Comparison of Sagittal Plane Correction With "Bullet" Versus "Banana" Type Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Devices.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Zach Pennington, Abdelrahman Hamouda, Michael Martini, Rahul Kumar, Anthony L Mikula, Maria Astudillo Potes, Mohamad Bydon, Michelle J Clarke, William E Krauss, Ahmad N Nassr, Brett A Freedman, Arjun S Sebastian, Jeremy L Fogelson, Benjamin D Elder
{"title":"Comparison of Sagittal Plane Correction With \"Bullet\" Versus \"Banana\" Type Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Devices.","authors":"Zach Pennington, Abdelrahman Hamouda, Michael Martini, Rahul Kumar, Anthony L Mikula, Maria Astudillo Potes, Mohamad Bydon, Michelle J Clarke, William E Krauss, Ahmad N Nassr, Brett A Freedman, Arjun S Sebastian, Jeremy L Fogelson, Benjamin D Elder","doi":"10.1227/ons.0000000000001518","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) allows for direct and indirect decompression and segmental lordosis in sagittal plane correction. This study compares the effectiveness of \"Bullet\" type and \"Banana\" type devices for sagittal plane correction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent 1-level or 2-level TLIF for degenerative pathology at a single tertiary care center were identified. Details were extracted on demographics, interbody dimensions, and preoperative and postoperative lumbopelvic parameters from upright radiographs. Cages were categorized as \"Bullet\" or \"Banana\" type based on morphology and manufacturer description of optimal position. Univariable comparisons between levels treated with \"Bullet\" and \"Banana\" type interbodies were performed. Multivariable linear regression was performed to identify independent predictors of postoperative segmental lordosis and change in segmental lordosis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred and ninety eight unique patients (median 66.6 years; [IQR 59.5, 73.7]; 56.6% female) were included with 241 levels treated, of which 114 (52.7%) were treated with \"Banana\" type interbodies and 127 (47.3%) with \"Bullet\" type. \"Banana\" type interbodies afforded both greater postoperative segmental lordosis (8.1 [6.2, 10.7] vs 7.5 [5.2, 9.6]; P = .048) and greater increase in segmental lordosis (3.3 [0.7, 7.0] vs 2.3 [0.1, 4.2]; P = .015). On multivariable linear regression, only preoperative segmental lordosis (β = 0.322 per degree; [0.244, 0.399]; P < .001), implant listed lordosis (β = 0.146 per degree; 95% CI [0.048, 0.244]; P = .004), preoperative pelvic incidence (0.072 per degree; [0.034, 0.111]; P < .001), and use of bilateral TLIF windows (β = 3.133; [1.213, 5.053]; P = .001) were predictive of postoperative segmental lordosis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The present analysis suggests that baseline lumbopelvic anatomy, interbody lordosis, and the use of bilateral TLIF windows are the most important predictors of postoperative segmental lordosis. Use of \"Banana\" vs \"Bullet\" type interbodies was not predictive of segmental lordosis achieved on immediate postoperative upright radiographs. Further work is merited to determine whether the 2 interbody types demonstrate differences regarding subsidence risk or maintenance of correction.</p>","PeriodicalId":54254,"journal":{"name":"Operative Neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Operative Neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1227/ons.0000000000001518","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) allows for direct and indirect decompression and segmental lordosis in sagittal plane correction. This study compares the effectiveness of "Bullet" type and "Banana" type devices for sagittal plane correction.

Methods: Patients who underwent 1-level or 2-level TLIF for degenerative pathology at a single tertiary care center were identified. Details were extracted on demographics, interbody dimensions, and preoperative and postoperative lumbopelvic parameters from upright radiographs. Cages were categorized as "Bullet" or "Banana" type based on morphology and manufacturer description of optimal position. Univariable comparisons between levels treated with "Bullet" and "Banana" type interbodies were performed. Multivariable linear regression was performed to identify independent predictors of postoperative segmental lordosis and change in segmental lordosis.

Results: One hundred and ninety eight unique patients (median 66.6 years; [IQR 59.5, 73.7]; 56.6% female) were included with 241 levels treated, of which 114 (52.7%) were treated with "Banana" type interbodies and 127 (47.3%) with "Bullet" type. "Banana" type interbodies afforded both greater postoperative segmental lordosis (8.1 [6.2, 10.7] vs 7.5 [5.2, 9.6]; P = .048) and greater increase in segmental lordosis (3.3 [0.7, 7.0] vs 2.3 [0.1, 4.2]; P = .015). On multivariable linear regression, only preoperative segmental lordosis (β = 0.322 per degree; [0.244, 0.399]; P < .001), implant listed lordosis (β = 0.146 per degree; 95% CI [0.048, 0.244]; P = .004), preoperative pelvic incidence (0.072 per degree; [0.034, 0.111]; P < .001), and use of bilateral TLIF windows (β = 3.133; [1.213, 5.053]; P = .001) were predictive of postoperative segmental lordosis.

Conclusion: The present analysis suggests that baseline lumbopelvic anatomy, interbody lordosis, and the use of bilateral TLIF windows are the most important predictors of postoperative segmental lordosis. Use of "Banana" vs "Bullet" type interbodies was not predictive of segmental lordosis achieved on immediate postoperative upright radiographs. Further work is merited to determine whether the 2 interbody types demonstrate differences regarding subsidence risk or maintenance of correction.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Operative Neurosurgery
Operative Neurosurgery Medicine-Neurology (clinical)
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
13.00%
发文量
530
期刊介绍: Operative Neurosurgery is a bi-monthly, unique publication focusing exclusively on surgical technique and devices, providing practical, skill-enhancing guidance to its readers. Complementing the clinical and research studies published in Neurosurgery, Operative Neurosurgery brings the reader technical material that highlights operative procedures, anatomy, instrumentation, devices, and technology. Operative Neurosurgery is the practical resource for cutting-edge material that brings the surgeon the most up to date literature on operative practice and technique
×
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