Objective To summarize the basic research and the cl inical appl ication of biodegradable interbody fusion Cage. Methods Recent l iterature concerning biodegradable interbody fusion Cage at home and abroad was extensively reviewed, and current developments of the basic research and the cl inical appl ication of biodegradable interbody fusion Cage were investigated. Results Basic research showes that the stiffness of biodegradable interbody fusion Cage is lower than that of metall ic Cage, so it can enhance interbody fusion. As interbody fusion proceeded, biodegradable interbody fusion Cage degrades constantly, but the speed of degradation can not keep in parallel with that of fusion. In addition, the tissue response to degradation products is controversy. Cl inical appl ication showes that the biodegradable interbody fusion Cage can enhance interbody fusion and maintain disc space height. The short term results are good, however, the long term results need further observation. Conclusion Biodegradable interbody fusion Cage can effectively enhance interbody fusion.
Objective To investigate the early effectiveness of Zero-profile interbody fusion system (Zero-P) in the treatment of cervical disc protrusion. Methods Between October 2010 and June 2012, 25 patients with cervical disc protrusion underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) using the Zero-P system. There were 15 males and 10 females, aged from 35 to 68 years (mean, 49 years). The disease duration was 3-26 months (mean, 10.5 months). Single segment was involved in all cases (2 cases in C3, 4, 5 cases in C4, 5, 11 cases in C5, 6, and 7 cases in C6, 7). The operation time and blood loss were recorded and analyzed. The visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, and neck disability index (NDI) were used to assess pain and nerve function improvement; the cervical Cobb angle was measured on the X-ray films before and after operation; according to Pitzen’s criteria, intervertebral fusion was evaluated. Results The operation was successful in 25 patients, with no severe complication. The average blood loss was 42.6 mL (range, 20-120 mL). The average operation time was 63.6 minutes (range, 45-90 minutes). Primary healing of incision was obtained in all cases; no injury of spinal cord and nerve root, cerebrospinal leakage, or deep infection occurred. The patients were followed up 6-23 months (mean, 14.5 months). No Cage subsidence and loosening, breaking, or pulling-out were observed. The symptoms and curvature of the cervical spine were obviously improved in all patients after operation. The VAS score, JOA score, NDI, and the cervical Cobb angle at 3 months and last follow-up showed significant differences when compared with preoperative ones (P lt; 0.05), but no significant difference was found between at 3 months and at last follow-up (P gt; 0.05). The interbody fusion was achieved in each operated segment of all patients according to Pitzen’s criteria. Conclusion The early effectiveness of ACDF with Zero-P system is satisfactory in treatment of cervical disc protrusion because it has the advantages of short operation time, less bleeding, good stability and restoration of the cervical alignment.
ObjectiveTo investigate the correlation between CT value and Cage subsidence in patients with lumbar degenerative disease treated with stand-alone oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF). MethodsThe clinical data of 35 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases treated with stand-alone OLIF between February 2016 and October 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 15 males and 20 females; the age ranged from 29 to 81 years, with an average of 58.4 years. There were 39 operative segments, including 32 cases of single-segment, 2 cases of double-segment, and 1 case of three-segment. Preoperative lumbar CT was used to measure the CT values of the axial position of L1 vertebral body, the axial and sagittal positions of L1-4 vertebral body, surgical segment, and the axial position of upper and lower vertebral bodies as the bone mineral density index, and the lowest T value was recorded by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. The visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores were recorded before operation and at last follow-up. At last follow-up, the lumbar interbody fusion was evaluated by X-ray films of the lumbar spine and dynamic position; the lumbar lateral X-ray film was used to measure the subsidence of the Cage, and the patients were divided into subsidence group and nonsubsidence group. The univariate analysis on age, gender, body mass index, lowest T value, CT value of vertebral body, disease type, and surgical segment was performed to initially screen the influencing factors of Cage subsidence; further the logistic regression for multi-factor analysis was used to screen fusion independent risk factors for Cage subsidence. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and area under curve (AUC) were used to analyze the CT value and the lowest T value to predict the Cage subsidence. Spearman correlation analysis was used to determine the correlation between Cage subsidence and clinical results. Results All the 35 patients were followed up 27-58 months, with an average of 38.7 months. At last follow-up, the VAS and ODI scores were significantly decreased when compared with preoperative scores (t=32.850, P=0.000; t=31.731, P=0.000). No recurrent lower extremity radiculopathy occurred and no patient required revision surgery. Twenty-seven cases (77.1%) had no Cage subsidence (nonsubsidence group); 8 cases (22.9%) had at least radiographic evidence of Cage subsidence, the average distance of Cage subsidence was 2.2 mm (range, 1.1-4.2 mm) (subsidence group). At last follow-up, there was 1 case of fusion failure both in the subsidence group and the nonsubsidence group, there was no significant difference in the interbody fusion rate (96.3% vs. 87.5%) between two groups (P=0.410). Univariate analysis showed that the CT value of vertebral body (L1 axial position, L1-4 axial and sagittal positions, surgical segment, and upper and lower vertebral bodies axial positions) and the lowest T value were the influencing factors of Cage subsidence (P<0.05). According to ROC curve analysis, compared with AUC of the lowest T value [0.738, 95%CI (0.540, 0.936)], the AUC of the L1-4 axis CT value was 0.850 [95%CI (0.715, 0.984)], which could more effectively predict Cage subsidence. Multivariate analysis showed that the CT value of L1-4 axis was an independent risk factor for Cage subsidence (P<0.05). Conclusion The CT value measurement of the vertebral body based on lumbar spine CT before stand-alone OLIF can predict the Cage subsidence. Patients with low CT values of the lumbar spine have a higher risk of Cage subsidence. However, the Cage subsidence do not lead to adverse clinical results.
【Abstract】 Objective To investigate the effectiveness of surgical treatment for discogenic low back pain (DLBP) by minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) combined with unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UPSF). Methods Between March 2006 and July 2009, 57 patients with single-level DLBP were treated by minimally invasive TLIF combined with UPSF, including 27 males and 30 females with an average age of 45.6 years (range, 38-61 years) and a disease duration of 3.8 years (range, 9 months to 11 years). The involved segments included L2，3 in 2 cases, L3，4 in 5 cases, L4，5 in 29 cases, and L5, S1 in 21 cases. The operative time, incision length, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, hospitalization times, fusion rate, and complications were observed. The effectiveness were evaluated through Oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual analogue score (VAS), and the operative outcomes were compared in different groups classified according to various pressures of the contrast medium and sensitivities to discoblock after inducing consistent pain. Results The operation time, incision length, blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, and hospitalization times were (84.6 ± 37.4) minutes, (3.4 ± 0.6) cm, (132.5 ± 23.2) mL, (58.7 ± 21.4) mL, and (6.5 ± 0.8) days, respectively. All patients were followed up 2 years and 2 months to 5 years and 4 months (mean, 3.2 years). At last follow-up, ODI and VAS scores were significantly improved when compared with preoperative scores (P lt; 0.05). The effectiveness according to ODI were excellent in 27 cases, good in 22 cases, fair in 6 cases, and poor in 2 cases, with an excellent and good rate of 86.0%. All patients acquired b interbody fusion. At last follow-up according to ODI and VAS scores, better results were found in patients of low-pressure sensitive group and high-sensitive discoblock group (P lt; 0.05). Conclusion Minimally invasive TLIF combined with UPSF is reliable for DLBP with minimal surgical trauma, less paravertebral tissue injury, and fewer complications, but the indications for operation must be strictly followed. Patients being sensitive to low-pressure or high-sensitive to discoblock can achieve better surgical results.
Objective To analyze the cl inical effects of modified transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease. Methods From October 2003 to December 2006, 33 patients with lumbar degenerative disease (L3-S1) were treated by modified TLIF. There were 14 males and 19 females with an average age of 52.2 years(33 to 70 years). The median disease course was 1.8 years (4 months to 15 years). A total of 42 levels were fused, including 24 cases of single level and 9 cases of double levels. The results of preoperative diagnosis were lumbar degenerative spondylol isthesis with stenosis (8 cases), isthmic spondylol isthesis (5 cases), degenerative lumbar stenosis (16 cases), huge herniated disc with segmental instabil ity (3 cases) and failed back surgery syndrome (1 case). During the modified TLIF procedure, total inferior facet process and inner half summit of superior facet process of TLIF side were resected to make the posterior wall of foramen opened partly. After the bone graft (3 to 5 mL) was placed into the interbody space, a single rectangle Cage was inserted obl iquely from 30° to 40° toward the midl ine. Combined with pedicle screw instrumentation, TLIF was accompl ished. Middle canal and opposite side nerve root decompression were performed simultaneously when necessary. Results Intraoperative dura mater rupture, postoperative cerebral spinal fluid leakage, deep wound infection and transient nerve root stimulation occurredin 1 case respectively, and were all recovered after treatment. No patients had permanent neurologic deficit or aggravation. All patients were followed up for 20 to 58 months (mean 27.2 months). At the follow-up after 1 year postoperatively, all the operated segments achieved fusion standard and no broken screw or Cage dislocation occurred. All 13 cases of spondylol isthesis were reduced thoroughly and maintained satisfactorily. Nineteen patients remained sl ight chronic back pain. There was significant difference (P lt; 0.05) in JOA score between preoperation (14.9 ± 5.1) and postoperation (25.9 ± 3.0). The rate of cl inical improvement was 80.5% (excellent in 24 cases, good in 7 cases, and fair in 2 cases). Conclusion The modified TLIF carries out the less invasive principles in opening operations, simpl ifies the manipulation and expands the indication of TLIF to some extent, and the cl inical results for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease is satisfactory.
Objective To investigate the effect of the sagittal alignment of the spine and pelvis after surgical posterior intervertebral fusion combined with pedicle screw fixation for low-grade isthmic lumbar spondylolisthesis, and to assess the effectiveness. Methods Between October 2009 and October 2011, 30 patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis underwent surgical posterior intervertebral fusion combined with pedicle screw fixation, and the clinical data were retrospectively reviewed. There were 14 males and 16 females with an average age of 56.7 years (range, 48-67 years). The pre- and post-operative radiographic parameters, such as percentage of slipping (PS), intervertebral space height, angle of slip (AS), thoracic kyphosis (TK), thoracolumbar junction angle (TLJ), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), lumbar lordosis (LL), spino-sacral angle (SSA), sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT), and pelvic incidence (PI) were measured. The functional evaluation was made using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Pearson correlation were used to investigate the association between all parameters and ODI score. Results PS, intervertebral space height, AS, and ODI were improved significantly compared with properative ones (P lt; 0.05). Significant differences were found in the other parameters between pre- and post-operation (P lt; 0.05) except TLJ and TK. The alteration of SVA showed significant correlation with the changes of PS, PI, PT, LL, SS, AS, SSA, and ODI. The alteration of SSA showed significant correlation with the changes of PS, PI, LL, SS, AS, PT, and ODI. Conclusion Surgical posterior intervertebral fusion combined with pedicle screw fixation for low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis can effectively improve and maintain the spinal sagittal parameters. SVA and SSA are adequate to evaluate pre-and post-operative balance. The good clinical outcome is closely related with the improved of SVA and SSA.
Objective To investigate the effectiveness of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) assisted with microscope for lumbar degenerative disease. Methods Retrospective analysis was made on the clinical data of 82 patients with lumbar degenerative disease (minimally invasive group) undergoing minimally invasive TLIF assisted with microscope between January 2010 and June 2011, which was compared with those of 76 patients (traditional group) undergoing traditional open TLIF. There was no significant difference in age, gender, disease duration, disease type, lesion level, preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS), and preoperative Oswestry disability index (ODI) between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The perioperative related parameters, radiography index, and effectiveness were documented and compared. Results There was no significant difference in operation time and intraoperative radiological exposure time between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05), but intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage volume in the minimally invasive group were significantly less than those in the traditional group (P lt; 0.05). Dural tear occurred in 2 patients of the traditional group. Superficial infection of incision occurred in 1 case in each group, respectively; and primary healing of incision was obtained in the other patients. All patients were followed up 12-28 months (mean, 18 months). No failure of internal fixation occurred. Radiological analysis showed that the bone graft fusion rate was 96.1% (73/76) in the traditional group and 95.1% (78/82) in the minimally invasive group at last follow-up, showing no significant difference (χ2= 0.012 2, P= 0.912 0). The postoperative ODI and VAS score were significantly improved when compared with preoperative ones in 2 groups (P lt; 0.05); the ODI of the minimally invasive group were significantly better than those of the traditional group at 3 months (t= — 11.941 1, P=0.000 0), and the VAS score of the minimally invasive group was significantly lower than that of the traditional group at 1 day and 3 months (P lt; 0.05); but no significant difference was found in ODI and VAS score between 2 groups at 1 year and last follow-up (P gt; 0.05). Conclusion Minimally invasive TLIF is an effective method to treat lumbar degenerative disease. This procedure is safe and reliable because it has less injury, less blood loss, and milder pain than the traditional open TLIF, and the short-term effectiveness is comparable in 2 procedures.
Objective To compare the therapeutic effect of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and posterior lateral fusion (PLF) in treatment of thoracolumbar spine fracture and dislocation. Methods From January 2005 to July 2007, 35 patients (22 males, 13 females, aged 17-53 years old) with thoracolumbar spine fracture and dislocation (T11-L3) received posterior open reduction and pedicle nail-stick system internal fixation. Among which, 14 patients underwent TLIF(group TLIF), and the rest 21 patients underwent PLF (group PLF). According to AO classification, group TLIF had 3 cases of A3, 7 cases of B and 4 cases of C, while group PLF had 4 cases of A3, 10 cases of B and 7 cases of C. Based on American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) Scoring Standard formulated in 2000, the motor score of group TLIF and group PLF was (50.6 ± 3.6) and (50.8 ± 4.2) points, respectively; and the sensory score was (170.5 ± 42.7) and (153.8 ± 23.7) points, respectively. No significant difference was noted between 2 groups in general information (P gt; 0.05). Results The operation time of group TLIF and group PLF was (316 ± 32) minutes and (254 ± 27) minutes, and the blood loss of group TLIF and group PLF was (487 ± 184) mL and (373 ± 72) mL, indicating there were significant differences between 2 groups (P lt; 0.05). Wounds of all patients were healed by first intention and there was no death, aggravation of neurological function impairment and compl ication of internal fixation instrument loosening and breaking. All 35 cases were followed up for 9-23 months with an average of 14.6 months. Postoperatively, the thoracolumbar bone fusion rate of group TLIF and group PLF was 100% and 85.7%, respectively, indicating there was a significant difference (P lt; 0.05). At 3 months after operation, the motor score of group TLIF and group PLF was increased by (10.4 ± 10.0) and (9.4 ± 9.3) points, respectively; and the sensory score was upgraded by (26.5 ± 22.8) and (28.8 ± 28.4) points, respectively, showing there were no significant difference (P gt; 0.05). At immediate moment, 3, 6 and 12 months after operation, the spine height restoration of group TLIF was (5.4 ± 2.1), (5.4 ± 1.9), (5.4 ± 1.4) and (5.3 ± 1.3) mm, respectively; while it was (5.3 ± 2.6), (5.3 ± 2.2), (4.8 ± 3.1) and (4.2 ± 3.6) mm for group PLF. Meanwhile, the Cobbangle recovery of group TLIF was (14.5 ± 3.5), (14.5 ± 3.6), (14.4 ± 3.4) and (14.4 ± 3.6)º, respectively; while it was (14.3 ± 2.7), (14.2 ± 3.1), (12.2 ± 2.8) and (11.7 ± 3.3)º for group PLF. Concerning the spine height restoration and the Cobb angle recovery, no significant difference was observed between 2 groups at immediate moment and 3 months after operation (P gt; 0.05), but significant differences were noted at 6 and 12 months after operation (P lt; 0.05). Conclusion For the treatment othoracolumbar spine fracture and dislocation, TLIF is superior to PLF in bony fusion and restoration of spine column height.
Objective To analyze the effectiveness of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). Methods Between October 2003 and December 2007, 36 patients with FBSS were treated with TLIF. There were 19 males and 17 females with an average age of 52.6 years (range, 46-68 years) and an average disease duration of 1.6 years (range, 3 months-15 years). Of 36 patients, reoperation was performed in 25, 10 received 3 operations,and 1 had 5 operations. A total of 50 segments were involved in fusion, including L4, 5 in 12 cases, L5, S1 in 10 cases, L3, 4 and L4, 5 double segments in 8 cases, and L4, 5 and L5, S1 double segments in 6 cases. According to X-ray films, CT, and MRI examination, 12 patients were diagnosed as having lumbar instabil ity secondary to total laminectomy, 18 as having recurrence of lumbar disc protrusion, and 6 as having recurrence of lumbar spondylol isthesis. Results Dural rupture occurred in 1 case and was repaired by suturing without cerebrospinal fluid leakage was observed; 1 had deep incision infection of Staphylococcus; and 1 had transient single irritation sign because of hematoma formation and was cured after symptomatic treatment. The other incisions healed by first intention. No patients had permanent nerve injury or deterioration. Thirty-three cases were followed up 18-72 months (mean, 35.2 months). At 12 months, all the operated segments reached interbody fusion, and no breakage of screw or Cage dislocation occurred. Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores showed significant difference (t=2.45, P=0.01) between before operation (14.2 ± 4.1) and 18 months after operation (23.9 ± 2.6). The rate of cl inical improvement was 90.9% (23 cases of excellent, 7 cases of good, 3 cases of acceptable). Conclusion The TLIF simpl ifies the manipulation of lumbar revision surgery and decreases the operation risk and the operative compl ications for the treatment of FBSS.
ObjectiveTo study the anatomical characteristics of blood vessels in the lateral segment of the vertebral body through the surgical approach of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) using MRI imaging, and evaluate its potential vascular safety zone. Methods The lumbar MRI data of 107 patients with low back and leg pain who met the selection criteria between October 2019 and November 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The vascular emanation angles, vascular travel angles, and the length of vessels in the lateral segments of the left vertebral body of L1-L5, as well as the distance between the segmental vessels in different Moro junctions of the vertebral body and their distances from the edges of the vertebrae in the same sequence (bottom marked as I, top as S) were measured. The gap between the large abdominal vessels and the lateral vessels of the vertebral body was set as the lateral vascular safe zones of the lumbar spine, and the extent of the safe zones (namely the area between the vessels) was measured. The anterior 1/3 of the lumbar intervertebral disc was taken as the simulated puncture center, and the area with a diameter of 22 mm around it as the simulated channel area. The proportion of vessels in the channel was further counted. In addition, the proportions of segmental vessels at L5 without a clear travel and with an emanation angel less than 90° were calculated. Results Except for the differences in the vascular emanation angles between L4 and L5, the vascular travel angles between L1, L2 and L4, L5, and the length of vessels in the lateral segments of the vertebral body among L1-L4 were not significant (P>0.05), the differences in the vascular emanation angles, vascular travel angles, and the length of vessels between the rest segments were all significant (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the distance between vessels of L1, L2 and L2, L3 at Moro Ⅰ-Ⅳ junctions (P>0.05), in L3, L4 and L4, L5 at Ⅱ and Ⅲ junction (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the vascular distance of L2, L3 between Ⅱ, Ⅲ junction and Ⅲ, Ⅳ junction, and the vascular distance of L3, L4 between Ⅰ, Ⅱ junction and Ⅲ, Ⅳ junction (P>0.05). The vascular distance of the other adjacent vertebral bodies was significant different between different Moro junctions (P<0.05). Except that there was no significant difference in the distance between L2I and L3S at Ⅰ, Ⅱ junction, L3I and L4S at Ⅱ, Ⅲ junction, and L2I and L3S at Ⅲ, Ⅳ junction (P>0.05), there was significant difference of the vascular distance between the bottom of one segment and the top of the next in the other segments (P<0.05). Comparison between junctions: Except for the L3S between Ⅰ, Ⅱ junction and Ⅱ, Ⅲ junction, and L5S between Ⅰ, Ⅱ junction and Ⅱ, Ⅲ and Ⅲ, Ⅳ junctions had no significant difference (P>0.05), there were significant differences in the distance between the other segmental vessels and the vertebral edge of the same sequence in different Moro junctions (P<0.05). The overall proportion of vessels in the simulated channels was 40.19% (43/107), and the proportion of vessels in L1 (41.12%, 44/107) and L5 (18.69%, 20/107) was higher than that in the other segments. The proportion of vessels in the channel of Moro zone Ⅰ (46.73%, 50/107) and zone Ⅱ (32.71%, 35/107) was higher than that in the zone Ⅲ, while no segmental vessels in L1 and L2 were found in the channel of zone Ⅲ (χ2=74.950, P<0.001). Moreover, 26.17% (28/107) of the segmental vessels of lateral L5 showed no movement, and 27.10% (29/107) vascular emanation angles of lateral L5 were less than 90°. Conclusion L1 and L5 segmental vessels are most likely to be injured in Moro zones Ⅰ and Ⅱ, and the placement of OLIF channels in L4, 5 at Ⅲ, Ⅳ junction should be avoided. It is usually safe to place fixation pins at the vertebral body edge on the cephalic side of the intervertebral space, but it is safer to place them on the caudal side in L1, 2 (Ⅰ, Ⅱ junction), L3, 4 (Ⅲ, Ⅳ junction), and L4, 5 (Ⅱ, Ⅲ, Ⅳ junctions).