Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Original Paper

Impact of lordotic cages in the restoration of spinopelvic parameters after dorsal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective case control study

Authors: Stavros Oikonomidis, Vincent Heck, Sonja Bantle, Max Joseph Scheyerer, Christoph Hofstetter, Stefan Budde, Peer Eysel, Jan Bredow

Published in: International Orthopaedics | Issue 12/2020

Abstract

Purpose

Aim of this study was to compare the reconstruction of radiological sagittal spinopelvic parameters between lordotic (10°) and normal cages (0°) after dorsal lumbar spondylodesis.

Methods

This retrospective monocentric study included patients who received dorsal lumbar spondylodesis between January 2014 and December 2018. Inclusion criteria were degenerative lumbar diseases and mono- or bi-segmental fusions in the middle and lower lumbar region. Exclusion criteria were long-distance fusions (3 segments and more) and infectious and tumour-related diseases. The sagittal spinopelvine parameters (lumbar lordosis, segmental lordosis, sacral slope, pelvic incidence, and pelvic tilt) were measured pre- and post-operatively by two examiners at two different times. The patients were divided into 2 groups (group 1: lordotic cage, group 2: normal cage).

Results

One hundred thirty-eight patients (77 female, 61 male) with an average age of 66.6 ± 11.2 years (min.: 26, max.: 90) were included in the study based on the inclusion criteria. Ninety-two patients (66.7%) received 0° cages and 46 (33.3%) lordotic cages (10°). Segmental lordosis was increased by 4.2° on average in group 1 and by 6.5° in group 2 (p = 0.074). Average lumbar lordosis was increased by 2.1° in group 1 and by 0.6° in group 2 (p = 0.378). There was no significant difference in the correction of sagittal spinopelvic parameters. Inter- and inter-class reliability was between 0.887 and 0.956.

Conclusion

According to the results of our study, no advantages regarding sagittal radiological parameters for the implantation of a lordotic cage could be demonstrated.

Hedlund R, Johansson C, Hägg O, Fritzell P, Tullberg T, Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group (2016) The long-term outcome of lumbar fusion in the Swedish lumbar spine study. Spine J 16(5):579–587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2015.08.065CrossRefPubMed

Ahlquist S, Park HY, Gatto J, Shamie AN, Park DY (2018) Does approach matter? A comparative radiographic analysis of spinopelvic parameters in single-level lumbar fusion. Spine J 18(11):1999–2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2018.03.014CrossRefPubMed

de Kunder SL, van Kuijk SMJ, Rijkers K, Caelers IJMH, van Hemert WLW, de Bie RA, van Santbrink H (2017) Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine J 17(11):1712–1721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2017.06.018CrossRefPubMed

Oikonomidis S, Meyer C, Scheyerer MJ, Grevenstein D, Eysel P, Bredow J (2019) Lumbar spinal fusion of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis (Meyerding grade I and II): do reduction and correction of the radiological sagittal parameters correlate with better clinical outcome? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-019-03282-9

Lazennec JY, Ramaré S, Arafati N, Laudet CG, Gorin M, Roger B, Hansen S, Saillant G, Maurs L, Trabelsi R (2000) Sagittal alignment in lumbosacral fusion: relations between radiological parameters and pain. Eur Spine J 9(1):47–55CrossRef

Kumar MN, Baklanov A, Chopin D (2001) Correlation between sagittal plane changes and adjacent segment degeneration following lumbar spine fusion. Eur Spine J 10(4):314–319CrossRef

Rothenfluh DA, Mueller DA, Rothenfluh E, Min K (2015) Pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch predisposes to adjacent segment disease after lumbar spinal fusion. Eur Spine J 24(6):1251–1258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3454-0CrossRefPubMed

Makino T, Kaito T, Fujiwara H, Honda H, Sakai Y, Takenaka S, Yoshikawa H, Yonenobu K (2017) Risk factors for poor patient-reported quality of life outcomes after posterior lumbar Interbody fusion: an analysis of 2-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 42(19):1502–1510. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002137CrossRef

Galla F, Wähnert D, Liljenqvist U (2018) Georg Schmorl Prize of the German Spine Society (DWG) 2017: correction of spino-pelvic alignment with relordosing mono- and bisegmental TLIF spondylodesis. Eur Spine J 27(4):789–796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-018-5503-6CrossRefPubMed

10.

Phan K, Xu J, Scherman DB, Rao PJ, Mobbs RJ (2017) Anterior lumbar interbody fusion with and without an “access surgeon”: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 42(10):E592–E601. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000001905CrossRef

11.

Kepler CK, Rihn JA, Radcliff KE, Patel AA, Anderson DG, Vaccaro AR, Hilibrand AS, Albert TJ (2012) Restoration of lordosis and disk height after single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Orthop Surg 4(1):15–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1757-7861.2011.00165.xCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Gödde S, Fritsch E, Dienst M, Kohn D (2003) Influence of cage geometry on sagittal alignment in instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28(15):1693–1699

13.

Uribe JS, Harris JE, Beckman JM, Turner AW, Mundis GM, Akbarnia BA (2015) Finite element analysis of lordosis restoration with anterior longitudinal ligament release and lateral hyperlordotic cage placement. Eur Spine J 24(Suppl 3):420–426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3872-7CrossRefPubMed

14.

Hong TH, Cho KJ, Kim YT, Park JW, Seo BH, Kim NC (2017) Does lordotic angle of cage determine lumbar lordosis in lumbar interbody fusion? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 42(13):E775–E780. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000001957CrossRef

15.

Sembrano JN, Horazdovsky RD, Sharma AK, Yson SC, Santos ERG, Polly DW Jr (2017) Do lordotic cages provide better segmental lordosis versus nonlordotic cages in lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF)? Clin Spine Surg 30(4):E338–E343. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000000114CrossRefPubMed

16.

Lachin JM (2004) The role of measurement reliability in clinical trials. Clin Trials 1(6):553–566CrossRef

17.

Glassman SD, Bridwell K, Dimar JR, Horton W, Berven S, Schwab F (2005) The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30(18):2024–2029CrossRef

18.

Hioki A, Miyamoto K, Kodama H, Hosoe H, Nishimoto H, Sakaeda H, Shimizu K (2005) Two-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative disc disease: improved clinical outcome with restoration of lumbar lordosis. Spine J 5(6):600–607CrossRef

19.

Diedrich O, Perlick L, Schmitt O, Kraft CN (2001) Radiographic spinal profile changes induced by cage design after posterior lumbar interbody fusion preliminary report of a study with wedged implants. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26(12):E274–E280CrossRef

20.

Takahashi H, Suguro T, Yokoyama Y, Iida Y, Terashima F, Wada A (2010) Effect of cage geometry on sagittal alignment after posterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative disc disease. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 18(2):139–142CrossRef

21.

Melikian R, Yoon ST, Kim JY, Park KY, Yoon C, Hutton W (2016) Sagittal plane correction using the lateral transpsoas approach: a biomechanical study on the effect of cage angle and surgical technique on segmental lordosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 41(17):E1016–E1021. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000001562CrossRef

22.

Robertson PA, Armstrong WA, Woods DL, Rawlinson JJ (2018) Lordosis re-creation in TLIF and PLIF: a cadaveric study of the influence of surgical bone resection and cage angle. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002705

23.

Landham PR, Don AS, Robertson PA (2017) Do position and size matter? An analysis of cage and placement variables for optimum lordosis in PLIF reconstruction. Eur Spine J 26(11):2843–2850. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5170-zCrossRefPubMed

24.

Miyazaki M, Ishihara T, Abe T, Kanezaki S, Notani N, Kataoka M, Tsumura H (2019) Effect of intraoperative position in single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at the L4/5 level on segmental and overall lumbar lordosis in patients with lumbar degenerative disease. Medicine (Baltimore) 98(39):e17316. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000017316CrossRef

25.

Haque RM, Uddin OM, Ahmed Y, El Ahmadieh TY, Hashmi SZ, Shah A, Fessler RG (2016) “Push-through” rod passage technique for the improvement of lumbar lordosis and sagittal balance in minimally invasive adult degenerative scoliosis surgery. Clin Spine Surg 29(8):323–330. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000000094CrossRefPubMed

26.

Stinchfield T, Vadapalli S, Pennington Z, Sivagnanam R, Prevost J, Schroeder G, Sciubba DM (2019) Improvement in vertebral endplate engagement following anterior column reconstruction using a novel expandable cage with self-adjusting, multiaxial end cap. J Clin Neurosci 67:249–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2019.06.017CrossRefPubMed

Title: Impact of lordotic cages in the restoration of spinopelvic parameters after dorsal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective case control study
Authors: Stavros Oikonomidis
Vincent Heck
Sonja Bantle
Max Joseph Scheyerer
Christoph Hofstetter
Stefan Budde
Peer Eysel
Jan Bredow
Publication date: 01-12-2020
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: International Orthopaedics / Issue 12/2020
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04719-2

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Impact of lordotic cages in the restoration of spinopelvic parameters after dorsal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective case control study

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 12/2020

The survival and prognosis analysis of synovial sarcoma subtypes: a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results population-based analysis

Long-term functional outcome after dorsal capsular imbrication for post-traumatic dorsal instability of the distal radioulnar joint

A clinical decision tool for septic arthritis in children based on epidemiologic data of atraumatic swollen painful joints in South Africa

Risk factors of thigh pain following total hip arthroplasty with short, tapered-wedge stem

Patient care modifications and hospital regulations during the COVID-19 crisis created inequality and functional hazard for patients with orthopaedic trauma

Comment on Goyal et al.: Simultaneous single-stage versus two-staged bilateral total knee arthroplasty: a prospective comparative study