M Formica1, E Quarto2, A Zanirato2, L Mosconi2, M Lontaro-Baracchini2, M Alessio-Mazzola2, L Felli2. 1. IRCCS Policlinico San Martino, Genova - Clinica Ortopedica, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132, Genova, GE, Italy. dott.formica@gmail.com. 2. IRCCS Policlinico San Martino, Genova - Clinica Ortopedica, Largo Rosanna Benzi 10, 16132, Genova, GE, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We aim at analysing the impact of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) in restoring the main spinopelvic parameters, along with its potentials and limitations in correcting sagittal imbalance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 2009 PRISMA flow chart was used to systematically review the literature; 27 papers were eventually selected. The following spinopelvic parameters were observed: pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lumbar lordosis (LLseg) and sagittal vertical axis (SVA). Papers reporting on hyperlordotic cages (HLC) were analysed separately. The indirect decompression potential of ALIF was also assessed. The clinical outcome was obtained by collecting visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Global fusion rate and main complications were collected. RESULTS: PT, SS, LL, LLseg and SVA spinopelvic parameters all improved postoperatively by - 4.3 ± 5.2°, 3.9 ± 4.5°, 10.6 ± 12.5°, 6.7 ± 3.5° and 51.1 ± 44.8 mm, respectively. HLC were statistically more effective in restoring LL and LLseg (p < 0.05). Postoperative disc height, anterior disc height, posterior disc height and foraminal height, respectively, increased by 58.5%, 87.2%, 80.9% and 18.1%. Postoperative improvements were observed in VAS back and leg and ODI scores (p < 0.05). The global fusion rate was 94.5 ± 5.5%; the overall complication rate was 13%. CONCLUSION: When managing sagittal imbalance, ALIF can be considered as a valid technique to achieve the correct spinopelvic parameters based on preoperative planning. This technique permits to obtain an optimal LL distribution and a solid anterior column support, with lower complications and higher fusion rates when compared to posterior osteotomies.
PURPOSE: We aim at analysing the impact of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) in restoring the main spinopelvic parameters, along with its potentials and limitations in correcting sagittal imbalance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 2009 PRISMA flow chart was used to systematically review the literature; 27 papers were eventually selected. The following spinopelvic parameters were observed: pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lumbar lordosis (LLseg) and sagittal vertical axis (SVA). Papers reporting on hyperlordotic cages (HLC) were analysed separately. The indirect decompression potential of ALIF was also assessed. The clinical outcome was obtained by collecting visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Global fusion rate and main complications were collected. RESULTS: PT, SS, LL, LLseg and SVA spinopelvic parameters all improved postoperatively by - 4.3 ± 5.2°, 3.9 ± 4.5°, 10.6 ± 12.5°, 6.7 ± 3.5° and 51.1 ± 44.8 mm, respectively. HLC were statistically more effective in restoring LL and LLseg (p < 0.05). Postoperative disc height, anterior disc height, posterior disc height and foraminal height, respectively, increased by 58.5%, 87.2%, 80.9% and 18.1%. Postoperative improvements were observed in VAS back and leg and ODI scores (p < 0.05). The global fusion rate was 94.5 ± 5.5%; the overall complication rate was 13%. CONCLUSION: When managing sagittal imbalance, ALIF can be considered as a valid technique to achieve the correct spinopelvic parameters based on preoperative planning. This technique permits to obtain an optimal LL distribution and a solid anterior column support, with lower complications and higher fusion rates when compared to posterior osteotomies.
Authors: Junseok Bae; Alexander A Theologis; Russell Strom; Bobby Tay; Shane Burch; Sigurd Berven; Praveen V Mummaneni; Dean Chou; Christopher P Ames; Vedat Deviren Journal: J Neurosurg Spine Date: 2017-11-03
Authors: Benny T Dahl; Jonathan A Harris; Manasa Gudipally; Mark Moldavsky; Saif Khalil; Brandon S Bucklen Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2017-08-02 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: E Quarto; A Zanirato; M Pellegrini; S Vaggi; F Vitali; S Bourret; J C Le Huec; M Formica Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2022-09-25 Impact factor: 2.721