Literature DB >> 24980581

Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 4: radiographic assessment of fusion status.

Tanvir F Choudhri1, Praveen V Mummaneni, Sanjay S Dhall, Jason C Eck, Michael W Groff, Zoher Ghogawala, William C Watters, Andrew T Dailey, Daniel K Resnick, Alok Sharan, Jeffrey C Wang, Michael G Kaiser.   

Abstract

The ability to identify a successful arthrodesis is an essential element in the management of patients undergoing lumbar fusion procedures. The hypothetical gold standard of intraoperative exploration to identify, under direct observation, a solid arthrodesis is an impractical alternative. Therefore, radiographic assessment remains the most viable instrument to evaluate for a successful arthrodesis. Static radiographs, particularly in the presence of instrumentation, are not recommended. In the absence of spinal instrumentation, lack of motion on flexion-extension radiographs is highly suggestive of a successful fusion; however, motion observed at the treated levels does not necessarily predict pseudarthrosis. The degree of motion on dynamic views that would distinguish between a successful arthrodesis and pseudarthrosis has not been clearly defined. Computed tomography with fine-cut axial images and multiplanar views is recommended and appears to be the most sensitive for assessing fusion following instrumented posterolateral and anterior lumbar interbody fusions. For suspected symptomatic pseudarthrosis, a combination of techniques including static and dynamic radiographs as well as CT images is recommended as an option. Lack of facet fusion is considered to be more suggestive of a pseudarthrosis compared with absence of bridging posterolateral bone. Studies exploring additional noninvasive modalities of fusion assessment have demonstrated either poor potential, such as with (99m)Tc bone scans, or provide insufficient information to formulate a definitive recommendation.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ALIF = anterior lumbar interbody fusion; AP = anteroposterior; NPV = negative predictive value; PLF = posterolateral lumbar fusion; PLIF = posterior lumbar interbody fusion; PPV = positive predictive value; RSA = roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis; diagnostic techniques; fusion; lumbar spine; practice guidelines

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24980581     DOI: 10.3171/2014.4.SPINE14267

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine        ISSN: 1547-5646


  25 in total

1.  Custom-made trabecular titanium implants for the treatment of lumbar degenerative discopathy via ALIF/XLIF techniques: rationale for use and preliminary results.

Authors:  Fulvio Tartara; Daniele Bongetta; Giulia Pilloni; Elena Virginia Colombo; Ermanno Giombelli
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-11-06       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Low volumetric bone density is a risk factor for early complications after spine fusion surgery.

Authors:  Y Liu; A Dash; A Krez; H J Kim; M Cunningham; F Schwab; A Hughes; B Carlson; A Samuel; E Marty; H Moore; D J McMahon; J A Carrino; R S Bockman; E M Stein
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2020-01-09       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Fusion rate and influence of surgery-related factors in lumbar interbody arthrodesis for degenerative spine diseases: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  M Formica; D Vallerga; A Zanirato; L Cavagnaro; M Basso; S Divano; L Mosconi; E Quarto; G Siri; L Felli
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2020-01-01

4.  Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis correction by instrumented vertebral arthrodesis with autologous bone graft from local harvesting without bone substitute use: results with mean 3 year follow-up.

Authors:  Marco Crostelli; Osvaldo Mazza; Massimo Mariani; Dario Mascello; Carlo Iorio
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-04-19       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Results of lumbar spondylodeses using different bone grafting materials after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

Authors:  Nicolas Heinz vonderHoeh; Anna Voelker; Christoph-Eckhard Heyde
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-05-25       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  A Comparative Radiographic Analysis of Fusion Rate between L4-5 and L5-S1 in a Single Level Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Authors:  Sang-Hyun Han; Seung-Jae Hyun; Tae-Ahn Jahng; Ki-Jeong Kim
Journal:  Korean J Spine       Date:  2015-06-30

7.  Radiological evaluation of fusion patterns after lateral lumbar interbody fusion: institutional case series.

Authors:  Luca Proietti; Andrea Perna; Luca Ricciardi; Caterina Fumo; Domenico Alessandro Santagada; Ilaria Giannelli; Francesco Ciro Tamburrelli; Antonio Leone
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2020-07-11       Impact factor: 3.469

Review 8.  Failure in Lumbar Spinal Fusion and Current Management Modalities.

Authors:  Alex Cruz; Alexander E Ropper; David S Xu; Michael Bohl; Edward M Reece; Sebastian J Winocour; Edward Buchanan; Geoffrey Kaung
Journal:  Semin Plast Surg       Date:  2021-05-10       Impact factor: 2.314

9.  Randomized Controlled Trial of Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Ti- and CaP-Nanocoated Polyetheretherketone Cages: Comparative Study of the 1-Year Radiological and Clinical Outcome.

Authors:  Karel Willems; Philippe Lauweryns; Gino Verleye; Johan VAN Goethem
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2019-12-31

10.  Lumbar Fusion With Polyetheretherketone Rods Use for Patients With Degenerative Disease.

Authors:  Donald A Ross; Miner N Ross
Journal:  Fed Pract       Date:  2021-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.