Lumbar Spine Fusion

Introduction

  • Segmental instability:
    • Defined as “an abnormal response to applied loads, characterised by motion in motor segment beyond normal constraints”
  • Accepted standard for hypermobility or instability is:
    • >4mm (8% anterior & 9% posterior) translation at interlumbar level
    • >5mm (6% anterior & 9% posterior) translation at lumbosacral level; &/or
    • >10° of angular motion between adjacent endplates on lateral flexion / extension radiographs when compared with adjacent proximal & distal levels
    • On AP view, spinous process & facet malalignment may suggest segmental instability

Indications

  • Degenerative spondylolisthesis with back pain may represent true segmental instability
  • Curve progression or lateral listhesis in degenerative lumbar scoliosis may imply relative instability, which may worsen after a posterior decompression
  • Excessive segmental or junctional kyphosis may be an indicator of segmental instability at that motion segment
  • Intra-operative structural alterations that may lead to instability include the following:
    • Excessive removal of facet joints for adequate decompression
      • >50% resection of each facet joint at same level leads to unacceptable segmental instability
      • Therefore, when a facetectomy of 50% or more is performed, posterolateral arthrodesis should be strongly considered
    • Disc excision
      • Most disc herniations that occur in this group represent extrusions or free fragments of disk at level of foramen
      • Simple removal of these disk fragments at time of decompressive laminectomy is sufficient
      • Radical disc excision involves removal of as much of the disc material & endplates as possible
        • This destabilises anterior column after posterior column has been compromised by decompressive laminectomy & may lead to iatrogenic spondylolisthesis
        • Therefore, if a radical discectomy is considered necessary, a concomitant posterolateral arthrodesis is often considered
      • However, isolated discectomy without iatrogenic destabilisation of posterior column does not necessarily mandate fusion
      • A 2nd or 3rd disc herniation at same motion segment may be considered by some as evidence of instability at that particular interspace, even without radiologic confirmation
  •  Role of lumbar fusion in various degenerative conditions:
    • Recurrent disc herniation
      • Occurrence of ³2 episodes of disc herniation at same segment is a relative indication for arthrodesis/fusion
    • Spinal stenosis
      • Preoperative instability may be judged on basis of presence of any of following factors, as determined radiologically
        • Degenerative spondylolisthesis or lateral listhesis
        • Flexible or progressive degenerative scoliosis or kyphosis
        • Recurrent spinal stenosis at same segment
      • Instability after decompression may be considered a potential risk in presence of
        • Excessive removal of facet joints
        • Radical disc excision
        • Removal of pars interarticularis
        • Pars fracture
    • Degenerative spondylolisthesis
      • Posterolateral arthrodesis is indicated for decompressive lumbar surgery in patients who have stenosis as well as preexisting degenerative spondylolisthesis or isthmic spondylolisthesis
    • Degenerative scoliosis
      • Relative indications include curve progression & sagittal &/or coronal imbalance with unremitting back pain
      • Curve flexibility
        • If >50% curve correction (as measured on supine forced side-bending films) has been achieved, a decompressive laminectomy alone may increase risk of curve progression
      • Curve progression
      • Radiculopathy
        • If patient has scoliosis with predominant radiculopathy within concavity of curve, a decompressive laminectomy with partial facetectomy may not be sufficient to decompress nerve root in concavity
        • This is because nerve root may be compressed between adjacent pedicles
        • Use of instrumentation with distraction of adjacent pedicles on concavity & neutralisation or compression along convexity may be necessary to reduce pedicular kinking & unload compression on nerve root
      • Loss of lumbar lordosis
        • On standing lateral radiograph, plumb line drawn inferiorly from odontoid should normally pass through posterior 50% of L5 vertebral body
        • In “flat-back” deformity, plumb line will lie anterior to L5,
        • Flat-back deformity or relative lumbar kyphosis by itself may cause increasing back pain & can lead to impaired ability to stand upright
        • Therefore, improving sagittal alignment through segmental instrumentation & fusion +/- osteotomy should be considered at time of decompressive surgery
      • Fixed lateral listhesis
        • If motion of hypermobile segment is demonstrated on side-bending films, then instability is suggested
        • Because decompression of this segment may result in further decompensation of curve & increased lateral listhesis, a concomitant arthrodesis should be considered, which also lowers pseudarthrosis rate
      • Extent of intra-operative decompression
      • Magnitude of curve by itself is not an indication for arthrodesis
        • If none of previous 6 (high-lighted) factors is present, decompression alone is sufficient
      • When fusion is indicated, it is not necessary to fuse entire length of degenerative curve
        • Curve will often ascend into lower portion of thoracic spine & down to sacrum
        • Such long fusions are unnecessary in elderly patients & may, in fact, contribute to significant morbidity
        • Fusion should end at a disc space that appears to be horizontal with neutral rotation
        • Fusion should restore sagittal alignment & include decompressed spinal segments.
    • Degenerative disk disease
      • Indications for arthrodesis include
        • Unremitting pain & disability for >1 year
        • Failure of a trial of aggressive physical conditioning & non-operative treatment lasting >4 months
        • MRI findings consistent with advanced disc degeneration, preferably at a single level
        • Normal findings from a psychiatric evaluation
      • Success rate highly variable (50 to 80%)

 Techniques

  • Posterolateral arthrodesis:
    • Fusion mass sufficiently close to center of vertebral motion to prevent movement that may stimulate a pain response
    • Resected spinous processes applied to laminae as local autogenous graft – can be supplemented with allograft and/or synthetic graft
    • Now used rarely as an isolated procedure because it associated with high rate of pseudarthrosis
  • Pedicle-screw instrumentation:
    • Adding posterior instrumentation to posterolateral arthrodesis increases fusion rate (85%)
    • Better clinical outcomes with regard to pain, function, & neurological recovery than without instrumentation (80%)
  • Lumbar interbody arthrodesis:
    • Those who advocate this technique generally consider disc to be primary source of pain
      • Excision of disc & interbody arthrodesis is thought to remove source of pain & to prevent motion
      • Bone graft placed closer to centre of vertebral motion, theoretically achieving greater stiffness when fusion has occurred
      • In addition, intervertebral height may be restored, & a smaller volume of bone graft may be used compared with that required for posterior techniques
    • Posterior lumbar interbody arthrodesis
      • 85 to 90% good to excellent clinical results
      • 90 to 95% fusion rate
    • Anterior lumbar interbody arthrodesis
      • Advantages include direct removal of involved disc & avoidance of iatrogenic trauma associated with posterior paraspinal muscle dissection & partial denervation
      • Compared with posterior lumbar interbody arthrodesis, allows more complete excision of disc (which is believed to be primary cause of pain)
      • Concerns related to this technique include injury to great vessels & risk of injury to presacral plexus, potentially resulting in retrograde ejaculation & sterility
      • 70% good to excellent clinical results
      • 50% multiple level & 70% single level fusion rate
  • Interbody fusion cages:
    • Metal & carbon-fibre implants filled with nonstructural cancellous bone have been found to provide immediate structural support & a biological substrate to promote fusion
    • Inserted by anterior or posterior approach
    • Potential risks during insertion of posterior (PLIF) cages with damage to dura, cord or nerve roots
    • Difficulties associated with removal if revision surgery required for failed fusion
    • 85% good to excellent clinical results
    • 95% fusion rate
  • Circumferential arthrodesis:
    • Treatment of trauma, deformity, failure of a previous operation on lumbar spine, & use as primary procedure for disabling low-back pain
    • Theoretical advantages of this procedure include elimination of all potential sources of pain in anterior & posterior structures as well as maximization of stability with a resulting increase in rate of fusion
    • Posterior approach alone or combined anterior & posterior approach
  • Intervertebral disc prosthesis:
    • Controversial & investigational
    • Involves removal of disc to relieve pain, followed by implantation of a prosthesis to simulate stability, mobility, & weight-bearing properties of disc
    • Complications include migration or dislocation of implant & fracture of metal
    • 88% of prostheses subside to some extent into vertebral end plates

 Complications

  • Mortality (0.2%)
  • Deep infection (1.5%)
  • DVT (3.7%)
  • PE (2.2%)
  • Neural injury (2.8%)
  • Donor-site complications (10.8%)
  • Instrumentation failure (7.3%)