» Articles » PMID: 31435533

Nonunion of Transpsoas Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using an Allograft: Clinical Assessment and Risk Factors

Overview
Date 2019 Aug 23
PMID 31435533
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: This retrospective study was performed to evaluate the clinical influence of - and to identify the risk factors for nonunion of transpsoas lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) with use of allograft.

Methods: Sixty-three patients who underwent transpsoas LLIF (69.8 ± 8.9 years, 21 males and 42 females, 125 segments) were followed for a minimum 2 years postoperatively. For all LLIF segments, polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages packed with allogenic bone were applied with supplemental bilateral pedicle screws (PSs). Bone bridge formation was evaluated by computed tomography (CT) 2 years postoperative, and a segment without any bridge formation was determined to be a nonunion. Sixty-one participants (96.8%) were classified into two groups for clinical evacuation: Group N that contained one or more nonunion segments and Group F that contained no nonunion segment. Visual analogue scales (VAS) scores and the effective rates of the five domains of the Japanese Orthopedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) were compared between Groups N and F. The risk factors for nonunion were determined by univariate and multivariate analyses.

Results: Twenty segments (16%) were diagnosed as nonunion. There were no significant differences in all VAS scores, and the ratio of effective cases in all domains of JOABPEQ between Group N ( = 14) and F ( = 47). Multivariate analysis identified percutaneous PS (PPS) usage (odds ratio [OR]: 3.14, 95% confidence interval: 1.13-8.68, = 0.028) as a positive risk factor for nonunion.

Conclusions: We should be aware of the higher nonunion rate in the LLIF segments supplemented with PPS, though nonunion does not affect significantly clinical outcomes at 2 years postoperative.

Citing Articles

Trabecular Bone Remodeling after Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Indirect Findings for Stress Transmission between Vertebrae after Spinal Fusion Surgery.

Segi N, Nakashima H, Ito S, Ouchida J, Oishi R, Yamauchi I Spine Surg Relat Res. 2025; 9(1):51-60.

PMID: 39935989 PMC: 11808242. DOI: 10.22603/ssrr.2024-0054.


A spontaneous anterior fusion of lumbar spine after posterolateral lumbar fusion with pedicle screw-plate system.

Kraiwattanapong C, Chandrsawang I, Keorochana G, Rajinda P, Chanplakorn P, Leelapattana P BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2025; 26(1):95.

PMID: 39893374 PMC: 11786541. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-024-08184-5.


Pseudarthrosis risk factors in lumbar fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Boonsirikamchai W, Wilartratsami S, Ruangchainikom M, Korwutthikulrangsri E, Tongsai S, Luksanapruksa P BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024; 25(1):433.

PMID: 38831392 PMC: 11149252. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-024-07531-w.


Comparing Bone Fusion Rates Between Novel Unidirectional Porous Tricalcium Beta-Phosphate and Autologous Bone in Lumbar Lateral Interbody Fusion: A Two-Year Radiographic Outcome Study.

Kumagai H, Funayama T, Sato K, Noguchi H, Yoshioka T, Koda M Cureus. 2023; 15(9):e46240.

PMID: 37908955 PMC: 10614489. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.46240.


Comparison of clinical and radiological outcomes of local morselized bone grafts and structural iliac bone grafts in the treatment of lumbar tuberculosis with posterior-only surgery.

Xu S, Zhang S, Wang G, Yang J, Song Y, Wang Q BMC Surg. 2022; 22(1):184.

PMID: 35568944 PMC: 9107644. DOI: 10.1186/s12893-022-01638-4.


References
1.
Wimmer C, Krismer M, Gluch H, Ogon M, Stockl B . Autogenic versus allogenic bone grafts in anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1999; (360):122-6. DOI: 10.1097/00003086-199903000-00015. View

2.
Rehman Q, Lang T, Modin G, Lane N . Quantitative computed tomography of the lumbar spine, not dual x-ray absorptiometry, is an independent predictor of prevalent vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women with osteopenia receiving long-term glucocorticoid and hormone-replacement.... Arthritis Rheum. 2002; 46(5):1292-7. DOI: 10.1002/art.10277. View

3.
Shah R, Mohammed S, Saifuddin A, Taylor B . Comparison of plain radiographs with CT scan to evaluate interbody fusion following the use of titanium interbody cages and transpedicular instrumentation. Eur Spine J. 2003; 12(4):378-85. PMC: 3467781. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-002-0517-4. View

4.
Santos E, Goss D, Morcom R, Fraser R . Radiologic assessment of interbody fusion using carbon fiber cages. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003; 28(10):997-1001. DOI: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000061988.93175.74. View

5.
Pruss A, Seibold M, Benedix F, Frommelt L, von Garrel T, Gurtler L . Validation of the 'Marburg bone bank system' for thermodisinfection of allogenic femoral head transplants using selected bacteria, fungi, and spores. Biologicals. 2003; 31(4):287-94. DOI: 10.1016/j.biologicals.2003.08.002. View