Objective To review the feature, biomechanics, and cl inical appl ication of percutaneous 360 degree axial lumbar interbody fusion (AxiaLIF) technique. Methods Recent l iterature on investigation and appl ication of percutaneous360 degree AxiaLIF technique was reviewed. Results Percutaneous 360 degree AxiaLIF technique mainly contained operative approach, axial technique, and posterior fixation. It was obviously different from other lumbar interbody fusion techniques due to its capabil ity of maintaining the integrity of the bilateral facet joints, the anterior/posterior longitudinal l igament, and the annulus fibrosus. Three-dimensional AxiaLIF RodTM provided axial support and firmly fixation, thereby rel ieving stenosis of lumbar intervertebral foramen and restoring the intervertebral disc height and the whole height and physiological curvature of the lumbar spine. The recovery of the intervertebral disc height could restore the folded or crumpled flavum, the posterior longitudinal l igament, and the herniated annulus, resulting in the improvement of stenosis symptoms of nerve root canal or central vertebral canal. Conclusion Percutaneous 360 degree AxiaLIF technique achieves satisfying therapeutic effects, although it has fairly narrow indication and needs long-term follow-up observation.
ObjectiveTo explore the fusion effect of allograft Cages on transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).MethodsThe clinical data of 30 patients (38 vertebral segments) who underwent TLIF with allograft interbody fusion Cages between January 2015 and January 2017 were retrospectively analysed. There were 25 males and 5 females with an average age of 56.9 years (range, 44-72 years). The lesions included 20 cases of lumbar disc herniation, 7 cases of lumbar spondylolisthesis, and 3 cases of lumbar spinal stenosis. The operation section included 4 cases of L3, 4, 13 cases of L4, 5, 5 cases of L5, S1, 6 cases of L4, 5-L5, S1, and 2 cases of L3, 4-L4, 5. The disease duration was 6-36 months (mean, 12 months). The clinical effectiveness was evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score at preoperation, 3 months and 6 months after operation, and last follow-up. The fusion rate was evaluated by anteroposterior and lateral X-ray films and CT three-dimensional reconstruction at 3 and 6 months after operation. The intervertebral space height was measured on anteroposterior and lateral X-ray films at preoperation, 3 days, 3 months, and 6 months after operation.ResultsThe operation time was 2.1-4.3 hours (mean, 3.1 hours), and the intraoperative blood loss was 150-820 mL (mean, 407.5 mL). The follow-up time was 8-25 months (mean, 16.4 months). One Cage split at 6 months after operation without Cage movement and neurologic symptoms; none of the other patients had Cage prolapse, displacement, and fragmentation. No local or systemic allergy or infection signs was found in all patients. No nerve compression or symptoms was observed during the follow-up. The postoperative VAS score, ODI score, and JOA score improved significantly when compared with preoperative scores (P<0.05); and the scores at 6 months and at last follow-up were significantly improved when compared with those at 3 months after operation (P<0.05); but no significant difference was found between at 6 months and at last follow-up (P>0.05). The fusion rate was 55.3% (21/38), 92.1% (35/38), and 100% (38/38) at 3 months, 6 months, and last follow-up postoperatively. The intervertebral space height was increased significantly at 3 days, 3 months, 6 months, and last follow-up postoperatively when compared with preoperative ones (P<0.05); and the loss of intervertebral space height was significant at last follow-up when compared with postoperative at 3 days (P<0.05).ConclusionThe allograft interbody fusion Cage contributes to the spine interbody fusion by providing an earlier stability and higher fusion rate.
Objective
To compare the effectiveness of cortical bone trajectory screw (CBTS) and conventional pedicle screw for posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in the treatment of single segment lumbar degenerative disease.
Methods
Between May 2013 and May 2016, a total of 97 patients with single segment lumbar degenerative disease were treated with PLIF. Fifty-one patients were fixed with CBTS in PLIF (trajectory screw group) and 46 with pedicle screw (pedicle screw group). There was no significant difference in age, gender, body mass index, preoperative diagnosis, lesion segment, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Oswestry dysfunction index (ODI) between 2 groups (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, bed rest time, length of hospital stay, serum creatine kinase (CK) concentration, total amount of diclofenac sodium, perioperative complications, ODI, VAS score, and interbody fusion rate were recorded and compared between 2 groups.
Results
All patients were followed up 12 months. The patients in trajectory screw group had a significantly less operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, and serum CK concentration when compared with the patients in pedicle screw group (P<0.05). Thirty-five patients (68.6%) in trajectory screw group and 46 patients (100%) in pedicle screw group were given diclofenac sodium within 48 hours after operation, showing significant difference between 2 groups (χ2=89.334, P=0.000). There was no significant difference in the incidence of perioperative complications between trajectory screw group and pedicle screw group (3.9% vs. 8.7%, P=0.418). There was no significant difference in the VAS score, ODI, and interbody fusion rate at 12 months after operation between 2 groups (P>0.05).
Conclusion
For the single segment degenerative lumbar disease, the use of CBTS or conventional pedicle screw for PLIF can obtain satisfactory clinical function and interbody fusion rate. But the former has the advantages of less blood loss, less intraoperative muscle damage, less perioperative pain, shorter length of hospital stay and bed rest time.
Objective To review the progress in the features, early cl inical outcomes, and cl inical appl ication of axial lumbar interbody fusion (AxiaLIF) for the minimally invasive treatment of lumbosacral degenerative diseases. Methods The l iterature about the features, early cl inical outcomes, and cl inical appl ication of AxiaLIF for the minimally invasive treatment of lumbosacral degenerative diseases in recent years was reviewed. Results Almost 9 000 procedures performed globally in recent years, AxiaLIF has shown its safety and effectiveness because of high fusion rates, short hospital ization days, and less iatrogenic compl ications in comparison with standard fusion procedures. ConclusionPostoperative long-term outcomes, biomechanics stabil ity, and extended appl ication of AxiaLIF still need a further study,though it suggests an original minimally invasive treatment of lumbosacral degenerative diseases.
Objective To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-TLIF) and minimally invasive tubular TLIF (MT-TLIF) in treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. Methods A clinical data of 75 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases, who met the selection criteria between August 2019 and August 2020, was retrospectively analyzed, including 35 patients in the UBE- TLIF group and 40 patients in the MT-TLIF group. There was no significant difference in general data such as gender, age, body mass index, disease type and duration, and surgical segment between the two groups (P>0.05), which was comparable. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hemoglobin (Hb) before operation and at 1 day after operation, the length of hospital stay, incidence of complications, and visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short-Form 36 Health Survey Scale (SF-36 scale), intervertebral disc height (IDH), sagittal Cobb angle, lumbar lordosis (LL), and the intervertebral fusion were compared between the two groups. Results Compared with MT-TLIF group, UBE-TLIF group had significantly longer operation time but less intraoperative blood loss and shorter length of hospital stay (P<0.05). The Hb levels in both groups decreased at 1 day after operation, but there was no significant difference in the difference before and after operation between the two groups (P>0.05). All patients were followed up, and the follow-up time was (14.7±2.5) months in the UBE-TLIF group and (15.0±3.4) months in the MT-TLIF group, with no significant difference (t=0.406, P=0.686). In both groups, the VAS score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, SF-36 scale, and ODI after operation significantly improved when compared with those before operation (P<0.05). There was no significant difference between 1 month after operation and last follow-up (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the VAS score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, and SF-36 scale between the two groups before and after operation (P>0.05). At 1 month after operation, the ODI in the UBE-TLIF group was significantly better than that in the MT-TLIF group (P<0.05). At 1 month after operation, IDH, Cobb angle, and LL in both groups recovered when compared with those before operation (P<0.05), and were maintained until last follow-up (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the IDH, Cobb angle, and LL between the two groups at each time point (P>0.05). Thirty-three cases (89.2%) in the UBE-TLIF group and 35 cases (87.5%) in the MT-TLIF group achieved fusion, and the difference was not significant (χ2=0.015, P=0.901). In the UBE-TLIF group, 1 case of intraoperative dural tear and 1 case of postoperative epidural hematoma occurred, with an incidence of 5.7%. In the MT-TLIF group, 1 case of intraoperative dural tear, 1 case of postoperative epidural hematoma, and 1 case of superficial infection of the surgical incision occurred, with an incidence of 7.5%. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (χ2=1.234, P=1.000). Conclusion Compared with MT-TLIF, UBE-TILF can achieve similar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases, and has the advantages of smaller incision, less bleeding, and shorter length of hospital stay.
Based on the surgical model using transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) to treat lumbar spondylolisthesis, this paper presents the investigations of the biomechanical characteristics of cage and pedicle screw in lumbar spinal fusion implant fixed system under different combinations with finite element method. Firstly, combining the CT images with finite element pretreatment software, we established three dimensional nonlinear finite element model of human lumbar L4-L5 segmental slight slippage and implant under different fixed combinations. We then made a comparison analysis between the biomechanical characteristics of lumbar motion range, stress distribution of cage and pedicle screw under six status of each model which were flexion, extension, left lateral bending, right lateral bending, left axial rotation and right axial rotation. The results showed that the motion ranges of this model under different operations were reduced above 84% compared with those of the intact model, and the stability of the former was improved significantly. The stress values of cage and pedicle screw were relatively larger when they were fixed by single fusion device additional unilateral pedicle screw, but there was no statistically significant difference. The above research results would provide reference and confirmation for further biomechanics research of TLIF extracorporal specimens, and finally provide biomechanical basis for the feasibility of unilateral internal fixed diagonal intervertebral fusion TLIF surgery.
Objective To summarize the progress of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. Methods The relevant literature about percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion at home and abroad in recent years was reviewed, the approaches, technical characteristics, short- and long-term effectiveness, and complications of different surgical procedures were summarized. Results Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion is a safe and reliable treatment. At present, the main surgical methods in clinical application can be roughly summarized as percutaneous endoscopic posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-PTLIF), percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF), percutaneous endoscopic oblique lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-OLIF), percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion/Z’s percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-LIF/ZELIF), and unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-TLIF). Each surgical method has its own technical characteristics and development. Conclusion Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion is a kind of combined technology based on the individualization of the patient’s anatomical structure and the technical differentiation of the surgeon. Surgical experience, choosing adaptive indication and operative way reasonably are the key for the success.
Objective To compare the effectiveness of O-arm navigation and ultrasound volume navigation (UVN) in guiding screw placement during minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) surgery. Methods Sixty patients who underwent MIS-TLIF surgery for lumbar disc herniation between June 2022 and June 2023 and met the selection criteria were included in the study. They were randomly assigned to group A (screw placement guided by UVN during MIS-TLIF) or group B (screw placement guided by O-arm navigation during MIS-TLIF), with 30 cases in each group. There was no significant difference in baseline data, including gender, age, body mass index, and surgical segment, between the two groups (P>0.05). Intraoperative data, including average single screw placement time, total radiation dose, and average single screw effective radiation dose, were recorded and calculated. Postoperatively, X-ray film and CT scans were performed at 10 days to evaluate screw placement accuracy and assess facet joint violation. Pearson correlation and Spearman correlation analyses were used to observe the relationship between the studied parameters (average single screw placement time and screw placement accuracy grading) and BMI. Results The average single screw placement time in group B was significantly shorter than that in group A, and the total radiation dose of single segment and multi-segment and the average single screw effective radiation dose in group B were significantly higher than those in group A (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the total radiation dose between single segment and multiple segments in group B (P>0.05), while the total radiation dose of multiple segments was significantly higher than that of single segment in group A (P<0.05). No significant difference was found in the accuracy of screw implantation between the two groups (P>0.05). In both groups, the grade 1 and grade 2 screws broke through the outer wall of the pedicle, and no screw broke through the inner wall of the pedicle. There was no significant difference in the rate of facet joint violation between the two groups (P>0.05). In group A, both the average single screw placement time and screw placement accuracy grading were positively correlated with BMI (r=0.677, P<0.001; r=0.222, P=0.012), while in group B, neither of them was correlated with BMI (r=0.224, P=0.233; r=0.034, P=0.697). Conclusion UVN-guided screw placement in MIS-TLIF surgery demonstrates comparable efficiency, visualization, and accuracy to O-arm navigation, while significantly reducing radiation exposure. However, it may be influenced by factors such as obesity, which poses certain limitations.
Objective To compare the mid-term effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE)-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and minimally invasive surgery-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) assisted with three-dimensional microscope in the treatment of single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis. Methods A total of 41 single level lumbar spondylolisthesis patients who met the selection criteria were retrospectively collected between June 2018 and September 2019. Twenty-three patients were treated with UBE-TLIF (study group) and 18 with MIS-TLIF assisted with three-dimensional microscope (control group). There was no significant difference in gender, age, Meyerding degree of slippage, type of spondylolisthesis, lesion segment, course of disease, and preoperative hemoglobin (Hb) level, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), lumbar lordosis (LL), and disc height (DH) between the two groups (P>0.05). The operation time, hospitalization time, intraoperative blood loss, Hb level between preoperative and postoperative at 1 day, and complications were compared between the two groups. The recovery of clinical sign and symptom was evaluated by VAS score and ODI before operation, and at 1 month, 3 months, 1 year, and 3 years after operation. The LL and DH were measured by radiography before operation and at last follow-up, and the fusion rate was calculated according to Suk grade at last follow-up. ResultsAll the operations were successfully completed. There was no significant difference in operation time between the two groups (P>0.05); the hospitalization time, intraoperative blood loss, and Hb difference between pre- and post-operation in the study group were significantly less than those in the control group (P<0.05). Both groups were followed up 36-48 months, with an average of 39.2 months. In the study group, 1 case of dural tear and 2 cases of Cage subsidence occurred, without postoperative infection and epidural hematoma; in the control group, infection occurred in 1 case, dural tear in 2 cases, Cage subsidence in 1 case, and no epidural hematoma occurred; there was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (13.04% vs. 22.22%) (χ2=0.601, P=0.438). The VAS score and ODI at each time point after operation in both groups significantly improved when compared with those before operation, and further improved with time (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in VAS scores between the two groups at each time point after operation (P>0.05); the ODI of the study group was significantly lower than that of the control group at 1 and 3 months after operation (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference between the two groups at other time points (P>0.05). The imaging test showed that the intervertebral fusion rates were 95.7% in the study group and 94.4% in the control group at last follow-up, with no significant difference (χ2=0.032, P=0.859). At last follow-up, LL and DH in the two groups significantly improved when compared with those before operation (P<0.05), and the difference between before and after operation showed no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). ConclusionBoth UBE-TLIF and MIS-TLIF assisted with three-dimensional microscope have the advantages of clear intraoperative field and high surgical efficiency in treating lumbar spondylolisthesis, and can obtain satisfactory mid-term effectiveness. Compared with MIS-TLIF assisted with three-dimensional microscope, UBE-TLIF has the advantages of less bleeding and faster recovery.
To evaluate the safety and efficacy of one-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion(PLIF) combined with Prospace and facet fusion using local autograft. Methods Clinical and radiographic data of 76 patients treated by this technique was reviewed from May 2002 to December 2004. Of them, there were 52 males and 24 females, with an average age of 53.2 years (2381 years), including 60 cases of degenerative disc disease, 9 cases of failed back surgery syndrome and 3 cases of spondylolysis. The disese courses were 1.2-8.7 years (mean 3.6 years). The levels of PLIF were:L 2,3 in 2 cases, L 3,4 in 7, L 4,5 in 54, L 5/S 1 in 10, L 4/S 1 in 1 and L 5,6 in 2. After decompression，Prospace was inserted into interbody space bilaterally，and located in disc space 4 mm beyond the rear edge ofthe vertebral body. Local laminectomy autograft was packed both laterally into and between 2 implants. Then the remanent local autograft was placed over facet bed. Pedicle screws were used after insertion of Prospace. Clinical results wereevaluated by the JOA score. Disc height ratio and lumbar lordosis angles were measured on lateral radiographs. Fusion status was determined by evidence of bridge trabeculae across facet joint and interbody space on CT scan without mobility in lateral dynamic X-rays, and no radiolucent gap between Prospace and endplate. Paired t test was used for statistical analysis. Results Mean blood loss and operative time was 384 ml and 178 minutes, respectively. The average JOA score at final follow-up (26.1±2.7) was significantly improved when compared with that of preoperation (14.5±4.0, P＜0.05), with a mean recovery rate of JOA score 81.1% (37.5%-100.0%). The fusion rate was 974%(74/76). Mean disc height ratio and the involved segmental lordosis angle were increased from preoperative 0.27± 0.07 and 5.8±2.2° to 0.33±0.06 and 11.3±2.0° respectively at the final followup, and the differences were significant (P＜0.05). There were no devicerelated complications. Conclusion This surgical technique combined with Prospace interbody device is a safe and effective surgical option for patients with onelevel lumbar disorders when PLIF is warranted.
