The lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is a relatively new technique that allows the surgeon to access the intervertebral space from a direct lateral approach either anterior to or through the psoas muscle. This approach provides an alternative to anterior lumbar interbody fusion with instrumentation, posterior lumbar interbody fusion, and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for anterior column support. LLIF is minimally invasive, safe, better structural support from the apophyseal ring, potential for coronal plane deformity correction, and indirect decompression, which have has made this technique popular. LLIF is currently being utilized for a variety of pathologies including but not limited to adult de novo lumbar scoliosis, central and foraminal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, and adjacent segment degeneration. Although early clinical outcomes have been good, the potential for significant neurological and vascular vertebral endplate complications exists. Nevertheless, LLIF is a promising technique with the potential to more effectively treat complex adult de novo scoliosis and achieve predictable fusion while avoiding the complications of traditional anterior surgery and posterior interbody techniques.
Adult ; Congenital Abnormalities ; Constriction, Pathologic ; Decompression ; Humans ; Pathology ; Psoas Muscles ; Scoliosis ; Spondylolisthesis

STUDY DESIGN: Level 4 retrospective review. PURPOSE: To compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes between posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) with posterior segmental spinal instrumentation (SSI) for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Both PLIF and LLIF have been performed for degenerative spondylolisthesis with good results, but no study has directly compared these two techniques so far. METHODS: The electronic medical and radiographic records of 78 matched patients were analyzed. In one group, 39 patients underwent PLIF with SSI at 41 levels (L3-4/L4-5), while in the other group, 39 patients underwent the LLIF procedure at 48 levels (L3-4/L4-5). Radiological outcomes such as restoration of disc height and neuroforaminal height, segmental lumbar lordosis, total lumbar lordosis, incidence of endplate fracture, and subsidence were measured. Perioperative parameters were also recorded in each group. Clinical outcome in both groups was assessed by the short form-12, Oswestry disability index and visual analogue scale scores. The average follow-up period was 16.1 months in the LLIF group and 21 months in the PLIF group. RESULTS: The restoration of disc height, foraminal height, and segmental lumbar lordosis was significantly better in the LLIF group (p<0.001). The duration of the operation was similar in both groups, but the average blood loss was significantly lower in the LLIF group (p<0.001). However, clinical outcome scores were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Safe, effective interbody fusion can be achieved at multiple levels with neuromonitoring by the lateral approach. LLIF is a viable treatment option in patients with new onset symptoms due to degenerative spondylolisthesis who have had previous lumbar spine surgery, and it results in improved sagittal alignment and indirect foraminal decompression.
Animals ; Decompression ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Incidence ; Lordosis ; Retrospective Studies ; Spine ; Spondylolisthesis*

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of antidepressants on blood loss and transfusion requirements in spinal surgery patients. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Several studies have shown an increase in perioperative bleeding in orthopedic surgery patients on antidepressant drug therapy, yet no study has examined the impact of these agents on spinal surgery patients. METHODS: Charts of patients who underwent single-level spinal fusion (posterior lumbar interbody fusion with posterior instrumentation) performed by five fellowship-trained surgeons at a tertiary spine center between 2008 and 2013, were retrospectively reviewed. Exclusion criteria included select medical comorbidities, select drug therapy, and Amercian Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification score of greater than 2. Serotonergic antidepressants were examined in multivariate analysis to assess their predictive value on estimated blood loss and risk of transfusion. RESULTS: A total of 235 patients, of which 52% were female, were included. Allogeneic blood was transfused in 7% of patients. The average estimated blood loss was 682±463 mL. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors were taken by 10% of all patients. Multivariable regression analysis showed that intake of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors was a significant predictor for blood loss (average increase of 34%, p=0.015) and for the need of allogeneic blood transfusion (odds ratio, 4.550; p=0.029). CONCLUSIONS: There was a statistically significant association between selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and both increased blood loss and risk of allogeneic red blood cell transfusion. Surgeons and perioperative providers should take these findings into account when assessing patients' preoperative risk for blood loss and transfusion.
Antidepressive Agents* ; Blood Transfusion ; Case-Control Studies ; Classification ; Comorbidity ; Drug Therapy ; Erythrocyte Transfusion ; Female ; Hemorrhage ; Humans ; Multivariate Analysis ; Orthopedics ; Retrospective Studies ; Serotonin Uptake Inhibitors ; Spinal Fusion ; Spine ; Spondylosis ; Surgeons

Methods: A total of 77 opioid users grouped according to dose and duration (54 “higher users,” 30 “lower users”) were matched 2:1 to 154 non-opioid users based on age, sex, marital status, chiropractic care, disability, and diagnosis. All patients completed a validated 20-item Expectations Survey measuring expected improvement with regard to symptoms, function, psychological well-being, and anticipated future spine condition. “Greater expectations” was defined as a higher survey score (possible range, 0–100) based on the number of items expected and degree of improvement expected. Results: The mean Expectations Survey scores for all opioid users and all non-users were similar (73 vs. 70, p=0.18). Scores were different, however, for lower users (79) compared with matched non-users (69, p=0.01) and compared with higher users (70, p=0.01). In multivariable analysis, “reater expectations” was independently associated with having had chiropractic care (p=0.03), being more disabled (p=0.002), and being a lower-dose opioid user (p=0.03). Compared with higher users, lower users were also more likely to expect not to need pain medications 2 years after surgery (47% vs. 83%, p=0.003). Conclusions Patient expectations of lumbar surgery are associated with diverse demographic and clinical variables. A lower dose and shorter duration of opioid use were associated with expecting more items and expecting more complete improvement compared with non-users. In addition, lower opioid users had greater overall expectations compared with higher users.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical and imaging data of ASD patients who underwent lumbar corrective circumferential fusion of ≥3 levels (n=106). SH was defined as the vertical distance between C2 and S1 on a standing lateral image. As potential predictors of postoperative height change, the number of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) levels, change in spino-pelvic parameters, total number of levels fused, and pedicle subtraction osteotomies (PSO) were documented. Univariate and multivariate linear regression analyses were performed to identify the predictors of postoperative height change. Results: The mean SH change was −2.39±50.8 mm (range, −160 to 172 mm). The univariate analyses showed that the number of LLIF levels (coefficient=10.9, p=0.03), the absolute coronal vertical axis change (coefficient=0.6, p=0.01), and the absolute Cobb angle change (coefficient=−0.9, p=0.03) were significant predictors for height change. Patients with PSOs (n=14) tended to have a shorter height postoperatively (coefficient=−26.1); however, this difference was not significant (p=0.07). Multivariate analyses conducted with variables of p<0.20 showed that pelvic tilt (PT) change is an independent contributor to SH change (coefficient=−0.99, p=0.04, R2=0.11). Conclusions Utilizing a modified definition of SH used in previous AIS studies, we demonstrated that patients with ASD lose SH postoperatively and that PT change was an independent contributor of SH change.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical and imaging data of ASD patients who underwent lumbar corrective circumferential fusion of ≥3 levels (n=106). SH was defined as the vertical distance between C2 and S1 on a standing lateral image. As potential predictors of postoperative height change, the number of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) levels, change in spino-pelvic parameters, total number of levels fused, and pedicle subtraction osteotomies (PSO) were documented. Univariate and multivariate linear regression analyses were performed to identify the predictors of postoperative height change. Results: The mean SH change was −2.39±50.8 mm (range, −160 to 172 mm). The univariate analyses showed that the number of LLIF levels (coefficient=10.9, p=0.03), the absolute coronal vertical axis change (coefficient=0.6, p=0.01), and the absolute Cobb angle change (coefficient=−0.9, p=0.03) were significant predictors for height change. Patients with PSOs (n=14) tended to have a shorter height postoperatively (coefficient=−26.1); however, this difference was not significant (p=0.07). Multivariate analyses conducted with variables of p<0.20 showed that pelvic tilt (PT) change is an independent contributor to SH change (coefficient=−0.99, p=0.04, R2=0.11). Conclusions Utilizing a modified definition of SH used in previous AIS studies, we demonstrated that patients with ASD lose SH postoperatively and that PT change was an independent contributor of SH change.