Cargando…

The effect of expandable versus static lordotic interbody implants in minimally invasive spine surgery: patient reported outcomes, sagittal alignment, and restoration of disc height and foraminal height

BACKGROUND: Pain and disability due to age-related spinal disorders are increasing due to a more active population placing greater demands on their musculoskeletal system. For patients requiring surgery, spinal fusion is typically indicated. Interbody fusion cages improve fusion rates and restore lo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kucharzyk, Donald W., Budimir, Dushan, Waldorff, Erik I., Shum, Laura C., Vannabouathong, Christopher
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AME Publishing Company 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10082426/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37038423
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jss-22-55
_version_ 1785021315061645312
author Kucharzyk, Donald W.
Budimir, Dushan
Waldorff, Erik I.
Shum, Laura C.
Vannabouathong, Christopher
author_facet Kucharzyk, Donald W.
Budimir, Dushan
Waldorff, Erik I.
Shum, Laura C.
Vannabouathong, Christopher
author_sort Kucharzyk, Donald W.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Pain and disability due to age-related spinal disorders are increasing due to a more active population placing greater demands on their musculoskeletal system. For patients requiring surgery, spinal fusion is typically indicated. Interbody fusion cages improve fusion rates and restore lordosis, disc height, and foraminal height. Static cages are offered in multiple conformations to account for anatomic variability; however, they have issues related to implant subsidence and loss of lordosis. Expandable cages were developed to address these drawbacks. METHODS: Patients treated with either static or expandable transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion devices (ProLift(®) Expandable Spacer System) for the treatment of spondylolisthesis, degenerative disc disease, spinal stenosis, disc herniation, or degenerative scoliosis at L4-L5 or L5-S1 were chosen from retrospective data. Outcomes included radiographic and spinopelvic changes, patient-reported outcomes, and incidence of non-union and revision surgery. RESULTS: One hundred patients were included (Static: 50; Expandable: 50). Demographics between groups were similar, with some differences in comorbidities and spinal disease diagnosis. Radiographically, changes in disc height, foraminal height, and lordosis were significantly improved in the Expandable group up to 2 years (P<0.001). Improvements in patient reported outcomes were more favorable in the Expandable group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients who underwent transforaminal lumbar spinal fusion via minimally invasive surgery, the Expandable device group demonstrated significantly improved radiographic and patient reported outcomes compared to a static cage over 2 years.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10082426
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher AME Publishing Company
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100824262023-04-09 The effect of expandable versus static lordotic interbody implants in minimally invasive spine surgery: patient reported outcomes, sagittal alignment, and restoration of disc height and foraminal height Kucharzyk, Donald W. Budimir, Dushan Waldorff, Erik I. Shum, Laura C. Vannabouathong, Christopher J Spine Surg Original Article BACKGROUND: Pain and disability due to age-related spinal disorders are increasing due to a more active population placing greater demands on their musculoskeletal system. For patients requiring surgery, spinal fusion is typically indicated. Interbody fusion cages improve fusion rates and restore lordosis, disc height, and foraminal height. Static cages are offered in multiple conformations to account for anatomic variability; however, they have issues related to implant subsidence and loss of lordosis. Expandable cages were developed to address these drawbacks. METHODS: Patients treated with either static or expandable transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion devices (ProLift(®) Expandable Spacer System) for the treatment of spondylolisthesis, degenerative disc disease, spinal stenosis, disc herniation, or degenerative scoliosis at L4-L5 or L5-S1 were chosen from retrospective data. Outcomes included radiographic and spinopelvic changes, patient-reported outcomes, and incidence of non-union and revision surgery. RESULTS: One hundred patients were included (Static: 50; Expandable: 50). Demographics between groups were similar, with some differences in comorbidities and spinal disease diagnosis. Radiographically, changes in disc height, foraminal height, and lordosis were significantly improved in the Expandable group up to 2 years (P<0.001). Improvements in patient reported outcomes were more favorable in the Expandable group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients who underwent transforaminal lumbar spinal fusion via minimally invasive surgery, the Expandable device group demonstrated significantly improved radiographic and patient reported outcomes compared to a static cage over 2 years. AME Publishing Company 2023-01-09 2023-03-30 /pmc/articles/PMC10082426/ /pubmed/37038423 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jss-22-55 Text en 2023 Journal of Spine Surgery. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Kucharzyk, Donald W.
Budimir, Dushan
Waldorff, Erik I.
Shum, Laura C.
Vannabouathong, Christopher
The effect of expandable versus static lordotic interbody implants in minimally invasive spine surgery: patient reported outcomes, sagittal alignment, and restoration of disc height and foraminal height
title The effect of expandable versus static lordotic interbody implants in minimally invasive spine surgery: patient reported outcomes, sagittal alignment, and restoration of disc height and foraminal height
title_full The effect of expandable versus static lordotic interbody implants in minimally invasive spine surgery: patient reported outcomes, sagittal alignment, and restoration of disc height and foraminal height
title_fullStr The effect of expandable versus static lordotic interbody implants in minimally invasive spine surgery: patient reported outcomes, sagittal alignment, and restoration of disc height and foraminal height
title_full_unstemmed The effect of expandable versus static lordotic interbody implants in minimally invasive spine surgery: patient reported outcomes, sagittal alignment, and restoration of disc height and foraminal height
title_short The effect of expandable versus static lordotic interbody implants in minimally invasive spine surgery: patient reported outcomes, sagittal alignment, and restoration of disc height and foraminal height
title_sort effect of expandable versus static lordotic interbody implants in minimally invasive spine surgery: patient reported outcomes, sagittal alignment, and restoration of disc height and foraminal height
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10082426/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37038423
http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jss-22-55
work_keys_str_mv AT kucharzykdonaldw theeffectofexpandableversusstaticlordoticinterbodyimplantsinminimallyinvasivespinesurgerypatientreportedoutcomessagittalalignmentandrestorationofdischeightandforaminalheight
AT budimirdushan theeffectofexpandableversusstaticlordoticinterbodyimplantsinminimallyinvasivespinesurgerypatientreportedoutcomessagittalalignmentandrestorationofdischeightandforaminalheight
AT waldorfferiki theeffectofexpandableversusstaticlordoticinterbodyimplantsinminimallyinvasivespinesurgerypatientreportedoutcomessagittalalignmentandrestorationofdischeightandforaminalheight
AT shumlaurac theeffectofexpandableversusstaticlordoticinterbodyimplantsinminimallyinvasivespinesurgerypatientreportedoutcomessagittalalignmentandrestorationofdischeightandforaminalheight
AT vannabouathongchristopher theeffectofexpandableversusstaticlordoticinterbodyimplantsinminimallyinvasivespinesurgerypatientreportedoutcomessagittalalignmentandrestorationofdischeightandforaminalheight
AT kucharzykdonaldw effectofexpandableversusstaticlordoticinterbodyimplantsinminimallyinvasivespinesurgerypatientreportedoutcomessagittalalignmentandrestorationofdischeightandforaminalheight
AT budimirdushan effectofexpandableversusstaticlordoticinterbodyimplantsinminimallyinvasivespinesurgerypatientreportedoutcomessagittalalignmentandrestorationofdischeightandforaminalheight
AT waldorfferiki effectofexpandableversusstaticlordoticinterbodyimplantsinminimallyinvasivespinesurgerypatientreportedoutcomessagittalalignmentandrestorationofdischeightandforaminalheight
AT shumlaurac effectofexpandableversusstaticlordoticinterbodyimplantsinminimallyinvasivespinesurgerypatientreportedoutcomessagittalalignmentandrestorationofdischeightandforaminalheight
AT vannabouathongchristopher effectofexpandableversusstaticlordoticinterbodyimplantsinminimallyinvasivespinesurgerypatientreportedoutcomessagittalalignmentandrestorationofdischeightandforaminalheight