Cargando…

Modified posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a single cage with unilateral pedicle screws: a retrospective clinical study

BACKGROUND: The traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) technique usually involves implantation of two cages through a bilateral approach and bilateral laminectomy, which requires bilateral transpedicle screw fixation. The procedure itself has several negative impacts. Therefore, a modi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bingqian, Chen, Feng, Xue, Xiaowen, Shen, Feng, Zhang, Xiaowen, Fang, Yufeng, Qian, Qirong, Dong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4486715/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26122941
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-015-0243-3
_version_ 1782378917245485056
author Bingqian, Chen
Feng, Xue
Xiaowen, Shen
Feng, Zhang
Xiaowen, Fang
Yufeng, Qian
Qirong, Dong
author_facet Bingqian, Chen
Feng, Xue
Xiaowen, Shen
Feng, Zhang
Xiaowen, Fang
Yufeng, Qian
Qirong, Dong
author_sort Bingqian, Chen
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) technique usually involves implantation of two cages through a bilateral approach and bilateral laminectomy, which requires bilateral transpedicle screw fixation. The procedure itself has several negative impacts. Therefore, a modified PLIF procedure that includes insertion of a unilateral cage through the symptomatic side with supplementary unilateral pedicle screws has been conducted. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-one patients with unilateral radiculopathy who were diagnosed with spinal stenosis along with degenerative disc disease and a herniated intervertebral disc with lumbar instability underwent a unilateral PLIF using a single cage and unilateral pedicle screws. The postoperative clinical evaluation was based on the visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for back pain and leg pain at multiple time points following the surgery. Radiological assessments were performed with lateral plain radiographs taken preoperation, immediately postoperation, 1, 2, 3 and 6 months postoperation and at the most recent follow-up. RESULTS: The patients all underwent a single-level fusion, and the mean duration for the surgeries was 94 min. The mean haemorrhage volume was 250 ml, and no blood transfusion was required for any of the cases. Twelve months postoperatively, all patients had achieved an Excellent or Good outcome (Excellent in 28 patients and Good in 3). The mean pain score was 6.8 prior to surgery and decreased to 2.3 at the 3-month postoperative examination. No significant complications or neurological deterioration occurred. None of the 31 patients appeared to have any fusion failure. No broken screw, screw loosening, significant cage migration or subsidence was observed in any of the cases. A mean increase in the intervertebral disc height of 3.14 mm from the preoperative measurement to the most recent follow-up examination was determined to be statistically significant (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Conducting PLIF using the diagonal insertion of a single cage with supplemental unilateral transpedicular screw instrumentation enables sufficient decompression and solid interbody fusion to be achieved with minimal invasion of the posterior spinal elements. This technique is a more clinically secure, straightforward and cost-effective way to perform PLIF.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4486715
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44867152015-07-02 Modified posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a single cage with unilateral pedicle screws: a retrospective clinical study Bingqian, Chen Feng, Xue Xiaowen, Shen Feng, Zhang Xiaowen, Fang Yufeng, Qian Qirong, Dong J Orthop Surg Res Research Article BACKGROUND: The traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) technique usually involves implantation of two cages through a bilateral approach and bilateral laminectomy, which requires bilateral transpedicle screw fixation. The procedure itself has several negative impacts. Therefore, a modified PLIF procedure that includes insertion of a unilateral cage through the symptomatic side with supplementary unilateral pedicle screws has been conducted. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-one patients with unilateral radiculopathy who were diagnosed with spinal stenosis along with degenerative disc disease and a herniated intervertebral disc with lumbar instability underwent a unilateral PLIF using a single cage and unilateral pedicle screws. The postoperative clinical evaluation was based on the visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for back pain and leg pain at multiple time points following the surgery. Radiological assessments were performed with lateral plain radiographs taken preoperation, immediately postoperation, 1, 2, 3 and 6 months postoperation and at the most recent follow-up. RESULTS: The patients all underwent a single-level fusion, and the mean duration for the surgeries was 94 min. The mean haemorrhage volume was 250 ml, and no blood transfusion was required for any of the cases. Twelve months postoperatively, all patients had achieved an Excellent or Good outcome (Excellent in 28 patients and Good in 3). The mean pain score was 6.8 prior to surgery and decreased to 2.3 at the 3-month postoperative examination. No significant complications or neurological deterioration occurred. None of the 31 patients appeared to have any fusion failure. No broken screw, screw loosening, significant cage migration or subsidence was observed in any of the cases. A mean increase in the intervertebral disc height of 3.14 mm from the preoperative measurement to the most recent follow-up examination was determined to be statistically significant (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Conducting PLIF using the diagonal insertion of a single cage with supplemental unilateral transpedicular screw instrumentation enables sufficient decompression and solid interbody fusion to be achieved with minimal invasion of the posterior spinal elements. This technique is a more clinically secure, straightforward and cost-effective way to perform PLIF. BioMed Central 2015-06-30 /pmc/articles/PMC4486715/ /pubmed/26122941 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-015-0243-3 Text en © Bingqian et al. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Bingqian, Chen
Feng, Xue
Xiaowen, Shen
Feng, Zhang
Xiaowen, Fang
Yufeng, Qian
Qirong, Dong
Modified posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a single cage with unilateral pedicle screws: a retrospective clinical study
title Modified posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a single cage with unilateral pedicle screws: a retrospective clinical study
title_full Modified posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a single cage with unilateral pedicle screws: a retrospective clinical study
title_fullStr Modified posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a single cage with unilateral pedicle screws: a retrospective clinical study
title_full_unstemmed Modified posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a single cage with unilateral pedicle screws: a retrospective clinical study
title_short Modified posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a single cage with unilateral pedicle screws: a retrospective clinical study
title_sort modified posterior lumbar interbody fusion using a single cage with unilateral pedicle screws: a retrospective clinical study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4486715/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26122941
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-015-0243-3
work_keys_str_mv AT bingqianchen modifiedposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusionusingasinglecagewithunilateralpediclescrewsaretrospectiveclinicalstudy
AT fengxue modifiedposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusionusingasinglecagewithunilateralpediclescrewsaretrospectiveclinicalstudy
AT xiaowenshen modifiedposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusionusingasinglecagewithunilateralpediclescrewsaretrospectiveclinicalstudy
AT fengzhang modifiedposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusionusingasinglecagewithunilateralpediclescrewsaretrospectiveclinicalstudy
AT xiaowenfang modifiedposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusionusingasinglecagewithunilateralpediclescrewsaretrospectiveclinicalstudy
AT yufengqian modifiedposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusionusingasinglecagewithunilateralpediclescrewsaretrospectiveclinicalstudy
AT qirongdong modifiedposteriorlumbarinterbodyfusionusingasinglecagewithunilateralpediclescrewsaretrospectiveclinicalstudy