S Harrison Farber, Michael D White, Robert K Dugan, Luke K O'Neill, Kurt V Shaffer, Jacquelyn L Ho, Nicolas P Kuttner, Kristina M Kupanoff, Jay D Turner, Juan S Uribe
{"title":"在腰骶交界处行腰椎前路椎间融合术的长期融合和沉降的计算机断层评估。","authors":"S Harrison Farber, Michael D White, Robert K Dugan, Luke K O'Neill, Kurt V Shaffer, Jacquelyn L Ho, Nicolas P Kuttner, Kristina M Kupanoff, Jay D Turner, Juan S Uribe","doi":"10.1097/BSD.0000000000001809","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate factors associated with long-term pseudoarthrosis and subsidence following L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF).</p><p><strong>Summary of background data: </strong>Reported fusion rates for ALIF at the lumbosacral junction vary widely.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients undergoing L5-S1 ALIF (November 1, 2016-September 3, 2021) were retrospectively analyzed. Fusion (Bridwell grades: 1-2) or pseudoarthrosis (Bridwell grades: 3-4) and subsidence (Marchi grades: 0-3) were determined using 1-year follow-up computed tomography (CT) studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 101 patients were analyzed [mean (SD) age, 62.8 (13.3) y; 51 (50.5%) men]. Bone morphogenic protein (BMP) was used in 59 patients (58.4%), demineralized bone matrix in 44 (43.6%), and cellular allograft in 57 (56.4%). Oswestry Disability Index and Short-Form 36 scores improved postoperatively ( P ≤0.01). At L5-S1, 79 patients (78.2%) had fusion at 1 year. Patients receiving 3D-printed porous [89.5% (17/19)] and solid titanium [100% (14/14)] interbody cages were significantly more likely to have fusion than those receiving polyetheretherketone [70.6% (48/68)] interbody cages ( P =0.02). Adjusted multivariate analyses found that titanium interbody cages were associated with fusion (odds ratio=5.42, P =0.04). Patients with subsidence [n=17 (16.8%)] were significantly older than patients without subsidence [n=84 (83.2%)]: 70.2 (4.7) years vs. 61.3 (14.0) years ( P <0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The 1-year postoperative CT findings showed that 78.2% of the cohort achieved fusion. Fusion was more common among patients with 3D-printed and solid titanium implants than among those with polyetheretherketone implants. Subsidence was more common among older patients. No differences in fusion or subsidence were found based on surgical indication, allograft type, or other patient characteristics.</p>","PeriodicalId":10457,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"E38-E44"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Computed Tomography Assessment of Long-Term Fusion and Subsidence for Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Performed at the Lumbosacral Junction.\",\"authors\":\"S Harrison Farber, Michael D White, Robert K Dugan, Luke K O'Neill, Kurt V Shaffer, Jacquelyn L Ho, Nicolas P Kuttner, Kristina M Kupanoff, Jay D Turner, Juan S Uribe\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/BSD.0000000000001809\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate factors associated with long-term pseudoarthrosis and subsidence following L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF).</p><p><strong>Summary of background data: </strong>Reported fusion rates for ALIF at the lumbosacral junction vary widely.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients undergoing L5-S1 ALIF (November 1, 2016-September 3, 2021) were retrospectively analyzed. Fusion (Bridwell grades: 1-2) or pseudoarthrosis (Bridwell grades: 3-4) and subsidence (Marchi grades: 0-3) were determined using 1-year follow-up computed tomography (CT) studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 101 patients were analyzed [mean (SD) age, 62.8 (13.3) y; 51 (50.5%) men]. Bone morphogenic protein (BMP) was used in 59 patients (58.4%), demineralized bone matrix in 44 (43.6%), and cellular allograft in 57 (56.4%). Oswestry Disability Index and Short-Form 36 scores improved postoperatively ( P ≤0.01). At L5-S1, 79 patients (78.2%) had fusion at 1 year. Patients receiving 3D-printed porous [89.5% (17/19)] and solid titanium [100% (14/14)] interbody cages were significantly more likely to have fusion than those receiving polyetheretherketone [70.6% (48/68)] interbody cages ( P =0.02). Adjusted multivariate analyses found that titanium interbody cages were associated with fusion (odds ratio=5.42, P =0.04). Patients with subsidence [n=17 (16.8%)] were significantly older than patients without subsidence [n=84 (83.2%)]: 70.2 (4.7) years vs. 61.3 (14.0) years ( P <0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The 1-year postoperative CT findings showed that 78.2% of the cohort achieved fusion. Fusion was more common among patients with 3D-printed and solid titanium implants than among those with polyetheretherketone implants. Subsidence was more common among older patients. No differences in fusion or subsidence were found based on surgical indication, allograft type, or other patient characteristics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10457,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Spine Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"E38-E44\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Spine Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001809\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/4/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Spine Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001809","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
研究设计回顾性队列研究:评估L5-S1前路腰椎椎间融合术(ALIF)后长期假关节和下沉的相关因素:背景数据摘要:据报道,腰骶交界处 ALIF 的融合率差异很大:对接受L5-S1 ALIF手术的患者(2016年11月1日-2021年9月3日)进行回顾性分析。融合(Bridwell分级:1-2)或假关节(Bridwell分级:3-4)和下沉(Marchi分级:0-3)通过1年随访计算机断层扫描(CT)研究确定:共分析了101名患者[平均(标清)年龄为62.8(13.3)岁;51名(50.5%)男性]。59名患者(58.4%)使用了骨形态形成蛋白(BMP),44名患者(43.6%)使用了脱矿物质骨基质,57名患者(56.4%)使用了细胞异体移植。术后 Oswestry 失能指数和 Short-Form 36 评分均有所改善(P≤0.01)。在L5-S1,79名患者(78.2%)在1年后实现了融合。接受3D打印多孔椎体间架[89.5% (17/19)]和固体钛椎体间架[100% (14/14)]的患者发生融合的几率明显高于接受聚醚醚酮椎体间架[70.6% (48/68)]的患者(P=0.02)。调整后的多变量分析发现,钛椎间套管与融合相关(几率比=5.42,P=0.04)。出现下沉的患者[n=17 (16.8%)]明显比未出现下沉的患者[n=84 (83.2%)]年长:70.2(4.7)岁 vs. 61.3(14.0)岁(PC结论:术后1年的CT结果显示,78.2%的患者实现了融合。与使用聚醚醚酮植入物的患者相比,使用 3D 打印和固体钛植入物的患者更容易实现融合。在年龄较大的患者中,下沉更为常见。手术适应症、同种异体移植类型或其他患者特征在融合或下沉方面没有差异。
Computed Tomography Assessment of Long-Term Fusion and Subsidence for Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Performed at the Lumbosacral Junction.
Study design: Retrospective cohort study.
Objective: To evaluate factors associated with long-term pseudoarthrosis and subsidence following L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF).
Summary of background data: Reported fusion rates for ALIF at the lumbosacral junction vary widely.
Methods: Patients undergoing L5-S1 ALIF (November 1, 2016-September 3, 2021) were retrospectively analyzed. Fusion (Bridwell grades: 1-2) or pseudoarthrosis (Bridwell grades: 3-4) and subsidence (Marchi grades: 0-3) were determined using 1-year follow-up computed tomography (CT) studies.
Results: Overall, 101 patients were analyzed [mean (SD) age, 62.8 (13.3) y; 51 (50.5%) men]. Bone morphogenic protein (BMP) was used in 59 patients (58.4%), demineralized bone matrix in 44 (43.6%), and cellular allograft in 57 (56.4%). Oswestry Disability Index and Short-Form 36 scores improved postoperatively ( P ≤0.01). At L5-S1, 79 patients (78.2%) had fusion at 1 year. Patients receiving 3D-printed porous [89.5% (17/19)] and solid titanium [100% (14/14)] interbody cages were significantly more likely to have fusion than those receiving polyetheretherketone [70.6% (48/68)] interbody cages ( P =0.02). Adjusted multivariate analyses found that titanium interbody cages were associated with fusion (odds ratio=5.42, P =0.04). Patients with subsidence [n=17 (16.8%)] were significantly older than patients without subsidence [n=84 (83.2%)]: 70.2 (4.7) years vs. 61.3 (14.0) years ( P <0.001).
Conclusions: The 1-year postoperative CT findings showed that 78.2% of the cohort achieved fusion. Fusion was more common among patients with 3D-printed and solid titanium implants than among those with polyetheretherketone implants. Subsidence was more common among older patients. No differences in fusion or subsidence were found based on surgical indication, allograft type, or other patient characteristics.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Spine Surgery is the ideal journal for the busy practicing spine surgeon or trainee, as it is the only journal necessary to keep up to date with new clinical research and surgical techniques. Readers get to watch leaders in the field debate controversial topics in a new controversies section, and gain access to evidence-based reviews of important pathologies in the systematic reviews section. The journal features a surgical technique complete with a video, and a tips and tricks section that allows surgeons to review the important steps prior to a complex procedure.
Clinical Spine Surgery provides readers with primary research studies, specifically level 1, 2 and 3 studies, ensuring that articles that may actually change a surgeon’s practice will be read and published. Each issue includes a brief article that will help a surgeon better understand the business of healthcare, as well as an article that will help a surgeon understand how to interpret increasingly complex research methodology. Clinical Spine Surgery is your single source for up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations for spine care.