STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study comparing evaluations of single-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) versus anteroposterior lumbar fusion (APLF). OBJECTIVE: To clinically and radiologically compare the outcome after angle-stable, locked, stand-alone ALIF with that obtained after APLF, in cases with degenerative disc disease (DDD). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Fusion rates have been reported to be highest after interbody fusion with transpedicular fixation. However, transpedicular fixation is linked to significant damage of the paravertebral muscles, to screw displacement-related neurological and vascular complications, and to an increased rate of adjacent segment degeneration. When performed as a stand-alone procedure, the disadvantages of transpedicular fixation can be completely avoided by ALIF. METHODS: Eighty patients with chronic low-back pain due to a single-level DDD (Modic ≥2) and facet joint arthritis (Fujiwara ≥3) were enrolled in this study. Forty patients received an anteroposterior fusion (ALIF with transpedicular fixation: APLF group) and 40 patients (ALIF group) were treated with a stand-alone ALIF using the Synfix-LR device. At 7 days, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, and at a mean follow-up of 41 months, patients were clinically (visual analog scale, Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index, satisfaction) and radiologically (x-ray, and at 12 months, thin-slice computed tomography) compared. RESULTS: Blood loss and duration of surgery were significantly lower in the ALIF group (P<0.001). Visual analog scale and Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index improved significantly over time (analysis of variance, P<0.001) in both groups, but both scores were significantly better in ALIF group (analysis of variance, P<0.001). Patients' satisfaction consistently ranked higher in the ALIF group (P=0.042 at 12 mo). No significant difference was found in the fusion rate throughout the study. CONCLUSIONS: Stand-alone ALIF leads to better clinical results than APLF, without differences in fusion rates after 41 months. Therefore, when a posterior approach is not needed for decompression or reposition, we suggest performing a stand-alone ALIF in cases with single-level DDD.
STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study comparing evaluations of single-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) versus anteroposterior lumbar fusion (APLF). OBJECTIVE: To clinically and radiologically compare the outcome after angle-stable, locked, stand-alone ALIF with that obtained after APLF, in cases with degenerative disc disease (DDD). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Fusion rates have been reported to be highest after interbody fusion with transpedicular fixation. However, transpedicular fixation is linked to significant damage of the paravertebral muscles, to screw displacement-related neurological and vascular complications, and to an increased rate of adjacent segment degeneration. When performed as a stand-alone procedure, the disadvantages of transpedicular fixation can be completely avoided by ALIF. METHODS: Eighty patients with chronic low-back pain due to a single-level DDD (Modic ≥2) and facet joint arthritis (Fujiwara ≥3) were enrolled in this study. Forty patients received an anteroposterior fusion (ALIF with transpedicular fixation: APLF group) and 40 patients (ALIF group) were treated with a stand-alone ALIF using the Synfix-LR device. At 7 days, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, and at a mean follow-up of 41 months, patients were clinically (visual analog scale, Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index, satisfaction) and radiologically (x-ray, and at 12 months, thin-slice computed tomography) compared. RESULTS: Blood loss and duration of surgery were significantly lower in the ALIF group (P<0.001). Visual analog scale and Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index improved significantly over time (analysis of variance, P<0.001) in both groups, but both scores were significantly better in ALIF group (analysis of variance, P<0.001). Patients' satisfaction consistently ranked higher in the ALIF group (P=0.042 at 12 mo). No significant difference was found in the fusion rate throughout the study. CONCLUSIONS: Stand-alone ALIF leads to better clinical results than APLF, without differences in fusion rates after 41 months. Therefore, when a posterior approach is not needed for decompression or reposition, we suggest performing a stand-alone ALIF in cases with single-level DDD.
Authors: Christoph J Siepe; Katrin Stosch-Wiechert; Franziska Heider; Phat Amnajtrakul; Alexander Krenauer; Wolfgang Hitzl; Ulrike Szeimies; Axel Stäbler; H Michael Mayer Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2014-12-05 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Ata George Kasis; Cyrus Jensen; Rahul Dharmadhikari; Benjamin Ross Emmerson; Matthew Mawdsley Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2021-02-15 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Mathew Cyriac; Justin Kyhos; Uchechi Iweala; Danny Lee; Matthew Mantell; Warren Yu; Joseph R O'Brien Journal: Int J Spine Surg Date: 2018-08-15
Authors: Seth Ahlquist; Rachel Thommen; Howard Y Park; William Sheppard; Kevin James; Elizabeth Lord; Arya N Shamie; Don Y Park Journal: J Spine Surg Date: 2020-12