Differences in surgical outcome after anterior corpectomy and reconstruction with an expandable cage with rectangular footplates between thoracolumbar and lumbar osteoporotic vertebral fracture

BACKGROUND: Anterior and posterior spinal fixation (APSF) can provide rigid structural anterior column support in patients with osteoporotic vertebral fracture (OVF). A new rectangular footplate designed based on biomechanical studies of endplates provides better resistance to subsidence. However, differences in characteristics exist between the thoracolumbar and lower lumbar spine. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the surgical outcomes following APSF using an expandable cage with rectangular footplates in the thoracolumbar/lumbar region. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent APSF for OVF at multiple centers were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical and radiographic evaluations were performed by dividing the patients into thoracolumbar (TL, T10–L2) and lumbar (L, L3–L5) groups. Surgical indications were incomplete neurologic deficit or intractable back pain with segmental spinal instability. Surgical outcomes including the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score and reoperation rate were compared between TL and L groups. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients were followed-up for more than 12 months and analyzed. Operative intervention was required for 35 patients in the TL group and 34 patients in the L group. Mean ages in the TL and L groups were 76.5 years and 75.1 years, respectively. Intra-vertebral instability was more frequent in the TL group (p<0.001). Screw fixation range was significantly longer in the TL group (p=0.012). The rate of cage subsidence did not differ significantly between the TL group (46%) and L group (44%). Reoperation rate tended to be higher in the TL group (p=0.095). Improvement ratio of JOA score was significantly better in the L group (60%) than in the TL group (46.9%, p=0.029). CONCLUSION: APSF using an expandable cage was effective to treat OVF at both lumbar and thoracolumbar levels. However, the improvement ratio of the JOA score was better in the L group than in the TL group.