Literature DB >> 19893721

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

Kyung Hoon Kim1, Jeong Yoon Park, Dong Kyu Chin.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to establish new fusion criteria to complement existing Brantigan-Steffee fusion criteria. The primary purpose of intervertebral cage placement is to create a proper biomechanical environment through successful fusion. The existence of a traction spur is an essential predictable radiologic factor which shows that there is instability of a fusion segment. We studied the relationship between the existence of a traction spur and fusion after a posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) procedure.
METHODS: This study was conducted using retrospective radiological findings from patients who underwent a PLIF procedure with the use of a cage without posterior fixation between 1993 and 1997 at a single institution. We enrolled 183 patients who were followed for a minimum of five years after the procedure, and used the Brantigan-Steffee classification to confirm the fusion. These criteria include a denser and more mature bone fusion area than originally achieved during surgery, no interspace between the cage and the vertebral body, and mature bony trabeculae bridging the fusion area. We also confirmed the existence of traction spurs on fusion segments and non-fusion segments.
RESULTS: The PLIF procedure was done on a total of 251 segments in 183 patients (71 men and 112 women). The average follow-up period was 80.4 +/- 12.7 months. The mean age at the time of surgery was 48.3 +/- 11.3 years (range, 25 to 84 years). Among the 251 segments, 213 segments (84.9%) were fused after five years. The remaining 38 segments (15.1%) were not fused. An analysis of the 38 segments that were not fused found traction spur formation in 20 of those segments (52.6%). No segments had traction spur formation with fusion.
CONCLUSION: A new parameter should be added to the fusion criteria. These criteria should be referred to as 'no traction spur formation' and should be used to confirm fusion after a PLIF procedure.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Instability; Posterior lumbar interbody fusion; Traction spur

Year:  2009        PMID: 19893721      PMCID: PMC2773389          DOI: 10.3340/jkns.2009.46.4.328

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc        ISSN: 1225-8245


  22 in total

Review 1.  Interbody fusion cages in reconstructive operations on the spine.

Authors:  P C McAfee
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  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 3.  Interbody, posterior, and combined lumbar fusions.

Authors:  R D Fraser
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1995-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 4.  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

5.  Traction osteophytes of the lumbar spine: radiographic-pathologic correlation.

Authors:  D Pate; J Goobar; D Resnick; P Haghighi; D J Sartoris; M N Pathria
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1988-03       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  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.

Authors:  Keun Su Kim; Tai Ki Yang; Jung Chung Lee
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2005-03-15       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Segmental instability. Rationale for treatment.

Authors:  J W Frymoyer; D K Selby
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1985-04       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Lumbar spine instability. A critical update and symposium summary.

Authors:  A Nachemson
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1985-04       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  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

10.  Direction of the formation of anterior lumbar vertebral osteophytes.

Authors:  Yuichi Kasai; Eiji Kawakita; Toshihiko Sakakibara; Koji Akeda; Atsumasa Uchida
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2009-01-13       Impact factor: 2.362

View more
  6 in total

1.  Approach to interpret images produced by new generations of multidetector CT scanners in post-operative spine.

Authors:  Rania Zeitoun; Manar Hussein
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-10-09       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Minimally invasive multi-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a percutaneously inserted spinal fixation system : technical tips, surgical outcomes.

Authors:  Hyeun Sung Kim; Keun Ho Park; Chag Il Ju; Seok Won Kim; Seung Myung Lee; Ho Shin
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2011-11-30

3.  Long-Term Outcomes of Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Stand-Alone Ray Threaded Cage for Degenerative Disk Disease: A 20-Year Follow-Up.

Authors:  Saleh S Baeesa; Belen G Medrano; David C Noriega
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2016-12-08

4.  Incidence and risk factors of persistent low back pain following posterior decompression and instrumented fusion for lumbar disk herniation.

Authors:  Hui Wang; Tao Wang; Qian Wang; Wenyuan Ding
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 3.133

5.  Comparison of unilateral pedicle screw fixation and interbody fusion with PEEK cage vs. standalone expandable fusion cage for the treatment of unilateral lumbar disc herniation.

Authors:  Jinlei Zhang; Aixing Pan; Li Zhou; Jingyi Yu; Xiao Zhang
Journal:  Arch Med Sci       Date:  2018-04-06       Impact factor: 3.318

6.  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

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.