38. MRI-based Endplate Bone Quality Score As a Predictor of Cage Subsidence Following Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Qiujiang Li,Yueming Song
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2024.06.481
IF: 4.297
2024-01-01
The Spine Journal
Abstract:BACKGROUND CONTEXT N/A PURPOSE To compare the predictive value of QCT-vBMD and MRI-based vertebral bone quality (VBQ), endplate bone quality (EBQ) score for cage subsidence (CS) following oblique lumbar interbody fusion combined with combined with anterolateral single-rod screw fixation (OLIF-AF). STUDY DESIGN/SETTING Retrospective single-center cohort. PATIENT SAMPLE Clinical data of 149 patients with single-level lumbar degenerative disease treated with OLIF-AF from February 2019 to October 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. OUTCOME MEASURES N/A METHODS Clinical data of 149 patients with single-level lumbar degenerative disease treated with OLIF-AF from February 2019 to October 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 54 males and 95 females with an average age of 58.82±7.28 years. VBQ score and EBQ score were measured by preoperative T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Cage subsidence was measured on lumbar X-rays at final follow-up and patients were divided into subsidence and nonsubsidence groups. Univariate analysis was performed on age, sex, body mass index (BMI), previous medical history, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), surgical level, Modic change, and cage parameters and perioperative radiographic data to preliminarily screen the influencing factors of CS. Cage parameters include cage length and cage height. Perioperative radiographic data included preop disc height, Immediate postop disc height, change of disc height, L1/2 QCT-vBMD, VBQ score and EBQ score. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to screen independent risk factors for CS. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of independent risk factors were drawn, area under the curves (AUC) were calculated, and differences of AUC of independent risk factors were evaluated by ROC curve comparison analysis. ROC curves were also used to determine the most appropriate threshold (cut-off) for EBQ with higher sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS A total of 149 patients were included in the final analysis (54 males, 95 females; mean age 58.82±7.28 years, mean BMI 25.93±4.85 kg/m2, mean follow-up 23.77±4.18 months. During follow-up, the incidence of CS was 30.2% (45/149). VBQ and EBQ score measurements showed good intraobserver and inter-observer reliability (ICC>0.80). Both VBQ and EBQ score were significantly higher in the subsidence group than in the nonsubsidence group (3.71±0.58 vs 3.09±0.46, 5.16±0.46 vs 4.47±0.46; both p<0.001). L1/2 QCT-vBMD was lower in the subsidence group compared with the nonsubsidence group (110.50±22.88 vs 136.96±19.20, p<0.001). Multivariate regression analysis showed lower L1/2 QCT-vBMD ([OR]=0.917;95%[CI] [0.878-0.959]; p<0.001); higher VBQ score ([OR]=3.569;95%[CI] [3.110-5.202]; p=0.001) and higher EBQ score ([OR]=5.720;95%[CI] [4.124-7.645]; p<0.001) were independently associated with CS. ROC curves showed EBQ score had the highest predictive value, and L1/2 QCT-vBMD and VBQ had similar predictive value. The predictive value AUC of EBQ score as CS was 0.855, its sensitivity was 85.6% and specificity was 67.7%, and its most appropriate threshold was 4.745. CONCLUSIONS MRI-based EBQ score was independent predictors of CS following OLIF-AF, and higher EBQ score was significantly associated with an increased risk of CS. EBQ scores showed higher predictive value for CS following OLIF-AF than L1/2 QCT-vBMD and VBQ score. FDA Device/Drug Status This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?