Anterior lumbar interbody fusion

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is a common technique for treating a variety of lumbar spine disorders. Although used predominantly to obtain fusion, it is also excellent for restoring lumbar lordosis and can be used for indirect decompression, especially in the setting of foraminal stenosis.⁴ The technique is used predominantly at L4-5 and L5-S1, but can be used at L3-4 and even L2-3. ALIF provides an excellent biomechanical environment for arthrodesis. The anterior longitudinal ligament resection allows for excellent restoration of lordosis. ALIF can be performed as an isolated procedure or combined with posterior approaches. Although there are major risks associated with the required abdominal approach, ALIF has reached popularity for its reliability and versatility. With good knowledge of anatomical hazards, the properly indicated patient has much to gain with an ALIF surgery.     

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion surgical complications.

Complications of anterior lumbar fusion may be divided into several categories. The first of these is complications related to patient selection, the second is visceral complications, and the third is vascular complications. Complications of anterior lumbar fusion and complications of interbody fusion technique occur at the graft site and the donor site.     

Anterior interbody fusion of the lumbar spine

Anterior interbody fusion of the lumbar spine by the extraperitoneal technique was performed in 47 patients with incapacitating low-back pain due to spondylolisthesis (26 patients) or disc degeneration (21 patients). The mean age was 38.2 years. Forty-five patients were re-examined 2--6 years postoperatively. According to the patients' own evaluation at follow-up, 53 per cent were free or almost free of back pain, 29 per cent were improved, 11 per cent unchanged and 7 per cent felt that the condition had deteriorated. Non-union occurred in nine patients, but among these three were free of pain, four were better and two were worse than before operation. The results do not seem to be correlated with age, sex, duration of pain before operation, degree of slipping in spondylolisthesis or the length of time out of work before surgery. It is concluded that this method may be worth continuing, but the patients should be selected with care.     

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion with osteoinductive growth factors

Anterior intervertebral fusion increasingly is used as a treatment for discogenic or intersegmental pathologic diseases of the lumbar spine. This is in part attributable to the evolution and refinement of laparoscopic and minimally invasive surgical techniques that now can be used to access the anterior spinal column. It also is attributable to the availability of newer generation intervertebral fixation devices such as the threaded titanium cages or threaded allograft bone dowels, both of which are technically simpler to implant. Recently, limited clinical studies of intervertebral lumbar fusion have examined the use of these devices combined with osteoinductive growth factors as substitutes for autogenous bone graft. Early clinical results of lumbar fusion using threaded intervertebral implants filled with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 have been favorable. Higher fusion rates, shorter operative times, and shorter hospital stays have been reported in the initial series. Clinical trials involving larger cohorts with various spinal applications for osteoinductive molecules currently are in progress.     

Anterior lumbar fusion using a hybrid interbody graft

Summary This is a radiographic report of 40 patients (20 men, 20 women) who underwent anterior lumbar interbody fusions (73 levels) utilizing a “hybrid” interbody graft composed of femoral cortical allograft (FCA) bone and iliac crest cancellous autograft bone. The average age at surgery was 38 years (range 17–64 years), and follow-up averaged 1.4 years (range 1.0–2.4 years). Nineteen of the patients had undergone previous lumbar surgery. Thirty-two patients (63 levels) underwent anterior fusion combined with some type of posterior fixation, and eight patients (10 levels) had no posterior fixation. Types of posterior fixation included: for 20 patients (36 levels) Steffee variable screw placement fixation, for 10 patients (23 levels) translaminar facet screws (TFS), for 1 patient (3 levels) Knodt rods and for 1 patient (1 level) facet screws. Based on the persistence of lucent lines at the graft-host interface, three patients (one level each) were felt to have non-unions at their latest follow-ups at 1.4, 1.5 and 2.0 years, respectively. Two of these patients had no posterior fixation, and the other had TFS fixation. The overall fusion rate was 96% (70 of 73 levels). The fusion rate for all levels treated with posterior fixation was 98% compared with 75% for those without fixation. Intervertebral disc heights (IVDH) were measured on all films and corrected for magnification with computer assistance. On average, the IVDH was increased postoperatively but returned to preoperative values at follow-up. IVDH loss was independent of the type of instrumentation used. No complications arose from the use of the hybrid graft. Incorporation of the allograft portion of the graft is slow and was felt to be complete in only 7 of the 73 levels at follow-up. We conclude that the hybrid interbody graft technique is a safe and reliable method for performing anterior lumbar interbody fusions and should be combined with some type of posterior fixation. Long-term follow-up will be required to assess the behaviour of the allograft until incorporation is complete.     

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion using a hybrid graft

This prospective study evaluates the clinical and radiological results of anterior lumbar interbody fusion using a femoral cortical ring allograft (FCA) packed with cancellous autologous bone (hybrid graft), combined with posterior pedicular fixation but without posterior fusion, for symptomatic degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Twenty-eight out of 30 consecutive adult patients were followed up for a minimum period of 2 years. Intra- and postoperative complications were seen in 2 out of 28 patients (7%); no complications resulted from the allografts. Clinically, 24 out of 28 patients (85%) had a good to excellent result, one patient (4%) a fair result, and 3 patients (11%) a poor result. Radiologically, the overall fusion rate by the level was 98% in 28 patients.     

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion using rhBMP-2 with tapered interbody cages

In a multicenter, prospective, randomized, nonblinded, 2-year study, 279 patients with degenerative lumbar disc disease were randomly divided into two groups that underwent interbody fusion using two tapered threaded fusion cages. The investigational group (143 patients) received rhBMP-2 on an absorbable collagen sponge, and a control group (136 patients) received autogenous iliac crest bone graft. Plain radiographs and computed tomographic scans were used to evaluate fusion at 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. Mean operative time (1.6 hours) and blood loss (109.8 mL) were less in the investigational rhBMP-2 group than in the autograft control group (2.0 hours and 153.1 mL). At 24 months the investigational group's fusion rate (94.5%) remained higher than that of the control group (88.7%). New bone formation occurred in all investigational patients. At all intervals, mean postoperative Oswestry, back pain, and leg pain scores and neurologic status improved in both treatment groups with similar outcomes. In the control group, eight adverse events related to the iliac crest graft harvest occurred (5.9%), and at 24 months 32% of patients reported graft site discomfort and 16% were bothered by its appearance. Lumbar fusion using rhBMP-2 and a tapered titanium fusion cage can yield a solid union and eliminate the need for harvesting iliac crest bone graft.     

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion for internal disc disruption.

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion was performed as the primary surgical procedure for 36 patients with internal disc derangement. Patients were selected on the basis of clinical complaints, discography, and magnetic resonance imaging results. Twenty-eight patients underwent a one-level fusion and eight patients had a two-level fusion for a total of 44 levels. Autogenous graft was used in all cases. Clinical results were categorized as success or failure based on return to work or activities of daily living, drug usage patterns, and complaints of pain. Thirty-one patients (86.1%) had a successful clinical result and five patients (13.9%) had an unsuccessful clinical result. Based on flexion-extension radiographs fusion was achieved in 32 patients (88.9%). Forty of the forty-four levels (90.9%) fused. Complications include one each of: pulmonary embolus, retrograde ejaculation, wound hematoma at the donor site, and perioperative graft extrusion.     

前/后路腰椎椎间融合术治疗椎间盘源性腰痛

目的　比较前路腰椎椎间融合术(ALIF)与后路腰椎椎间融合术(PLIF)治疗椎间盘源性腰痛的疗效。方法回顾性分析2010年1月—2015年12月分别接受ALIF(31例)和PLIF(34例)治疗的退行性椎间盘源性腰痛患者的临床资料,比较2组患者术中出血量、术后症状无缓解例数、恢复工作时间及并发症发生情况,术前和术后6周、3个月、1年疼痛视觉模拟量表(VSA)评分、Oswestry功能障碍指数(ODI)及融合率。结果所有手术顺利完成,所有患者随访≥1年。ALIF组术中出血量、术后症状无缓解例数低于PLIF组,恢复工作时间长于PLIF组,术后6周、3个月、1年腰痛VAS评分和ODI改善较PLIF组显著,术后6周、3个月下肢痛VAS评分改善较PLIF组显著,差异均有统计学意义(P 0.05);术后1年下肢痛VAS评分、术后融合率组间差异无统计学意义(P 0.05)。术后3例患者(ALIF组1例、PLIF组2例)出现切口愈合不佳,经换药后好转。PLIF组1例硬膜撕裂于术中修补,术后未出现脑脊液漏;1例持续存在神经根刺激症状,经复查可能为1枚椎弓根螺钉位置偏内所致,经非手术治疗3个月症状缓解。ALIF组1例发生难治性呃逆,术后15 d缓解。2组均无内固定松动、断裂等并发症发生。结论治疗椎间盘源性腰痛,ALIF在改善症状方面更具优势,术中出血量更小。     

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion with threaded fusion cages and autologous bone grafts

The goal of this study was to evaluate the ability of Ray threaded fusion cages, when used in an anterior approach, to restore intervertebral height and to improve the functional and occupational performance of the patients. The present study was initiated because insertion of fusion cages through a posterior approach causes destruction of facet joints and violation of the spinal canal. The anterior approach for insertion of threaded fusion cages to accomplish lumbar interbody fusion was evaluated in a series of 13 patients suffering monosegmental disc disease. The patients’ functional and occupational performance was evaluated using the Prolo score. Radiological measurements were used to evaluate disc height and degree of penetration into the endplates, and to confirm fusion. Seven of the 13 patients were short-term failures and had to be revised within 2 years. The study found that revised patients had poorer Prolo scores than non-revised patients. Although for the non-revised patients, the mean Prolo scores remained relatively stable during the 1st year, they dropped after 3 years. We were not able to identify any further clinical or radiological differences between the groups. These results indicate that although the anterior approach seems technically suitable for insertion of threaded fusion cages, destruction of the anterior longitudinal ligament and the anterior part of the annulus fibrosis appears to result in destabilisation of the motion segment. Received: 9 August 1999 Accepted: 17 November 1999     

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion for lumbosacral junction in steep sacral slope

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study of surgical technique and clinical outcome. OBJECTIVES: To examine the technique and outcomes of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) surgery for a lumbosacral junction in a steep sacral slope. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There are no studies on the outcome and technical pitfalls on ALIF surgery for a lumbosacral junction in a steep sacral slope. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six female patients (mean age of 55.67 y; range, 42 to 69) who had a steep sacral slope underwent ALIF surgery for degenerative (2 patients) and spondylolytic (4 patients) spondylolisthesis. The average follow-up duration was 29.33 months (range, 27 to 33 mo). The following parameters were used to assess the outcomes: slip angle, slip percentage, sacral inclination, lumbosacral angle, sacral slope, and distance from the upper margin of the pubis symphysis to the sacral plane. The level of pain was measured using the visual analog pain scale score. The function was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score. Satisfaction surveys were also carried out. Statistical analysis was performed using a Friedman test. A P value <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The mean sacral inclination, lumbosacral angle, sacral slope, and distance from the upper margin of the pubis symphysis to the sacral plane were 37.34 degrees (range, 28.55 to 48.92 degrees), 12.20 degrees (range, 5.09 to 16.5 degrees), 40.70 degrees (range, 30.54 to 49.98 degrees), and 22.06 cm (range, 16.13 to 29.72 cm), respectively. The mean correction of slip percentage and slip angle was 35.46%, and 9.3 degrees, respectively. The mean visual analog pain scale score decreased from 8.5 (back pain) and 7.3 (leg pain) to 1.8 (back pain) and 1.8 (leg pain) after surgery (P=0.001). The mean ODI scores also reflected the improved status (ODI of 64.7 before surgery to 8.5 after surgery; P=0.001). The patient's satisfaction was relatively high. All the patients had radiographically solid fusion at the latest follow-up. There were no significant complications encountered in this study. CONCLUSIONS: In selected cases, a steep sacral slope may not be an absolute contraindication of ALIF. Moreover, the C-arm-guided reduction and cage insertion method is a reliable way of treating spondylolisthesis in those with a steep sacral slope.     

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion: Does stable anterior fixation matter?

The purpose of this study was to compare the outcome of anterior lumbar interbody fusion without instrumentation (uninstrumented ALIF) against that with stable anterior cage fixation using Hartshill horseshoe instrumentation (ALIF-HH) for similar severity of disc disease. Between April 1994 and June 1998 the senior author N.R.B. performed 29 instrumented ALIF procedures with a Hartshill horseshoe cage (ALIF-HH). Between 1990 and 1998, the other senior author (J.M.H.), together with another senior consultant orthopaedic surgeon, performed 27 noninstrumented ALIF procedures using corticocancellous iliac crest autograft. All the patients in both groups had single-level fusion. An independent assessor (S.M.) performed the entire review. The mean follow-up was 4.7 years (2.3-7.9 years) in the uninstrumented ALIF group and 3.0 years (2.1-4.4 years) in the ALIF-HH group. There was subsidence of graft in four patients in the uninstrumented ALIF group. It is reasonable to assume that there was no pseudarthrosis in the ALIF-HH group. This difference was statistically significant (two-sided P-value =0.0425). On subjective score assessment, there was a satisfactory outcome (score0.05). On classification by the Oswestry Index into four categories, we found no difference in outcome between the two groups: 83.3% ( n=20) had a satisfactory outcome (defined as Excellent or Better) with ALIF and 77.8% ( n=21) had a satisfactory outcome with ALIF-HH using the Oswestry Disability Index for post-operative assessment ( P>0.05). The results of this study indicate that the Hartshill horseshoe cage does improve the fusion rate, but does not affect clinical outcome.     

腰椎后路微创TLIF和开放PLIF两种术式临床短期效果报告

目的评价微创经椎间孔椎间融合术（transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion,TLIF）与开放后路椎间融合术（posterior lumbar interbody fusion,PLIF）行后路椎间融合及椎弓根钉内固定的短期临床疗效。方法2009年1-3月对30例腰椎退变性疾病患者分别采用微创TLIF（METRXQuadrant）和开放PLIF术式进行对照研究。结果术后1周微创TLIF组腰痛VAS评分的降低更为明显（P〈0．05）;术后1周及4个月2组腿痛VAS评分比较差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）;术后1周微创TLIF组JOA评分同开放PLIF组比较差异具有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论METRX Quadrant系统下行微创TLIF后路腰椎管减压、椎间融合和椎弓根螺钉固定术,可促进患者早期康复,减少住院时间,是一种安全、可靠的方法。     

Biomechanical comparison of anterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

STUDY DESIGN: An in vitro biomechanical comparison of 2 fusion techniques, anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), on cadaveric human spines. OBJECTIVE: To compare the immediate construct stability, in terms of range of motion (ROM) and neutral zone, of ALIF, including 2 separate approaches, and TLIF procedures with posterior titanium rod fixation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Both ALIF and TLIF have been used to treat chronic low back pain and instability. In many cases, the choice between these 2 techniques is based only on personal preference. No biomechanical performance comparison between these 2 fusion techniques is available to assist surgical decision. METHODS: Twelve cadaveric lumbar motion segments were loaded sinusoidally at 0.05 Hz and 5 Nm in unconstrained axial rotation, lateral bending and flexion extension. Specimens were randomly divided into 2 groups with 6 in each group. One group was assigned for TLIF whereas the other group for ALIF. In the ALIF group, there were 3 steps. First, the lateral ALIF procedure with the anterior longitudinal ligament (ALL) intact was performed. Afterwards, the ALL was cut without removing the ALIF cage. Finally, another appropriately sized ALIF cage was inserted anteriorly. Biomechanical tests were conducted after each step. RESULTS: In the ALIF group, the lateral ALIF and subsequent anterior ALIF reduced segmental motion significantly (P=0.03) under all loading conditions. Removing the ALL increased ROM by 59% and 142% in axial rotation and flexion extension, respectively (P=0.03). The anterior ALIF approach was able to achieve similar biomechanical stability of the lateral approach in lateral bending and flexion extension (P>0.05) under all loading conditions. The TLIF procedure significantly reduced the range of motion compared with the intact state (P=0.03). However, no statistical difference was detected between the TLIF group and the ALIF group (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both ALIF and TLIF procedures combined with posterior instrumentation significantly improved construct stability of intact spinal motion segments. However, there was no statistical difference between these 2 fusion techniques. The 2 ALIF approaches (lateral and anterior) also had similar construct stability even though anterior longitudinal ligament severing significantly reduced stability.