Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2021

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Pseudarthrosis | Research

Clinical and radiological outcomes in patients who underwent posterior lumbar interbody fusion: comparisons between unilateral and bilateral cage insertion

Authors: Jae Hwan Cho, Chang Ju Hwang, Dong-Ho Lee, Choon Sung Lee

Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders | Issue 1/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Although the original technique involves inserting two cages bilaterally, there could be situations that only allow for insertion of one cage unilaterally. However, only a few studies have compared the outcomes between unilateral and bilateral cage insertion. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes in patients who underwent posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) between unilaterally and bilaterally inserted cages.

Methods

Among 206 eligible patients who underwent 1- or 2-level PLIF, 78 patients were 1:3 cohort-matched by age, sex, and operation level (group U, 19 patients with unilateral cages; and group B, 57 patients with bilateral cages). Fusion status was evaluated by computed tomography (CT) scans at postoperative 1 year. Clinical outcomes were measured by visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and EQ-5D. Radiological and clinical parameters were compared between the two groups. Risk factors for pseudarthrosis were also analyzed by multivariate analysis.

Results

The demographic data were not significantly different between the two groups. However, previous laminectomy, asymmetric disc collapse, and fusion at L5-S1 level were more frequently found in group U (P = 0.003, P = 0.014, and P = 0.014, respectively). Furthermore, pseudarthrosis was more frequently observed in group U (36.8%) than in group B (7.0%) (P = 0.004). Back pain VAS was higher in group U at postoperative 1 year (P = 0.033). Lower general activity function of EQ-5D was observed in group U at postoperative 1 year (P = 0.035). Older age (P = 0.028), unilateral cage (P = 0.007), and higher bone mineral density (P = 0.033) were positively correlated with pseudarthrosis.

Conclusions

Unilaterally inserted cage might be a possible risk factor for pseudarthrosis when performing PLIF, which could be related with the difficult working conditions such as scars due to previous laminectomy or asymmetric disc collapse. Furthermore, suboptimal clinical outcomes are expected following PLIF with unilateral cage insertion at postoperative 1 year regardless of similar clinical outcomes at postoperative 2 year. Therefore, caution is advised when inserting cages unilaterally, especially under above-mentioned conditions in terms of its possible relationship with symptomatic pseudarthrosis.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Elfiky TA, Patil ND, Allam Y, Ragab R. Endplate changes with Polyetheretherketone cages in posterior lumbar Interbody fusion. Asian Spine J. 2020;14:229–37.CrossRef Elfiky TA, Patil ND, Allam Y, Ragab R. Endplate changes with Polyetheretherketone cages in posterior lumbar Interbody fusion. Asian Spine J. 2020;14:229–37.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Kim YH, Ha KY, Rhyu KW, Park HY, Cho CH, Kim HC, et al. Lumbar Interbody fusion: techniques, Pearls and Pitfalls. Asian Spine J. 2020;14:730–41.CrossRef Kim YH, Ha KY, Rhyu KW, Park HY, Cho CH, Kim HC, et al. Lumbar Interbody fusion: techniques, Pearls and Pitfalls. Asian Spine J. 2020;14:730–41.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Schmidt CK, Rustagi T, Alonso F, Loukas M, Chapman JR, Oskouian RJ, et al. Nerve root anomalies: making sense of a complicated literature. Childs Nerv Syst. 2017;33:1261–73.CrossRef Schmidt CK, Rustagi T, Alonso F, Loukas M, Chapman JR, Oskouian RJ, et al. Nerve root anomalies: making sense of a complicated literature. Childs Nerv Syst. 2017;33:1261–73.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference König MA, Ebrahimi FV, Nitulescu A, Behrbalk E, Boszczyk BM. Early results of stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion in iatrogenic spondylolisthesis patients. Eur Spine J. 2013;22:2876–83.CrossRef König MA, Ebrahimi FV, Nitulescu A, Behrbalk E, Boszczyk BM. Early results of stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion in iatrogenic spondylolisthesis patients. Eur Spine J. 2013;22:2876–83.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Lee JH, Lee JH, Yoon KS, Kang SB, Jo CH. Comparative study of unilateral and bilateral cages with respect to clinical outcomes and stability in instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurgery. 2008;63:109–13.CrossRef Lee JH, Lee JH, Yoon KS, Kang SB, Jo CH. Comparative study of unilateral and bilateral cages with respect to clinical outcomes and stability in instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurgery. 2008;63:109–13.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Fogel GR, Toohey JS, Neidre A, Brantigan JW. Is one cage enough in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a comparison of unilateral single cage interbody fusion to bilateral cages. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007;20:60–5.CrossRef Fogel GR, Toohey JS, Neidre A, Brantigan JW. Is one cage enough in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a comparison of unilateral single cage interbody fusion to bilateral cages. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007;20:60–5.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Kim GU, Chang MC, Kim TU, Lee GW. Diagnostic modality in spine disease: a review. Asian Spine J. 2020;14:910–20.CrossRef Kim GU, Chang MC, Kim TU, Lee GW. Diagnostic modality in spine disease: a review. Asian Spine J. 2020;14:910–20.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Brantigan JW, Steffee AD. A carbon fiber implant to aid interbody lumbar fusion. Two-year clinical results in the first 26 patients. Spine. 1993;18:2106–7.CrossRef Brantigan JW, Steffee AD. A carbon fiber implant to aid interbody lumbar fusion. Two-year clinical results in the first 26 patients. Spine. 1993;18:2106–7.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Lee BH, Moon SH, Suk KS, Kim HS, Yang JH, Lee HM. Lumbar spinal stenosis: pathophysiology and treatment principle: a narrative review. Asian Spine J. 2020;14:682–93.CrossRef Lee BH, Moon SH, Suk KS, Kim HS, Yang JH, Lee HM. Lumbar spinal stenosis: pathophysiology and treatment principle: a narrative review. Asian Spine J. 2020;14:682–93.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Lin PM, Cautilli RA, Joyce MF. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983;180:154–68. Lin PM, Cautilli RA, Joyce MF. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983;180:154–68.
11.
go back to reference Takeda M. Experience in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: unicortical versus bicortical autologous grafts. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985;193:120–6.CrossRef Takeda M. Experience in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: unicortical versus bicortical autologous grafts. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985;193:120–6.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Brantigan JW, Steffee AD. A carbon fiber implant to aid interbody lumbar fusion. Two-year clinical results in the first 26 patients. Spine (Phila Pa). 1976;1993(18):2106–7. Brantigan JW, Steffee AD. A carbon fiber implant to aid interbody lumbar fusion. Two-year clinical results in the first 26 patients. Spine (Phila Pa). 1976;1993(18):2106–7.
13.
go back to reference Agazzi S, Reverdin A, May D. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cages: an independent review of 71 cases. J Neurosurg. 1999;91(2 Suppl):186–92.PubMed Agazzi S, Reverdin A, May D. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cages: an independent review of 71 cases. J Neurosurg. 1999;91(2 Suppl):186–92.PubMed
14.
go back to reference Trouillier H, Birkenmaier C, Rauch A, Weiler C, Kauschke T, Refior HJ. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with cages and local bone graft in the treatment of spinal stenosis. Acta Orthop Belg. 2006;72:460–6.PubMed Trouillier H, Birkenmaier C, Rauch A, Weiler C, Kauschke T, Refior HJ. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with cages and local bone graft in the treatment of spinal stenosis. Acta Orthop Belg. 2006;72:460–6.PubMed
15.
go back to reference Sim HB, Murovic JA, Cho BY, Lim TJ, Park J. Biomechanical comparison of single-level posterior versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions with bilateral pedicle screw fixation: segmental stability and the effects on adjacent motion segments. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010;12:700–8.CrossRef Sim HB, Murovic JA, Cho BY, Lim TJ, Park J. Biomechanical comparison of single-level posterior versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions with bilateral pedicle screw fixation: segmental stability and the effects on adjacent motion segments. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010;12:700–8.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Molinari RW, Sloboda J, Johnstone FL. Are 2 cages needed with instrumented PLIF? A comparison of 1 versus 2 interbody cages in a military population. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2003;32:337–43 discussion 343. Molinari RW, Sloboda J, Johnstone FL. Are 2 cages needed with instrumented PLIF? A comparison of 1 versus 2 interbody cages in a military population. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2003;32:337–43 discussion 343.
17.
go back to reference Han SH, Hyun SJ, Jahng TA, Kim KJ. A comparative radiographic analysis of fusion rate between L4-5 and L5-S1 in a single level posterior lumbar Interbody fusion. Korean J Spine. 2015;12:60–7.CrossRef Han SH, Hyun SJ, Jahng TA, Kim KJ. A comparative radiographic analysis of fusion rate between L4-5 and L5-S1 in a single level posterior lumbar Interbody fusion. Korean J Spine. 2015;12:60–7.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Formica M, Vallerga D, Zanirato A, Cavagnaro L, Basso M, Divano S, et al. Fusion rate and influence of surgery-related factors in lumbar interbody arthrodesis for degenerative spine diseases: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Musculoskelet Surg. 2020;104:1–15.CrossRef Formica M, Vallerga D, Zanirato A, Cavagnaro L, Basso M, Divano S, et al. Fusion rate and influence of surgery-related factors in lumbar interbody arthrodesis for degenerative spine diseases: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Musculoskelet Surg. 2020;104:1–15.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference DePalma AF, Rothman RH. The nature of pseudarthrosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1968;59:113–8.CrossRef DePalma AF, Rothman RH. The nature of pseudarthrosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1968;59:113–8.CrossRef
20.
go back to reference Burkus JK, Gornet MF, Dickman CA, Zdeblick TA. Anterior lumbar interbody fusion using rhBMP-2 with tapered interbody cages. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2002;15:337–49.CrossRef Burkus JK, Gornet MF, Dickman CA, Zdeblick TA. Anterior lumbar interbody fusion using rhBMP-2 with tapered interbody cages. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2002;15:337–49.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Noshchenko A, Lindley EM, Burger EL, Cain CM, Patel VV. What is the clinical relevance of radiographic nonunion after single-level lumbar Interbody arthrodesis in degenerative disc disease?: a Meta-analysis of the YODA project database. Spine (Phila Pa). 1976;2016(41):9–17. Noshchenko A, Lindley EM, Burger EL, Cain CM, Patel VV. What is the clinical relevance of radiographic nonunion after single-level lumbar Interbody arthrodesis in degenerative disc disease?: a Meta-analysis of the YODA project database. Spine (Phila Pa). 1976;2016(41):9–17.
22.
go back to reference Zhang Q, Yuan Z, Zhou M, Liu H, Xu Y, Ren Y. A comparison of posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a literature review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014;15:367.CrossRef Zhang Q, Yuan Z, Zhou M, Liu H, Xu Y, Ren Y. A comparison of posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a literature review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014;15:367.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference de Kunder SL, van Kuijk SMJ, Rijkers K, Caelers I, van Hemert WLW, de Bie RA, et al. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine J. 2017;17:1712–21.CrossRef de Kunder SL, van Kuijk SMJ, Rijkers K, Caelers I, van Hemert WLW, de Bie RA, et al. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine J. 2017;17:1712–21.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Kim DH, Lee N, Shin DA, Yi S, Kim KN, Ha Y. Matched comparison of fusion rates between hydroxyapatite demineralized bone matrix and autograft in lumbar Interbody fusion. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2016;59:363–7.CrossRef Kim DH, Lee N, Shin DA, Yi S, Kim KN, Ha Y. Matched comparison of fusion rates between hydroxyapatite demineralized bone matrix and autograft in lumbar Interbody fusion. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2016;59:363–7.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Konomi T, Yasuda A, Fujiyoshi K, Yato Y, Asazuma T. Incidences and risk factors for postoperative non-union after posterior lumbar Interbody fusion with closed-box titanium spacers. Asian Spine J. 2020;14:106–12.CrossRef Konomi T, Yasuda A, Fujiyoshi K, Yato Y, Asazuma T. Incidences and risk factors for postoperative non-union after posterior lumbar Interbody fusion with closed-box titanium spacers. Asian Spine J. 2020;14:106–12.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Okuyama K, Abe E, Suzuki T, Tamura Y, Chiba M, Sato K. Influence of bone mineral density on pedicle screw fixation: a study of pedicle screw fixation augmenting posterior lumbar interbody fusion in elderly patients. Spine J. 2001;1:402–7.CrossRef Okuyama K, Abe E, Suzuki T, Tamura Y, Chiba M, Sato K. Influence of bone mineral density on pedicle screw fixation: a study of pedicle screw fixation augmenting posterior lumbar interbody fusion in elderly patients. Spine J. 2001;1:402–7.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Zou D, Li W, Deng C, Du G, Xu N. The use of CT Hounsfield unit values to identify the undiagnosed spinal osteoporosis in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases. Eur Spine J. 2019;28:1758–66.CrossRef Zou D, Li W, Deng C, Du G, Xu N. The use of CT Hounsfield unit values to identify the undiagnosed spinal osteoporosis in patients with lumbar degenerative diseases. Eur Spine J. 2019;28:1758–66.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Gruskay JA, Webb ML, Grauer JN. Methods of evaluating lumbar and cervical fusion. Spine J. 2014;14:531–9.CrossRef Gruskay JA, Webb ML, Grauer JN. Methods of evaluating lumbar and cervical fusion. Spine J. 2014;14:531–9.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Clinical and radiological outcomes in patients who underwent posterior lumbar interbody fusion: comparisons between unilateral and bilateral cage insertion
Authors
Jae Hwan Cho
Chang Ju Hwang
Dong-Ho Lee
Choon Sung Lee
Publication date
01-12-2021
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2474
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04852-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2021 Go to the issue