Author:
Hou Yang,Shi Hongyang,Zhao Tianyi,Shi Haoyang,Shi Jiangang,Shi Guodong
Abstract
Abstract
Background
As an important part of spinal fusion procedure, the selection of fusion cage size is closely related to the curative effect of the surgery. It mainly depends on the clinical experience of surgeons, and there is still a lack of objective standards. The purpose of this study is to propose the concept of relative intervertebral tension (RIT) for the first time and its grading standards to improve the surgical procedures of lumbar interbody fusion.
Methods
This retrospective study was conducted from January 2018 to July 2019. A total of 83 eligible patients including 45 men and 38 women with lumbar degenerative disease underwent transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) were included in this study. A total of 151 fusion segments were divided into group A, group B and group C according to the grading standards of RIT. In addition, parameters of intervertebral space angle (ISA), intervertebral space height (ISH), intervertebral space foramen (IFH), fusion rates, cage-related complications and cage heights were also compared among the three groups.
Results
The ISA in group A was the smallest among three groups in contrast with group C with largest ISA at the final follow-up(P < 0.05). The group A presented the smallest ISH and IFH values(P < 0.05), compared with group B with the largest ISH and IFH values(P < 0.05). These two parameters in the group C were in-between. The fusion rates of group A, group B and group C were 100%, 96.3% and 98.8% at the final follow-up, respectively. No statistical difference in fusion rates and cage-related complications occurred among the three groups(P > 0.05), and a certain correlation between ISH and RIT was also observed.
Conclusions
The concept of RIT and the application of its clinical grading standards could simplify the surgical procedures of spinal fusion and reduce cage-related complications.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference25 articles.
1. Mobbs RJ, Phan K, Malham G, Seex K, Rao PJ. Lumbar interbody fusion: techniques, indications and comparison of interbody fusion options including PLIF, TLIF, MI-TLIF, OLIF/ATP, LLIF and ALIF. J Spine Surg. 2015;1(1):2–18.
2. Xu DS, Walker CT, Godzik J, Turner JD, Smith W, Uribe JS. Minimally invasive anterior, lateral, and oblique lumbar interbody fusion: a literature review. Ann Transl Med. 2018;6(6):104.
3. Patel DV, Yoo JS, Karmarkar SS, Lamoutte EH, Singh K. Interbody options in lumbar fusion. J Spine Surg. 2019;5(Suppl 1):19–S24.
4. de Kunder SL, Rijkers K, Caelers I, de Bie RA, Koehler PJ, van Santbrink H. Lumbar Interbody Fusion: a historical overview and a future perspective. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018;43(16):1161–8.
5. Wang H, Chen W, Jiang J, Lu F, Ma X, Xia X. Analysis of the correlative factors in the selection of interbody fusion cage height in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016;17:9.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献