[Reasons and strategies of reoperation after oblique lateral interbody fusion]
Zhong-You Zeng,Deng-Wei He,Wen-Fei Ni,Ping-Quan Chen,Wei Yu,Yong-Xing Song,Hong-Fei Wu,Shi-Yang Fan,Guo-Hao Song,Hai-Feng Wang,Fei Pei
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12200/j.issn.1003-0034.20230338
2024-08-25
Abstract:Objective: To summarize the reasons and management strategies of reoperation after oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF), and put forward preventive measures. Methods: From October 2015 to December 2019, 23 patients who underwent reoperation after OLIF in four spine surgery centers were retrospectively analyzed. There were 9 males and 14 females with an average age of (61.89±8.80) years old ranging from 44 to 81 years old. The index diagnosis was degenerative lumbar intervertebral dics diseases in 3 cases, discogenic low back pain in 1 case, degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis in 6 cases, lumbar spinal stenosis in 9 cases and degenerative lumbar spinal kyphoscoliosis in 4 cases. Sixteen patients were primarily treated with Stand-alone OLIF procedures and 7 cases were primarily treated with OLIF combined with posterior pedicle screw fixation. There were 17 cases of single fusion segment, 2 of 2 fusion segments, 4 of 3 fusion segments. All the cases underwent reoperation within 3 months after the initial surgery. The strategies of reoperation included supplementary posterior pedicle screw instrumentation in 16 cases;posterior laminectomy, cage adjustment and neurolysis in 2 cases, arthroplasty and neurolysis under endoscope in 1 case, posterior laminectomy and neurolysis in 1 case, pedicle screw adjustment in 1 case, exploration and decompression under percutaneous endoscopic in 1 case, interbody fusion cage and pedicle screw revision in 1 case. Visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) index were used to evaluate and compare the recovery of low back pain and lumbar function before reoperation and at the last follow-up. During the follow-up process, the phenomenon of fusion cage settlement or re-displacement, as well as the condition of intervertebral fusion, were observed. The changes in intervertebral space height before the first operation, after the first operation, before the second operation, 3 to 5 days after the second operation, 6 months after the second operation, and at the latest follow-up were measured and compared. Results: There was no skin necrosis and infection. All patients were followed up from 12 to 48 months with an average of (28.1±7.3) months. Nerve root injury symptoms were relieved within 3 to 6 months. No cage transverse shifting and no dislodgement, loosening or breakage of the instrumentation was observed in any patient during the follow-up period. Though the intervertebral disc height was obviously increased at the first postoperative, there was a rapid loss in the early stage, and still partially lost after reoperation. The VAS for back pain recovered from (6.20±1.69) points preoperatively to (1.60±0.71) points postoperatively(P<0.05). The ODI recovered from (40.60±7.01)% preoperatively to (9.14±2.66)% postoperatively(P<0.05). Conclusion: There is a risk of reoperation due to failure after OLIF surgery. The reasons for reoperation include preoperative bone loss or osteoporosis the initial surgery was performed by Stand-alone, intraoperative endplate injury, significant subsidence of the fusion cage after surgery, postoperative fusion cage displacement, nerve damage, etc. As long as it is discovered in a timely manner and handled properly, further surgery after OLIF surgery can achieve better clinical results, but prevention still needs to be strengthened.