Study Design Retrospective cohort study Objectives This study aimed to report the incidence and potential risk factors of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage subsidence following oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) for lumbar degenerative diseases. We proposed also an algorithm to minimize subsidence following OLIF surgery. Methods The study included a retrospective cohort of 107 consecutive patients (48 men and 59 women; mean age, 67.4 years) who had received either single- or multi-level OLIF between 2012 and 2019. Patients were classified into subsidence and non-subsidence groups. PEEK cage subsidence was defined as any violation of either endplate from the computed tomography scan in both sagittal and coronal views. Preoperative variables such as age, sex, body mass index, bone mineral density (BMD) measured by preoperative dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, smoking status, corticosteroid use, diagnosis, operative level, multifidus muscle cross-sectional area, and multifidus muscle fatty degeneration were collected. Age-related variables (height and length) were also documented. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to analyze the risk factors of subsidence. Results Of the 107 patients (137 levels), 50 (46.7%) met the subsidence criteria. Higher PEEK cage height had the strongest association with subsidence (OR = 9.59, P < .001). Other factors significantly associated with cage subsistence included age >60 years (OR = 3.15, P = .018), BMD <−2.5 (OR = 2.78, P = .006), and severe multifidus muscle fatty degeneration (OR = 1.97, P = .023). Conclusions Risk factors for subsidence in OLIF were age >60 years, BMD < −2.5, higher cage height, and severe multifidus muscle fatty degeneration. Patients who had subsidence had worse early (3 months) postoperative back and leg pain.

Purpose: No consensus criteria have been established regarding ideal candidates for indirect decompression with lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF), and contributing factors of indirect decompression failure were rarely reported. We aim to investigate the success rate of indirect decompression by LLIF with proposed selection criteria and identify risk factors associated with indirect decompression failure, defined as persistent pain requiring revision with direct decompression. Methods: Data from 191 patients undergoing LLIF were retrospectively reviewed. All the following criteria must be fulfilled: 1) dynamic clinical symptoms (pain relief in supine position), 2) presence of reducible disc height (recovered disc height in supine position), 3) no profound weakness and 4) no static stenosis. The success rate of indirect decompression with LLIF and results after at least 1-year of follow-up were collected. Preoperative, procedure-related, and postoperative factors were assessed for their relationship with failure. Results: Of 191 patients,13 patients (6.8%) required additional direct decompression due to persistent pain, giving a criteria success rate of 93.2%. Factors associated with indirect decompression failure included low bone mineral density (BMD) (T-score < 2.1), low reducible disc height (<13%), low postoperative disc height (<10 mm), high-grade cage subsidence, and use of plate fixation. Conclusion: We proposed patient selection criteria for indirect decompression with LLIF which had a satisfactory success rate and identified factors associated with the need for additional direct decompression. Our proposed criteria may assist selection of patients likely to achieve good results following indirect decompression with LLIF, and optimize selection based on risk factors of failure.

To compare clinical and radiographic outcomes among minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF), extreme lateral lumbar interbody fusion (XLIF), and oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) techniques. Overview of Literature: To date, there are many reports comparing outcomes between MIS-TLIF and XLIF, MIS-TLIF and OLIF, or XLIF and OLIF procedures. However, there are no previous studies comparing clinical and radiographic outcomes among all these three techniques. Methods: Data from patients who underwent minimally invasive (MI) fusion surgery for lumbar degenerative diseases at L4-L5 level was analyzed. Thirty patients each from MIS-TLIF, XLIF, and OLIF groups were recruited for propensity score matching. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) of the back and legs and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were evaluated preoperatively and at 1, 3, and 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. Radiographic outcomes were also compared. The fusion rate was evaluated at 1 year after surgeries. Results: The clinical outcomes were significantly improved in all groups. The disk height was significantly restored in all groups postoperatively, which was significantly more improved in XLIF and OLIF than MIS-TLIF group (p<0.001). The axial canal area was significantly increased more in MIS-TLIF versus XLIF and OLIF (p<0.001). The correction of lumbar lordotic angle and segmental sagittal angle were similar among these techniques. OLIF and XLIF groups showed less blood loss and shorter hospital stays than MIS-TLIF group (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in fusion rate among all groups. Conclusions: MIS-TLIF, XLIF, and OLIF facilitated safe and effective MI procedures for treating lumbar degenerative diseases. XLIF and OLIF can achieve clinical outcomes equivalent to MIS-TLIF by indirect decompression. XLIF and OLIF showed less blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and better disk and foraminal height restorations. In single-level L4-5, the restoration of sagittal alignment was similar between these three techniques.