Journal of Orthopedics and Joint Surgery

Register      Login

VOLUME 6 , ISSUE 2 ( July-December, 2024 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Clinical and Radiological Outcome of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Polyether Ether Ketone Cage in Patients with Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Rishab Chandraprakash, Rajavel Kalirajan, Milap Bhalodiya, Vijayanand Balasubramanian, Gowthaman Nambiraj, Mohan Mahendramani

Keywords : Polyether ether ketone cage, Spondylolisthesis, Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Citation Information : Chandraprakash R, Kalirajan R, Bhalodiya M, Balasubramanian V, Nambiraj G, Mahendramani M. Clinical and Radiological Outcome of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Polyether Ether Ketone Cage in Patients with Lumbar Spondylolisthesis. 2024; 6 (2):130-135.

DOI: 10.5005/jojs-10079-1161

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 14-06-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: Lumbar spondylolisthesis has been a major cause of disability in the general population, mostly in the later part of the productive age-group. Various modes of treatment and surgeries have come up to tackle this morbidity, but with differing results. This study aims to assess clinical and radiological outcomes in patients who underwent transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with a polyether ether ketone (PEEK) cage for lumbar spondylolisthesis. Materials and methods: A total of 38 patients with varying grades of lumbar spondylolisthesis, among which, 11 males and 27 females were included in this study. All underwent TLIF with PEEK cage surgery. Their preoperative and postoperative pain score, functional scores, and radiological parameters were compared. All patients were followed up to 12 months. Results: The mean preoperative visual analog scale (VAS) started from 8.53 and came to 2.79, postoperatively. Around 68.4% of patients showed minimal disability. Around 60.5% of patients showed excellent outcomes. Around 73.7% of patients showed fusion at 12 months. Near-normal radiological parameters were achieved in all the patients. Five patients showed complications. Conclusion: Overall patient satisfaction was observed in this study, and good radiological outcomes were achieved. The PEEK cage augments the mechanical support provided by TLIF. Clinical significance: The modulus of elasticity of PEEK (3.6 GPa) makes it more closely aligned with cancellous bone (1–20 GPa) compared to traditionally used titanium cages (120 GPa). This alignment contributes to lower rates of bone dehiscence and improved patient outcomes.


HTML PDF Share
  1. Potter BK, Freedman BA, Verwiebe EG, et al. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: clinical and radiographic results and complications in 100 consecutive patients. J Spinal Disord Tech 2005;18(4):337–346. DOI: 10.1097/01.bsd.0000166642.69189.45
  2. Jagannathan J, Sansur CA, Oskouian RJ Jr, et al. Radiographic restoration of lumbar alignment after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurgery 2009;64(5):955–964. DOI: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000343544.77456.46
  3. Adogwa O, Parker SL, Davis BJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 2011;15(2):138–143. DOI: 10.3171/2011.3.SPINE10562
  4. Tormenti MJ, Maserati MB, Bonfield CM, et al. Perioperative surgical complications of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a single-center experience. J Neurosurg Spine 2012;16(1):44–50. DOI: 10.3171/2011.9.SPINE11373
  5. Zhang Q, Yuan Z, Zhou M, et al. A comparison of posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a literature review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2014;15:367. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-367
  6. Al Barbarawi MM, Audat ZM, Allouh MZ. Analytical comparison study of the clinical and radiological outcome of spine fixation using postero-lateral, posterior lumbar interbody and transforaminal lumbar interbody spinal fixation techniques to treat lumbar spine degenerative disc disease. Scoliosis 2015;10:17. DOI: 10.1186/s13013-015-0040-0
  7. Vila Canet G. A comparative study to assess fusion rate differences between titanium and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages in lumbar TLIF procedure. Euro Spine 2014.
  8. Nemoto O, Asazuma T, Yato Y, et al. Comparison of fusion rates following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using polyetheretherketone cages or titanium cages with transpedicular instrumentation. Eur Spine J 2014;23(10):2150–2155. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-014-3466-9
  9. Brantigan JW, Steffee AD. A carbon fiber implant to aid interbody lumbar fusion. Two-year clinical results in the first 26 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1993;18(14):2106–2107. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199310001-00030
  10. McAfee PC, DeVine JG, Chaput CD, et al. The indications for interbody fusion cages in the treatment of spondylolisthesis: analysis of 120 cases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005;30(6 Suppl):S60–S65. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000155578.62680.dd
  11. Panjabi MM. The stabilising system of spine: part II. Neutral zone and instability hypothesis. J Spinal Disord 1992;5(4):390–396. DOI: 10.1097/00002517-199212000-00002
  12. Lin B, Yu H, Chen Z, et al. Comparison of the PEEK cage and an autologous cage made from the lumbar spinous process and laminae in posterior lumbar interbody fusion. BMC Musculoskeletal Disord 2016;17(1):374. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-016-1237-y
  13. Boden SD, Riew KD, Yamaguchi K, et al. Orientation of the lumbar facet joints: association with degenerative disc disease. J Bone Joint Surg 1996;78(3):403–411. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-199603000-00012
  14. Panjabi MM, White AA 3rd. Basic biomechanics of the spine. Neurosurg 1980;7(1):76–93. DOI: 10.1227/00006123-198007000-00014
  15. Weinstein JN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, et al. Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. N Engl J Med 2007;356(22):2257–2270. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa070302
  16. Harris BM, Hilibrand AS, Savas PE, et al. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: the effect of various instrumentation techniques on the flexibility of the lumbar spine. Spine 2004;29(4):E65–E70. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000113034.74567.86
  17. Seaman S, Kerezoudis P, Bydon M, et al. Titanium vs. polyetheretherketone (PEEK) interbody fusion: meta-analysis and review of the literature. J Clin Neurosci 2014;44:23–29. DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2017.06.062
  18. Chen Y, Wang X, Lu X, et al. Comparison of titanium and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages in the surgical treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a prospective, randomized, control study with over 7-year follow-up. Eur Spine J 2013;22(7):1539–1546. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-013-2772-y
  19. Möller H, Hedlund R. Surgery versus conservative management in adult isthmic spondylolisthesis—a prospective randomized study: part 1. Spine 2000;25(13):1711–1715. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200007010-00016
  20. Hackenberg L, Halm H, Bullmann V, et al. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a safe technique with satisfactory three to five year results. Eur Spine J 2005;14(6):551–558. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-004-0830-1
  21. Boissiere L, Perrin G, Rigal J, et al. Lumbar-sacral fusion by a combined approach using interbody PEEK cage and posterior pedicle-screw fixation: clinical and radiological results from a prospective study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2013;99(8):945–951. DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2013.09.003
  22. Uysal M, Ozalay M, Derincek A, et al. Effect of PLIF and TLIF on sagittal spinopelvic balance of patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2018;52(4):272–276. DOI: 10.1016/j.aott.2018.03.001
  23. Yan DL, Pei FX, Li J, et al. Comparative study of PILF and TLIF treatment in adult degenerative spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J 2008;17(10):1311–1316. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-008-0739-1
  24. Kwon BK, Berta S, Daffner SD, et al. Radiographic analysis of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of adult isthmic spondylolisthesis. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003;16(5):469–476. DOI: 10.1097/00024720-200310000-00006
  25. Hagenmaier HS, Delawi D, Verschoor N, et al. No correlation between slip reduction in low-grade spondylolisthesis or change in neuroforaminal morphology and clinical outcome. BMC Musculoskeletal Disord 2013;14:245. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-14-245
  26. Soleman J, Schär K, Muroi C, et al. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using LOOP® PEEK cage implants: safety, feasibility, radiographic and clinical outcome. J Spine 2015;4:1–8. DOI: 10.4172/2165-7939.1000261
  27. Poh SY, Yue WM, Chen LT, et al. Two-year outcomes of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2011;19(2):135–140. DOI: 10.1177/230949901101900201
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.