Radiographic and clinical outcome after 1- and 2-level transsacral axial interbody fusion

Christoph P. Hofstetter, Benjamin Shin, Apostolos John Tsiouris, Eric Elowitz, Roger Härt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Object. The paracoccygeal approach allows for instrumentation of L5/S1 and L4/5 by using a transsacral rod (AxiaLIF; TransS1, Inc.). The authors analyzed clinical and radiographic outcomes of 1- or 2-level AxiaLIF procedures with focus on durability of the construct. Methods. This was a retrospective study of 38 consecutive patients who underwent either 1-level (32 patients) or 2-level (6 patients) AxiaLIF procedures at the authors' institution. The Oswestry Disability Index (minimum clinically important difference [MCID] ≥ 12) and visual analog scale ([VAS]; MCID ≥ 3) scores were collected. Disc height and Cobb angles were measured on pre- and postoperative radiographs. Bony fusion was determined on CT scans or flexion/extension radiographs. Results. Implantation of a transsacral rod allowed for intraoperative distraction of the L5/S1 intervertebral space and resulted in increased segmental lordosis postoperatively. At a mean follow-up time of 26.2 ± 2.4 months, however, graft subsidence (1.9 mm) abolished partial correction of segmental lordosis. Moreover, subsidence of the construct reduced L5/S1 lordosis in patients with 1-level AxiaLIF by 3.2° and L4-S1 lordosis in patients with 2-level procedures by 10.1° compared with preoperative values (p < 0.01). Loss of segmental lordosis predicted failure to improve VAS scores for back pain in the patient cohort (p < 0.05). Overall, surgical intervention led to modest symptomatic improvement; only 26.3% of patients achieved an MCID of the Oswestry Disability Index and 50% of patients an MCID of the VAS score for back pain. At last follow-up, 71.9% of L5/S1 levels demonstrated bony fusion (1-level AxiaLIF 80.8%, 2-level AxiaLIF 33.3%; p < 0.05), whereas none of the L4/5 levels in 2-level AxiaLIF fused. Five constructs developed pseudarthrosis and required surgical revision. Conclusions. The AxiaLIF procedure constitutes a minimally invasive technique for L5/S1 instrumentation, with low perioperative morbidity. However, the axial rod provides inadequate long-term anterior column support, which leads to subsidence and loss of segmental lordosis. Modification of the transsacral technique to allow for placement of a solid interposition graft may counteract subsidence of the construct.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)454-463
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Neurosurgery: Spine
Volume19
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2013

Fingerprint

Lordosis
Visual Analog Scale
Back Pain
Transplants
Pseudarthrosis
Reoperation
Retrospective Studies
Morbidity

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery
  • Neurology
  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

Hofstetter, Christoph P. ; Shin, Benjamin ; Tsiouris, Apostolos John ; Elowitz, Eric ; Härt, Roger. / Radiographic and clinical outcome after 1- and 2-level transsacral axial interbody fusion. In: Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine. 2013 ; Vol. 19, No. 4. pp. 454-463.
@article{972a32f2f5574cf08df4f7bf163d163f,
title = "Radiographic and clinical outcome after 1- and 2-level transsacral axial interbody fusion",
abstract = "Object. The paracoccygeal approach allows for instrumentation of L5/S1 and L4/5 by using a transsacral rod (AxiaLIF; TransS1, Inc.). The authors analyzed clinical and radiographic outcomes of 1- or 2-level AxiaLIF procedures with focus on durability of the construct. Methods. This was a retrospective study of 38 consecutive patients who underwent either 1-level (32 patients) or 2-level (6 patients) AxiaLIF procedures at the authors' institution. The Oswestry Disability Index (minimum clinically important difference [MCID] ≥ 12) and visual analog scale ([VAS]; MCID ≥ 3) scores were collected. Disc height and Cobb angles were measured on pre- and postoperative radiographs. Bony fusion was determined on CT scans or flexion/extension radiographs. Results. Implantation of a transsacral rod allowed for intraoperative distraction of the L5/S1 intervertebral space and resulted in increased segmental lordosis postoperatively. At a mean follow-up time of 26.2 ± 2.4 months, however, graft subsidence (1.9 mm) abolished partial correction of segmental lordosis. Moreover, subsidence of the construct reduced L5/S1 lordosis in patients with 1-level AxiaLIF by 3.2° and L4-S1 lordosis in patients with 2-level procedures by 10.1° compared with preoperative values (p < 0.01). Loss of segmental lordosis predicted failure to improve VAS scores for back pain in the patient cohort (p < 0.05). Overall, surgical intervention led to modest symptomatic improvement; only 26.3{\%} of patients achieved an MCID of the Oswestry Disability Index and 50{\%} of patients an MCID of the VAS score for back pain. At last follow-up, 71.9{\%} of L5/S1 levels demonstrated bony fusion (1-level AxiaLIF 80.8{\%}, 2-level AxiaLIF 33.3{\%}; p < 0.05), whereas none of the L4/5 levels in 2-level AxiaLIF fused. Five constructs developed pseudarthrosis and required surgical revision. Conclusions. The AxiaLIF procedure constitutes a minimally invasive technique for L5/S1 instrumentation, with low perioperative morbidity. However, the axial rod provides inadequate long-term anterior column support, which leads to subsidence and loss of segmental lordosis. Modification of the transsacral technique to allow for placement of a solid interposition graft may counteract subsidence of the construct.",
author = "Hofstetter, {Christoph P.} and Benjamin Shin and Tsiouris, {Apostolos John} and Eric Elowitz and Roger H{\"a}rt",
year = "2013",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3171/2013.6.SPINE12282",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "19",
pages = "454--463",
journal = "Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine",
issn = "1547-5654",
publisher = "American Association of Neurological Surgeons",
number = "4",

}

Radiographic and clinical outcome after 1- and 2-level transsacral axial interbody fusion. / Hofstetter, Christoph P.; Shin, Benjamin; Tsiouris, Apostolos John; Elowitz, Eric; Härt, Roger.

In: Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, Vol. 19, No. 4, 01.10.2013, p. 454-463.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Radiographic and clinical outcome after 1- and 2-level transsacral axial interbody fusion

AU - Hofstetter, Christoph P.

AU - Shin, Benjamin

AU - Tsiouris, Apostolos John

AU - Elowitz, Eric

AU - Härt, Roger

PY - 2013/10/1

Y1 - 2013/10/1

N2 - Object. The paracoccygeal approach allows for instrumentation of L5/S1 and L4/5 by using a transsacral rod (AxiaLIF; TransS1, Inc.). The authors analyzed clinical and radiographic outcomes of 1- or 2-level AxiaLIF procedures with focus on durability of the construct. Methods. This was a retrospective study of 38 consecutive patients who underwent either 1-level (32 patients) or 2-level (6 patients) AxiaLIF procedures at the authors' institution. The Oswestry Disability Index (minimum clinically important difference [MCID] ≥ 12) and visual analog scale ([VAS]; MCID ≥ 3) scores were collected. Disc height and Cobb angles were measured on pre- and postoperative radiographs. Bony fusion was determined on CT scans or flexion/extension radiographs. Results. Implantation of a transsacral rod allowed for intraoperative distraction of the L5/S1 intervertebral space and resulted in increased segmental lordosis postoperatively. At a mean follow-up time of 26.2 ± 2.4 months, however, graft subsidence (1.9 mm) abolished partial correction of segmental lordosis. Moreover, subsidence of the construct reduced L5/S1 lordosis in patients with 1-level AxiaLIF by 3.2° and L4-S1 lordosis in patients with 2-level procedures by 10.1° compared with preoperative values (p < 0.01). Loss of segmental lordosis predicted failure to improve VAS scores for back pain in the patient cohort (p < 0.05). Overall, surgical intervention led to modest symptomatic improvement; only 26.3% of patients achieved an MCID of the Oswestry Disability Index and 50% of patients an MCID of the VAS score for back pain. At last follow-up, 71.9% of L5/S1 levels demonstrated bony fusion (1-level AxiaLIF 80.8%, 2-level AxiaLIF 33.3%; p < 0.05), whereas none of the L4/5 levels in 2-level AxiaLIF fused. Five constructs developed pseudarthrosis and required surgical revision. Conclusions. The AxiaLIF procedure constitutes a minimally invasive technique for L5/S1 instrumentation, with low perioperative morbidity. However, the axial rod provides inadequate long-term anterior column support, which leads to subsidence and loss of segmental lordosis. Modification of the transsacral technique to allow for placement of a solid interposition graft may counteract subsidence of the construct.

AB - Object. The paracoccygeal approach allows for instrumentation of L5/S1 and L4/5 by using a transsacral rod (AxiaLIF; TransS1, Inc.). The authors analyzed clinical and radiographic outcomes of 1- or 2-level AxiaLIF procedures with focus on durability of the construct. Methods. This was a retrospective study of 38 consecutive patients who underwent either 1-level (32 patients) or 2-level (6 patients) AxiaLIF procedures at the authors' institution. The Oswestry Disability Index (minimum clinically important difference [MCID] ≥ 12) and visual analog scale ([VAS]; MCID ≥ 3) scores were collected. Disc height and Cobb angles were measured on pre- and postoperative radiographs. Bony fusion was determined on CT scans or flexion/extension radiographs. Results. Implantation of a transsacral rod allowed for intraoperative distraction of the L5/S1 intervertebral space and resulted in increased segmental lordosis postoperatively. At a mean follow-up time of 26.2 ± 2.4 months, however, graft subsidence (1.9 mm) abolished partial correction of segmental lordosis. Moreover, subsidence of the construct reduced L5/S1 lordosis in patients with 1-level AxiaLIF by 3.2° and L4-S1 lordosis in patients with 2-level procedures by 10.1° compared with preoperative values (p < 0.01). Loss of segmental lordosis predicted failure to improve VAS scores for back pain in the patient cohort (p < 0.05). Overall, surgical intervention led to modest symptomatic improvement; only 26.3% of patients achieved an MCID of the Oswestry Disability Index and 50% of patients an MCID of the VAS score for back pain. At last follow-up, 71.9% of L5/S1 levels demonstrated bony fusion (1-level AxiaLIF 80.8%, 2-level AxiaLIF 33.3%; p < 0.05), whereas none of the L4/5 levels in 2-level AxiaLIF fused. Five constructs developed pseudarthrosis and required surgical revision. Conclusions. The AxiaLIF procedure constitutes a minimally invasive technique for L5/S1 instrumentation, with low perioperative morbidity. However, the axial rod provides inadequate long-term anterior column support, which leads to subsidence and loss of segmental lordosis. Modification of the transsacral technique to allow for placement of a solid interposition graft may counteract subsidence of the construct.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84885409786&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84885409786&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3171/2013.6.SPINE12282

DO - 10.3171/2013.6.SPINE12282

M3 - Article

C2 - 23971765

AN - SCOPUS:84885409786

VL - 19

SP - 454

EP - 463

JO - Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine

JF - Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine

SN - 1547-5654

IS - 4

ER -