Segmental Sagittal Alignment in Lumbar Spinal Fusion: A Review of Evidence-Based Evaluation of Preoperative Measurement, Surgical Planning, Intraoperative Execution, and Postoperative Evaluation.
Journal
Operative neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.)
ISSN: 2332-4260
Titre abrégé: Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101635417
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 May 2024
01 May 2024
Historique:
received:
05
02
2024
accepted:
05
03
2024
medline:
1
5
2024
pubmed:
1
5
2024
entrez:
1
5
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Maintaining and restoring global and regional sagittal alignment is a well-established priority that improves patient outcomes in patients with adult spinal deformity. However, the benefit of restoring segmental (level-by-level) alignment in lumbar fusion for degenerative conditions is not widely agreed on. The purpose of this review was to summarize intraoperative techniques to achieve segmental fixation and the impact of segmental lordosis on patient-reported and surgical outcomes. In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were queried for the literature reporting lumbar alignment for degenerative lumbar spinal pathology. Reports were assessed for data regarding the impact of intraoperative surgical factors on postoperative segmental sagittal alignment and patient-reported outcome measures. Included studies were further categorized into groups related to patient positioning, fusion and fixation, and interbody device (technique, material, angle, and augmentation). A total of 885 studies were screened, of which 43 met inclusion criteria examining segmental rather than regional or global alignment. Of these, 3 examined patient positioning, 8 examined fusion and fixation, 3 examined case parameters, 26 examined or compared different interbody fusion techniques, 5 examined postoperative patient-reported outcomes, and 3 examined the occurrence of adjacent segment disease. The data support a link between segmental alignment and patient positioning, surgical technique, and adjacent segment disease but have insufficient evidence to support a relationship with patient-reported outcomes, cage subsidence, or pseudoarthrosis. This review explores segmental correction's impact on short-segment lumbar fusion outcomes, finding the extent of correction to depend on patient positioning and choice of interbody cage. Notably, inadequate restoration of lumbar lordosis is associated with adjacent segment degeneration. Nevertheless, conclusive evidence linking segmental alignment to patient-reported outcomes, cage subsidence, or pseudoarthrosis remains limited, underscoring the need for future research.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
Maintaining and restoring global and regional sagittal alignment is a well-established priority that improves patient outcomes in patients with adult spinal deformity. However, the benefit of restoring segmental (level-by-level) alignment in lumbar fusion for degenerative conditions is not widely agreed on. The purpose of this review was to summarize intraoperative techniques to achieve segmental fixation and the impact of segmental lordosis on patient-reported and surgical outcomes.
METHODS
METHODS
In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases were queried for the literature reporting lumbar alignment for degenerative lumbar spinal pathology. Reports were assessed for data regarding the impact of intraoperative surgical factors on postoperative segmental sagittal alignment and patient-reported outcome measures. Included studies were further categorized into groups related to patient positioning, fusion and fixation, and interbody device (technique, material, angle, and augmentation).
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 885 studies were screened, of which 43 met inclusion criteria examining segmental rather than regional or global alignment. Of these, 3 examined patient positioning, 8 examined fusion and fixation, 3 examined case parameters, 26 examined or compared different interbody fusion techniques, 5 examined postoperative patient-reported outcomes, and 3 examined the occurrence of adjacent segment disease. The data support a link between segmental alignment and patient positioning, surgical technique, and adjacent segment disease but have insufficient evidence to support a relationship with patient-reported outcomes, cage subsidence, or pseudoarthrosis.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This review explores segmental correction's impact on short-segment lumbar fusion outcomes, finding the extent of correction to depend on patient positioning and choice of interbody cage. Notably, inadequate restoration of lumbar lordosis is associated with adjacent segment degeneration. Nevertheless, conclusive evidence linking segmental alignment to patient-reported outcomes, cage subsidence, or pseudoarthrosis remains limited, underscoring the need for future research.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38690883
doi: 10.1227/ons.0000000000001179
pii: 01787389-990000000-01153
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2024. All rights reserved.
Références
Diebo BG, Shah NV, Boachie-Adjei O, et al. Adult spinal deformity. Lancet (London, England). 2019;394(10193):160-172.
Boody BS, Rosenthal BD, Jenkins TJ, et al. Iatrogenic flatback and flatback syndrome: evaluation, management, and prevention. Clin Spine Surg. 2017;30(4):142-149.
Gottfried ON, Daubs MD, Patel AA, et al. Spinopelvic parameters in postfusion flatback deformity patients. Spine J. 2009;9(8):639-647.
Potter BK, Lenke LG, Kuklo TR. Prevention and management of iatrogenic flatback deformity. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86(8):1793-1808.
Wiggins GC, Ondra SL, Shaffrey CI. Management of iatrogenic flat-back syndrome. Neurosurg Focus. 2003;15(3):e8.
Leveque J-CA, Segebarth B, Schroerlucke SR, et al. A multicenter radiographic evaluation of the rates of preoperative and postoperative malalignment in degenerative spinal fusions. Spine. 2018;43(13):e782-e789.
Tempel ZJ, Gandhoke GS, Bolinger BD, et al. The influence of pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis mismatch on development of symptomatic adjacent level disease following single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurgery. 2017;80(6):880-886.
Matsuoka Y, Endo K, Suzuki H, et al. Postoperative radiographic early-onset adjacent segment degeneration after single-level L4-L5 posterior lumbar interbody fusion in patients without preoperative severe sagittal spinal imbalance. Asian Spine J. 2018;12(4):743-748.
Duan P, Mummaneni P, Berven S, et al. Revision surgery for adjacent segment degeneration after fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis is there a correlation with roussouly type? Spine. 2022;47(1):e10-e15.
Takeda K, Okada E, Shinozaki Y, et al. Risk factors for early-onset radiographical adjacent segment disease in patients with spondylolytic spondylolisthesis after single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J. 2022;22(7):1112-1118.
Aoki Y, Nakajima A, Takahashi H, et al. Influence of pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch on surgical outcomes of short-segment transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015;16:213.
Liang Y, Shi W, Jiang C, et al. Clinical outcomes and sagittal alignment of single-level unilateral instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with a 4 to 5-year follow-up. Eur Spine J. 2015;24(11):2560-2566.
Makino T, Kaito T, Fujiwara H, et al. Risk factors for poor patient-reported quality of life outcomes after posterior lumbar interbody fusion: an analysis of 2-year follow-up. Spine. 2017;42(19):1502-1510.
Chang HS. Effect of sagittal spinal balance on the outcome of decompression surgery for lumbar canal stenosis. World Neurosurg. 2018;119:e200-e208.
Hori Y, Matsumura A, Namikawa T, et al. Does sagittal imbalance impact the surgical outcomes of short-segment fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis associated with degenerative lumbar scoliosis? J Orthop Sci. 2019;24(2):224-229.
Li J, Zhang D, Shen Y, et al. Lumbar degenerative disease after oblique lateral interbody fusion: sagittal spinopelvic alignment and its impact on low back pain. J Orthop Surg Res. 2020;15(1):326.
Xiao L, Zhao Q, Sun X, et al. Relationship between alterations of spinal/pelvic sagittal parameters and clinical outcomes after oblique lumbar interbody fusion. World Neurosurg. 2020;133:e156-e164.
Thornley P, Urquhart JC, Glennie A, et al. Functional outcomes correlate with sagittal spinal balance in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis surgery. Spine J. 2023;23(10):1512-1521.
Hikata T, Watanabe K, Fujita N, et al. Impact of sagittal spinopelvic alignment on clinical outcomes after decompression surgery for lumbar spinal canal stenosis without coronal imbalance. J Neurosurg Spine. 2015;23(4):451-458.
Lee B, Park J, Kim H, et al. Spinal sagittal balance status affects postoperative actual falls and quality of life after decompression and fusion in-situ surgery in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2016;148:52-59.
Ogura Y, Shinozaki Y, Kobayashi Y, et al. Impact of decompression surgery without fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis on sagittal spinopelvic alignment: minimum 2-year follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine. 2019;30(6):743-749.
Bouknaitir J, Carreon L, Brorson S, et al. Change in sagittal alignment after decompression alone in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis without significant deformity: a prospective cohort study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2022;37(1):57-63.
Zhu W, Sun K, Li X, et al. Symptomatic sagittal imbalance and severe degeneration of paraspinal muscle predispose suboptimal outcomes after lumbar short fusion surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. World Neurosurg. 2022;164:e741-e748.
Lugue MKT, Watanabe K, Yamazaki A, et al. Impact of L4/5 posterior interbody fusion with or without decompression on spinopelvic alignment and health-related quality-of-life outcomes. Clin Spine Surg. 2020;33(10):e504-e511.
Takahashi Y, Okuda S, Nagamoto Y, et al. Effect of segmental lordosis on the clinical outcomes of 2-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion for 2-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2019;31(5):670-675.
He S, Zhang Y, Ji W, et al. Analysis of spinopelvic sagittal balance and persistent low back pain (PLBP) for degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) following posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Pain Res Manag. 2020;2020:5971937.
Liow MHL, Goh GS-H, Chua JL, et al. Sagittally balanced degenerative spondylolisthesis patients with increased sacral slope and greater lumbar lordosis experience less back pain after short-segment lumbar fusion surgery. Clin Spine Surg. 2020;33(5):e231-e235.
Yuan J-J, Li G, Liu Y, et al. The association between sagittal spinopelvic alignment and persistent low back pain after posterior lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of mild L5-S1 spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study. Int J Gen Med. 2022;15:4807-4816.
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71.
Miyazaki M, Ishihara T, Abe T, et al. Effect of intraoperative position in single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at the L4/5 level on segmental and overall lumbar lordosis in patients with lumbar degenerative disease. Medicine. 2019;98(39):e17316.
Walker CT, Farber SH, Gandhi S, et al. Single-position prone lateral interbody fusion improves segmental lordosis in lumbar spondylolisthesis. World Neurosurg. 2021;151:e786-e792.
Khajavi K, Menezes CM, Braly BA, et al. Postoperative spinal alignment comparison of lateral versus supine patient position L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J. 2022;31(9):2248-2254.
Rajasekaran S, Das G, Aiyer SN, et al. Analysis of spinopelvic parameters with L5 as the new sacrum after fusion in high-grade spondylolisthesis: a possible explanation for satisfactory results with in-situ fusion. Asian Spine J. 2018;12(1):103-111.
Mohanty S, Barchick S, Kadiyala M, et al. Should patients with lumbar stenosis and grade I spondylolisthesis be treated differently based on spinopelvic alignment? A retrospective, two-year, propensity matched, comparison of patient-reported outcome measures and clinical outcomes from multiple sites within a single health system. Spine J. 2023;23(1):92-104.
Liu H, Li S, Wang J, et al. An analysis of spinopelvic sagittal alignment after lumbar lordosis reconstruction for degenerative spinal diseases how much balance can be obtained? Spine. 2014;39(26 Spec No.):B52-B59.
Bai H, Li Y, Liu C, et al. Surgical management of degenerative lumbar scoliosis associated with spinal stenosis does the PI-LL matter? Spine. 2020;45(15):1047-1054.
Harada GK, Khan JM, Vetter C, et al. Does the number of levels fused affect spinopelvic parameters and clinical outcomes following posterolateral lumbar fusion for low-grade spondylolisthesis? Glob Spine J. 2021;11(1):116-121.
Youn Y, Cho K, Na Y, et al. Global sagittal alignment and clinical outcomes after 1-3 short-segment lumbar fusion in degenerative spinal diseases. Asian Spine J. 2022;16(4):551-559.
Cheng X, Zhang K, Sun X, et al. Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of lumbar foraminal stenosis. Spine J. 2022;22(10):1687-1693.
Zhang Y, Song J, Lu Y, et al. Modified unilateral iliac screw fixation with partial reduction in the treatment of high-grade spondylolisthesis at L5/S1 in adult patients: introduction of key technique, report of clinical outcomes and analysis of spinopelvic parameters. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023;24(1):451.
Tegos S, Charitidis C, Korovessis P. Hybrid circumferential fixation for degenerative lumbosacral spine disease: posterior lumbar interbody fusion plus universal clamp rod-band instrumentation a novel technique for lumbosacral fixation. Spine. 2014;39(7):e441-e449.
Canseco J, Karamian B, Patel P, et al. PEEK versus titanium static interbody cages a comparison of 1-year clinical and radiographic outcomes for 1-level TLIFs. Clin Spine Surg. 2021;34(8):e483-e493.
Oikonomidis S, Heck V, Bantle S, et al. Impact of lordotic cages in the restoration of spinopelvic parameters after dorsal lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective case control study. Int Orthop. 2020;44(12):2665-2672.
Zhu C, Qiu X, Zhuang M, et al. Surgical outcomes of single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis with and without kyphotic alignment. World Neurosurg. 2018;117:e396-e402.
Huang Z, Michael Li Y, Towner J, et al. Laterally placed expandable interbody spacers improve radiographic and clinical outcomes: a 1-year follow-up study. Interdiscip Neurosurg. 2020;20:100639.
Liang Y, Zhao Y, Xu S, et al. Effects of different orientations of cage implantation on lumbar interbody fusion. World Neurosurg. 2020;140:e97-e104.
Kakadiya DG, Gohil DK, Soni DY, et al. Clinical, radiological and functional results of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative spondylolisthesis. N Am Spine Soc J. 2020;2:100011.
Sakaura H, Yamashita T, Miwa T, et al. Outcomes of 2-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion for 2-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 2013;19(1):90-94.
Kong LD, Zhang YZ, Wang F, et al. Radiographic restoration of sagittal spinopelvic alignment after posterior lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative spondylolisthesis. Clin Spine Surg. 2016;29(2):e87-92.
Takahashi Y, Okuda S, Nagamoto Y, et al. Effect of segmental lordosis on the clinical outcomes of 2-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion for 2-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2019;31(5):670-675.
Chung NS, Lee HD, Jeon CH, et al. Factors affecting slip reduction in oblique lumbar interbody fusion with posterior fixation for degenerative spondylolisthesis. Glob Spine J. 2022;12(8):1786-1791.
Li Z, Wang X, Xie T, et al. Oblique lumbar interbody fusion combined with stress end plate augmentation and anterolateral screw fixation for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with osteoporosis: a matched-pair case-controlled study. Spine J. 2023;23(4):523-532.
Johnson R, Valore A, Villaminar A, et al. Pelvic parameters of sagittal balance in extreme lateral interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar disc disease. J Clin Neurosci. 2013;20(4):576-581.
Kim JK, Moon BG, Kim DR, et al. Postoperative flat back: contribution of posterior accessed lumbar interbody fusion and spinopelvic parameters. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2014;56(4):315-322.
Challier V, Boissiere L, Obeid I, et al. One-level lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis and posterior approach: is transforaminal lateral interbody fusion mandatory? Spine. 2017;42(8):531-539.
Chumnanvej S, Segkhaphant N. Determination of spinopelvic parameters in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis patients undergoing lumbosacral spine fusion surgery: the lesson learnt. Turk Neurosurg. 2019;29(3):386-391.
Uysal M, Ozalay M, Derincek A, et al. Effect of PLIF and TLIF on sagittal spinopelvic balance of patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2018;52(4):272-276.
Divi SN, Schroeder GD, Goyal DKC, et al. Fusion technique does not affect short-term patient-reported outcomes for lumbar degenerative disease. Spine J. 2019;19(12):1960-1968.
Saadeh YS, Joseph JR, Smith BW, et al. Comparison of segmental lordosis and global spinopelvic alignment after single-level lateral lumbar interbody fusion or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. World Neurosurg. 2019;126:e1374-e1378.
Nakashima H, Kanemura T, Satake K, et al. Changes in sagittal alignment following short-level lumbar interbody fusion: comparison between posterior and lateral lumbar interbody fusions. Asian Spine J. 2019;13(6):904-912.
Bassani R, Morselli C, Querenghi AM, et al. Functional and radiological outcome of anterior retroperitoneal versus posterior transforaminal interbody fusion in the management of single-level lumbar degenerative disease. Neurosurg Focus. 2020;49(3):e2.
Korwutthikulrangsri E, Junsri K, Ruangchainikom M, et al. Comparison of spinal alignment between XLIF, TLIF, PLIF, and PLF in the treatment of single level spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study. J Med Assoc Thai. 2021;104:1959-1965.
Li R, Shao X, Li X, et al. Comparison of clinical outcomes and spino-pelvic sagittal balance in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: minimally invasive oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Medicine. 2021;100(3):e23783.
Leveque JCA, Drolet CE, Nemani V, et al. The impact of surgical approach on sagittal plane alignment in patients undergoing one- or two- level fusions for degenerative pathology: a multicenter radiographic evaluation 6 months following surgery. World Neurosurg. 2022;164:e311-e317.
Zhao L, Xie T, Wang X, et al. Comparing the medium-term outcomes of lumbar interbody fusion via transforaminal and oblique approach in treating lumbar degenerative disc diseases. Spine J. 2022;22(6):993-1001.
Hung S, Liao J, Tsai T, et al. Comparison of outcomes between indirect decompression of oblique lumbar interbody fusion and MIS-TLIF in one single-level lumbar spondylosis. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):12783.
Kim WJ, Ma CH, Kim SH, et al. Prevention of adjacent segmental disease after fusion in degenerative spinal disorder: correlation between segmental lumbar lordosis ratio and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch for a minimum 5-year follow-up. Asian Spine J. 2019;13(4):654-662.
Wang M, Xu L, Chen X, et al. Optimal reconstruction of sagittal alignment according to global alignment and proportion score can reduce adjacent segment degeneration after lumbar fusion. Spine. 2021;46(4):e257-e266.
Yoon S, Lee H, Lee S. Pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch is predisposed to adjacent segment degeneration after single-level anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective case-control study. Neurospine. 2023;20(1):301-307.
Pesenti S, Lafage R, Stein D, et al. The amount of proximal lumbar lordosis is related to pelvic incidence. Clin Orthopaedics Relat Res. 2018;476(8):1603-1611.