Purpose: Implant subsidence is a possible complication of spinal interbody fusion. We aim to evaluate porous titanium cages subsidence, fusion and functional outcomes in patients subjected to oblique lumbar interbody ...Purpose: Implant subsidence is a possible complication of spinal interbody fusion. We aim to evaluate porous titanium cages subsidence, fusion and functional outcomes in patients subjected to oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) with these novel devices. Methods: Our institutional review board approved a single-center experience which included 60 patients who underwent OLIF from June 2018 to June 2020 utilizing the porous titanium implants. Data was collected in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and written informed consent was obtained. Imaging studies including radiographs 1, 3, 6 and 12 months and computed tomography (CT) scan at 6 months obtained during routine postoperative follow-up visits, were studied for signs of implant subsidence, fusion and clinical parameters to determine the effectiveness of surgery such as Oswestry disability index (ODI). Results: Radiographic subsidence occurred in 1 out of 89 porous titanium interbody cages (1.1%). No subsidence was observed in the posterior screws and rods fixation group (N = 57). However, one case of subsidence occurred in the lateral plate fixation group (N = 3). The subsidence occurred in an osteoporotic elderly patient operated for adjacent segment disease, and she was later revised with posterior instrumentation using cemented screws and rods. She had an uneventful recovery. Fusion rates were evaluated under CT scan at 6 months with a rate of 88%. In terms of clinical outcomes, ODI decreased significantly from 20.3 preop to 10.7 postop with a P-value Conclusions: In our study, the subsidence rate was lower than previously reported in the literature. Also, we had good fusion rates at 6 months likely due to the porous titanium cages use. We had no subsidence in the posterior instrumented group and one case in the lateral fixation group with improved clinical outcomes.展开更多
Background: The different methods of anterior reconstruction and posterior instrumentation in surgical management of thoracolumbar spine fractures are PLIF, TLIF, lateral extracaviatary and transpedicular techniques w...Background: The different methods of anterior reconstruction and posterior instrumentation in surgical management of thoracolumbar spine fractures are PLIF, TLIF, lateral extracaviatary and transpedicular techniques which are increasingly used to perform partial or total corpectomies and anterior reconstructions from a posterior approach. These techniques were being alternative to the standard anterior approach with less morbidity and mortality. Patients and Methods: This study was performed between 2011 and 2014 on 100 patients with acute unstable thoracolumbar spine fractures which were divided into four groups: 30 patients underwent (TLIF), 28 patients underwent (PLIF), 28 patients underwent (PA) and 14 patients underwent (TPA). Neurological outcome, complications, operative times, kyphotic angle, vertebral height loss, spinal canal compromise, pulmonary functions, Denis pain and work scale, VAS score, ODI score, hospital stay, and estimated blood loss (EBL) were evaluated and compared in between the four groups. Results: There was a higher complication rate, increased EBL, and longer operative time with posteroanterior (PA) compared with PLIF, TLIF and (TPA). Patients undergoing PLIF, TLIF and TPA had a greater recovery of neurological function than those in whom PA were performed. Conclusion: TPA appeared to have more favorable results in improving the clinical and radiological outcome and no complications were reported apart from superficial wound infection which healed rapidly. The PLIF, TLIF and TPA appeared to have a comparable morbidity rate to PA. The different methods of anterior reconstruction from posterior approach are more favorable, applicable and convenient than PA approach.展开更多
文摘Purpose: Implant subsidence is a possible complication of spinal interbody fusion. We aim to evaluate porous titanium cages subsidence, fusion and functional outcomes in patients subjected to oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) with these novel devices. Methods: Our institutional review board approved a single-center experience which included 60 patients who underwent OLIF from June 2018 to June 2020 utilizing the porous titanium implants. Data was collected in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and written informed consent was obtained. Imaging studies including radiographs 1, 3, 6 and 12 months and computed tomography (CT) scan at 6 months obtained during routine postoperative follow-up visits, were studied for signs of implant subsidence, fusion and clinical parameters to determine the effectiveness of surgery such as Oswestry disability index (ODI). Results: Radiographic subsidence occurred in 1 out of 89 porous titanium interbody cages (1.1%). No subsidence was observed in the posterior screws and rods fixation group (N = 57). However, one case of subsidence occurred in the lateral plate fixation group (N = 3). The subsidence occurred in an osteoporotic elderly patient operated for adjacent segment disease, and she was later revised with posterior instrumentation using cemented screws and rods. She had an uneventful recovery. Fusion rates were evaluated under CT scan at 6 months with a rate of 88%. In terms of clinical outcomes, ODI decreased significantly from 20.3 preop to 10.7 postop with a P-value Conclusions: In our study, the subsidence rate was lower than previously reported in the literature. Also, we had good fusion rates at 6 months likely due to the porous titanium cages use. We had no subsidence in the posterior instrumented group and one case in the lateral fixation group with improved clinical outcomes.
文摘Background: The different methods of anterior reconstruction and posterior instrumentation in surgical management of thoracolumbar spine fractures are PLIF, TLIF, lateral extracaviatary and transpedicular techniques which are increasingly used to perform partial or total corpectomies and anterior reconstructions from a posterior approach. These techniques were being alternative to the standard anterior approach with less morbidity and mortality. Patients and Methods: This study was performed between 2011 and 2014 on 100 patients with acute unstable thoracolumbar spine fractures which were divided into four groups: 30 patients underwent (TLIF), 28 patients underwent (PLIF), 28 patients underwent (PA) and 14 patients underwent (TPA). Neurological outcome, complications, operative times, kyphotic angle, vertebral height loss, spinal canal compromise, pulmonary functions, Denis pain and work scale, VAS score, ODI score, hospital stay, and estimated blood loss (EBL) were evaluated and compared in between the four groups. Results: There was a higher complication rate, increased EBL, and longer operative time with posteroanterior (PA) compared with PLIF, TLIF and (TPA). Patients undergoing PLIF, TLIF and TPA had a greater recovery of neurological function than those in whom PA were performed. Conclusion: TPA appeared to have more favorable results in improving the clinical and radiological outcome and no complications were reported apart from superficial wound infection which healed rapidly. The PLIF, TLIF and TPA appeared to have a comparable morbidity rate to PA. The different methods of anterior reconstruction from posterior approach are more favorable, applicable and convenient than PA approach.
