Dataset Information

In vivo dynamic motion characteristics of the lower lumbar spine: L4-5 lumbar degenerative disc diseases undergoing unilateral or bilateral pedicle screw fixation combined with TLIF.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To evaluate the short-term in vivo dynamic motion characteristics of the lower lumbar spine (L3-S1) after unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UPSF) or bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BPSF) combined with TLIF for treatment of L4-5 lumbar degenerative disc diseases (DDD).

Methods

Twenty-eight patients were recruited (13 UPSF, 15 BPSF). Each patient was CT-scanned to construct 3D models of the L3-S1 vertebrae. The dual fluoroscopic imaging system (DFIS) was then used to image the lumbar spine while the patient performed seven functional activities (upright standing, maximum extension, flexion, left-right twist, and left-right bend). The in vivo vertebral positions were reproduced using the 3D vertebral models and DFIS images. The ranges of motion (ROMs) of L3-4, L4-5, and L5-S1 segments were analyzed.

Results

At the index L4-5 segment, the primary ROM of left-right twist of the UPSF group (2.11 ± 0.52°) was significantly larger (p = 0.000) than the BPSF group (0.73 ± 0.32°). At the proximal adjacent L3-4 segment, the primary ROMs of left-right twist, and left-right bend of the UPSF group (2.16 ± 0.73°, 2.28 ± 1.03°) were significantly less (p = 0.003, 0.023) than the BPSF group (3.17 ± 0.88, 3.12 ± 1.04°), respectively. However, at distal adjacent L5-S1 segment, no significant difference was found between the two groups during all activities.

Conclusions

The ROM in left-right twisting of UPSF group was significantly larger compared with BPSF group at the index level in the short term. The UPSF has less impact on the cranial adjacent level (L3-4) in left-right twisting and bending activities compared to the BPSF. The data implied that the UPSE and BPSF combined with TLIF would result in different biomechanics in the index and cranial adjacent segment biomechanics. Long-term follow-up studies are necessary to compare the clinical outcomes of the two surgeries.

SUBMITTER: Nie T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6555927 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of unilateral vs. bilateral pedicle screw fixation (BPSF) for lumbar degenerative diseases. Methods Electronic databases including PubMed, Web of science, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, MEDLINE, EMBASE, EBSCO were searched by computer. The deadline was set for June 1, 2022. This study included all high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective clinical controlled studies (PRO), and retrospective studies (Retro) that compared unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. Revman5.3 software was used for meta-analysis after two researchers independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the study. Results Fourteen studies with a total of 1,086 patients were included. Compared with BPSF, unilateral pedicle screw fixation (UPSF) has shorter operation time and hospital time, and less blood loss and operation cost, operation time [SMD = −1.75, 95% CI (−2.46 to −1.03), P < 0.00001], hospital time [SMD = −1.10, 95% CI (−1.97 to −0.22), P = 0.01], Blood loss [SMD = −1.62, 95% CI (−2.42 to −0.82), P < 0.0001], operation cost [SMD = −14.03, 95% CI (−20.08 to −7.98), P < 0.00001], the ODI after bilateral pedicle screw fixation was lower, and the degree of lumbar dysfunction was lighter, [SMD = 0.19, 95% CI (0.05–0.33), P = 0.007], better fusion effect, fusion rate [RR=0.95, 95% CI (0.91–1.00), P = 0.04]. VAS-Low back pain [SMD = 0.07, 95% CI (−0.07–0.20), P = 0.35], VAS-Leg pain [SMD = 0.18, 95% CI (−0.00–0.36), P = 0.05], SF-36 [SMD = 0.00, 95% CI (−0.30–0.30), P = 1.00], complications rate [RR = 0.94, 95% CI (0.9154–1.63), P = 0.82], the overall difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions Currently limited evidence suggests that UPSF significantly reduces blood loss, significantly shortens the operative time and hospital stay, and reduces blood loss and costs. After BPSF, the ODI was lower, the degree of lumbar spine dysfunction was lower, and the fusion rate was significantly higher. The VAS, SF-36, and complications scores of the two groups were comparable, and there was no significant clinical difference.

Project description:BackgroundTransforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has become one of the most widely used procedures for lumbar spinal disorders. However, it is still unclear whether TLIF with unilateral pedicle screw (PS) fixation is as effective as that with bilateral PS fixation. We performed a meta-analysis of the literatures and aimed to gain a better understanding of whether TLIF with unilateral PS fixation was safe and effective for lumbar diseases.Methodology/principal findingsWe systematically searched Ovid, Springer, and Medline databases for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the clinical and radiological outcomes of unilateral versus bilateral PS fixation in TLIF. Risk of bias in included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. We generated pooled risk ratios or weighted mean differences across studies. According to our predefined inclusion criteria, seven RCTs with a total of 441 patients were included in this study. Baseline characteristics were similar between the unilateral and bilateral groups. Our meta-analysis showed that no significant difference was detected between the two groups in terms of postoperative clinical function, fusion status, reoperation rate, complication rate, and hospital stay (p>0.05). Pooled estimates revealed that the unilateral group was associated with significantly reduced implant cost, operative time and blood loss (p<0.05).Conclusions/significancesOur meta-analysis suggested TLIF with unilateral PS fixation was as safe and effective as that with bilateral PS fixation for lumbar diseases in selected patients. Despite these findings, our meta-analysis was based on studies with small sample size and different study characteristics that might lead to the inconsistent results such as various functional outcomes among the included studies. Therefore, high-quality randomized controlled trials with larger sample size are also needed to further clarify these issues and to provide the long-term outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundInferior clinical outcomes have been reported in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) accompanied by lumbar degenerative scoliosis, but little attention has been paid to its radiologic assessment or preoperative planning. The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion on patients with DLS and lumbar degenerative scoliosis and explore the surgical aspects benefiting the restoration of lumbar degenerative scoliosis.MethodsAll patients with DLS and lumbar degenerative scoliosis undergoing single-level unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery between July 1, 2015, and April 30, 2021, were screened in this retrospective cohort study. Clinical outcomes including visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and radiographic parameters of sagittal and coronal alignment, cage spatial locations, and angle of pedicle screw (parallel, cranial, and caudad angle) were assessed. Coronal asymmetry was demonstrated by the intervertebral height difference between the medial and lateral margins of indexed intersegmental space. The correlations between Δintervertebral height difference (postoperative intervertebral height difference-preoperative intervertebral height difference) and radiographic parameters and clinical outcomes were analyzed by univariable, multivariable, mediation, and correlation analyses. Significance was set at a bilateral P<0.05.ResultsA total of 57 included patients were followed up for a minimum of 1 year. Reduction of VAS, ODI, and improvement of radiographic parameters were found after surgery. The cranial angle of the lower pedicle screw positively correlated with Δintervertebral height difference restoration (b=0.54; standard error=0.11; P<0.001).ConclusionsTransforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery appears to be an effective approach to improving the radiographic and clinical outcomes of patients with DLS and lumbar degenerative scoliosis. The cranial direction of the lower pedicle screws in single-level unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery may be associated with a better postoperative restoration of lumbar degenerative scoliosis.

Project description:BackgroundThe fusion of the lumbar spine may lead to the degeneration of the adjacent segments. In this study, the effects of OLIF and TLIF on adjacent segments after treatment of L4 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) were compared and analysed.MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis of the medical records of consecutive patients treated with OLIF or TLIF for L4DLS. They were divided into the OLIF group and TLIF group based on different treatment methods. Cage height, segmental lordosis (SL), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), and sacral slope (SS) were compared between the two groups, and the postoperative biomechanical changes were analysed by establishing the disc angle (DA). The clinical outcomes were analysed by comparing the visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and incidence of adjacent segment disease (ASDis) between the two groups. The intervertebral disc height (IDH), intervertebral foramen height (IDH), intervertebral foramen area (IFA), sliding distance (SD), and angular displacement (AD) in L3-4 and L5-S1 were compared between the two groups. The incidence of aggravated disc degeneration (ADD), the incidence of aggravated zygapophyseal joint degeneration (AJD) and the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg) were compared between the two groups for radiological degeneration.ResultsAt the last follow-up, there was one case of ASDis in the OLIF group (2.78%) and two cases in the TLIF group (5.56%). At the last follow-up, compared with the preoperative values, IDH, IFH, and IFA of the adjacent segments above and below L4-5 decreased in both groups (P < 0.05); the SD and AD increased in both groups (P < 0.05). The cage height and L4-5 IDH in the OLIF group were significantly higher than those in the TLIF group (P < 0.05). SL, LL, PT, SS, and L5- S1DA were significantly improved in the OLIF group compared with the TLIF group (P < 0.05). The incidence of L3-4ASDeg in the two groups was higher than that of L5-S1. The incidence of ASDeg and the incidence of L5-S1ADD in the OLIF group were lower than those in the TLIF group, but the incidence of L5-S1AJD was higher than that in the TLIF group.ConclusionL4DLS after OLIF and TLIF treatment will cause adjacent segment degeneration, and L3-4 degeneration is more obvious than L5-S1 degeneration. OLIF has more advantages in restoring lumbar sagittal balance. Compared with TLIF, OLIF can weaken the degeneration of the L5-S1 disc and increase the degeneration of the L5-S1 zygapophyseal joints.