Comparison of Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion using Cage and Cage Combined with Pedicle Screw System

陈飞雁,顾湘杰,鲍根喜,王旭,华英汇,蒋欣
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1005-8478.2003.03.014
2003-01-01
Abstract:Objective: To compare the effect of posterior lumbar interbody fusion between using cage alone and cage combined with pedicle screw system, discuss the way to reduce postoperative complications and the way to improve fusion rate. Methods: Two hundred and two cases who received PLIF with cage or cage combined with pedicle screw yielded 243 operative lumbar segments from L2-S1 were followed up from 1996.1~2001.11,in which 110 cases who involved only one segment received cage only,other 50 who involved single segment received cage combined with pedicle screw; in those involving two segments 18 received cage alone and 23 combined with pedicle screw; only 1 case involved three segments and received cage combined with pedicle screw. A single cage was placed into each operative intervertebral space posterolaterally, in which 100 cylindrical threaded cage,90 contact cage,53 wedged cage were randomly used. Followed up period were from 6 months to 4.5 years, the Oswestry disability index was used to evaluate the curative effect,X-ray and laminal CT scanning were used to estimate fusion rate. Result:The fusion rate was 90.1% at 6 months,93% at 12 months,and 95.1% at 24 months postoperatively. The clinical symptom remission rate was 91.6% at 3 months and 95.0% at 6 months and later postoperatively. Postoperative com- plications: 30 cases suffered with transient nerve root injury and recovered in 3 months; 3 cases happened with cages retro-extrusion(1. 22%);5 cases met with CSF-leakage; 1 case of implant sinkage and pseuderarthritis. Conclusion: Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cage is satisfactory and reliable in treating with lumbar disease. There are still some complications when using cage alone especially in multiple segments, cage combined with pedicle screw is effective in preventing the retro-extrusion and loosening even sinkage and collapse of the implant. Excellent operative technique and appropriate choice of cage is the key point for a successful treatment.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?