• Title/Summary/Keyword: Lumbar fusion

Search Result 204, Processing Time 0.026 seconds

Minimally Invasive Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Indications, Outcomes and Complications (최소 침습적 외측 요추간 유합술: 적응증, 결과, 합병증)

  • Soh, Jaewan;Lee, Jae Chul
    • Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association
    • /
    • v.54 no.3
    • /
    • pp.203-210
    • /
    • 2019
  • The aim of this review was to evaluate minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion on the latest update. Lumbar interbody fusion was introduced recently. This study performed, a literature review of the indications, clinical outcomes, fusion rate, and complications regarding recently highlighted minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion. The indications of lateral lumbar interbody fusion are similar to the conventional anterior and posterior interbody fusion in degenerative lumbar diseases. In particular, lateral lumbar interbody fusion is an effective minimally invasive surgery in spinal stenosis, degenerative spondylolisthesis, degenerative adult deformity, degenerative disc disease and adjacent segment disease. In addition, the clinical outcomes and fusion rates of lateral lumbar interbody fusion are similar compared to conventional lumbar fusion. On the other hand, non-specific complications including hip flexor weakness, nerve injury, vascular injury, visceral injury, cage subsidence and pseudohernia have been reported. Lateral lumbar interbody fusion is a very useful minimally invasive surgery because it has advantages over conventional anterior and posterior interbody fusion without many of the disadvantages. Nevertheless, nonspecific complications during lateral lumbar interbody fusion procedure remain a challenge to be improved.

Morphometric Analysis of the Ureter with Respect to Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography

  • Chunneng Huang;Zhenyu Bian;Liulong Zhu
    • Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
    • /
    • v.66 no.2
    • /
    • pp.155-161
    • /
    • 2023
  • Objective : To analyze the anatomical location of the ureter in relation to lateral lumbar interbody fusion and evaluate the potential risk of ureteral injury. Methods : One hundred eight patients who performed contrast-enhanced computed tomographic scans were enrolled in this study. The location of the ureter from L2-L3 to L4-L5 was evaluated. The distances between the ureter and psoas muscle, intervertebral disc, and retroperitoneal vessels were also recorded bilaterally. Results : Over 30% of the ureters were close to the working corridor of extreme lumbar interbody fusion at L2-L3. Most of the ureters were close to working corridor of oblique lumbar interbody fusion, especially at L4-L5. The distance from the ureter to the great vessels on the left side was significantly narrowing from L2-L3 to L4-L5 (28.8±9.5 mm, 22.0±8.0 mm, 15.5±8.4 mm), and it was significantly larger than that on the right side (12.3±6.1 mm, 7.4±5.7 mm, 5.4±4.4 mm). Conclusion : Our findings indicate that the location of the ureter varies widely among individuals. To avoid unexpected damage to the ureter, it is imperative to directly visualize it and verify the ureter is not in the surgical pathway during lateral lumbar interbody fusion.

Comparison of Fusion Rate between Demineralized Bone Matrix versus Autograft in Lumbar Fusion : Meta-Analysis

  • Han, Sanghyun;Park, Bumsoo;Lim, Jeong-Wook;Youm, Jin-Young;Choi, Seoung-Won;Kim, Dae Hwan;Ahn, Dong Ki
    • Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
    • /
    • v.63 no.6
    • /
    • pp.673-680
    • /
    • 2020
  • The demineralized bone matrix (DBM) as the bone graft material to increase the fusion rate was widely used in spinal fusion. The current study aimed to compare the fusion rate of DBM to the fusion rate of autograft in lumbar spine fusion via meta-analysis of published literature. After systematic search, comparative studies were selected according to eligibility criteria. Checklist (risk of bias assessment tool for non-randomized study) was used to evaluate the risk of bias of the included nonrandomized controlled studies. The corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated. We also used subgroup analysis to analyze the fusion rate of posterolateral lumbar fusion and lumbar interbody fusion. Eight studies were finally included in this meta-analysis. These eight studies included 581 patients. Among them, 337 patients underwent spinal fusion surgery using DBM (DBM group) and 204 patients underwent spinal fusion surgery with mainly autologous bone and without using DBM (control group). There was no significant differences of fusion rate between the two groups in posterolateral fusion analysis (risk ratio [RR], 1.03; 95% CI, 0.90-1.17; p=0.66) and interbody fusion analysis (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.91-1.39; p=0.27). Based on the available evidence, the use of DBM with autograft in posterolateral lumbar spine fusion and lumbar interbody fusion showed a slightly higher fusion rate than that of autograft alone; however, there was no statistically different between two groups.

Comparison of Outcomes of Multi-Level Anterior, Oblique, Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery : Impact on Global Sagittal Alignment

  • Jiwon, Yoon;Ho Yong, Choi;Dae Jean, Jo
    • Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
    • /
    • v.66 no.1
    • /
    • pp.33-43
    • /
    • 2023
  • Objective : To compare the outcomes of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF), and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in terms of global sagittal alignment. Methods : From January 2007 to December 2019, 141 adult patients who underwent multilevel interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative disorders were enrolled. Regarding the approach, patients were divided into the ALIF (n=23), OLIF (n=60), and TLIF (n=58) groups. Outcomes, including local radiographic parameters and global sagittal alignment, were then compared between the treatment groups. Results : Regarding local radiographic parameters, ALIF and OLIF were superior to TLIF in terms of the change in the anterior disc height (7.6±4.5 mm vs. 6.9±3.2 mm vs. 4.7±2.9 mm, p<0.001), disc angle (-10.0°±6.3° vs. -9.2°±5.2° vs. -5.1°±5.1°, p<0.001), and fused segment lordosis (-14.5°±11.3° vs. -13.8°±7.5° vs. -7.4°±9.1°, p<0.001). However, regarding global sagittal alignment, postoperative lumbar lordosis (-42.5°±9.6° vs. -44.4°±11.6° vs. -40.6°±12.3°, p=0.210), pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch (7.9°±11.3° vs. 6.7°±11.6° vs. 11.5°±13.0°, p=0.089), and the sagittal vertical axis (24.3±28.5 mm vs. 24.5±34.0 mm vs. 25.2±36.6 mm, p=0.990) did not differ between the groups. Conclusion : Although the anterior approaches were superior in terms of local radiographic parameters, TLIF achieved adequate global sagittal alignment, comparable to the anterior approaches.

Perioperative Risk Factors Related to Lumbar Spine Fusion Surgery in Korean Geriatric Patients

  • Lee, Jung-Hyun;Chun, Hyoung-Joon;Yi, Hyeong-Joong;Bak, Koang-Hum;Ko, Yong;Lee, Yoon-Kyoung
    • Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
    • /
    • v.51 no.6
    • /
    • pp.350-358
    • /
    • 2012
  • Objective : Life expectancy for humans has increased dramatically and with this there has been a considerable increase in the number of patients suffering from lumbar spine disease. Symptomatic lumbar spinal disease should be treated, even in the elderly, and surgical procedures such as fusion surgery are needed for moderate to severe lumbar spinal disease. However, various perioperative complications are associated with fusion surgery. The aim of this study was to examine perioperative complications and assess risk factors associated with lumbar spinal fusion, focusing on geriatric patients at least 70 years of age in the Republic of Korea. Methods : We retrospectively investigated 489 patients with various lumbar spinal diseases who underwent lumbar spinal fusion surgery between 2003 and 2007 at our institution. Three fusion procedures and the number of fused segments were analyzed in this study. Chronic diseases were also evaluated. Risk factors for complications and their association with age were analyzed. Results : In this study, 74 patients experienced complications (15%). The rate of perioperative complications was significantly higher in patients 70 years of age or older than in other age groups (univariate analysis, p=0.001; multivariate analysis, p=0.004). However, perioperative complications were not significantly associated with the other factors tested (sex, comorbidities, operation procedures, fusion segments involved). Conclusion : Increasing age was an important risk factor for perioperative complications in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion surgery whereas other factors were not significant. We recommend good clinical judgment and careful selection of geriatric patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion surgery.

Clinical Analysis of Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome (Failed Back Surgery Syndrome에서 전방 요추체간 유합술의 치료성적분석)

  • Kim, Young Soo;Kuh, Sung Uk;Cho, Young Eun;Jin, Byung Ho;Chin, Dong Kyu
    • Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
    • /
    • v.30 no.6
    • /
    • pp.734-742
    • /
    • 2001
  • Objective : To evaluate the role of anterior lumbar interbody fusion in treatment of failed back surgery syndrome, the authors retrospectively analyzed the result of anterior lumbar interbody fusion performed in our institute. Methods : Fifteen FBSS patients due to variable causes have been treated with anterior lumbar interbody fusion in our institute from April 1994 to June 1999. We analyzed clinical changes in 15 patients who were followed up for an average of 23 months. Results : The etiologies of FBSS were post operative discitis(6 cases), post operative instability(3 cases), post operative adhesion(5 cases), and recurrence(1 case). These fifteen FBSS patients were treated with anterior lumbar interbody fusion. The overall treatment outcome was satisfactory(excellent and good) in 11 cases. Three patients were slightly improved, but post operative low back pain was remained. One patient who had underwent nerve root injury due to pedicle screw insertion showed no improvement. Conclusion : We conclude that the anterior lumbar interbody fusion for FBSS seems to be safe and favorable treatment in selective patients, because low incidence of nerve injury risk and post-operative infection.

  • PDF

Do Trunk Muscles Affect the Lumbar Interbody Fusion Rate? : Correlation of Trunk Muscle Cross Sectional Area and Fusion Rates after Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Stand-Alone Cage

  • Choi, Man Kyu;Kim, Sung Bum;Park, Bong Jin;Park, Chang Kyu;Kim, Sung Min
    • Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
    • /
    • v.59 no.3
    • /
    • pp.276-281
    • /
    • 2016
  • Objective : Although trunk muscles in the lumbar spine preserve spinal stability and motility, little is known about the relationship between trunk muscles and spinal fusion rate. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the correlation between trunk muscles cross sectional area (MCSA) and fusion rate after posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) using stand-alone cages. Methods : A total of 89 adult patients with degenerative lumbar disease who were performed PLIF using stand-alone cages at L4-5 were included in this study. The cross-sectional area of the psoas major (PS), erector spinae (ES), and multifidus (MF) muscles were quantitatively evaluated by preoperative lumbar magnetic resonance imaging at the L3-4, L4-5, and L5-S1 segments, and bone union was evaluated by dynamic lumbar X-rays. Results : Of the 89 patients, 68 had bone union and 21 did not. The MCSAs at all segments in both groups were significantly different (p<0.05) for the PS muscle, those at L3-4 and L4-5 segments between groups were significantly different (p=0.048, 0.021) for the ES and MF muscles. In the multivariate analysis, differences in the PS MCSA at the L4-5 and L5-S1 segments remained significant (p=0.048, 0.043 and odds ratio=1.098, 1.169). In comparison analysis between male and female patients, most MCSAs of male patients were larger than female's. Fusion rates of male patients (80.7%) were higher than female's (68.8%), too. Conclusion : For PLIF surgery, PS muscle function appears to be an important factor for bone union and preventing back muscle injury is essential for better fusion rate.

Lumbar Interbody Fusion Outcomes in Degenerative Lumbar Disease : Comparison of Results between Patients Over and Under 65 Years of Age

  • Jo, Dae-Jean;Jun, Jae-Kyun;Kim, Ki-Tack;Kim, Sung-Min
    • Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
    • /
    • v.48 no.5
    • /
    • pp.412-418
    • /
    • 2010
  • Objective : To evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of lumbar interbody fusion and its correlation with various factors (e.g., age, comorbidities, fusion level, bone quality) in patients over and under 65 years of age who underwent lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative lumbar disease. Methods : One-hundred-thirty-three patients with lumbar degenerative disease underwent lumbar fusion surgery between June 2006 and June 2007 and were followed for more than one year. Forty-eight (361%) were older than 65 years of age (group A) and 85 (63.9%) were under 65 years of age (group B). Diagnosis, comorbidities, length of hospital stay, and perioperative complications were recorded. The analysis of clinical outcomes was based on the visual analogue scale (VAS). Radiological results were evaluated using plain radiographs. Clinical outcomes, radiological outcomes, length of hospital stay, and complication rates were analyzed in relation to lumbar fusion level, the number of comorbidities, bone mineral density (BMD), and age. Results : The mean age of the patients was 61.2 years (range, 33-86 years) and the mean BMD was -2.2 (range, -4.8 to -2.8). The mean length of hospital stay was 15.0 days (range, 5-60 days) and the mean follow-up was 23.0 months (range, 18-30 months). Eighty-five (64.0%) patients had more than one preoperative comorbidities. Perioperative complications occurred in 27 of 133 patients (20.3%). The incidence of overall complication was 22.9% in group A, and 18.8% in group B but there was no statistical difference between the two groups. The mean VAS scores for the back and leg were significantly decreased in both groups (p < 0.05), and bony fusion was achieved in 125 of 133 patients (94.0%). There was no significant difference in bony union rates between groups A and B (91.7% in group A vs. 95.3% in group B, p = 0.398). In group A. perioperative complications were more common with the increase in fusion level (p = 0.027). Perioperative complications in both groups A (p = 0.035) and B (p = 0.044) increased with an increasing number of comorbidities. Conclusion : Elderly patients with comorbidities are at a high risk for complications and adverse outcomes after lumbar spine surgery. In our study, clinical outcomes, fusion rates, and perioperative complication rates in older patients were comparable with those in younger populations. The number of comorbidities and the extent of fusion level were significant factors in predicting the occurrence of postoperative complications. However, proper perioperative general supportive care with a thorough fusion strategy during the operation could improve the overall postoperative outcomes in lumbar fusion surgery for elderly patients.

Delayed Retroperitoneal Hemorrhage due to Lumbar Artery Pseudoaneurysm after Lumbar Posterolateral Fusion

  • Oh, Young Min;Choi, Ha Young;Eun, Jong Pil
    • Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
    • /
    • v.54 no.4
    • /
    • pp.344-346
    • /
    • 2013
  • A 55-year-old female patient presented with lower back pain and neurogenic intermittent claudication and underwent L3-L4 posterolateral fusion. To prepare the bone fusion bed, the transverse process of L3 and L4 was decorticated with a drill. On the 9th post-operative day, the patient complained of a sudden onset of severe abdominal pain and distension. Abdominal computed tomography revealed retroperitoneal hematoma in the right psoas muscle and iatrogenic right L3 transverse process fracture. Lumbar spinal angiography showed the delayed hematoma due to rupture of the 2nd lumbar artery pseudoaneurysm and coil embolization was done at the ruptured lumbar artery pseudoaneusyrm. Since then, the patient's postoperative progress proceeded normally with recovery of the hemodynamic parameters.

Comparison of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Direct Lumbar Interbody Fusion : Clinical and Radiological Results

  • Lee, Young Seok;Kim, Young Baeg;Park, Seung Won;Chung, Chan
    • Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
    • /
    • v.56 no.6
    • /
    • pp.469-474
    • /
    • 2014
  • Objective : The use of direct lumbar interbody fusion (DLIF) has gradually increased; however, no studies have directly compared DLIF and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). We compared DLIF and TLIF on the basis of clinical and radiological outcomes. Methods : A retrospective review was performed on the medical records and radiographs of 98 and 81 patients who underwent TLIF and DLIF between January 2011 and December 2012. Clinical outcomes were compared with a visual analog scale (VAS) and the Oswestry disability index (ODI). The preoperative and postoperative disc heights, segmental sagittal/coronal angles, and lumbar lordosis were measured on radiographs. Fusion rates, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of hospital stay, and complications were assessed. Results : DLIF was superior to TLIF regarding its ability to restore disc height, foraminal height, and coronal balance (p<0.001). As the extent of surgical level increased, DLIF displayed significant advantages over TLIF considering the operative time and EBL. However, fusion rates at 12 months post-operation were lower for DLIF (87.8%) than for TLIF (98.1%) (p=0.007). The changes of VAS and ODI between the TLIF and DLIF were not significantly different (p>0.05). Conclusion : Both DLIF and TLIF are less invasive and thus good surgical options for treating degenerative lumber diseases. DLIF has higher potential in increasing neural foramina and correcting coronal balance, and involves a shorter operative time and reduced EBL, in comparison with TLIF. However, DLIF displayed a lower fusion rate than TLIF, and caused complications related to the transpsoas approach.