Powered by OpenAIRE graph
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Revue de Chirurgie O...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Revue de Chirurgie Orthopédique et Traumatologique
Article . 2021 . Peer-reviewed
License: Elsevier TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 1 versions

Incidence et facteurs de risque de la migration des cages latérales après le premier temps d’arthrodèse intersomatique antéro-latérale circonférentielle

Authors: Hao Li; Zheng kuan Xu; Ning Zhang; Fangcai Li; Qixin Chen;

Incidence et facteurs de risque de la migration des cages latérales après le premier temps d’arthrodèse intersomatique antéro-latérale circonférentielle

Abstract

Abstract Background Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is a novel, minimally invasive technique for the surgical treatment of lumbar diseases. The aim of this study was to identify the incidence and risk factors of lateral cage migration (LCM) occurred after the first-stage LLIF. Hypothesis The hypothesis was that LCM occurred after the first-stage LLIF was associated with some demographic characteristics, surgical variables and radiographic parameters. Patients and methods Between June 2016 and August 2020, 335 patients (901 levels) underwent staged LLIF were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were classified into LCM and non-LCM group based on the experience of LCM before the second-stage posterior instrumentation. 100 patients in non-LCM were randomly sampled as a control group. Incidence of LCM was determined; demographic characteristics, surgical variables and radiographic parameters associated with LCM were compared between the LCM and control group. Univariate analyses and multivariable logistic regression analysis were used to identify the risk factors. Results LCM occurred after the first-stage LLIF was found in 19 (5.7%) patients. Bony endplate injury (OR, 106.255; 95% CI, 1.265–8924.765; p = 0.039) and greater preoperative range of motion (ROM) (OR, 2.083, 95% CI, 1.068–4.066, p = 0.031) were high-risk factors for LCM. LCM occurred mainly 3 days later after the first-stage LLIF, while 4 cases experienced severe neural symptoms, intolerable low back pain and finally underwent reoperation. Discussion LCM occurred after the first-stage LLIF was significantly associated with bony endplate injury and greater preoperative ROM. Second-stage posterior fixation should be performed as soon as possible or a supplement lateral fixation/self-locking cage should be used in high-risk patients. Level of Evidence IV.

Related Organizations
  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average