• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.40 no.2
• /
• pp.84-89
• /
• 2006

Objective : The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of two methods for stabilization and fusion : Postero-Lateral Fusion [PLF, pedicle screw fixation with bone graft] and Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion [PLIF, cage insertion] for spinal stenosis and recurred disc herniation except degenerative spondylolisthesis. Methods : Seventy one patients who underwent PLF [n=36] or PLIF [n=35] between 1997 and 2001 were evaluated prospectively. These two groups were compared for the change of interbody space, the range of segmental angle, the angle of lumbar motion, and clinical outcomes by Prolo scale. Results : The mean follow-up period was 32.6 months. The PLIF group showed statistically significant increase of the interbody space after surgery. However, the difference in the change of interbody space between two groups was insignificant [P value=0.05]. The range of segmental angle was better in the PLIF group, but the difference in the change of segmental angle was not statistically significant [P value=0.0l7]. Angle of lumbar motion was similar in the two groups. Changes of Prolo economic scale were not statistically significant [P value=0.193]. The PLIF group showed statistically significant improvement in Prolo functional scale [P value=0.003]. In Prolo economic and functional scale, there were statistically significant relationships between follow-up duration [P value<0.001]. change of interbody space [P value<0.001], and range of segmental angle [P value<0.001]. Conclusion : Results of this study indicate that PLIF is superior to PLF in interbody space augmentation and clinical outcomes by Prolo functional scale. Analysis of clinical outcomes showed significant relationships among various factors [fusion type, follow-up duration, change of interbody space, and range of segmental angle]. Therefore, the authors recommend instrumented PLIF to offer better clinical outcomes in patients who needed instrumented lumbar fusion for spinal stenosis and recurred disc herniation.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.37 no.5
• /
• pp.340-344
• /
• 2005

Objective: Posterior lumbar interbody fusion(PLIF), the current leading method of pedicle screw fixation combined with interbody fusion via posterior route, sometimes requires too much destruction of the facet joint than expected especially for the patient with a narrow spine. On the other hand, tranforaminal lumbar interbody fusion(TLIF) technique provides potential advantages over PLIF and can be chosen as a better surgical alternative to more traditional fusion methods in certain surgical conditions. Methods: From October 1999, 99 PLIF and 29 TLIF procedures were done for the patients with spinal stenosis and instability. Radiological data including the interpedicular distance and the size of the pedicles as well as the clinical parameters were collected retrospectively. The degree of resection of the inferior articular process was compared with the interpedicular distance in each patient who received PLIF. Results: No significant differences were found between PLIF and TLIF regarding the operation time, blood loss, duration of hospital stay, or short term postoperative clinical result. There were no complication with TLIF, but PLIF resulted in 9(9.1%) complications. During PLIF procedure, all patients(n=24) except one with the interpedicular distance shorter than 27mm required near complete or complete resection of the inferior articular processes, whereas only 6(31.5%) of 19 patients with the interpedicular distances longer than 30mm required the similar extent of resection. Conclusion: TLIF is better than PLIF in terms of the complication rate. The patient who had narrow interpedicular distance(<27mm) might be better candidate for TLIF.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.30 no.sup1
• /
• pp.108-114
• /
• 2001

Objective : Posterior lumbar interbody fusion(PLIF) provides the favorable outcome to degenerative lumbar disease, especially isthmic spondylolisthesis. To determine the long-term effect of PLIF using psterior movable segment, we analysed the results of follow-up radiologic changes and surgical outcome retrospectively Patients and Method : During the past 11 years(1989. 1.-1999. 9.), 148 patients with symptomatic lumbar spondylolisthesis were managed at our department and the clinical wants were throughly recieved and final outcome is determined at last follow up. PLIF using antogenous bone(posterior movable segment, iliac bone and rib) were performed in 106 case. Results : After an average follow-up period of 33 months(range ; 15-58 months), the results were excellent in 66 cases, good in 37 cases, fair in 2 cases and poor in 1 cases. And the satisfactory results were 103 cases(98.2%) in PLIF,. Conclusion : In conclusion, patients who underwent PLIF with autologous bone graft had good clinical and radiological outcomes without significant neurological complications.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.59 no.3
• /
• pp.276-281
• /
• 2016

Objective : Although trunk muscles in the lumbar spine preserve spinal stability and motility, little is known about the relationship between trunk muscles and spinal fusion rate. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the correlation between trunk muscles cross sectional area (MCSA) and fusion rate after posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) using stand-alone cages. Methods : A total of 89 adult patients with degenerative lumbar disease who were performed PLIF using stand-alone cages at L4-5 were included in this study. The cross-sectional area of the psoas major (PS), erector spinae (ES), and multifidus (MF) muscles were quantitatively evaluated by preoperative lumbar magnetic resonance imaging at the L3-4, L4-5, and L5-S1 segments, and bone union was evaluated by dynamic lumbar X-rays. Results : Of the 89 patients, 68 had bone union and 21 did not. The MCSAs at all segments in both groups were significantly different (p<0.05) for the PS muscle, those at L3-4 and L4-5 segments between groups were significantly different (p=0.048, 0.021) for the ES and MF muscles. In the multivariate analysis, differences in the PS MCSA at the L4-5 and L5-S1 segments remained significant (p=0.048, 0.043 and odds ratio=1.098, 1.169). In comparison analysis between male and female patients, most MCSAs of male patients were larger than female's. Fusion rates of male patients (80.7%) were higher than female's (68.8%), too. Conclusion : For PLIF surgery, PS muscle function appears to be an important factor for bone union and preventing back muscle injury is essential for better fusion rate.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.46 no.4
• /
• pp.328-332
• /
• 2009

Objective : The purpose of this study was to establish new fusion criteria to complement existing Brantigan-Steffee fusion criteria. The primary purpose of intervertebral cage placement is to create a proper biomechanical environment through successful fusion. The existence of a traction spur is an essential predictable radiologic factor which shows that there is instability of a fusion segment. We studied the relationship between the existence of a traction spur and fusion after a posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) procedure. Methods : This study was conducted using retrospective radiological findings from patients who underwent a PLIF procedure with the use of a cage without posterior fixation between 1993 and 1997 at a single institution. We enrolled 183 patients who were followed for a minimum of five years after the procedure, and used the Brantigan-Steffee classification to confirm the fusion. These criteria include a denser and more mature bone fusion area than originally achieved during surgery, no interspace between the cage and the vertebral body, and mature bony trabeculae bridging the fusion area. We also confirmed the existence of traction spurs on fusion segments and non-fusion segments. Results : The PLIF procedure was done on a total of 251 segments in 183 patients (71 men and 112 women). The average follow-up period was $80.4{\pm}12.7$ months. The mean age at the time of surgery was $48.3{\pm}11.3$ years (range, 25 to 84 years). Among the 251 segments, 213 segments (84.9%) were fused after five years. The remaining 38 segments (15.1%) were not fused. An analysis of the 38 segments that were not fused found traction spur formation in 20 of those segments (52.6%). No segments had traction spur formation with fusion. Conclusion : A new parameter should be added to the fusion criteria. These criteria should be referred to as 'no traction spur formation' and should be used to confirm fusion after a PLIF procedure.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.30 no.sup2
• /
• pp.247-253
• /
• 2001

Objective : In general, to perform posterior lumbar interbody fusion(PLIF), it has been used more invasive procedure than simple discectomy. However we try to perform PLIF with TFC with smaller invasion almost same as in simple discectomy. This study is about its procedure and clinical results. Materials and Methods : The authors retrospectively analyzed 43 cases of minimally invasive PLIF with TFC from July 1998 to May 2000. Operative procedure, operative complication, change of disc height, blood loss, ambulation time, hospitalization period, clinical success rate, and bony fusion rate were analyzed. Results : 40 patients were capable to walk on the 2nd day of the post-operation. The average hospitalization period is 5.6 days. The average blood loss was 0.19L/level with no transfusion or wound drainage. The height of disc changed from 8.84mm to 13.54mm. Clinical success rate is 95% when evaluated by the Prolo's scale. The complication was delayed wound infection(2) and transient paresthesis(1). The bony fusion was shown in 17 patients (94.4%) out of 18 patients who passed one year. Conclusion : As a result of minimally invasive PLIF, pain was decreased and early ambulation and short hospitalization was possible. Complication was similar or lower than other studies, and the bony fusion rate and clinical success rate were also similar during follow-up.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.37 no.1
• /
• pp.39-43
• /
• 2005

Objective: For Posterior lumbar interbody fusion(PLIF) various cages or iliac bone dowels are used with or without pedicle screw fixation(PSF). To evaluate and compare the clinical and radiological results of different fusion methods, we intend to verify the effect of added PSF on PLIF, the effect of bone cages and several factors which are thought to be related with the postoperative prognosis. Methods: One hundred and ninety seven patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and instability or spondylolisthesis underwent various fusion operations from May 1993 to May 2003. The patients were divided into five groups, group A (PLIF with autologous bone dowels, N=24), group B (PLIF with bone cages, N=13), group C (PLIF with bone dowels and PSF, N=37), group D (PLIF with bone cages and PSF, N=30) and group E (PSF with intertransverse bone graft, N=93) for comparison and analyzed for the outcome and fusion rate. Results: Outcome was not significantly different among the five groups. In intervertebral height (IVH) changes between pre- and post-operation, Group B ($2.42{\pm}2.20mm$) was better than Group A ($-1.33{\pm}2.05mm$). But in the Group C, D and E, the IVH changes were not different statistically. Fusion rate of group C, D was higher than that of Group A and B. But the intervertebral height(IVH) increased significantly in group B($2.42{\pm}2.20mm$). Fusion rate of group C and D were higher than that of group A and D. Conclusion: Intervertebral cages are superior to autologous iliac bone dowels for maintaining intervertebral height in PLIF. The additional pedicle screw fixation seems to stabilize the graft and improve fusion rates.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.56 no.4
• /
• pp.315-322
• /
• 2014

Objective : Posterior accessed lumbar interbody fusion (PALIF) has a clear objective to restore disc height and spinal alignment but surgeons may occasionally face the converse situation and lose lumbar lordosis. We analyzed retrospective data for factors contributing to a postoperative flat back. Methods : A total of 105 patients who underwent PALIF for spondylolisthesis and stenosis were enrolled. The patients were divided according to surgical type [posterior lumbar inter body fusion (PLIF) vs. unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF)], number of levels (single vs. multiple), and diagnosis (spondylolisthesis vs. stenosis). We measured perioperative index level lordosis, lumbar lordosis, pelvic tilt, sacral slope, pelvic incidence, and disc height in standing lateral radiographs. The change and variance in each parameter and comparative group were analyzed with the paired and Student t-test (p<0.05), correlation coefficient, and regression analysis. Results : A significant perioperative reduction was observed in index-level lordosis following TLIF at the single level and in patients with spondylolisthesis (p=0.002, p=0.005). Pelvic tilt and sacral slope were significantly restored following PLIF multilevel surgery (p=0.009, p=0.003). Sacral slope variance was highly sensitive to perioperative variance of index level lordosis in high sacral sloped pelvis. Perioperative variance of index level lordosis was positively correlated with disc height variance ($R^2=0.286$, p=0.0005). Conclusion : Unilateral TLIF has the potential to cause postoperative flat back. PLIF is more reliable than unilateral TLIF to restore spinopelvic parameters following multilevel surgery and spondylolisthesis. A high sacral sloped pelvis is more vulnerable to PALIF in terms of a postoperative flat back.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.29 no.4
• /
• pp.507-513
• /
• 2000

Objective : Posterior lumbar interbody fusion(PLIF) with transpedicular screw fixation(TPSF) have many merits in the treatment of spondylolisthesis. The aim of this study was to compare cage PLIF group(PLIF using cage and TPSF) with chip PLIF group(PLIF using autologous bone chips and TPSF) as surgical treatment of spondyloisthesis. Methods : PLIF and TPSF were performed in 44 patients with spondylolisthesis from January 1994 to December 1998. The surgical methods were divided into two groups. One group was cage PLIF(20 patients), and the other group was chip PLIF(24 patients). We analyzed the change of anterior translation, change of intervertebral space height, fusion rate, clinical outcomes, and postoperative complications in two groups. Result : There was no significant difference in reduction and maintenance of anterior translation between two groups. Intervertebral space height was increased in the two groups at immediate postoperative state. At last followup, it was decreased compared to preoperative height in chip PLIF group. In cage PLIF group, last follow-up height was decreased compared to immedate postoperative height, but it was significantly increased compared to preoperative height. Fusion rates were 70.9% and 90% in chip PLIF group and cage PLIF group, respectively. Excellent and good clinical outcomes were 79.2% in chip PLIF group and 85% in cage PLIF group, but there was no statistical significance. Complications were screw fracture(1 case), CSF leakage(1 case) in chip PLIF group and screw loosening and retropulsion of cage(1 case), CSF leakage(2 cases) in cage PLIF group. Conclusion : PLIF using cage is better than PLIF using autologous bone chips in the maintenance of intervertebral space height and fusion rate. But there is no statistical difference of the clinical outcomes between the two groups. Further studies, especially on long term follow-up, should be considered.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.50 no.4
• /
• pp.363-369
• /
• 2011

Objective : We investigated the clinical and radiological advantages of unilateral laminectomy in posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) procedure comparing with bilateral laminectomy, under the same procedural condition including bilateral instrumentation and insertion of two cages, in patients with degenerative lumbar disease with unilateral leg symptoms. Methods : We retrospectively reviewed 124 consecutive cases of PLIF via unilateral or bilateral approach between January 2006 and April 2010. In 80 cases (bilateral group), two cages were inserted via bilateral laminectomy, and in 44 cases (unilateral group), via unilateral laminectomy. The average follow-up duration was 29.5 months. The clinical outcomes were evaluated with the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Oswestry disability index (ODI). The fusion rates and disc space heights were determined by dynamic standing radiographs and/or computed tomography. Operative times, intra-operative and post-operative blood losses and hospitalization periods were also evaluated. Results : In clinical evaluation, the VAS and ODI scores showed excellent outcomes in both groups. There were no significant differences in term of fusion rate, but the perioperative blood loss and the operative time of the unilateral group were lower than that of the bilateral group. Conclusion : Unilateral laminectomy can minimize the operative time and perioperative blood loss in PLIF procedure. However, the different preoperative disc height between two groups is a limitation of this study. Despite this limitation, solid fusion and satisfactory symptomatic improvement could be achieved uniquely by our surgical method. This surgical method can be an alternative surgical technique in patients with unilateral leg pain.