Abstract:Background/context: Degenerative lumbar disease can be addressed via an anterior or posterior approach, and with or without the use of an interbody cage. Although several studies have compared the type of approach and technique, there is a lack of literature assessing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and radiographic parameters between different fusion techniques. Purpose: To determine whether the surgical approach and fusion technique for lumbar degenerative disease had an effect on short-term PROMs and radiographic parameters. Study design/setting: Retrospective Cohort Study. Patient sample: Three hundred and ninety-one patients who underwent a 1-3 level lumbar spine fusion procedure at a high-volume academic center were retrospectively identified. Patients were divided into three groups based on the type of fusion they underwent: posterolateral fusion (PLF), anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Outcome measures: PROMs: Short Form-12 (SF-12) Physical Component Score (PCS) and Mental Component Score (MCS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Score (VAS) Back, VAS Leg. Spinopelvic measurements: Pelvic Tilt (PT), Sacral Slope (SS), Pelvic Incidence (PI), Lumbar Lordosis (LL), Segmental Lordosis (SL), PI-LL mismatch. Methods: Patients with less than 1-year follow-up were excluded from the cohort. Pre- and postoperative spinopelvic measurements were obtained for all patients. Univariate analysis (Chi-squared/Fisher's exact test or ANOVA test with post-hoc Bonferroni test) was used to compare among the three groups in the PROMs and radiographic spinopelvic parameters. Multiple linear regression was used to determine if fusion technique was an independent predictor of change in each patient outcome. Results: Two hundred and sixteen patients were included in the PLF group, 33 patients in the ALIF group, and 142 patients in the TLIF group. The PLF group was significantly older at baseline (p<.001) and had lower preoperative diagnosis rates of degenerative scoliosis and disc herniations (p<.001), whereas the ALIF group underwent a higher proportion of three-level fusions (p<.001). There was no significant difference in spinopelvic parameters preoperatively, however the ALIF group showed significantly more improvement in SL postoperatively (p=.004) than the PLF and TLIF groups. Within each group, SL improved for the PLF and ALIF groups (p=.002 for both), but not for the TLIF group (p=.238). Comparing patient outcomes, the ALIF group reported lower preoperative VAS Leg scores (p=.031), however, this difference resolved postoperatively. Stratifying for preoperative diagnosis, there were no significant differences in outcomes, except for a greater improvement in VAS Leg scores for degenerative scoliosis patients undergoing ALIF. Using multivariate analysis, fusion technique was not found to be a significant predictor of change in any patient outcome or in odds of revision. Conclusions: Lumbar degenerative disease can be treated with several different fusion techniques, however, the relationship between type of fusion and PROMs is not established. Based on the findings in this study, the ALIF group showed greater improvement in SL compared with the PLF and TLIF groups, however, there was no difference noted in overall LL, PI-LL mismatch or other spinopelvic parameters. Despite these radiographic findings, patient outcome measures remained similar between all three fusion types.

Impact of Lumbar Fusion on Sitting Spinopelvic Balance: Multisegmental Versus Monosegmental

The Standing and Sitting Spino‐Pelvic Sagittal Alignment in Patients with Instrumented Lumbar Fusion Might Correlate with Adjacent Segment Degeneration

Impact of Lumbar Fusion on Spinopelvic Sagittal Alignment from Standing to Sitting Position: Which Factor is Associated with Postoperative Functional Limitations Due to Lumbar Stiffness?

An analysis of spinopelvic sagittal alignment after lumbar lordosis reconstruction for degenerative spinal diseases: how much balance can be obtained?

Relationship between sagittal balance and adjacent segment disease in surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spine disease: meta-analysis and implications for choice of fusion technique

Effect of spinal-pelvic sagittal balance on the clinical outcomes after lumbar fusion surgery

Evaluation of Spinopelvic Alignment According to Roussouly Classification Can Predict the Occurrence of Adjacent Segment Disease after Lumbar Fusion

Pelvic Incidence–Lumbar Lordosis Mismatch Is Predisposed to Adjacent Segment Degeneration After Single-Level Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Case-Control Study

Is multilevel MIS-TLIF with bilateral facetectomy a lordosing procedure? A retrospective cohort of 3-level MIS-TLIF

How Does Sagittal Spinopelvic Alignment of Lumbar Multisegmental Spondylolysis Differ from Monosegmental Spondylolysis?

Spinal sagittal balance status affects postoperative actual falls and quality of life after decompression and fusion in-situ surgery in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis

Effects of different lumbar fusion modes on lumbar spine biomechanics

Effects of dynamic and rigid implantation on biomechanical characteristics of different sagittal alignment lumbar after single- or double-level spinal fixations: a finite-element modeling study

Has a Mono- or Bisegmental Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery an Influence on Self-Assessed Quality of Life, Trunk Range of Motion, and Gait Performance?

Restoration of the Spinopelvic Sagittal Balance in Isthmic Spondylolisthesis: Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion May Be Better Than Posterolateral Fusion.

Distinct fusion intersegmental parameters regarding local sagittal balance provide similar clinical outcomes: a comparative study of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

Impact of Sagittal Imbalance Correction on Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing MIS-TLIF for LSS

Influence of the posterior lumbar interbody fusion on the sagittal spino-pelvic parameters in isthmic L5-S1 spondylolisthesis.

A retrospective comparative study of postoperative sagittal balance in isthmic L5–S1 spondylolisthesis using single segment or two-segment pedicle screw fixation

Fusion technique does not affect short-term patient-reported outcomes for lumbar degenerative disease

Comparison of sagittal spinopelvic parameters in different types of double-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study