), and better correction of lumbar lordosis (P < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences between OLIF and TLIF in terms of the incidence of surgical complications (P > 0.05) and fusion rates (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: When treating degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, OLIF demonstrates significant advantages over TLIF in terms of shorter surgical duration, reduced intraoperative bleeding, shorter hospital stay, superior improvement in postoperative VAS and ODI scores, better restoration of disc height, and more effective correction of lumbar lordosis.

The relationship between paraspinal muscle atrophy and degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis at the L4/5 level.

BACKGROUND/CONTEXT: Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) is a prevalent spinal condition that can result in significant disability. DLS is thought to result from a combination of disc and facet joint degeneration, as well as various biological, biomechanical, and behavioral factors. One hypothesis is the progressive degeneration of segmental stabilizers, notably the paraspinal muscles, contributes to a vicious cycle of increasing slippage. PURPOSE: To examine the correlation between paraspinal muscle status on MRI and severity of slippage in patients with symptomatic DLS. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cross-sectional study at an academic tertiary care center. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients who underwent surgery for DLS at the L4/5 level between 2016-2018 were included. Those with multilevel DLS or insufficient imaging were excluded. OUTCOME MEASURES: The percentage of relative slippage (RS) at the L4/5 level evaluated on standing lateral radiographs. Muscle morphology measurements including functional cross-sectional area (fCSA), body height normalized functional cross-sectional area (HI) of Psoas, erector spinae (ES) and multifidus muscle (MF) and fatty infiltration (FI) of ES and MF were measured on axial MR. Disc degeneration and facet joint arthritis were classified according to Pfirrmann and Weishaupt, respectively. METHODS: Descriptive and comparative statistics, univariable and multivariable linear regression models were utilized to examine the associations between RS and muscle parameters, adjusting for confounders sex, age, BMI, segmental degeneration, and back pain severity and symptom duration. RESULTS: The study analyzed 138 out of 183 patients screened for eligibility. The median age of all patients was 69.5 years (IQR 62 to 73), average BMI was 29.1 (SD±5.1) and average preoperative ODI was 46.4 (SD±16.3). Patients with Meyerding-Grade 2 (M2, N=25) exhibited higher Pfirrmann scores, lower MFfCSA and MFHI, and lower BMI, but significantly more fatty infiltration in the MF and ES muscles compared to those with Meyerding Grade 1 (M1). Univariable linear regression showed that each cm2 decrease in MFfCSA was associated with a 0.9%-point increase in RS (95% CI -1.4 to - 0.4, p<.001), and each cm2/m2 decrease in MFHI was associated with an increase in slippage by 2.2%-points (95% CI -3.7 to -0.7, p=.004). Each 1%-point rise in ESFI and MFFI corresponded to 0.17%- (95% CI 0.05-0.3, p=.01) and 0.20%-point (95% CI 0.1-0.3 p<.001) increases in relative slippage, respectively. Notably, after adjusting for confounders, each cm2 increase in PsoasfCSA and cm2/m2 in PsoasHI was associated with an increase in relative slippage by 0.3% (95% CI 0.1-0.6, p=.004) and 1.1%-points (95% CI 0.4-1.7, p=.001). While MFfCSA tended to be negatively associated with slippage, this did not reach statistical significance (p=.105). However, each 1%-point increase in MFFI and ESFI corresponded to increases of 0.15% points (95% CI 0.05-0.24, p=.002) and 0.14% points (95% CI 0.01-0.27, p=.03) in relative slippage, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study found a significant association between paraspinal muscle status and severity of slippage in DLS. Whereas higher degeneration of the ES and MF correlate with a higher degree of slippage, the opposite was found for the psoas. These findings suggest that progressive muscular imbalance between posterior and anterior paraspinal muscles could contribute to the progression of slippage in DLS.

Biomechanical response of decompression alone in lower grade lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis--A finite element analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated the clinical efficacy of decompression alone in lower-grade spondylolisthesis. A higher rate of surgical revision and a lower rate of back pain relief was also observed. However, there is a lack of relevant biomechanical evidence after decompression alone for lower-grade spondylolisthesis. PURPOSE: Evaluating the biomechanical characteristics of total laminectomy, hemilaminectomy, and facetectomy for lower-grade spondylolisthesis by analyzing the range of motion (ROM), intradiscal pressure (IDP), annulus fibrosus stress (AFS), facet joints contact force (FJCF), and isthmus stress (IS). METHODS: Firstly, we utilized finite element tools to develop a normal lumbar model and subsequently constructed a spondylolisthesis model based on the normal model. We then performed total laminectomy, hemilaminectomy, and one-third facetectomy in the normal model and spondylolisthesis model, respectively. Finally, we analyzed parameters, such as ROM, IDP, AFS, FJCF, and IS, for all the models under the same concentrate force and moment. RESULTS: The intact spondylolisthesis model showed a significant increase in the relative parameters, including ROM, AFS, FJCF, and IS, compared to the intact normal lumbar model. Hemilaminectomy and one-third facetectomy in both spondylolisthesis and normal lumbar models did not result in an obvious change in ROM, IDP, AFS, FJCF, and IS compared to the pre-operative state. Moreover, there was no significant difference in the degree of parameter changes between the spondylolisthesis and normal lumbar models after undergoing the same surgical procedures. However, total laminectomy significantly increased ROM, AFS, and IS and decreased the FJCF in both normal lumbar models and spondylolisthesis models. CONCLUSION: Hemilaminectomy and one-third facetectomy did not have a significant impact on the segment stability of lower-grade spondylolisthesis; however, patients with LDS undergoing hemilaminectomy and one-third facetectomy may experience higher isthmus stress on the surgical side during rotation. In addition, total laminectomy changes the biomechanics in both normal lumbar models and spondylolisthesis models.

Differences in the surgical management of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis based on self-reported sex: analysis of the CSORN prospective DLS study.

OBJECTIVE: Surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) reliably improves patient-reported quality of life; however, patient population heterogeneity, in addition to other factors, ensures ongoing equipoise in choosing the ideal surgical treatment. Surgeon preference for fusion or decompression alone influences surgical treatment decision-making. Meanwhile, at presentation, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) differ considerably between females and males. The aims of this study were to determine whether there exists a difference in the rates of decompression and fusion versus decompression alone based on patient-reported sex, and to determine if widely accepted indications for fusion justify any observed differences or if surgeon preference plays a role. METHODS: This study is a retrospective cohort analysis of patients enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network (CSORN) DLS study, a multicentered Canadian prospective study, investigating the surgical management and outcome of DLS. Decompression and fusion rates, patient characteristics, preoperative PROMs, and radiographic measures were compared between males and females before and after propensity score matching. RESULTS: In the unmatched cohort, female patients were more likely to undergo decompression and fusion than male patients. Females were more likely to have the recognized indications for fusion, including kyphotic disc angle, higher spondylolisthesis grade and slip percentage, and patient-reported back pain. Other radiographic findings associated with the decision to fuse, including facet effusion, facet distraction, or facet angle, were not more prevalent in females. After propensity score matching for demographic and radiographic characteristics, similar proportions of male and female patients underwent decompression and fusion and decompression alone. CONCLUSIONS: Although it remains unclear who should or should not undergo fusion, in addition to surgical decompression of DLS, female patients undergo fusion at a higher rate than their male counterparts. After matching baseline radiographic factors indicating fusion, this analysis showed that the decision to fuse was not biased by sex differences. Rather, the higher proportion of females undergoing fusion is largely explained by the radiographic and clinical indications for fusion, suggesting that specific clinical and anatomical features of this condition are indeed different between sexes.

[Comparison of effectiveness between unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression and unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion for degree â degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis].

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression and unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) in the treatment of degreeⅠdegenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). Methods: A clinical data of 58 patients with degreeⅠDLS who met the selection criteria between October 2021 and October 2022 was retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 28 cases were treated with unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression (decompression group) and 30 cases with ULIF (ULIF group). There was no significant difference between the two groups ( P>0.05) in the gender, age, lesion segment, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), disk height (DH), segmental lordosis (SL), and other baseline data. The operation time, postoperative drainage volume, postoperative ambulation time, VAS score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, ODI, laboratory examination indexes (CRP, ESR), and imaging parameters (DH, SL) were compared between the two groups. Results: Compared with the ULIF group, the decompression group had shorter operation time, less postoperative drainage, and earlier ambulation ( P<0.05). All incisions healed by first intention, and no complication such as nerve root injury, epidural hematoma, or infection occurred. All patients were followed up 12 months. Laboratory tests showed that ESR and CRP at 3 days after operation in decompression group were not significantly different from those before operation ( P>0.05), while the above indexes in ULIF group significantly increased at 3 days after operation compared to preoperative values ( P<0.05). There were significant differences in the changes of ESR and CRP before and after operation between the two groups ( P<0.05). Except that the VAS score of low back pain at 3 days after operation was not significantly different from that before operation in decompression group ( P>0.05), there were significant differences in VAS score of low back pain and VAS score of leg pain between the two groups at other time points ( P<0.05). The VAS score of low back pain in ULIF group was significantly higher than that in decompression group at 3 days after operation ( P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in VAS score of low back pain and VAS score of leg pain between the two groups at other time points ( P>0.05). The ODI of the two groups significantly improved after operation ( P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between 3 days and 6 months after operation ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups at the two time points after operation ( P<0.05). Imaging examination showed that there was no significant difference in DH and SL between pre-operation and 12 months after operation in decompression group ( P>0.05). However, the above two indexes in ULIF group were significantly higher than those before operation ( P<0.05). There were significant differences in the changes of DH and SL before and after operation between the two groups ( P<0.05). Conclusion: Unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression can achieve good effectiveness in the treatment of degree Ⅰ DLS. Compared with ULIF, it can shorten operation time, reduce postoperative drainage volume, promote early ambulation, reduce inflammatory reaction, and accelerate postoperative recovery. ULIF has more advantages in restoring intervertebral DH and SL.

Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression with removal of the posterosuperior region underneath the slipping vertebral body for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression (PTED) is an ideal minimally invasive decompression technique for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). The posterosuperior region underneath the slipping vertebral body (PRSVB) formed by DLS is an important factor exacerbating LSS in patients. Therefore, the necessity of removing the PRSVB during ventral decompression remains to be discussed. This study aimed to describe the procedure of PTED combined with the removal of the PRSVB and to evaluate the clinical outcomes. METHODS: LSS with DLS was diagnosed in 44 consecutive patients at our institution from January 2019 to July 2021, and they underwent PTED combined with the removal of the PRSVB. All patients were followed up for at least 12 months. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 69.5 ± 7.1 years. The mean preoperative ODI score, VAS score of the low back, and VAS score of the leg were 68.3 ± 10.8, 5.8 ± 1.0, and 7.7 ± 1.1, respectively, which improved to 18.8 ± 5.0, 1.4 ± 0.8, and 1.6 ± 0.7, respectively, at 12 months postoperatively. The proportion of patients presenting "good" and "excellent" ratings according to the modified MacNab criteria was 93.2%. The percent slippage in spondylolisthesis preoperatively (16.0% ± 3.3%) and at the end of follow-up (15.8% ± 3.3%) did not differ significantly (p>0.05). One patient had a dural tear, and one patient had postoperative dysesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the removal of PRSVB during the PTED process may be a beneficial surgical procedure for alleviating clinical symptoms in patients with LSS and DLS. However, long-term follow-up is needed to study clinical effects.

A Retrospective Study of the Effect of Spinopelvic Parameters on Fatty Infiltration in Paraspinal Muscles in Patients With Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.

OBJECTIVE: The effect on fat infiltration (FI) of paraspinal muscles in degenerative lumbar spinal diseases has been demonstrated except for spinopelvic parameters. The present study is to identify the effect of spinopelvic parameters on FI of paraspinal muscle (PSM) and psoas major muscle (PMM) in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective cross-sectional study of 160 patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) and lumbar stenosis (LSS) who had lateral full-spine x-ray and lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging was conducted. PSM and PMM FIs were defined as the ratio of fat to its muscle cross-sectional area. The FIs were compared among patients with different pelvic tilt (PT) and pelvic incidence (PI), respectively. RESULTS: The PSM FI correlated significantly with pelvic parameters in DLS patients, but not in LSS patients. The PSM FI in pelvic retroversion (PT > 25°) was 0.54 ± 0.13, which was significantly higher in DLS patients than in normal pelvis (0.41 ± 0.14) and pelvic anteversion (PT < 5°) (0.34 ± 0.12). The PSM FI of DLS patients with large PI ( > 60°) was 0.50 ± 0.13, which was higher than those with small ( < 45°) and normal PI (0.37 ± 0.11 and 0.36 ± 0.13). However, the PSM FI of LSS patients didn't change significantly with PT or PI. Moreover, the PMM FI was about 0.10-0.15, which was significantly lower than the PSM FI, and changed with PT and PI in a similar way of PSM FI with much less in magnitude. CONCLUSION: FI of the PSMs increased with greater pelvic retroversion or larger pelvic incidence in DLS patients, but not in LSS patients.

Fusion with and without lever reduction in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The reduction of slipped vertebra is often performed during surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). This approach, while potentially improving clinical and radiological outcomes, also carries a risk of increased complications due to the reduction process. To address this, we introduced an innovative lever reduction technique for DLS treatment. This study aims to investigate the clinical efficacy, radiological outcomes, and complications of fusion with or without lever reduction. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from a registry of patients who underwent lumbar fusion surgery for DLS, with a follow-up of at least 24 months. Self-reported measures included visual analog scale (VAS) for back or leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the achievement of minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Radiological assessments encompassed spondylolisthesis percentage (SP), focal lordosis (FL), and lumbar lordosis (LL). Complications were categorized using the modified Clavien-Dindo classification (MCDC) scheme. Patients were assigned to the reduction group (RG) and non-reduction group (NRG) based on the application of the lever reduction technique. Clinical and radiological outcomes at baseline, immediately after surgery, and at the last follow-up were compared. RESULTS: A total of 281 patients were analyzed (123 NRG, 158 RG). Baseline patient demographics, comorbidities, and surgical characteristics were similarly distributed between groups except for operating time (NRG 129.25 min, RG 138.04 min, P = .009). Both groups exhibited significant clinical improvement after surgery (all, P = .000), with no substantial difference between groups (VAS, ODI, or the ability to reach MCID). Patients in RG showed statistically lower SP and higher FL during follow-up (all, P = .000). LL was comparable at different time points within each group or at the same time point between the two groups (all, P > .050). The overall complication rate (NRG 38.2%, RG 27.2%, P = .050) or specific complication rates per MCDC were similar between groups (all, P > .050). Patients in RG were predisposed to a lower risk of adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg) (NRG 9.8%, RG 6.3%, P = .035). CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in postoperative measures such as VAS scores for back and leg pain, ODI, the ability to reach MCID, overall complication rate, or specific complication rates per MCDC between surgical approaches. However, fusion with lever reduction demonstrated a notable advantage in restoring segmental spinal sagittal alignment and reducing the occurrence of ASDeg compared to in situ fusion.

Predicting postoperative outcomes in lumbar spinal fusion: development of a machine learning model.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) is a prevalent spinal disorder, often requiring surgical intervention. Accurately predicting surgical outcomes is crucial to guide clinical decision-making, but this is challenging due to the multifactorial nature of postoperative results. Traditional risk assessment tools have limitations, and with the advent of machine learning, there is potential to enhance the precision and comprehensiveness of preoperative evaluations. PURPOSE: We aimed to develop a machine-learning algorithm to predict surgical outcomes in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) undergoing spinal fusion surgery, only using preoperative data. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients with DLS undergoing lumbar spinal fusion surgery. OUTCOME MEASURES: This study aimed to predict the occurrence of lower back pain (LBP) ≥4 on the numeric analogue scale (NAS) 2 years after surgery. LBP was evaluated as the average pain patients experienced at rest in the week before questioning. NAS ranges from 0 to 10, 0 representing no pain and 10 representing the worst pain imaginable. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of prospectively enrolled patients who underwent spinal fusion surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolistheses at our institution in the United States between January 2016 and December 2018. The initial patient characteristics to be included in the training of the model were chosen by clinical expertise and through a literature review and included demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and radiologic features. The data was split into a training and validation datasets using a 60/40 split. Four different machine learning models were trained, including the modern XGBoost model, logistic regression, random-forest, and support vector machine (SVM). The models were evaluated according to the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve. An AUC of 0.7 to 0.8 was considered fair, 0.8 to 0.9 good, and ≥ 0.9 excellent. Additionally, a calibration plot and the Brier score were calculated for each model. RESULTS: A total of 135 patients (66% female) were included. A total of 38 (28%) patients reported LBP ≥ 4 after 2 years, representing the positive class. The XGBoost model demonstrated the best performance in the validation set with an AUC of 0.81 (95% CI 0.67-0.95). The other machine learning models performed significantly worse: with an AUC of 0.52 (95% CI 0.37-0.68) for the SVM, 0.56 (95% CI 0.37-0.76) for the logistic regression and an AUC of 0.56 (95% CI 0.37-0.78) for the random forest. In the XGBoost model age, composition of the erector spinae, and severity of lumbar spinal stenosis as were identified as the most important features. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents a novel approach to predicting surgical outcomes in spinal fusion patients. The XGBoost demonstrated a better performance compared with classical models and highlighted the potential contributions of age and paraspinal musculature atrophy as significant factors. These findings have important implications for enhancing patient care through the identification of high-risk individuals and modifiable risk factors. As the incorporation of machine learning algorithms into clinical decision-making continues to gain traction in research and clinical practice, our insights reinforce this trajectory by showcasing the potential of these techniques in forecasting surgical results.

Variations in surgical practice and short-term outcomes for degenerative lumbar scoliosis and spondylolisthesis: do surgeon training and experience matter?

For diverse procedures, sizable geographic variation exists in rates and outcomes of surgery, including for degenerative lumbar spine conditions. Little is known about how surgeon training and experience are associated with surgeon-level variations in spine surgery practice and short-term outcomes. This retrospective observational analysis characterized variations in surgical operations for degenerative lumbar scoliosis or spondylolisthesis, two common age-related conditions. The study setting was two large spine surgery centers in one region during 2017-19. Using data (International Classification of Diseases-10th edition and current procedural terminology codes) extracted from electronic health record systems, we characterized surgeon-level variations in practice (use of instrumented fusion - a more extensive procedure that involves device-related risks) and short-term postoperative outcomes (major in-hospital complications and readmissions). Next, we tested for associations between surgeon training (specialty and spine fellowship) and experience (career stage and operative volume) and use of instrumented fusion as well as outcomes. Eighty-nine surgeons performed 2481 eligible operations. For the study diagnoses, spine surgeons exhibited substantial variation in operative volume, use of instrumented fusion, and postoperative outcomes. Among surgeons above the median operative volume, use of instrumented fusion ranged from 0% to >90% for scoliosis and 9% to 100% for spondylolisthesis, while rates of major in-hospital complications ranged from 0% to 25% for scoliosis and from 0% to 14% for spondylolisthesis. For scoliosis, orthopedic surgeons were more likely than neurosurgeons to perform instrumented fusion for scoliosis [49% vs. 33%, odds ratio (OR) = 2.3, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.3-4.2, P-value = .006] as were fellowship-trained surgeons (49% vs. 25%, OR = 3.0, 95% CI 1.6-5.8; P = .001). Fellowship-trained surgeons had lower readmission rates. Surgeons with higher operative volumes used instrumented fusion more often (OR = 1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.2, P < .05 for both diagnoses) and had lower rates of major in-hospital complications (OR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.97; P = .006). Surgical practice can vary greatly for degenerative spine conditions, even within the same region and among colleagues at the same institution. Surgical specialty and subspecialty, in addition to recent operative volume, can be linked to variations in spine surgeons' practice patterns and outcomes. These findings reinforce the notion that residency and fellowship training may contribute to variation and present important opportunities to optimize surgical practice over the course of surgeons' careers. Future efforts to reduce unexplained variation in surgical practice could test interventions focused on graduate medical education. Graphical Abstract.

Clinical comparison of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion verse 3D microscope-assisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of single-segment lumbar spondylolisthesis with lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective study with 24-month follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the safety and the mid-term efficacy of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-TLIF) and 3D microscope-assisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MMIS-TLIF) for treating single-segment lumbar spondylolisthesis with lumbar spinal stenosis (DLS-LSS). METHODS: The clinical data of 49 patients who underwent UBE-TLIF or MMIS-TLIF in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed, including 26 patients who underwent the UBE-TLIF and 23 patients who underwent the MMIS-TLIF. The demographic and perioperative outcomes of patients before and after surgery were reviewed. Visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes of patients before surgery and at 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery. The lumbar lordosis angle (LL), disc height (DH) and lumbar intervertebral fusion rate were assessed before surgery and at the last follow-up. RESULTS: The VAS and ODI scores of the two groups were improved compared with those before surgery. The ODI of UBE-TLIF group was lower than that of MMIS-TLIF group at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery, and there were no significant differences between the two groups at other time points (P > 0.05). There were no significant differences in VAS between the two groups at each time point (P > 0.05). However, the UBE-TLIF group had more advantages in blood loss and hospital stay. The complications between the UBE-TLIF group (11.54%) and the MMIS-TLIF group (17.39%) were comparable (P > 0.05). Radiographic outcomes showed that the LL and DH of the two groups were improved compared with those before surgery, and the difference before and after surgery was not significant (P > 0.05). The fusion rate was 96.2% in the UBE-TLIF group and 95.7% in the MMIS-TLIF group. There was no significant difference in the fusion rate between the two groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both UBE-TLIF and MMIS-TLIF have favorable outcomes for treating single-segment DLS-LSS. Both groups have the advantages of clear surgical vision, high surgical efficiency, and favorable mid-term efficacy. In addition, compared with MMIS-TLIF, UBE-TLIF causes less intraoperative bleeding and faster postoperative recovery.

Vertebral Fracture in a Short Period Following Posterior Decompression and Fixation for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.

Posterior decompression and fixation are established therapeutic modalities for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). Postoperative complications associated with these procedures may require supplementary interventions, potentially resulting in subsequent vertebral fractures. However, vertebral fractures that occur within a short period after posterior decompression and fixation for DLS are rare. An 80-year-old woman presented with right leg pain and ambulatory difficulties attributed to DLS. The patient was administered medications, including prednisolone, for managing diabetes mellitus and rheumatoid arthritis. Subsequently, the patient underwent posterior decompression from L3 to S1, coupled with fixation extending from L4 to S1 using percutaneous pedicle screws. The symptoms disappeared, and the patient was discharged two weeks after the surgery. However, two months after the surgery, the patient visited our outpatient clinic, complaining of sudden backache and motor weakness in the bilateral lower extremities. A vertebral fracture of L4 was identified on computed tomography (CT). Long-level fusion from Th10 to the iliac bone was performed to correct the thoracic-lumbar deformity. Following rehabilitation therapy after the second surgery, the patient was discharged on day 45 post-surgery. As observed in this case, vertebral fractures following posterior decompression and fixation surgery for DLS can occur within a relatively short period. Neurosurgeons should be aware of these rare complications.

Analysis of Degenerative and Isthmic Lumbar Spondylolisthesis from the Difference of Pelvic Parameters and the Degree of Degeneration through Imaging Data.

BACKGROUND: In previous studies, many imaging analyses have been conducted to explore the changes in the intervertebral disc degeneration (DD), facet joint osteoarthritis (FJOA), L4 inclination angle (L4IA), pelvis-related parameters, lumbar lordosis (LL), and paravertebral muscle (PVM) in the occurrence and development of degenerative spinal diseases via measuring the X-ray, CT, and MRI data of clinical patients. However, few studies have quantitatively investigated the pelvic parameters and the degree of spine degeneration in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) and isthmic lumbar spondylolisthesis (ILS). This study discusses the changes in the imaging parameters of DLS, ILS, and a control group; explores the correlation between different measurement parameters; and discusses their risk factors. METHODS: We evaluated 164 patients with single L4-L5 grade 1 level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS group), 161 patients with single L4-L5 grade 1 level isthmic lumbar spondylolisthesis (ILS group), and 164 patients with non-specific back pain (control group). The grades of DD and FJOA as well as the percentage of the fat infiltration area (%FIA) of multifidus muscle (MM) at the L4-L5 level were measured via CT and MRI. Lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), the L4 inclination angle (L4IA), and sacral slope (SS) were measured via X-ray film, and the differences among the DLS group, ILS group, and control group were analyzed. Furthermore, the risk factors related to the incidences of the DLS and ILS groups were discussed. RESULTS: First, the pelvis-related parameters of DLS and ILS patients were 51.91 ± 12.23 and 53.28 ± 11.12, respectively, while those of the control group were 40.13 ± 8.72 (p1 < 0.001, p2 < 0.001). Lumbar lordosis (LL) in DLS patients (39.34 ± 8.57) was significantly lower than in the control group (44.40 ± 11.79, p < 0.001). On the contrary, lumbar lordosis (LL) in the ILS group (55.16 ± 12.31) was significantly higher than in the control group (44.40 ± 11.79, p < 0.001). Secondly, the three groups of patients were characterized by significant variations in the L4 inclination angle (L4IA), disc degeneration (DD), facet joint osteoarthritis (FJOA), pelvis-related parameters, and paravertebral muscle (PVM) (p < 0.05). Finally, logistic regression suggests that the L4IA, FJOA, and PT may be risk factors for the occurrence of DLS, and the occurrence of ILS is correlated with the L4IA, FJOA, DD, PT, and LL. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the control group, there are changes in pelvic parameters, the L4IA, LL, DD, FJOA, and PVM in DLS and ILS patients, and the degree is different. The parameters within the same group are related to each other, and DLS and ILS have different risk factors. The mechanical stability of the spine is affected by the parameter and angle changes, which may be of great significance for explaining the cause of spondylolisthesis, evaluating the health of the lumbar spine, and guiding the lifestyles of patients.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of risk factors for reoperation after degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis surgery.

BACKGROUND: Considering the high reoperation rate in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) patients undergoing lumbar surgeries and controversial results on the risk factors for the reoperation, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the reoperation rate and risk factors for the reoperation in DLS patients undergoing lumbar surgeries. METHODS: Literature search was conducted from inception to October 28, 2022 in Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Odds ratio (OR) was used as the effect index for the categorical data, and effect size was expressed as 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity test was performed for each outcome effect size, and subgroup analysis was performed based on study design, patients, surgery types, follow-up time, and quality of studies to explore the source of heterogeneity. Results of all outcomes were examined by sensitivity analysis. Publication bias was assessed using Begg test, and adjusted using trim-and-fill analysis. RESULTS: A total of 39 cohort studies (27 retrospective cohort studies and 12 prospective cohort studies) were finally included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The overall results showed a 10% (95%CI: 8%-12%) of reoperation rate in DLS patients undergoing lumbar surgeries. In surgery types subgroup, the reoperation rate was 11% (95%CI: 9%-13%) for decompression, 10% (95%CI: 7%-12%) for fusion, and 9% (95%CI: 5%-13%) for decompression and fusion. An increased risk of reoperation was found in patients with obesity (OR = 1.91, 95%CI: 1.04-3.51), diabetes (OR = 2.01, 95%CI: 1.43-2.82), and smoking (OR = 1.51, 95%CI: 1.23-1.84). CONCLUSIONS: We found a 10% of reoperation rate in DLS patients after lumbar surgeries. Obesity, diabetes, and smoking were risk factors for the reoperation.

Functional outcomes correlate with sagittal spinal balance in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis surgery.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) is a debilitating condition associated with poor preoperative functional status. Surgical intervention has been shown to improve functional outcomes in this population though the optimal surgical procedure remains controversial. The importance of maintaining and/or improving sagittal and pelvic spinal balance parameters has received increasing interest in the recent DLS literature. However, little is known about the radiographic parameters most associated with improved functional outcomes among patients undergoing surgery for DLS. PURPOSE: To identify the effect of postoperative sagittal spinal alignment on functional outcome after DLS surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Two-hundred forty-three patients in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) prospective DLS study database. OUTCOME MEASURES: Baseline and 1-year postoperative leg and back pain on the 10-point Numeric Rating Scale and baseline and 1-year postoperative disability on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). METHODS: All enrolled study patients had a DLS diagnosis and underwent decompression in isolation or with posterolateral or interbody fusion. Global and regional radiographic alignment parameters were measured at baseline and 1-year postoperatively including sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis (LL). Both univariate and multiple linear regression was used to assess for the association between radiographic parameters and patient-reported functional outcomes with adjustment for possible confounding baseline patient factors. RESULTS: Two-hundred forty-three patients were available for analysis. Among participants, the mean age was 66 with 63% (153/243) female with the primary surgical indication of neurogenic claudication in 197/243 (81%) of patients. Worse pelvic incidence-LL mismatch was correlated with more severe disability [ODI, 0.134, p<.05), worse leg pain (0.143, p<.05) and worse back pain (0.189, p<.001) 1-year postoperatively. These associations were maintained after adjusting for age, BMI, gender, and preoperative presence of depression (ODI, R2 0.179, ß, 0.25, 95% CI 0.08, 0.42, p=.004; back pain R2 0.152 (ß, 0.05, 95% CI 0.022, 0.07, p<.001; leg pain score R2 0.059, ß, 0.04, 95% CI 0.008, 0.07, p=.014). Likewise, reduction of LL was associated with worse disability (ODI, R2 0.168, ß, 0.04, 95% CI -0.39, -0.02, p=.027) and worse back pain (R2 0.135, ß, -0.04, 95% CI -0.06, -0.01, p=.007). Worsened SVA correlated with worse patient reported functional outcomes (ODI, R2 0.236, ß, 0.12, 95% CI 0.05, 0.20, p=.001). Similarly, an increase (worsening) in SVA resulted in a worse NRS back pain (R2 0.136, ß, 0.01, 95% CI .001, 0.02, p=.029) and worse NRS leg pain (R2 0.065, ß, 0.02, 95% CI 0.002, 0.02, p=.018) scores regardless of surgery type. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative emphasis on regional and global spinal alignment parameters should be considered in order to optimize functional outcome in lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis treatment.

Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation with Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis with Instability.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PE-TLIF) in patients with L4-L5 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) with instability. METHODS: The clinical data of 27 patients with L4-L5 DLS who underwent PE-TLIF from September 2019 to April 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. A minimum of 12 months of follow-up visits was provided to all patients. The demographics, perioperative, and clinical outcomes were reviewed based on the visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria. Brantigan criteria estimated the result of interbody fusion at 12 months. RESULTS: The mean age was 70.70 ± 8.91 (55-83) years. The mean ± standard deviation values of the preoperative visual analog scale for back pain, leg pain, and Oswestry Disability Index were 7.37 ± 1.01, 7.26 ± 0.94, and 66.22 ± 7.49, respectively. The values improved to 1.66 ± 0.62, 1.74 ± 0.52, and 19.55 ± 5.56 at 12 months postoperatively (P ＜ 0.05). The modified MacNab criteria revealed that 88.89% (24/27) of patients achieved good-to-excellent outcomes. The interbody fusion rate was 100% at the final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with L4-L5 DLS with instability, PE-TLIF under conscious sedation and local anesthesia could be an effective supplement for open decompression and fusion.

Outcomes of surgical intervention for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a comparative analysis of different surgical fixation techniques.

Background: Debate regarding effectiveness of surgical modalities contributes to a lack of consensus of decision making for surgical interventions. Furthermore, data regarding cost effectiveness, surgical operative time, resources, patient hospital stay and recovery is limited, particularly in the medium term for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. The objective was to compare clinical outcomes following different fixation interventions treating degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Methods: A retrospective cohort study using the British Spine Registry (BSR) of 1,838 patients aged ≥18 years. Five hundred and five patients undergoing posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and 1,333 undergoing transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with 6 months follow-up, were compared. Demographics, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) [back and leg], quality of life, complications and cost effectiveness were analysed. Results: NRS (back and leg) demonstrated a statistically significant difference favouring TLIF at 6 months (P=0.04) and (P<0.05) respectively. There was no difference in ODI improvement at 6 months between PLIF and TLIF (P=0.620), but there was a statistically significant difference in ODI scores preoperatively between PLIF and TLIF (P<0.001). EQ-5D-5L-Health VAS (P=0.136) and EQ-5D-5L (P=0.655) did not show a statistically significant difference in improvement between PLIF and TLIF. Dural tear was the most common complication and was higher in the PLIF group (5.7%) but not statistically significant. Estimated blood loss was greater for PLIF (P=0.041). Implant cost (P<0.001) was higher for TLIF whereas theatre time was higher for PLIF (P=0.031). Conclusions: Both PLIF and TLIF result in clinically significant improvements in ODI, NRS back pain and NRS leg pain, with superiority of TLIF for improvements in back and leg pain. Surgeons appeared to use ODI preoperatively to decide intervention with comparable improvements for both approaches. Average theatre time and blood loss volume was higher for PLIF. Factors like implant costs and costs of consumables were higher for TLIF. Costs merit further evaluation.