Tag: segmental lordosis

Posted on

Postoperative loss in segmental lumbar lordosis following L5–S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion

J Neurosurg Spine 44:420–425, 2026

This clinical study evaluates predictors and thresholds for postoperative loss of L5–S1 segmental lordosis following anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) in 94 adults treated for degenerative disc disease. Multivariate analyses identified baseline obesity, absence of posterior fixation, and larger immediate lordotic correction as independent predictors of 6-week to 1-year segmental lordosis loss, which related to higher rates of cage subsidence and revision.

The authors derived 6-week postoperative L5–S1 lordosis thresholds (overall range 21.6°–26.8°, PI-specific: low 19.0°–24.8°, average 21.0°–26.4°, high 24.1°–28.7°) that minimized subsequent loss and need for revision. Findings support targeted preoperative planning to achieve sustainable correction while balancing risks of overcorrection and subsidence.

Segmental Lordosis Restoration: L5–S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) provides strong and durable correction of segmental lumbar lordosis and disc height, with most correction maintained at 1 year postoperatively.

Predictors of Lordosis Loss: Baseline obesity, lack of posterior fixation, and larger initial correction in L5–S1 lordosis are independent predictors of postoperative segmental lordosis loss within 1 year.

Complications: Loss of segmental lordosis increases the risk of cage subsidence and revision surgery, particularly due to pseudarthrosis.

Optimal Correction Thresholds: Achieving 6-week postoperative L5–S1 segmental lordosis between 21.6° and 26.8° minimizes the risk of lordotic loss and need for revision; PI-specific thresholds are 19.0°–24.8° (low PI), 21.0°–26.4° (average PI), and 24.1°–28.7° (high PI).

Risks of Overcorrection/Undercorrection: Overcorrection (>26.8°) increases risk of cage subsidence and mechanical complications, while undercorrection (<21.6°) may predispose to implant failure and adjacent segment disease.

Surgical Planning Importance: Preoperative planning should target lordosis correction within these thresholds and consider modifiable risk factors to optimize outcomes and reduce complications.

Comparison to Other Techniques: ALIF offers greater segmental correction than other lumbar interbody fusion techniques such as TLIF or XLIF.

Clinical Implications: Nearly half of patients experience some degree of lordosis loss post-ALIF, highlighting the need for careful patient selection, surgical technique, and postoperative monitoring.

Posted on

Segmental Lordosis After Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Expandable Oblique Versus Static Anterior Banana Cages

Operative Neurosurgery 30:78–89, 2026

This clinical research article compares segmental and lumbar lordosis outcomes after open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with posterior column osteotomy using either static anterior “banana” cages or obliquely placed expandable cages. In a single-surgeon retrospective cohort of 210 patients (327 segments), expandable cages produced a significantly greater median change in segmental lordosis (ΔSL) by 2.0° at six months, persisting after multivariate adjustment and propensity matching.

The study also reports inconsistent effects of cage type on overall lumbar lordosis (ΔLL), with subgroup and matched analyses yielding differing results, and found no difference in subsidence or complication rates. Findings emphasize the influence of preoperative segmental lordosis, segment level (notably L5–S1), and construct length on achieved correction, while noting limitations including retrospective design and lack of clinical outcomes.

Expandable Cages: Expandable obliquely placed cages in open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with posterior column osteotomy (PCO) produce a significantly greater median increase in segmental lordosis (ΔSL) of 2.0° compared to static anteriorly placed banana cages, representing a 50% increase.

Statistical Robustness: The greater segmental lordosis achieved with expandable cages remained significant after multivariate regression analysis and propensity score matching, confirming the reliability of the finding.

Overall Lumbar Lordosis (ΔLL): No clear advantage was found between cage types regarding the change in overall lumbar lordosis, with results varying depending on the statistical method used.

Surgical Technique Consistency: All surgeries were performed open with a full PCO using a consistent technique, minimizing confounding variables related to surgical approach or technique.

Preoperative Segmental Lordosis Impact: Segments with lower preoperative segmental lordosis (<15°) experienced the greatest increase in lordosis postoperatively, regardless of cage type.

L5-S1 Segment Benefit: Expandable cages were especially favorable at the L5-S1 segment, likely due to anatomical constraints that make insertion of large static cages more challenging at this level.

Complication and Subsidence Rates: No significant differences were observed between cage types in rates of complications, cage subsidence, or spondylolisthesis correction.

Clinical Outcomes Unclear: The study did not assess clinical outcomes, so the impact of the observed radiographic differences on patient-reported outcomes remains unknown.

Posted on

Segmental and overall lumbar lordosis after single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis

J Neurosurg Spine 43:70–82, 2025

This systematic review and meta-analysis found that single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) generally preserves segmental and overall lumbar lordosis, with preoperative alignment and use of expandable cages predicting postoperative lordosis. Greater segmental lordosis improvement was associated with reduced leg pain, but clinical outcome correlations were otherwise limited.

• Single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) generally preserves or slightly increases segmental and overall lumbar lordosis.

• Meta-analysis of 35 studies (1935 patients) showed significant but modest increases in segmental lordosis (mean +2.2°) and lumbar lordosis (mean +2.8°) postoperatively.

• Preoperative alignment and use of expandable cages are significant predictors of postoperative lordosis change.

• Greater improvement in segmental lordosis was associated with larger reductions in postoperative leg pain, but no strong correlation with other clinical outcomes was found.

• Most included studies were retrospective case series, with high heterogeneity in surgical technique and reporting.

• No significant association was found between facetectomy type, operative bed, or fixation technique and changes in lordosis.

• The main goal of MI-TLIF is neural decompression and fusion, not alignment correction; alternative approaches may be needed for major lordosis restoration.

Posted on

Is multilevel MIS-TLIF with bilateral facetectomy a lordosing procedure?

J Neurosurg Spine 42:158–168, 2025

• Objective: The study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of 3-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and its effect on sagittal balance, particularly in patients with different preoperative segmental lordosis (SL) values.

• Methods: A retrospective analysis of 47 patients who underwent 3-level MIS-TLIF was conducted, with a focus on radiological and clinical outcomes.

• Surgical Techniques: The procedure involved using bullet-shaped static polyetheretherketone cages filled with autologous bone graft and demineralized bone matrix (DBM).

• Results: Patients with a preoperative SL ≤ 27° showed significant improvements in spinopelvic parameters, while those with SL > 27° had insignificant changes.

• Clinical Outcomes: All patients reported clinical improvements, as evidenced by the Oswestry Disability Index and visual analog scale scores.

• Conclusions: The study concluded that 3-level MIS-TLIF can effectively improve sagittal balance, especially in patients with a smaller preoperative lordotic curve.

• Implications: The findings suggest that MIS-TLIF is beneficial for restoring lumbar alignment and improving clinical outcomes in specific patient groups.

• Limitations: The study’s limitations include a small sample size and lack of a control group, which may affect the generalizability of the results.

 

Posted on

Does Baseline Facet Arthropathy Influence Early Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes After Cervical Disc Replacement?

Neurosurgery 96:87–95, 2025

Severe facet arthropathy is generally a contraindication to undergoing cervical disc replacement (CDR) due to associated instability and potentially limited improvement in neck pain caused by arthropathy. This study evaluates the influence of facet arthropathy on radiographic/early clinical outcomes after CDR.

METHODS: One/two-level CDR patients from a single surgeon’s prospectively maintained database created 2 cohorts based on facet arthropathy: grade 0-1 or 2-3 (milder/moderate arthropathy). Patient-reported outcome measures for neck disability, neck/arm pain, depressive burden, mental/physical health/function were obtained preoperatively and through final follow-up (average follow-up: 8.5 ± 6.5 months). Preoperative/postoperative radiographs measured segmental lordosis and C2-C7/segmental range of motion (ROM) and determined facet grade for each operative level. Demographic differences, perioperative variables, baseline patient-reported outcomes, and intercohort differences/ changes for postoperative patient-reported/radiographic outcomes were determined.

RESULTS: Of 161 patients, 100 were in the milder arthropathy group. There were no differences in baseline patientreported outcomes. Patients with moderate arthropathy reported superior 6-week 12-Item Veterans Rand Mental/ Physical Composite Scores (P ≤ .047, all). By final follow-up, moderate patients reported better 12-Item Veterans Rand Mental/Physical Composite Scores/Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System-Physical Function/Patient-Health Questionnaire-9 (P ≤ .049, all). Cohorts reported similar improvements in all patientreported outcomes by 6 weeks/final follow-up. Those with more severe facet arthropathy had significantly shorter preoperative disc heights (P < .001). Accounting for baseline disc height differences, by final follow-up, moderate patients had lower segmental ROM (P = .036). There were no significant differences in radiographic measurement changes (P ≥ .264, all).

CONCLUSION: Postoperatively, patients with moderate facet arthropathy reported lower depressive burden, better mental health/physical function, and lower segmental ROM. However, this did not translate to inferior short-term clinical outcomes. Further study should be conducted on the relationship between clinical/radiographic outcomes in CDR patients with facet arthropathy.

Posted on

Could indirect decompression occur for cord compression by the ligamentum flavum with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion?

J Neurosurg Spine 42:100–109, 2025

Cord compression by the ligamentum flavum (CCLF) has been reported to adversely affect the clinical outcomes of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). While indirect decompression does occur for foraminal stenosis with ACDF, whether ACDF could improve CCLF with the distraction of disc space remains unclear. This study aimed to identify 1) whether indirect decompression occurs for CCLF with ACDF, and 2) risk factors that hinder the improvement of CCLF.

METHODS This retrospective cohort study included 119 patients who underwent ACDF for the treatment of cervical myelopathy and CCLF was detected on preoperative MRI. Patients who demonstrated improvement in CCLF grade after ACDF were included in the improved group, while those who did not show improvement were classified as the unimproved group. Patient characteristics, cervical sagittal parameters, neck and arm pain visual analog scale score, and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score were assessed. A comparison between the improved and unimproved groups was performed. Regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with CCLF grade improvement.

RESULTS Overall, 58.0% (69/119) of patients showed improvement in CCLF grade after ACDF. CCLF grade did not improve in the remaining 42.0% (50/119) of patients, and 3.4% (4/119) of patients experienced aggravation of CCLF after ACDF. Preoperative spondylolisthesis (OR 0.252, 95% CI 0.090–0.711; p = 0.009) and greater segmental lordosis 3 months postoperatively (OR 0.835, 95% CI 0.731–0.953; p = 0.008) were the factors that hindered the improvement of CCLF after ACDF. Furthermore, patients with higher pre- or postoperative CCLF grades showed significantly less improvement in JOA score 2 years postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS Indirect decompression for CCLF with ACDF is not reliable because 42.0% of patients did not demonstrate improvement in CCLF grade after the operation. Preoperative spondylolisthesis and postoperative increased segmental lordosis were risk factors for failure of CCLF improvement. Both pre- and postoperative higher CCLF grades were associated with poor neurological recovery 2 years postoperatively.

 

Posted on

A comparison of modern-era anterior lumbar interbody fusion and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at the lumbosacral junction

J Neurosurg Spine 39:785–792, 2023

Interbody fusion is the primary method for achieving arthrodesis across the lumbosacral junction in the setting of degenerative pathologies, such as spondylosis and spondylolisthesis. Two common techniques are anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). In recent years, interbody design and technology have advanced, and most earlier studies comparing ALIF and TLIF did not specifically assess the lumbosacral junction. This study compared changes in radiographic and clinical parameters between patients undergoing modern-era single-level ALIF and minimally invasive surgery (MIS) TLIF at L5–S1.

METHODS Consecutive patients who underwent single-segment L5–S1 ALIF or MIS TLIF performed by the senior authors over a 6-year interval (January 1, 2016–November 30, 2021) were retrospectively reviewed. Upright radiographs were used to determine pre- and postoperative lumbar lordosis, segmental lordosis, disc angle, and neuroforaminal height. Improvements in patient-reported outcome scores (Oswestry Disability Index and SF-36) were also compared.

RESULTS Overall, 108 patients (58 [54%] men, 50 [46%] women; mean [SD] age 57.6 [13.5] years) were included in the study. ALIF was performed in 49 patients, and TLIF was performed in 59 patients. The most common treatment indications were spondylolisthesis (50%, 54/108) and spondylosis (46%, 50/108). The cohorts did not differ in terms of intraoperative (p > 0.99) or postoperative (p = 0.73) complication rates. The mean (SD) hospital length of stay was significantly shorter for patients undergoing TLIF than ALIF (1.3 [0.6] days vs 2.0 [1.4] days, p < 0.001). Both techniques significantly improved L5–S1 segmental lordosis, disc angle, and neuroforaminal height (p ≤ 0.008). ALIF versus TLIF significantly increased mean [SD] segmental lordosis (12.5° [7.3°] vs 2.0° [5.7°], p < 0.001), disc angle (14.8° [5.5°] vs 3.0° [6.1°], p < 0.001), and neuroforaminal height (4.5 [4.6] mm vs 2.4 [3.0] mm, p = 0.008). Improvements in patient-reported outcome parameters and reoperation rates were similar between cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS When treating patients at a single segment across the lumbosacral junction, ALIF resulted in significantly greater increases in segmental lordosis, L5–S1 disc angle, and neuroforaminal height compared with MIS TLIF. Improvements in clinical parameters and reoperation rates were similar between the 2 techniques.

Posted on

Comparison of local and regional radiographic outcomes in minimally invasive and open TLIF

J Neurosurg Spine 37:384–394, 2022

Local and regional radiographic outcomes following minimally invasive (MI) transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus open TLIF remain unclear. The purpose of this study was to provide a comprehensive assessment of local and regional radiographic parameters following MI-TLIF and open TLIF. The authors hypothesized that open TLIF provides greater segmental and global lordosis correction than MI-TLIF.

METHODS A single-center retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing MI- or open TLIF for grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis was performed. One-to-one nearest-neighbor propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match patients who underwent open TLIF to those who underwent MI-TLIF. Sagittal segmental radiographic measures included segmental lordosis (SL), anterior disc height (ADH), posterior disc height (PDH), foraminal height (FH), percent spondylolisthesis, and cage position. Lumbopelvic radiographic parameters included overall lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI)–lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch, sacral slope (SS), and pelvic tilt (PT). Change in segmental or overall lordosis after surgery was considered “lordosing” if the change was > 0° and “kyphosing” if it was ≤ 0°. Student t-tests or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to compare outcomes between MI-TLIF and open-TLIF groups.

RESULTS A total of 267 patients were included in the study, 114 (43%) who underwent MI-TLIF and 153 (57%) who underwent open TLIF, with an average follow-up of 56.6 weeks (SD 23.5 weeks). After PSM, there were 75 patients in each group. At the latest follow-up both MI- and open-TLIF patients experienced significant improvements in assessment scores obtained with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the numeric rating scale for low-back pain (NRS-BP), without significant differences between groups (p > 0.05). Both MI- and open-TLIF patients experienced significant improvements in SL, ADH, and percent corrected spondylolisthesis compared to baseline (p < 0.001). However, the MI-TLIF group experienced significantly larger magnitudes of correction with respect to these metrics (ΔSL 4.14° ± 4.35° vs 1.15° ± 3.88°, p < 0.001; ΔADH 4.25 ± 3.68 vs 1.41 ± 3.77 mm, p < 0.001; percent corrected spondylolisthesis: −10.82% ± 6.47% vs −5.87% ± 8.32%, p < 0.001). In the MI-TLIF group, LL improved in 44% (0.3° ± 8.5°) of the cases, compared to 48% (0.9° ± 6.4°) of the cases in the open-TLIF group (p > 0.05). Stratification by operative technique (unilateral vs bilateral facetectomy) and by interbody device (static vs expandable) did not yield statistically significant differences (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS Both MI- and open-TLIF patients experienced significant improvements in patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures and local radiographic parameters, with neutral effects on regional alignment. Surprisingly, in our cohort, change in SL was significantly greater in MI-TLIF patients, perhaps reflecting the effect of operative techniques, technological innovations, and the preservation of the posterior tension band. Taking these results together, no significant overall differences in LL between groups were demonstrated, which suggests that MI-TLIF is comparable to open approaches in providing radiographic correction after surgery. These findings suggest that alignment targets can be achieved by either MI- or open-TLIF approaches, highlighting the importance of surgeon attention to these variables.

Posted on

Radiographic and clinical outcomes in one- and two-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions: a comparison of bullet versus banana cages

J Neurosurg Spine 36:918–927, 2022

The aim of this study was to determine whether cage morphology influences clinical and radiographic outcomes following short-segment transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures.

METHODS The authors retrospectively reviewed one- and two-level TLIFs at a single tertiary care center between August 2012 and November 2019 with a minimum 1-year radiographic and clinical follow-up. Two cohorts were compared based on interbody cage morphology: steerable “banana” cage or straight “bullet” cage. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), radiographs, and complications were analyzed.

RESULTS A total of 135 patients with 177 interbody levels were identified; 45 patients had 52 straight cages and 90 patients had 125 steerable cages. Segmental lordosis increased with steerable cages, while it decreased with straight cages (+3.8 ± 4.6 vs −1.9 ± 4.3, p < 0.001). Conversely, the mean segmental lordosis of adjacent lumbar levels decreased in the former group, while it increased in the latter group (−0.52 ± 1.9 vs +0.52 ± 2.1, p = 0.004). This reciprocal relationship results in global sagittal parameters, including pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis and lumbar distribution index, which did not change after surgery with either cage morphology. Multivariate analysis confirmed that steerable cage morphology, anterior cage positioning, and less preoperative index-level segmental lordosis were associated with greater improvement in index-level segmental lordosis. PROMs were improved after surgery with both cage types, and the degree of improvement did not differ between cohorts (p > 0.05). Perioperative and radiographic complications were similar between cohorts (p > 0.05). Overall reoperation rates, as well as reoperation rates for adjacent-segment disease within 2 years of surgery, were not significantly different between cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS Steerable cages are more likely to lie within the anterior disc space, thus increasing index-level segmental lordosis, which is accompanied by a reciprocal change in segmental alignment at the adjacent lumbar levels. The converse relationship occurs for straight cages, with a kyphotic change at the index levels and reciprocal lordosis occurring at adjacent levels.

 

Posted on

Usefulness of anterior column release for segmental lordosis restoration in degenerative lumbar kyphosis

J Neurosurg Spine 36:422–428, 2022

Three-column osteotomies (3COs) for surgical correction of lumbar kyphosis show a strong correction capacity, but this procedure carries high morbidity rates. The anterior column release (ACR) technique was developed as a less invasive procedure. In this study the authors aimed to evaluate sagittal alignment restoration using ACR and to determine factors that affect the degree of correction.

METHODS This study included 36 patients (68 cases) who underwent ACR of more than one level for adult spinal deformity. Parameters for regional sagittal alignment included segmental lordosis (SL). The parameters for global sagittal alignment included pelvic incidence, lumbar lordosis, sacral slope, pelvic tilt, and sagittal vertical axis (SVA). In addition, the interdiscal height (IDH) and difference of interdiscal angle (DIDA) were measured to evaluate the stiffness of the vertebra segment. The changes in SL were evaluated after ACR and the change of global sagittal alignment was also determined. Factors such as the location of the ACR level, IDH, DIDA, cage height, and additional posterior column osteotomy (PCO) were analyzed for correlation with the degree of SL correction.

RESULTS Thirty-six patients were included in this study. A total of 68 levels were operated with the ACR (8 levels at L2–3, 27 levels at L3–4, and 33 levels at L4–5). ACR was performed for 1 level in 10 patients, 2 levels in 20, and 3 levels in 6 patients (mean 1.9   0.7 levels per patient). Mean follow-up duration was 27.1   4.2 months. The mean SL of the total segment was 0.4    7.2  preoperatively and increased by 15.3    5.5  at the last follow-up (p < 0.001); thus, the mean increase of SL was 14.9    8.1  per one ACR. Global sagittal alignment was also improved following SL restoration with SVA from 101.9 mm to 31.4 mm. The degree of SL correction was correlated with the location of ACR level (p = 0.041) and was not correlated with IDH, DIDA, cage height and additional PCO.

CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated that the mean correction angle of SL was 14.9 per one ACR. The degree of disc space collapse and stiffness of segment did not affect the degree of correction by ACR.

 

Posted on

Does transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion induce lordosis or kyphosis?

J Neurosurg Spine 35:419–426, 2021

Conflicting reports exist about whether transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) induces lordosis or kyphosis, ranging from decreasing lordosis by 3.71° to increasing it by 18.8°. In this study, the authors’ aim was to identify factors that result in kyphosis or lordosis after TLIF.

METHODS A single-center, retrospective study of open TLIF without osteotomy for spondylolisthesis with a minimum 2-year follow-up was undertaken. Preoperative and postoperative clinical and radiographic parameters and cage specifics were collected. TLIFs were considered to be “lordosing” if postoperative induction of lordosis was > 0° and “kyphosing” if postoperative induction of lordosis was ≤ 0°.

RESULTS A total of 137 patients with an average follow-up of 52.5 months (range 24–130 months) were included. The overall postoperative disc angle (DA) and segmental lordosis (SL) increased by 1.96° and 1.88° (p = 0.003 and p = 0.038), respectively, whereas overall lumbar lordosis remained unchanged (p = 0.133). Seventy-nine patients had lordosing TLIFs with a mean SL increase of 5.72° ± 3.97°, and 58 patients had kyphosing TLIFs with a mean decrease of 3.02° ± 2.98°. Multivariate analysis showed that a lower preoperative DA, lower preoperative SL, and anterior cage placement were correlated with the greatest increase in postoperative SL (p = 0.040, p < 0.001, and p = 0.035, respectively). There was no difference in demographics, cage type or height, or spinopelvic parameters between the groups (p > 0.05). Linear regression showed that the preoperative DA and SL correlated with SL after TLIF (R2 = 0.198, p < 0.001; and R2 = 0.2931, p < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS Whether a TLIF induces kyphosis or lordosis depends on the preoperative DA, preoperative SL, and cage position. Less-lordotic segments became more lordotic postoperatively, and highly lordotic segments may lose lordosis after TLIF. Cages placed more anteriorly were associated with more lordosis.

Proudly powered by WordPress