Radiographic comparison of lordotic and hyperlordotic implants in L5–S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion

View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Neurosurgery, Barrow Neurological Institute, St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center, Phoenix, Arizona; and
  • | 2 Southeastern Neurosurgical Specialists, Georgia Spine and Neurosurgery Center, Atlanta, Georgia
Restricted access

Purchase Now

USD  $45.00

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $376.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $612.00
Print or Print + Online

OBJECTIVE

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) used at the lumbosacral junction provides arthrodesis for several indications. The anterior approach allows restoration of lumbar lordosis, an important goal of surgery. With hyperlordotic ALIF implants, several options may be employed to obtain the desired amount of lordosis. In this study, the authors compared the degree of radiographic lordosis achieved with lordotic and hyperlordotic ALIF implants at the L5–S1 segment.

METHODS

All patients undergoing L5–S1 ALIF from 2 institutions over a 4-year interval were included. Patients < 18 years of age or those with any posterior decompression or osteotomy were excluded. ALIF implants in the lordotic group had 8° or 12° of inherent lordosis, whereas implants in the hyperlordotic group had 20° or 30° of lordosis. Upright standing radiographs were used to determine all radiographic parameters, including lumbar lordosis, segmental lordosis, disc space lordosis, and disc space height. Separate analyses were performed for patients who underwent single-segment fixation at L5–S1 and for the overall cohort.

RESULTS

A total of 204 patients were included (hyperlordotic group, 93 [45.6%]; lordotic group, 111 [54.4%]). Single-segment ALIF at L5–S1 was performed in 74 patients (hyperlordotic group, 27 [36.5%]; lordotic group, 47 [63.5%]). The overall mean ± SD age was 61.9 ± 12.3 years; 58.3% of patients (n = 119) were women. The mean number of total segments fused was 3.2 ± 2.6. Overall, 66.7% (n = 136) of patients had supine surgery and 33.3% (n = 68) had lateral surgery. Supine positioning was significantly more common in the hyperlordotic group than in the lordotic group (83.9% [78/93] vs 52.3% [58/111], p < 0.001). After adjusting for differences in surgical positioning, the change in lumbar lordosis was significantly greater for hyperlordotic versus lordotic implants (3.6° ± 7.5° vs 0.4° ± 7.5°, p = 0.048) in patients with single-level fusion. For patients receiving hyperlordotic versus lordotic implants, changes were also significantly greater for segmental lordosis (12.4° ± 7.5° vs 8.4° ± 4.9°, p = 0.03) and disc space lordosis (15.3° ± 5.4° vs 9.3° ± 5.8°, p < 0.001) after single-level fusion at L5–S1. The change in disc space height was similar for these 2 groups (p = 0.23).

CONCLUSIONS

Hyperlordotic implants provided a greater degree of overall lumbar lordosis restoration as well as L5–S1 segmental and disc space lordosis restoration than lordotic implants. The change in disc space height was similar. Differences in lateral and supine positioning did not affect these parameters.

ABBREVIATIONS

ALIF = anterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $376.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $612.00
  • 1

    Fritzell P, Hägg O, Wessberg P, Nordwall A. 2001 Volvo Award Winner in Clinical Studies: Lumbar fusion versus nonsurgical treatment for chronic low back pain: a multicenter randomized controlled trial from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2001;26(23):25212534.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Fritzell P, Hägg O, Wessberg P, Nordwall A. Chronic low back pain and fusion: a comparison of three surgical techniques: a prospective multicenter randomized study from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2002;27(11):11311141.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Sasso RC, Best NM, Mummaneni PV, Reilly TM, Hussain SM. Analysis of operative complications in a series of 471 anterior lumbar interbody fusion procedures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2005;30(6):670674.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Godzik J, Hlubek RJ, Newcomb AGUS, Lehrman JN, de Andrada Pereira B, Farber SH, et al. Supplemental rods are needed to maximally reduce rod strain across the lumbosacral junction with TLIF but not ALIF in long constructs. Spine J. 2019;19(6):11211131.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    Hlubek RJ, Godzik J, Newcomb AGUS, Lehrman JN, de Andrada B, Bohl MA, et al. Iliac screws may not be necessary in long-segment constructs with L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion: cadaveric study of stability and instrumentation strain. Spine J. 2019;19(5):942950.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Rothrock RJ, McNeill IT, Yaeger K, Oermann EK, Cho SK, Caridi JM. Lumbar lordosis correction with interbody fusion: systematic literature review and analysis. World Neurosurg.2018;118:2131.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Glassman SD, Bridwell K, Dimar JR, Horton W, Berven S, Schwab F. The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2005;30(18):20242029.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Glassman SD, Berven S, Bridwell K, Horton W, Dimar JR. Correlation of radiographic parameters and clinical symptoms in adult scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2005;30(6):682688.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Schwab FJ, Blondel B, Bess S, Hostin R, Shaffrey CI, Smith JS, et al. Radiographical spinopelvic parameters and disability in the setting of adult spinal deformity: a prospective multicenter analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2013;38(13):E803E812.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Buric J, Conti R, Peressutti S. Lumbar lordosis correction with interbody hyperlordotic cages: initial experience, learning curve, technical aspects, and complication incidence. Int J Spine Surg. 2018;12(2):185189.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Saville PA, Kadam AB, Smith HE, Arlet V. Anterior hyperlordotic cages: early experience and radiographic results. J Neurosurg Spine. 2016;25(6):713719.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Anand N, Cohen RB, Cohen J, Kahndehroo B, Kahwaty S, Baron E. The influence of lordotic cages on creating sagittal balance in the CMIS treatment of adult spinal deformity. Int J Spine Surg. 2017;11:23.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Kadam A, Wigner N, Saville P, Arlet V. Overpowering posterior lumbar instrumentation and fusion with hyperlordotic anterior lumbar interbody cages followed by posterior revision: a preliminary feasibility study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017;27(6):650660.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14

    Ajiboye RM, Alas H, Mosich GM, Sharma A, Pourtaheri S. Radiographic and clinical outcomes of anterior and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. Clin Spine Surg. 2018;31(4):E230E238.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Xi Z, Chou D, Mummaneni PV, Ruan H, Eichler C, Chang CC, Burch S. Anterior lumbar compared to oblique lumbar interbody approaches for multilevel fusions to the sacrum in adults with spinal deformity and degeneration. J Neurosurg Spine. 2020;33(4):461470.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Uribe JS, Smith DA, Dakwar E, Baaj AA, Mundis GM, Turner AW, et al. Lordosis restoration after anterior longitudinal ligament release and placement of lateral hyperlordotic interbody cages during the minimally invasive lateral transpsoas approach: a radiographic study in cadavers. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;17(5):476485.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Marouby S, Coulomb R, Maury E, Assi C, Mares O, Kouyoumdjian P. Prospective evaluation of spino-pelvic parameters with clinical correlation in patients operated with an anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Asian Spine J. 2020;14(1):8896.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Malham GM, Wagner TP, Claydon MH. Anterior lumbar interbody fusion in a lateral decubitus position: technique and outcomes in obese patients. J Spine Surg. 2019;5(4):433442.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 500 500 500
Full Text Views 42 42 42
PDF Downloads 57 57 57
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0