Literature DB >> 12734742

Comparison of plain radiographs with CT scan to evaluate interbody fusion following the use of titanium interbody cages and transpedicular instrumentation.

Rajesh R Shah1, Saeed Mohammed, Asif Saifuddin, Benjamin A Taylor.   

Abstract

The availability of lumbar interbody cages has fuelled renewed interest in interbody fusion. Despite this, there is no consensus regarding the best non-invasive method for evaluation of interbody fusion, especially where cages have been used. The purpose of this study was to determine whether high-quality thin-slice (1- to 3-mm) computed tomography (CT) scans allow proper evaluation of interbody fusion through titanium cages. Patients undergoing lumbar interbody fusion were prospectively evaluated with CT scan and plain radiographs 6 months following surgery. These images were blindly and independently evaluated by a consultant radiologist and a spine research fellow, for bridging bony trabeculation both through and surrounding the cages as well as for changes at the cage endplate interface. Fifty-three patients (156 cages) undergoing posterior lumbar interbody fusion using titanium interbody cages were evaluated. Posterior elements were used to pack the cages and no graft was packed outside the cages. The outcome data were analysed using the Kappa co-efficient and chi-squared analysis. On CT scan, both observers noted bridging trabeculation in 95% of the cages (Kappa 0.85), while on radiographs this was present in only 4% (Kappa 0.74). Both observers also identified bridging trabeculation surrounding the cages on CT scan in 90% of cages (Kappa 0.82), while on the radiographs this was 8% (Kappa 0.86). Radiographs also failed to demonstrate all the loose cages. The results of the study show that high-quality CT scans show images suggesting bridging bony trabeculae following the use of titanium interbody cages. They also appear to show consistent bone outside the cages in spite of no bone graft having been used, and they appear to be better than plain radiographs in the early detection of cage loosening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12734742      PMCID: PMC3467781          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-002-0517-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  27 in total

1.  Lumbar interbody fusion using the Brantigan I/F cage for posterior lumbar interbody fusion and the variable pedicle screw placement system: two-year results from a Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption clinical trial.

Authors:  J W Brantigan; A D Steffee; M L Lewis; L M Quinn; J M Persenaire
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-06-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 2.  Spine update lumbar interbody cages.

Authors:  B K Weiner; R D Fraser
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1998-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Threaded titanium cages for lumbar interbody fusions.

Authors:  C D Ray
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1997-03-15       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Anterior interbody lumbar spine fusion. Analysis of Mayo Clinic series.

Authors:  R N Stauffer; M B Coventry
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1972-06       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Osteogenic protein versus autologous interbody arthrodesis in the sheep thoracic spine. A comparative endoscopic study using the Bagby and Kuslich interbody fusion device.

Authors:  B W Cunningham; M Kanayama; L M Parker; J C Weis; J C Sefter; I L Fedder; P C McAfee
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1999-03-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 6.  Anterior lumbar fusion using a hybrid interbody graft. A preliminary radiographic report.

Authors:  D C Holte; J P O'Brien; P Renton
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Assessment of bony union after interbody fusion of the lumbar spine using a biplanar radiographic technique.

Authors:  M Pearcy; S Burrough
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1982

8.  A carbon fiber implant to aid interbody lumbar fusion. Two-year clinical results in the first 26 patients.

Authors:  J W Brantigan; A D Steffee
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1993-10-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Assessment of pseudarthrosis in pedicle screw fusion: a prospective study comparing plain radiographs, flexion/extension radiographs, CT scanning, and bone scintigraphy with operative findings.

Authors:  J M Larsen; R L Rimoldi; D A Capen; R W Nelson; S Nagelberg; J C Thomas
Journal:  J Spinal Disord       Date:  1996-04

10.  Anterior lumbar fusion: results, assessment techniques and prognostic factors.

Authors:  C G Greenough; L J Taylor; R D Fraser
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.134

View more
  34 in total

1.  [Bone grafts endoscopically applied to the spine Ergebnisse der anterioren Fusion und therapeutische Konsequenzen].

Authors:  D Briem; J Windolf; W Lehmann; P G C Begemann; N M Meenen; J M Rueger; W Linhart
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 1.000

2.  Interobserver agreement in fusion status assessment after instrumental desis of the lower lumbar spine using 64-slice multidetector computed tomography: impact of observer experience.

Authors:  Borislav Laoutliev; Inger Havsteen; Birthe Højlund Bech; Eva Narvestad; Hanne Christensen; Anders Christensen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-02-19       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Post-discectomy syndrome treated with lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Thomas Niemeyer; Henry Halm; Lars Hackenberg; Ulf Liljenqvist; Albert Schulze Bövingloh
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2006-04-19       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  CT-based classification of long spinal allograft fusion.

Authors:  G H Tan; B G Goss; P J Thorpe; R P Williams
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-05-12       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Large volume inside the cage leading incomplete interbody bone fusion and residual back pain after posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Mikinobu Takeuchi; Mitsuhiro Kamiya; Norimitsu Wakao; Atsuhiko Hirasawa; Katsuhisa Kawanami; Koji Osuka; Masakazu Takayasu
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2015-02-10       Impact factor: 3.042

6.  Evaluation of the 96/4 PLDLLA polymer resorbable lumbar interbody cage in a long term animal model.

Authors:  Jean Y Lazennec; Abdallah Madi; Marc A Rousseau; Bernard Roger; Gérard Saillant
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2006-05-31       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Common surgical complications in degenerative spinal surgery.

Authors:  Michael Papadakis; Lianou Aggeliki; Elias C Papadopoulos; Federico P Girardi
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2013-04-18

8.  The in vitro stabilising effect of polyetheretherketone cages versus a titanium cage of similar design for anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  M Spruit; R G Falk; L Beckmann; T Steffen; R M Castelein
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-08-17       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Results after anterior-posterior lumbar spinal fusion: 2-5 years follow-up.

Authors:  Thomas Niemeyer; Albert Schulze Bövingloh; Henry Halm; Ulf Liljenqvist
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2004-07-27       Impact factor: 3.075

10.  Anterior cervical fusion with a bio-resorbable composite cage (beta TCP-PLLA): clinical and radiological results from a prospective study on 20 patients.

Authors:  F Debusscher; S Aunoble; Y Alsawad; D Clement; Jean-Charles Le Huec
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-06-17       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.