Fusion rates and subsidence of morselized local bone grafted in titanium cages in posterior lumbar interbody fusion using quantitative three-dimensional computed tomography scans

Spine

Volumn 35, Issue 15, 2010, Pages 1460-1465

  Lee, Jae Hyup ^a,b   Jeon, Do Whan ^c   Lee, Suk Jae ^c   Chang, Bong Soon ^a,c   Lee, Choon Ki ^a,c  

^a Seoul National University   (South Korea)

^b Seoul National University Boramae Hospital   (South Korea)

^c Seoul National University Hospital   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Fusion rate of the cage; Localized bone graft; Posterior lumbar interbody fusion; Subsidence; Titanium cage

Indexed keywords

TITANIUM;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BONE GRAFT; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; LORDOSIS; LUMBAR SPINE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PEDICLE SCREW; POSTERIOR LUMBAR INTERBODY FUSION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPINAL CORD DECOMPRESSION; SPINE FUSION; SPINE STABILIZATION; SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; SURGICAL ANATOMY; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; THORAX; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VERTEBRAL CANAL STENOSIS; BONE SCREW; BONE TRANSPLANTATION; DEVICES; LUMBAR VERTEBRA; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PROCEDURES; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RADIOGRAPHY; SURGERY;

ADULT; AGED; BONE SCREWS; BONE TRANSPLANTATION; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SPINAL FUSION; TITANIUM; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 77954887814     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c4baf5     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Steffee AD, Sitkowski DJ. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion and plates. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988;227:99-102.
2. Okuyama K, Kido T, Unoki E, et al. PLIF with a titanium cage and excised facet joint bone for degenerative spondylolisthesis\in augmentation with a pedicle screw. J Spinal Disord Tech 2007;20:53-9.
3. Closkey RF, Parsons JR, Lee CK, et al. Mechanics of interbody spinal fusion. Analysis of critical bone graft area. Spine 1993;18:1011-5.
4. McAfee PC, Regan JJ, Geis PW, et al. Minimally invasive anterior retroper-itoneal approach to the lumbar spine. Emphasis on lateral BAK. Spine 1998; 23:1476-84.
5. Boden SD, Grob D, Damien C. Ne-Osteo bone growth factor for posterolateral lumbar spine fusion: results from a nonhuman primate study and a prospective human clinical pilot study. Spine 2004;29:504-14.
6. Brantigan JW, Steffee AD, Lewis ML, et al. Lumbar interbody fusion using the Brantigan I/F cage for posterior lumbar interbody fusion and the variable pedicle screw placement system: two-year results from a Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption clinical trial. Spine 2000; 25:1437-46.
7. Younger EM, Chapman MW. Morbidity at bone graft donor sites. J Orthop Trauma 1989;3:192-5.
8. Uzi EA, Dabby D, Tolessa E, et al. Early retropulsion of titanium-threaded cages after posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a report of two cases. Spine 2001;26:1073-5.
9. Hashimoto T, Shigenobu K, Kanayama M, et al. Clinical results of single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion using the Brantigan I/F carbon cage filled with a mixture of local morselized bone and bioactive ceramic granules. Spine 2002;27:258-62.
10. Miura Y, Imagama S, Yoda M, et al. Is local bone viable as a source of bone graft in posterior lumbar interbody fusion? Spine 2003;28:2386-9.
11. Kanayama M, Cunningham BW, Haggerty CJ, et al. In vitro biomechanical investigation of the stability and stress-shielding effect of lumbar interbody fusion devices. J Neurosurg 2000;93(suppl 2):259-65.
12. Polikeit A, Ferguson SJ, Nolte LP, et al. The importance of the endplate for interbody cages in the lumbar spine. Eur Spine J 2003;12:556-61.
13. Antonacci MD, Hanson DS, Leblanc A, et al. Regional variation in vertebral bone density and trabecular architecture are influenced by osteoarthritic change and osteoporosis. Spine 1997;22:2393-401; discussion 401-2.
14. Banse X, Devogelaer JP, Munting E,et al. Inhomogeneity ofhuman vertebral cancellous bone: systematic density and structure patterns inside the vertebral body. Bone 2001;28:563-71.
15. Edwards WT, Zheng Y, Ferrara LA, et al. Structural features and thickness of the vertebral cortex in the thoracolumbar spine. Spine 2001;26:218-25.
16. Kumar N, Judith MR, Kumar A, et al. Analysis of stress distribution in lumbar interbody fusion. Spine 2005;30:1731-5.
17. Boden SD, Zdeblick TA, Sandhu HS, et al. The use of rhBMP-2 in interbody fusion cages. Definitive evidence of osteoinduction in humans: a preliminary report. Spine 2000;25:376-81.
18. Cunningham BW, Kanayama M, Parker LM, et al. Osteogenic protein versus autologous interbody arthrodesis in the sheep thoracic spine. A comparative endoscopic study using the Bagby and Kuslich interbody fusion device. Spine 1999;24:509-18.
19. Togawa D, Bauer TW, Lieberman IH, et al. Lumbar intervertebral body fusion cages: histological evaluation of clinically failed cages retrieved from humans. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004;86:70-9.
20. Fogel GR, Toohey JS, Neidre A, et al. Is one cage enough in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a comparison of unilateral single cage interbody fusion to bilateral cages. J Spinal Disord Tech 2007;20:60-5.
21. Polly DW Jr, Klemme WR, Cunningham BW, et al. The biomechanical significance of anterior column support in a simulated single-level spinal fusion. J Spinal Disord 2000;13:58-62.