A comparative study between local bone graft with a cage and with no cage in single posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF): a multicenter study

Zhili Liu,Jiaming Liu,Yongming Tan,Laichang He,Xinhua Long,Dong Yang,Shanhu Huang,Yong Shu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-014-2016-6
IF: 2.928
2014-01-01
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery
Abstract:Objective A retrospective study was performed to compare the clinical and radiological results between local bone graft with a cage and without using a cage in patients treated with posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery. Methods A total of 115 consecutive patients who underwent PLIF in three institutions were evaluated from December 2005 to December 2010. 53 patients received PLIF with local bone graft combined with using one PEEK cage, and 62 patients received the PLIF with local bone graft without using a cage. The clinical data and perioperative complications of the patients in the two groups were recorded. Preoperative and postoperative radiographs were taken to calculate the disc height and the interbody bony fusion rate. Functional outcome was assessed using the Kirkaldy-Willis criteria at the follow-up time. The results between the cage group and no cage group were compared. Results The mean follow-up time was 19 months in no cage group and 18.5 months in cage group ( P = 0.716). 20.9 % of patients (13 cases) in no cage group and 20.7 % of patients (11 cases) in cage group developed surgical complications perioperatively ( P = 0.978). 51.6 % patients in no cage group got excellent functional outcome at the final follow-up while 54.7 % patients in cage group ( P = 0.944). The mean interbody bony fusion time was 7.5 ± 4.5 months in no cage group and 8 ± 3.5 months in cage group ( P = 0.841). According to the radiographs measurement, no significant difference was found for the disc height at each level between the two groups at the final follow-up. Conclusion Local bone graft without a cage is as beneficial as that with a cage for PLIF. Comparing with local bone graft using a single cage, we believe that the purely local bone graft is a more ideal way in single PLIF.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?