AxiaLif application in lumbosacral vertebral fusion
10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.0047
- VernacularTitle:AxiaLIF在腰骶椎融合治疗中的应用
- Author:
Xiao-Lin SHU
1
;
Xi-Zheng SONG
Author Information
1. 南华大学附属第一医院脊柱外科
- From:
Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research
2018;22(3):456-463
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Lumbosacral vertebral fusion operation is an important treatment for lumbosacral vertebral degenerative disease. Traditional open surgery has great trauma; postoperative recovery time is longer; there are more complications. To reduce the damage to normal tissue and increase the rate of healing, scholars in and outside China improve the lumbar spine fusion surgery, and lumbar fusion becomes a tendency of the development of minimally invasive surgery. In 2004, Cragg introduced lumbosacral vertebral axial fusion (AxiaLIF, axial lumbar intervertebral fusion). The operation is through posterior rectal wall and presacral space approach, axially nailing for fusion of L5/S1. Muscle, ligament and blood vessels of the spine were retained. Mechanical stability was similar to that of traditional fusion. Osseous fusion rate was high at the operation segment. This is in line with the concept of minimally invasive surgery of the spine. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the advantages and disadvantages of traditional and present fusion techniques from traditional lumbar fusion and present lumbar fusion angle, and to explore the application of AxiaLIF in lumbosacral fusion. METHODS: We retrieved PubMed, Web of Science, and Springer database with the English key words of "Axial interbody fusion and (properties or evaluation), biomechanics, spine mechanical test, spine and (kinematics or motion)", and Chinese Journal Full-Text Database with the Chinese key words of "Axial fusion, biomechanics research assessment, biomechanics, anterior sacral space, minimally invasive spine" for studies concerning lumbar fusion, complications, biomechanics, and humanistic medicine that had been published in recent 5 years. Repetitive studies were excluded, and 46 studies were analyzed and discussed. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: In the past 90 years, scholars in and outside China had studied the methods of lumbar fusion from various levels, analyzed and summarized the advantages and disadvantages of various operative methods, and identified the indications of lumbar spinal fusion. By comparing characteristics of open surgery and minimally invasive surgery, this study suggested that minimally invasive lumbar fusion has become a trend. In-depth understanding of biomechanical stability, complications, and postoperative recovery time after AxiaLIF is still a long way to go in future medical research.
