Literature DB >> 15770181

Radiological changes in the bone fusion site after posterior lumbar interbody fusion using carbon cages impacted with laminar bone chips: follow-up study over more than 4 years.

Keun Su Kim1, Tai Ki Yang, Jung Chung Lee.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A retrospective clinical study with a follow-up of more than 4 years was conducted.
OBJECTIVES: To know the radiologic changes in the interbody bone fusion site in patients who had received posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) using carbon fiber cages. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: PLIF using cages is a popular surgical method for treating degenerative lumbar spinal diseases. However, there are few reports on the radiologic changes in the bone fusion site after this procedure.
METHOD: Forty-one patients were observed (male-to-female ratio 12:29; mean age 51 years; 1-level-to-2-level PLIF 37:4) for 56 months (range 48-78). Anteroposterior and lateral radiograph films were taken from all patients immediately after bone fusion, at 6 and 12 months after surgery, and at follow-up. The extent of the bone fusion was classified as: only inside the cage; around the cage; extending to the vertebral cortical margin; and overgrowth beyond the vertebral cortical margin. The extent of bone fusion was observed anterior and posterior to the cages.
RESULTS: Of the 45 fusion levels examined in these 41 patients, successful bone fusion was observed in 40 levels of 36 patients (88%). All the successful fusions occurred inside and posterior to the cages. Of the 40 successful fusion levels at 6 and 12 months after surgery, 10% and 35% of the levels showed the fusion mass to be both inside and around the cages, while the remaining 90% and 65% of the levels showed the fusion mass only inside the cages, respectively. More than 4 years after surgery, 82% of the levels showed the fusion mass extending to the posterior cortical margin, and 2 levels (5%) with shallowly inserted cages showed bony overgrowth into the spinal canal.
CONCLUSION: All the intervertebral bone fusion after PLIF occurred inside the cages and in the posterior intervertebral space. We suggest the complete removal of discmaterial and deep insertion of the cages to create sufficient posterior intervertebral space for bone growth. PLIF using cages impacted with laminar bone chips is a useful method when considering the time required for surgery and the morbidity of the autograft donor sites.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15770181     DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000155421.07796.7f

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  10 in total

1.  The influence of cage positioning and cage type on cage migration and fusion rates in patients with monosegmental posterior lumbar interbody fusion and posterior fixation.

Authors:  Alexander Abbushi; Mario Cabraja; Ulrich-Wilhelm Thomale; Christian Woiciechowsky; Stefan Nikolaus Kroppenstedt
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-05-28       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Volumetric change in interbody bone graft after posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF): a prospective study.

Authors:  Zenya Ito; Shiro Imagama; Tokumi Kanemura; Kotaro Satake; Kei Ando; Kazuyoshi Kobayashi; Ryuichi Shinjo; Hideki Yagi; Tetsuro Hida; Kenyu Ito; Yoshimoto Ishikawa; Mikito Tsushima; Akiyuki Matsumoto; Hany El Zahlawy; Hidetoshi Yamaguchi; Yukihiro Matsuyama; Naoki Ishiguro
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-06-19       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Plate augmentation in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with cage for degenerative cervical spinal disorders.

Authors:  Kyung-Jin Song; Cyrus E Taghavi; Margaret S Hsu; Kwang-Bok Lee; Gyu-Hyung Kim; Ji-Hoon Song
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-02-21       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Restoration of lumbopelvic sagittal alignment and its maintenance following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): comparison between straight type versus curvilinear type cage.

Authors:  Jong-Tae Kim; Myung-Hoon Shin; Ho-Jin Lee; Du-Yong Choi
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-03-25       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Risk factors for cage subsidence and clinical outcomes after transforaminal and posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Tiago Amorim-Barbosa; Catarina Pereira; Diogo Catelas; Cláudia Rodrigues; Paulo Costa; Ricardo Rodrigues-Pinto; Pedro Neves
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2021-08-31

6.  Fusion criteria for posterior lumbar interbody fusion with intervertebral cages : the significance of traction spur.

Authors:  Kyung Hoon Kim; Jeong Yoon Park; Dong Kyu Chin
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2009-10-31

7.  Bone union rate with autologous iliac bone versus local bone graft in posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF): a multicenter study.

Authors:  Zenya Ito; Shiro Imagama; Tokumi Kanemura; Yudo Hachiya; Yasushi Miura; Mitsuhiro Kamiya; Yasutsugu Yukawa; Yoshihito Sakai; Yoshito Katayama; Norimitsu Wakao; Yukihiro Matsuyama; Naoki Ishiguro
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-01-30       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Comparison of the early results of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion in symptomatic lumbar instability.

Authors:  Najmus Sakeb; Kamrul Ahsan
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 1.251

9.  Prospective analysis of a new bone graft in lumbar interbody fusion: results of a 2- year prospective clinical and radiological study.

Authors:  Philippe Lauweryns; Yannic Raskin
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2015-02-03

10.  Augmenting posterolateral fusion with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cage improves clinical outcome, but not fusion rate, of posterior decompression.

Authors:  Teoman Atici; Selcan Yerebakan; Cenk Ermutlu; Ali Özyalçın
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 1.671

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.