Factors associated with intervertebral cage subsidence in posterior lumbar fusion

The interbody fusion apparatus is a key component of the operation and plays a key role in the postoperative efficacy. Cage subsidence is one of the common complications after lumbar fusion and internal fixation. Clinical studies on the risk factors of cage subsidence are incomplete and inaccurate,...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research 2024-01, Vol.19 (1), p.7-7, Article 7
Hauptverfasser: Liu, Yan, Li, Nian-Hu
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The interbody fusion apparatus is a key component of the operation and plays a key role in the postoperative efficacy. Cage subsidence is one of the common complications after lumbar fusion and internal fixation. Clinical studies on the risk factors of cage subsidence are incomplete and inaccurate, especially paravertebral muscle atrophy and intervertebral bone fusion time. Among the patients who underwent PLIF surgery in our hospital from January 2016 to January 2019, 30 patients with cage subsidence and 30 patients without cage subsidence were randomly selected to be included in this study. The differences between the two groups were compared, and the relevant factors of cage subsidence were explored by single factor comparison and multiple logistic regression analysis. Bone mineral density (T) of the subsidence group [(- 1.84 ± 1.81) g/cm vs (- 0.87 ± 1.63) g/cm , P = 0.018] was significantly lower than that of the normal group. There were 4 patients with end plate injury in the subsidence group (P = 0.038). Preoperative end plate Modic changes [I/II/III, (7/2/2) vs (2/5/8), P = 0.043] were significantly different between the two groups. In the subsidence group, preoperative rCSA of psoas major muscle [(1.43 ± 0.40) vs (1.64 ± 0.41), P = 0.043], CSA of paravertebral muscle [(4530.25 ± 776.55) mm2 vs (4964.75 ± 888.48) mm , P = 0.047], paravertebral muscle rCSA [(3.03 ± 0.72) vs (3.84 ± 0.73), P 
ISSN:1749-799X
1749-799X
DOI:10.1186/s13018-023-04479-w