Search

Objective: Depression and anxiety are associated with poor outcomes following spine surgery. However, the influence of these conditions on achieving a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) following lumbar spine surgery, as well as the potential compounding effects of comorbid depression and anxiety, is not well understood. This study explores the impact of comorbid depression and anxiety on long-term clinical outcomes following surgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis., Methods: This study was a retrospective analysis of the multicenter, prospectively collected Quality Outcomes Database (QOD). Patients with surgically treated grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis from 12 centers were included. Preoperative baseline characteristics and comorbidities were recorded, including self-reported depression and/or anxiety. Pre- and postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were recorded: the numeric rating scale (NRS) score for back pain (NRS-BP), NRS score for leg pain (NRS-LP), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and EQ-5D. Patients were grouped into 3 cohorts: no self-reported depression or anxiety (non-SRD/A), self-reported depression or anxiety (SRD/A), or presence of both comorbidities (SRD+A). Changes in PROs over time, satisfaction rates, and rates of MCID were compared. A multivariable regression analysis was performed to establish independent associations., Results: Of the 608 patients, there were 452 (74.3%) with non-SRD/A, 81 (13.3%) with SRD/A, and 75 (12.3%) with SRD+A. Overall, 91.8% and 80.4% of patients had ≥ 24 and ≥ 60 months of follow-up, respectively. Baseline PROs were universally inferior for the SRD+A cohort. However, at 60-month follow-up, changes in all PROs were greatest for the SRD+A cohort, resulting in nonsignificant differences in absolute NRS-BP, NRS-LP, ODI, and EQ-5D across the 3 groups. MCID was achieved for the SRD+A cohort at similar rates to the non-SRD/A cohort. All groups achieved > 80% satisfaction rates with surgery without significant differences across the cohorts (p = 0.79). On multivariable regression, comorbid depression and anxiety were associated with worse baseline PROs, but they had no impact on 60-month PROs or 60-month achievement of MCIDs., Conclusions: Despite lower baseline PROs, patients with comorbid depression and anxiety achieved comparable rates of MCID and satisfaction after surgery for lumbar spondylolisthesis to those without either condition. This quality-of-life benefit was durable at 5-year follow-up. These data suggest that patients with self-reported comorbid depression and anxiety should not be excluded from consideration of surgical intervention and often substantially benefit from surgery.

Objective: Interbody fusion is the primary method for achieving arthrodesis across the lumbosacral junction in the setting of degenerative pathologies, such as spondylosis and spondylolisthesis. Two common techniques are anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). In recent years, interbody design and technology have advanced, and most earlier studies comparing ALIF and TLIF did not specifically assess the lumbosacral junction. This study compared changes in radiographic and clinical parameters between patients undergoing modern-era single-level ALIF and minimally invasive surgery (MIS) TLIF at L5-S1., Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent single-segment L5-S1 ALIF or MIS TLIF performed by the senior authors over a 6-year interval (January 1, 2016-November 30, 2021) were retrospectively reviewed. Upright radiographs were used to determine pre- and postoperative lumbar lordosis, segmental lordosis, disc angle, and neuroforaminal height. Improvements in patient-reported outcome scores (Oswestry Disability Index and SF-36) were also compared., Results: Overall, 108 patients (58 [54%] men, 50 [46%] women; mean [SD] age 57.6 [13.5] years) were included in the study. ALIF was performed in 49 patients, and TLIF was performed in 59 patients. The most common treatment indications were spondylolisthesis (50%, 54/108) and spondylosis (46%, 50/108). The cohorts did not differ in terms of intraoperative (p > 0.99) or postoperative (p = 0.73) complication rates. The mean (SD) hospital length of stay was significantly shorter for patients undergoing TLIF than ALIF (1.3 [0.6] days vs 2.0 [1.4] days, p < 0.001). Both techniques significantly improved L5-S1 segmental lordosis, disc angle, and neuroforaminal height (p ≤ 0.008). ALIF versus TLIF significantly increased mean [SD] segmental lordosis (12.5° [7.3°] vs 2.0° [5.7°], p < 0.001), disc angle (14.8° [5.5°] vs 3.0° [6.1°], p < 0.001), and neuroforaminal height (4.5 [4.6] mm vs 2.4 [3.0] mm, p = 0.008). Improvements in patient-reported outcome parameters and reoperation rates were similar between cohorts., Conclusions: When treating patients at a single segment across the lumbosacral junction, ALIF resulted in significantly greater increases in segmental lordosis, L5-S1 disc angle, and neuroforaminal height compared with MIS TLIF. Improvements in clinical parameters and reoperation rates were similar between the 2 techniques.

Objective: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion are common techniques that typically require staged procedures when performed in combination. Interest is emerging in single-position surgery to increase operative efficiency. We report a novel surgical technique, supine extended reach lateral fusion, to perform ALIF and lateral lumbar interbody fusion with the patient in a single supine position., Methods: A man in his fifties presented with degenerative levoscoliosis, spondylolisthesis, sagittal plane deformity, and progressive low back pain. He was offered L3-S1 anterolateral fusion., Results: With the patient supine, a left abdominal paramedian incision was performed to gain anterior retroperitoneal access, and standard L5-S1 and L4-5 ALIFs were performed. The anterior incision was used for direct visualization, retraction, and bimanual dissection. A left lateral incision was then made to perform an L3-4 lateral lumbar interbody fusion. He subsequently underwent a second-stage L3-S1 posterior percutaneous fixation. The patient tolerated the procedures well, without complications. His postoperative radiograph findings confirmed acceptable implant positioning. He was discharged home in stable condition and was doing well at follow-up., Conclusions: This case description is the first report of the supine extended reach technique, which allows incorporation of anterior and lateral fusion constructs at adjacent levels without changing patient positioning. Many surgeons believe the ALIF to be the most powerful technique for achieving lordosis, and this technique enables concomitant lateral access in a supine position. It can also be used as an alternative strategy when anterior access to the disc space is unobtainable. Further clinical investigation of this technique is warranted., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) provides indirect decompression without disruption of the posterior elements. It involves a larger implant footprint than that of posterior approaches. LLIF is typically performed with the patient in the lateral decubitus position. When a posterior fixation is indicated, a second-stage procedure is performed with the patient in the prone position. Single-position surgery provides the potential advantage of decreased operative time because both procedures can be performed without patient repositioning. Single-position LLIF and posterior fixation in the prone position have not been well validated to date. Herein, techniques for LLIF, percutaneous pedicle screw fixation, and facetectomy in the prone position are shown. A 76-yr-old woman with osteoporosis presented with severe back and bilateral leg pain refractory to conservative management and imaging findings of grade 2 dynamic anterolisthesis at L4-L5 with severe stenosis. She underwent LLIF with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation and facetectomy. She was placed on a Jackson table in the prone position for the entire procedure, which was performed in a single stage. Percutaneous pedicle screws were placed, followed by a left-sided minimally invasive facetectomy. A left-sided retroperitoneal transpsoas approach was used to perform the LLIF in standard fashion. Finally, the rods were locked into place. Postoperatively, the patient was neurologically stable, and imaging confirmed good hardware placement. At the 6-wk follow-up, the patient was doing well. This case demonstrates the feasibility of performing LLIF and posterior fixation in a single stage in the prone position. The patient provided informed consent. Used with permission from Barrow Neurological Institute., (© Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2021.)

Objective: Single-position surgery in prone position is a novel technique for lateral interbody fusion with pedicle screw fixation. We performed a radiographic comparison of patients treated for spondylolisthesis using the prone lateral (PL) transpsoas approach versus the traditional dual position (DP) approach (lateral decubitus then prone)., Methods: Thirty consecutive patients with spondylolisthesis were treated using the PL approach (n = 15) versus the dual position approach (n = 15). Radiographic factors in the groups were retrospectively compared., Results: The groups were similar for age, sex, body mass index, and implant size, but there were more 15° (vs. 10°) cages inserted in the dual position group. Radiographically the groups had similar baseline spinopelvic parameters, lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis, anterolisthesis, and disc height (P > 0.05). Postoperatively the PL group demonstrated a larger improvement in segmental lordosis (5.1° vs. 2.5°, P = 0.02), but not overall LL (6.3° vs. 3.1°, P = 0.14). Both groups had similar improvements in pelvic tilt, disc height, and spondylolisthesis reduction (P > 0.05). The mean relative distance of the implant from the posterior edge of the vertebral body was greater in the PL group (26% vs. 17%, P < 0.001) indicating a tendency for more anterior cage placement. However, there was no significant correlation between the relative cage position and the increase in segmental lordosis (P = 0.35), so this result alone did not explain the relative increase in lordosis seen., Conclusions: This is the first study to our knowledge to demonstrate an improvement in segmental lordosis for patients with single-level spondylolisthesis using the PL approach., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)