JOCS
Journal of Comprehensive Surgery

The aim of the Comprehensive Surgery is to publish original research articles of the highest scientific and clinical value at the international level in all surgical fields. This journal is indexed by indices that are considered international scientific journal indices (DRJI, ESJI, OAJI, etc.). According to the current Associate Professorship criteria, it is within the scope of International Article 1-d. Each article published in this journal corresponds to 5 points.

eISSN: 2980-0862
Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International License.
EndNote Style

Online Manuscript System

Index
Original Article
Contrasted the clinical and radiological results of patients receiving cage-based bone grafting with PLIF surgical treatment that included bone grafting
Abstract
Aims: Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) is frequently used to treat spinal instabilities that can cause neurological symptoms, leg pain and low back pain including lumbar stenosis, degenerative disc disease and spondylolisthesis in which one vertebra slips over another. This study aimed to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of PLIF for degenerative L4 unstable grade III spondylolisthesis using bone grafts and cage bone grafts.
Methods: Between from September 2021 to August 2023, 30 patients with degenerative lumbar spine disorders were selected based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria for PLIF.
Results: We enrolled 30 patients and divided them into 15 groups (bone graft group I and Cage bone graft group II). The follow-up period was 2 years. Low back pain and leg function of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score showed significant improvement (p <0.005) at 3 months and at the final postoperative (62.1±5.5, 602±5.1) in both groups. The fusion rate was 93% in group I and 83% in group II. Radiological evaluation showed significant changes in slip angle, disc height, lumbar lordosis and translational motion from preoperative to final follow-up in both groups. A computer tomography (CT) revealed bilateral spondylolysis, disc collapse and anterolisthesis of the fifth lumbar vertebra. These results were verified by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). There was no spinal canal stenosis.
Conclusion: This finding suggests that successful clinical and radiological results can be obtained with PLIF surgery using either a cage with bone or a bone graft alone. The surgeon's inclination, the particular state of the patient and the resources at hand may influence which of the two approaches is used. The results showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of clinical and radiological outcomes (bone graft and cage with bone graft). This indicates that neither strategy showed a clear edge over the others in the criteria under study and both were equally successful in yielding favorable outcomes.

Keywords : Spine surgery, lumbar disc surgery, interbody fusion, low back pain, spinal cord

Download Article


1. Kim YH, Ha KY, Rhyu KW, et al. Lumbar Interbody Fusion:Techniques, Pearls and Pitfalls. Asian Spine J. 2020;14(5):730-741.
2. Meng B, Bunch J, Burton D, Wang J. Lumbar interbody fusion: recentadvances in surgical techniques and bone healing strategies. Eur Spine J.2021;30(1):22-33.
3. Camino-Willhuber G, Tani S, Shue J, et al. Lumbar lateral interbodyfusion: step-by-step surgical technique and clinical experience. J SpineSurg. 2023;9(3):294-305.
4. Lenz M, Mohamud K, Bredow J, Oikonomidis S, Eysel P, ScheyererMJ. Comparison of different approaches in lumbosacral spinal fusionsurgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Asian Spine J. 2022;16(1):141-149.
5. Park MK, Son SK, Choi SH. Lumbar interbody fusion by unilateralbiportal endoscopy, in unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery:basic and advanced technique. Spine Surg. 2022:139-154.
6. Matur AV, Mejia-Munne JC, Plummer ZJ, Cheng JS, PrestigiacomoCJ. The history of anterior and lateral approaches to the lumbar spine.World Neurosurg. 2020;144:213-221.
7. Zhao H, Wang YJ, Wang RG, et al. Three-dimensional hounsfieldunits measurement of pedicle screw trajectory for predicating screwloosening in lumbar fusion surgery. Clin Interv Aging. 2023;18:485-493.
8. Formica M, Vallerga D, Zanirato A, et al. Fusion rate and influence ofsurgery-related factors in lumbar interbody arthrodesis for degenerativespine diseases: a meta-analysis and systematic review.MusculoskeletSurg. 2020;104(1):1-15.
9. Jain D, Ray WZ, Vaccaro AR. Advances in techniques and technologyin minimally invasive lumbar interbody spinal fusion. JBJS Rev. 2020;8(4):e0171.
10. Patel PD, Canseco JA, Houlihan N, Gabay A, Grasso G, Vaccaro AR.Overview of minimally invasive spine surgery. World Neurosurg. 2020;142:43-56.
11. Wilson KV, McDonnell JM, O&rsquo;Malley S, et al. Morbidity and mortalityof traumatic cervical spinal cord injuries in a geriatric cohort. Ir J MedSci. 2023;192(4):1719-1725.
12. Sharif S, Jazaib Ali MY. Outcome prediction in spinal cord injury: mythor reality. World Neurosurg. 2020;140:574-590.
13. S&aacute;nchez JAS, Sharif S, Costa F, Rangel JAIR, Anania CD, Zileli M.Early management of spinal cord injury: WFNS spine committeerecommendations. Neurospine. 2020;17(4):759-784.
14. Pan M, Li Q, Li S, et al. Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy:indications and complications.Pain Physician. 2020;23(1):49-56.
15. Hersey AE, Durand WM, Eltorai AEM, DePasse JM, Daniels AH.Longer operative time in elderly patients undergoing posterior lumbarfusion is independently associated with increased complication rate.Global Spine J. 2019;9(2):179-184.
16. Gong K, Lin Y, Wang Z, Li F, Xiong W. Restoration and maintenanceof segment lordosis in oblique lumbar interbody fusion. RestorationLordosis. 2022;23(1):1-11.
17. Yang H, Liu J, Hai Y, Han B. What are the benefits of lateral lumbarinterbody fusion on the treatment of adult spinal deformity: a systematicreview and meta-analysis deformity. Global Spine J. 2023;13(1):172-187.
18. Kucharzyk DW, Budimir D, Waldorff EI, Shum LC, VannabouathongC. The effect of expandable versus static lordotic interbody implants inminimally invasive spine surgery: patient reported outcomes, sagittalalignment, and restoration of disc height and foraminal height. J SpineSurg. 2023;9(1):39-53.
19. Mokawem M, Katzouraki G, Harman CL, Lee R. Lumbar interbodyfusion rates with 3D-printed lamellar titanium cages using a silicate-substituted calcium phosphate bone graft. J Clin Neurosci. 2019;68:134-139.
20. Yao YC, Lin HH, Chou PH, Wang ST, Chang MC. Differences in theinterbody bone graft area and fusion rate between minimally invasiveand traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: aretrospective short-term image analysis. Eur Spine J. 2019;28(9):2095-2102.
21. Ran TF, Ke S, Li J, et al. Relieved low back pain after total hip arthroplastyin patients with both hip osteoarthritis and lumbar degenerativedisease. Orthop Surg. 2021;13(6):1882-1889.
22. Zhou C, Xia H, Yin J, Zheng Y. Three-dimensional gait quantitativeanalysis in postoperative rehabilitation of lumbar degenerative diseases:a self-controlled before-after study. Am J Transl Res. 2021;13(6):6913-6920.
23. Gao A, Wang Y, Yu M, et al. Association between radiographicspinopelvic parameters and health-related quality of life in de novodegenerative lumbar scoliosis and concomitant lumbar spinal stenosis.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020;45(16):E1013-E1019.
24. Lv H, Yang YS, Zhou JH, et al. Simultaneous single-position laterallumbar interbody fusion surgery and unilateral percutaneous pediclescrew fixation for spondylolisthesis.Neurospine. 2023;20(3):824-834.
25. Yin Y, Yu Z, Wang J, Sun J. Effectiveness of the rehabilitation trainingcombined with maitland mobilization for the treatment of chronicankle instability: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Environ Res PublicHealth. 2022;19(22):15328.
26. Ladouceur L, Shakeri A, Khan S, et al. Producing fluorine- andlubricant-free flexible pathogen- and blood-repellent surfaces usingpolysiloxane-based hierarchical structures. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces.2022;14(3):3864-3874.
27. Elgafy H, Behrens K. Comparing expandable and static interbody cagesin lumbar interbody fusion. J Spine Surg. 2023;9(1):1-5.
28. Tartara F, Garbossa D, Armocida D, et al. Relationship between lumbarlordosis, pelvic parameters, PI-LL mismatch and outcome after shortfusion surgery for lumbar degenerative disease. Literature review,rational and presentation of public study protocol: RELApSE study. World Neurosurg X. 2023;18:100162.
29. Tanasansomboon T, Robinson JE, Anand NC. Minimally invasivetransforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: strategies for creating lordosiswith a posterior approach. Neurosurg Clin. 2023;34(4):643-651.
30. Jiang D, Sun G, Jia R, Zhang Y, Wang X, Xu Z. Comparing bone grafttechniques for interbody fusion through a posterior approach fortreating mid-thoracic spinal tuberculosis: a retrospective analysis.Orthop Surg. 2023;15(1):53-61.
31. Subagio EA, Rahmadhan MA, Faris M, et al. Comparison of fusion outcomes of bone morphogenetics proteins-7 and bone autograft inposterolateral lumbar fusion: a systematic review. InterdisciplinaryNeurosurg. 2023;33:101765.
32. Kaiser R, Varga M, Lang O, et al. Spinal fusion for single-level SPECT/CT positive lumbar degenerative disc disease: the SPINUS I study. ActaNeurochir (Wien). 2023;165(9):2633-2640.
Article available in :
Volume 2, Issue 3, 2024
Page : 49-55
https://doi.org/10.51271/JOCS-0035
Article Information
Received : 30 Tem 2024
Accepted : 18 Ağu 2024
Published : 27 Ağu 2024
Corresponding Author :

Fahri Eryılmaz: Department of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, Bozok University, Yozgat, Turkiye

[email protected]
Citation : Eryılmaz F. Contrasted the clinical and radiological results of patients receiving cage-based bone grafting with PLIF surgical treatment that included bone grafting. J Compr Surg. 2024;2(3):49-55.

Read: 329
Cited: 0
Download : 159
_Footer