Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society

The Korean Neurosurgical Society (대한신경외과학회)
권호 표지

A Multi-center Clinical Study of Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion with the Expandable Stand-alone Cage($Tyche^{(R)}$ Cage) for Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Disorders

  • Kim, Jin-Wook (Department of Neurosurgery Inha University College of Medicine) ;
  • Park, Hyung-Chun (Department of Neurosurgery Inha University College of Medicine) ;
  • Yoon, Seung-Hwan (Department of Neurosurgery Inha University College of Medicine) ;
  • Oh, Seong-Hoon (Department of Neurosurgery College of Medicine Hanyang University) ;
  • Roh, Sung-Woo (Department of Neurosurgery Asan Medical Center College of Medicine University of Ulsan) ;
  • Rim, Dae-Cheol (Department of Neurosurgery College of Medicine Hallym University) ;
  • Kim, Tae-Sung (Department of Neurosurgery College of Medicine Kyung Hee University)
  • Published : 2007.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective : This multi-center clinical study was designed to determine the long-term results of patients who received a one-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion with expandable cage ($Tyche^{(R)}$ cage) for degenerative spinal diseases during the same period in each hospital. Methods : Fifty-seven patients with low back pain who had a one-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a newly designed expandable cage were enrolled in this study at five centers from June 2003 to December 2004 and followed up for 24 months. Pain improvement was checked with a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and their disability was evaluated with the Oswestry Disability Index. Radiographs were obtained before and after surgery. At the final follow-up, dynamic stability, quality of bone fusion, interveretebral disc height, and lumbar lordosis were assessed. In some cases, a lumbar computed tomography scan was also obtained. Results : The mean VAS score of back pain was improved from 6.44 points preoperatively to 0.44 at the final visit and the score of sciatica was reduced from 4.84 to 0.26. Also, the Oswestry Disability Index was improved from 32.62 points preoperatively to 18.25 at the final visit. The fusion rate was 92.5%. Intervertebral disc height, recorded as $9.94{\pm}2.69\;mm$ before surgery was increased to $12.23{\pm}3.31\;mm$ at postoperative 1 month and was stabilized at $11.43{\pm}2.23\;mm$ on final visit. The segmental angle of lordosis was changed significantly from $3.54{\pm}3.70^{\circ}$ before surgery to $6.37{\pm}3.97^{\circ}$ by 24 months postoperative, and total lumbar lordosis was $20.37{\pm}11.30^{\circ}$ preoperatively and $24.71{\pm}11.70^{\circ}$ at 24 months postoperative. Conclusion : There have been no special complications regarding the expandable cage during the follow-up period and the results of this study demonstrates a high fusion rate and clinical success.

Keywords

References

  1. Agazzi S, Reverdin A, May D : Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cages : an independent review of 71 cases. J Neurosurg 91 (Spine 2) : 186-192, 1999
  2. Attia D : Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using an original screwed titanium device : LIFEC expandable cages. A retrospective study of 48 patients with an minimal follow-up of 1 year in Gunzburg R and Szpalski M (eds) : Lumbar spinal stenosis : Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2000, pp263-273
  3. Barnes B, Rodts GE, McLaughlin MR, Haid RW Jr : Threaded cortical bone dowels for lumbar interbody fusion : over 1-year mean follow up in 28 patients. J Neurosurg 95 (Spine 1) : 1-4, 2001 https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.2001.95.1.0001
  4. Bernhardt M, Bridwell KH : Segmental analysis of the sagittal plane alignment of the normal thoracic and lumbar spines and thoracolumbar junction. Spine 14 : 717-721,1989 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-198907000-00012
  5. Brantigan JW, Steffee AD : A carbon fiber implant to aid interbody lumbar fusion. Two-year clinical results in the first 26 patients. Spine 18 : 2106-2117, 1993 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199310001-00030
  6. Brodke DS, Dick JC, Kunz DN, McCabe R, Zdeblick TA : Posterior lumbar interbody fusion. A biomechanical comparison, including a new threaded cage. Spine 22 : 26-31, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199701010-00005
  7. Burkus JK, Dorchak JD, Sanders DL : Radiographic assessment of interbody fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein type 2. Spine 28 : 372-377, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200302150-00012
  8. Cailliet R : Lumbar discogenic disease. Why the elderly are more vulnerable. Geriatrics 30 : 73-76, 1975
  9. Chernukha KV, Daffner RH, Reigel DH : Lumbar lordosis measurement. A new method versus Cobb technique. Spine 23 : 74-80, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199801010-00016
  10. Davne SH, Myers DL : Complications of lumbar spinal fusion with transpedicular instrumentation. Spine 17 : 184-189, 1992 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199206001-00021
  11. Diedrich O, Perlick L, Schmitt O, Kraft CN : Radiographic spinal profile changes induced by cage design after posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Preliminary report of a study with wedged implants. Spine 26 : 274-280, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200106150-00019
  12. Dietl RHJ, Krammer M, Kettler A, Wilke HJ, Claes L : Pullout test with three lumbar interbody fusion cages. Spine 27 : 1029-1036, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200205150-00005
  13. Fernand R, Fox DE : Evaluation of lumbar lordosis. A prospective and retrospective study. Spine 10 : 799-803, 1985 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-198511000-00003
  14. Frobin W, Brinckmann P, Biggemann M : Objective measurement of the height of lumbar intervertebral disc from lateral roentgen views of the spine. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 135 : 394-402, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1039407
  15. Hansson T, Bigos S, Beecher P, Wortley M : The lumbar lordosis in acute and chronic low-back pain. Spine 10 : 154-155, 1985 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-198503000-00008
  16. Hutter CG : Posterior intervertebral body fusion. A 25-year study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 179 : 86-96, 1983
  17. Itoi E : Roentgenographic analysis of posture in spinal osteoporosis. Spine 16 : 750-756, 1991 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199107000-00011
  18. Jackson RP, McManus AC : Radiographic analysis of sagittal plane alignment and balance in standing volunteers and patients with low back pain matched for age, sex, and size. Spine 19 : 1611-1618, 1994 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199407001-00010
  19. Jeon JH, KimSM, Jung DJ, Moon SM, Hwang HS, Choi SK : PLIF using cages at the instability level and additional transpedicular instrumental fusion in multilevel degenerative lumbar disease. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 35 : 372-378, 2004
  20. Jost B, Cripton PA, Lund T, Oxland TR, Lippuner K, Jaeqer P, et al : Compressive strength of interbody cages in the lumbar spine : the effect of cage shape, posterior instrumentation and bone density. Eur Spine J 7 : 132-141, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1007/s005860050043
  21. Klemme WR, Owens BD, Dhawan A, Zeidman S, Pollv DW Jr : Lumbar sagittal contour after posterior interbody fusion : threaded devices alone versus vertical cages plus posterior instrumentation. Spine 26 : 534-537, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200103010-00017
  22. Korovessis PG, Stamataskis MV, Baikousis AG : Reciprocal angulation of vertebral bodies in the sagittal plane in an asymptomatic Greek population. Spine 23 : 700-705, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199803150-00010
  23. Kuslich SD, Danielson G, Dowdle JD, Sherman J, Fredrickson B, Yuan H, et al : Four-year follow-up results of lumbar spine arthrodesis using the Bagby and Kuslich lumbar fusion cage. Spine 25 : 2656- 2662, 2000 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200010150-00018
  24. Lehmann TR, Spratt KF, Tozzi JE, Weinstein JN, Reinarz SJ, el-Khoury GY, et al : Long-term follow-up of lower lumbar fusion patients. Spine 12 : 97-104, 1987 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-198703000-00004
  25. Lin PM, Cautilli RA, Joyce MF : Posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Clin Orthop Relat Res 180 : 154-168, 1983
  26. Ma GW : Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with specialized instruments. Clin Orthop Relat Res 193 : 57-63, 1985
  27. McAfee PC, Maryland T : Interbody fusion cages in reconstructive operations on the spine. J Bone Joint Surg AM 81 : 859-880, 1999 https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199906000-00014
  28. Mizuno J, Nakaqawa H : Threaded fusion cage for lumbar spondylolisthesis. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 38 : 155-160, 1998 https://doi.org/10.2176/nmc.38.155
  29. Onesti ST, Ashkenazi E : The ray threaded fusion cage for posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurgery 42 : 200-205, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1097/00006123-199801000-00046
  30. Ray CD : Threaded titanium cages for lumbar interbody fusions. Spine 22 : 667-679; discussion 679-680, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199703150-00019
  31. Rish BL : A comparative evaluation of posterior lumbar interbody fusion for disc disease. Spine 10 : 855-857, 1985 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-198511000-00016
  32. Schlegel KF, Pon A : The biomechanics of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in spondylolisthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 193 : 115- 119,1985
  33. Tencer AF, Hampton D, Eddy S : Biomechanical properties of threaded fusion inserts for lumbar interbody spinal fusion. Spine 20 : 2408- 2414, 1995 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199511001-00007
  34. Tribus CB, Belanger TA, Zdeblick TA : The effect of operative position and short-segment fusion on maintenance of sagittal alignment of the lumbar spine. Spine 24 : 58-61, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199901010-00014
  35. Wetzel FT, LaRocca H : The failed posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine 16 : 839-845, 1991 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199107000-00027
  36. West JL 3rd, Bradford DS, Ogilvie JW : Results of spinal arthrodesis with pedicle screw-plate fixation. J Bone Joint Surg AM 73 : 1179- 1183, 1991 https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199173080-00006
  37. Ku JH : Health-related quality of life in patients with spinal cord injury : review of the short form 36-health questionnaire survey. Yonsei Med J 30; 48 : 360-370, 2007
  38. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD : The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30 : 473-483, 1992 https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002