Stand-alone anterior versus anteroposterior lumbar interbody single-level fusion after a mean follow-up of 41 months

Journal of Spinal Disorders and Techniques

Volumn 25, Issue 7, 2012, Pages 362-369

  Strube, Patrick ^a   Hoff, Eike ^a   Hartwig, Tony ^a   Perka, Carsten F ^a   Gross, Christian ^a   Putzier, Michael ^a  

^a CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

Author keywords

ALIF; anterior lumbar interbody fusion; anteroposterior fusion; circumferential fusion; Synfix LR; transpedicular fixation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANTERIOR SPINE FUSION; ANTEROPOSTERIOR LUMBAR FUSION; ARTHRITIS; ARTICLE; BLEEDING; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEGENERATIVE DISK DISEASE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LOW BACK PAIN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OPERATION DURATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; SPINE DISEASE; SPINE FUSION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADULT; AGED; BONE SCREWS; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; INTERVERTEBRAL DISC DEGENERATION; LOW BACK PAIN; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SPINAL FUSION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84866898678     PISSN: 15360652     EISSN: 15392465     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e3182263d91     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Christensen FB. Lumbar spinal fusion: outcome in relation to surgical methods, choice of implant and postoperative rehabilitation. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl. 2004;75:2-43
2. Mummaneni PV, Haid RW, Rodts GE. Lumbar interbody fusion: state-of-the-art technical advances. Invited submission from the Joint Section Meeting on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves, March 4. J Neurosurg Spine. 2004;1:24-30
3. Cole CD, McCall TD, Schmidt MH, et al. Comparison of low back fusion techniques: transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) or posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) approaches. Curr Rev Musculoskeletal Med. 2009;2:118-126
4. Faundez AA, Schwender JD, Safriel Y, et al. Clinical and radiological outcome of anterior-posterior fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for symptomatic disc degeneration: a retrospective study of 133 patients. Eur Spine J. 2009;18:203-211
5. Park P, Garton HJ, Gala VC, et al. Adjacent segment disease after lumbar or lumbosacral fusion: review of the literature. Spine (Phila Pa1976). 2004;29:1938-1944
6. Amato V, Giannachi L, Irace C, et al. Accuracy of pedicle screw placement in the lumbosacral spine using conventional technique: computed tomography postoperative assessment in 102 consecutive patients. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010;12:306-313
7. Fan S, Hu Z, Zhao F, et al. Multifidus muscle changes and clinical effects of one-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion: minimally invasive procedure versus conventional open approach. Eur Spine J. 2010;19:316-324
8. Faciszewski T, Winter RB, Lonstein JE, et al. The surgical and medical perioperative complications of anterior spinal fusion surgery in the thoracic and lumbar spine in adults: a review of 1223 procedures. Spine (Phila Pa1976). 1995;20:1592-1599
9. Spivak JM, Neuwirth MG, Giordano CP, et al. The perioperative course of combined anterior and posterior spinal fusion. Spine (Phila Pa1976). 1994;19:520-525
10. Button G, Gupta M, Barrett C, et al. Three-to six-year follow-up of stand-alone BAK cages implanted by a single surgeon. Spine J. 2005;5:155-160
11. Glazer PA, Colliou O, Klisch SM, et al. Biomechanical analysis of multilevel fixation methods in the lumbar spine. Spine (Phila Pa1976). 1997;22:171-182
12. Cain CM, Schleicher P, Gerlach R, et al. A new stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion device: biomechanical comparison with established fixation techniques. Spine (Phila Pa1976). 2005;30: 2631-2636
13. Greenough CG, Taylor LJ, Fraser RD. Anterior lumbar fusion: results, assessment techniques and prognostic factors. Eur Spine J. 1994;3:225-230
14. Penta M, Fraser RD. Anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a minimum 10-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa1976). 1997;22:2429-2434
15. Schleicher P, Gerlach R, Schar B, et al. Biomechanical comparison of two different concepts for stand alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J. 2008;17:1757-1765
16. Fujiwara A, Tamai K, Yamato M, et al. The relationship between facet joint osteoarthritis and disc degeneration of the lumbar spine: an MRI study. Eur Spine J. 1999;8:396-401
17. Modic MT, Masaryk TJ, Ross JS, et al. Imaging of degenerative disk disease. Radiology. 1988;168:177-186
18. Gerbershagen HU, Lindena G, Korb J, et al. Health-related quality of life in patients with chronic pain. Schmerz. 2002;16:271-284
19. Putzier M, Strube P, Funk JF, et al. Allogenic versus autologous cancellous bone in lumbar segmental spondylodesis: a randomized prospective study. Eur Spine J. 2009;18:687-695
20. Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, et al. The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy. 1980;66:271-273
21. McAfee PC, Boden SD, Brantigan JW, et al. Symposium: a critical discrepancyFa criteria of successful arthrodesis following interbody spinal fusions. Spine (Phila Pa1976). 2001;26:320-334
22. Ray CD. Threaded titanium cages for lumbar interbody fusions. Spine (Phila Pa1976). 1997;22:667-79; discussion 79-80
23. Hutter CG. Posterior intervertebral body fusion: a 25-year study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983;179:86-96
24. Simmons JW. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with posterior elements as chip grafts. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985;193:85-89
25. Williams AL, Gornet MF, Burkus JK. CT evaluation of lumbar interbody fusion: current concepts. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2005;26:2057-2066
26. Cunningham BW, Polly DW Jr. The use of interbody cage devices for spinal deformity: a biomechanical perspective. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;394:73-83
27. Turner JA, Herron L, Deyo RA. Meta-analysis of the results of lumbar spine fusion. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl. 1993;251:120-122
28. Glassman S, Gornet MF, Branch C, et al. MOS short form 36 and Oswestry Disability Index outcomes in lumbar fusion: a multicenter experience. Spine J. 2006;6:21-26
29. Niemeyer T, Bovingloh AS, Halm H, et al. Results after anteriorposterior lumbar spinal fusion: 2-5 years follow-up. Int Orthop. 2004;28:298-302
30. Mayer TG, Vanharanta H, Gatchel RJ, et al. Comparison of CT scan muscle measurements and isokinetic trunk strength in postoperative patients. Spine (Phila Pa1976). 1989;14:33-36
31. Kandziora F, Pflugmacher R, Kleemann R, et al. Biomechanical analysis of biodegradable interbody fusion cages augmented with poly (propylene glycol-co-fumaric acid). Spine (Phila Pa1976). 2002;27:1644-1651
32. Videbaek TS, Christensen FB, Soegaard R, et al. Circumferential fusion improves outcome in comparison with instrumented posterolateral fusion: long-term results of a randomized clinical trial. Spine (Phila Pa1976). 2006;31:2875-2880
33. Madan SS, Boeree NR. Comparison of instrumented anterior interbody fusion with instrumented circumferential lumbar fusion. Eur Spine J. 2003;12:567-575
34. Santos ER, Goss DG, Morcom RK, et al. Radiologic assessment of interbody fusion using carbon fiber cages. Spine (Phila Pa1976). 2003;28:997-1001
35. Brodsky AE, Kovalsky ES, Khalil MA. Correlation of radiologic assessment of lumbar spine fusions with surgical exploration. Spine (Phila Pa1976). 1991;16:S261-S265
36. Dawson EG, Clader TJ, Bassett LW. A comparison of different methods used to diagnose pseudarthrosis following posterior spinal fusion for scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1985;67:1153-1159
37. Patel AA, Brodke DS, Pimenta L, et al. Revision strategies in lumbar total disc arthroplasty. Spine (Phila Pa1976). 2008;33:1276-1283
38. Sasso RC, Best NM, Mummaneni PV, et al. Analysis of operative complications in a series of 471 anterior lumbar interbody fusion procedures. Spine (Phila Pa1976). 2005;30: 670-674
39. Scaduto AA, Gamradt SC, Yu WD, et al. Perioperative complications of threaded cylindrical lumbar interbody fusion devices: anterior versus posterior approach. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2003; 16:502-507
40. Thaler M, Mayr E, Liebensteiner M, et al. Injury of the right and left inferior epigastric artery during the implantation of a standalone ALIF cage through a left retroperitoneal approach: a case report. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2010;130:31-35