Lumbar Total Disc Replacement Leads to Increased Subsequent Facet Injections Compared to Anterolateral Lumbar Interbody Fusions.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Global Spine Journal Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-11 DOI:10.1177/21925682241260733
Nakul Narendran, Christopher M Mikhail, Paal K Nilssen, Alexander Tuchman, David L Skaggs
{"title":"Lumbar Total Disc Replacement Leads to Increased Subsequent Facet Injections Compared to Anterolateral Lumbar Interbody Fusions.","authors":"Nakul Narendran, Christopher M Mikhail, Paal K Nilssen, Alexander Tuchman, David L Skaggs","doi":"10.1177/21925682241260733","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Study DesignRetrospective Matched Cohort.ObjectiveDespite known consequences to the facet joints following lumbar total disc replacement (TDR), there is limited data on facet injection usage for persistent postoperative pain. This study uses real-world data to compare the usage of therapeutic lumbar facet injections as a measure of symptomatic facet arthrosis following single-level, stand-alone TDR vs anterolateral lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF/LLIF).MethodsThe PearlDiver database was queried for patients (2010-2021) with lumbar degenerative disc disease who received either a single-level, stand-alone TDR or ALIF/LLIF. All patients were followed for ≥2 years and excluded if they had a history of facet injections or spinal trauma, fracture, infection, or neoplasm. The two cohorts were matched 1:1 based on age, sex, insurance, year of operation, and medical comorbidities. The primary outcome was the use of therapeutic lumbar facet injections at 1-, 2-, and 5-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes included subsequent lumbar surgeries and surgical complications.ResultsAfter 1:1 matching, each cohort had 1203 patients. Lumbar facet injections occurred significantly more frequently in the TDR group at 1-year (6.07% vs 1.66%, <i>P</i> < .0001), 2-year (8.40% vs 3.74%%, <i>P</i> < .0001), and 5-year (11.47% vs 6.40%, <i>P</i> < .0001) follow-up. 5-year injection-free probability curves demonstrated an 87.1% injection-free rate for TDR vs 92.9% for ALIF/LLIF. There was no clinical difference in the incidence of subsequent lumbar surgeries or complications.ConclusionCompared with ALIF/LLIF, patients who underwent TDR received significantly more facet injections, suggesting a greater progression of symptomatic facet arthrosis. TDR was not protective against reoperations compared to ALIF/LLIF.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"1733-1742"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11572116/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682241260733","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study DesignRetrospective Matched Cohort.ObjectiveDespite known consequences to the facet joints following lumbar total disc replacement (TDR), there is limited data on facet injection usage for persistent postoperative pain. This study uses real-world data to compare the usage of therapeutic lumbar facet injections as a measure of symptomatic facet arthrosis following single-level, stand-alone TDR vs anterolateral lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF/LLIF).MethodsThe PearlDiver database was queried for patients (2010-2021) with lumbar degenerative disc disease who received either a single-level, stand-alone TDR or ALIF/LLIF. All patients were followed for ≥2 years and excluded if they had a history of facet injections or spinal trauma, fracture, infection, or neoplasm. The two cohorts were matched 1:1 based on age, sex, insurance, year of operation, and medical comorbidities. The primary outcome was the use of therapeutic lumbar facet injections at 1-, 2-, and 5-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes included subsequent lumbar surgeries and surgical complications.ResultsAfter 1:1 matching, each cohort had 1203 patients. Lumbar facet injections occurred significantly more frequently in the TDR group at 1-year (6.07% vs 1.66%, P < .0001), 2-year (8.40% vs 3.74%%, P < .0001), and 5-year (11.47% vs 6.40%, P < .0001) follow-up. 5-year injection-free probability curves demonstrated an 87.1% injection-free rate for TDR vs 92.9% for ALIF/LLIF. There was no clinical difference in the incidence of subsequent lumbar surgeries or complications.ConclusionCompared with ALIF/LLIF, patients who underwent TDR received significantly more facet injections, suggesting a greater progression of symptomatic facet arthrosis. TDR was not protective against reoperations compared to ALIF/LLIF.

与腰椎前外侧椎体间融合术相比,腰椎全椎间盘置换术导致更多的后续面骨注射。
研究设计回顾性匹配队列:尽管已知腰椎间盘全置换术(TDR)会对面关节造成影响,但关于面关节注射治疗术后持续疼痛的数据却很有限。本研究利用真实世界的数据,比较了单水平独立腰椎间盘置换术(TDR)与腰椎前外侧椎体间融合术(ALIF/LLIF)后治疗性腰椎面关节注射的使用情况,以此衡量症状性面关节炎:在PearlDiver数据库中查询了接受单水平独立TDR或ALIF/LLIF的腰椎间盘退行性疾病患者(2010-2021年)。对所有患者进行了≥2 年的随访,并排除了有椎面注射或脊柱创伤、骨折、感染或肿瘤病史的患者。两组患者根据年龄、性别、保险、手术年份和合并症进行了1:1配对。主要结果是在1年、2年和5年的随访中使用治疗性腰椎面注射。次要结果包括后续腰椎手术和手术并发症:经过1:1配对后,每个队列共有1203名患者。在 1 年(6.07% vs 1.66%,P < .0001)、2 年(8.40% vs 3.74%%,P < .0001)和 5 年(11.47% vs 6.40%,P < .0001)随访中,TDR 组的腰椎面注射发生率明显更高。5年无注射概率曲线显示,TDR的无注射率为87.1%,而ALIF/LLIF为92.9%。后续腰椎手术或并发症的发生率没有临床差异:结论:与ALIF/LLIF相比,接受TDR的患者接受的面关节注射次数明显增多,这表明无症状面关节炎的恶化程度更大。与ALIF/LLIF相比,TDR不能防止再次手术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Spine Journal
Global Spine Journal Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
278
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Global Spine Journal (GSJ) is the official scientific publication of AOSpine. A peer-reviewed, open access journal, devoted to the study and treatment of spinal disorders, including diagnosis, operative and non-operative treatment options, surgical techniques, and emerging research and clinical developments.GSJ is indexed in PubMedCentral, SCOPUS, and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信