TY - JOUR
T1 - Achieving Alignment and Implant-Specific Goals in Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion, and Predictors of Postoperative Intradiscal Lordosis
T2 - The Role of Spinopelvic Parameters, Cage Lordosis, Intraoperative Consistency, Surgical Technique, and Treated Level
AU - Hamouda, Abdelrahman M.
AU - Pennington, Zach
AU - Kumar, Rahul
AU - Martini, Michael
AU - Obiri-Yeboah, Derrick
AU - Astudillo Potes, Maria
AU - Kendall, Nicholas
AU - Hafz, Omar
AU - Clarke, Michelle J.
AU - Krauss, William E.
AU - Nassr, Ahmad N.
AU - Freedman, Brett A.
AU - Helgeson, Melvin D.
AU - Sebastian, Arjun S.
AU - Mikula, Anthony L.
AU - Fogelson, Jeremy L.
AU - Elder, Benjamin D.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025
PY - 2025
Y1 - 2025
N2 - BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: – Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is a powerful procedure for sagittal correction and indirect decompression in the lumbar spine, though aggressive correction can cause stretch neuropraxia and implant subsidence. The aim of this study was to identify radiographic and clinical predictors of segmental correction, as well as to evaluate the degree to which segmental correction on supine intraoperative radiographs translates to postoperative upright alignment changes.METHODS: – We identified patients treated with 1- or 2-level ALIF at a tertiary care center and extracted data on demographics, spinopelvic parameters, and surgical details. Patients treated with isolated ALIF and ALIF with supplementary posterior instrumentation were compared on pre- and postoperative intradiscal lordosis (IDL) and change in IDL. Multivariable linear regression was performed to identify independent predictors of postoperative IDL.RESULTS: – We included 204 patients (median age 57 years, 55.4% male) treated at 258 levels, of whom 114 (55.9%) underwent supplementary posterior fixation and 150 (73.5%) underwent single-level implantation. Across all patients, postoperative IDL was significantly greater than preoperative segmental lordosis (25.4° vs 15.3°; P < .001). Standalone ALIF achieved less ΔIDL than circumferential fusion for L5/S1 procedures (7.4° vs 11.6°; P < .001), though ΔIDL for L3/4 and L4/5 was similar between the standalone and circumferential groups. Multivariable analysis showed postoperative IDL to be predicted by greater preoperative IDL (β = 0.26° per degree; [0.15, 0.36]; P < .001), L5/S1 [vs L4/5] implantation (β = 3.97°; [2.72, 5.21]; P < .001), use of supplementary posterior fixation (β = 1.80°; [0.70, 2.89]; P < .001), and greater implant lordosis (β = 0.62° per degree; [0.44, 0.79]; P < .001).CONCLUSION: – Postoperative IDL after 1- or 2-level ALIF is best predicted by placement of larger interbody sizes, L5/S1 implantation, greater baseline IDL, and use of adjunct posterior fixation. Patients with higher preoperative lordosis experienced smaller postoperative increases in IDL, though this was likely influenced by a treatment bias.
AB - BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: – Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is a powerful procedure for sagittal correction and indirect decompression in the lumbar spine, though aggressive correction can cause stretch neuropraxia and implant subsidence. The aim of this study was to identify radiographic and clinical predictors of segmental correction, as well as to evaluate the degree to which segmental correction on supine intraoperative radiographs translates to postoperative upright alignment changes.METHODS: – We identified patients treated with 1- or 2-level ALIF at a tertiary care center and extracted data on demographics, spinopelvic parameters, and surgical details. Patients treated with isolated ALIF and ALIF with supplementary posterior instrumentation were compared on pre- and postoperative intradiscal lordosis (IDL) and change in IDL. Multivariable linear regression was performed to identify independent predictors of postoperative IDL.RESULTS: – We included 204 patients (median age 57 years, 55.4% male) treated at 258 levels, of whom 114 (55.9%) underwent supplementary posterior fixation and 150 (73.5%) underwent single-level implantation. Across all patients, postoperative IDL was significantly greater than preoperative segmental lordosis (25.4° vs 15.3°; P < .001). Standalone ALIF achieved less ΔIDL than circumferential fusion for L5/S1 procedures (7.4° vs 11.6°; P < .001), though ΔIDL for L3/4 and L4/5 was similar between the standalone and circumferential groups. Multivariable analysis showed postoperative IDL to be predicted by greater preoperative IDL (β = 0.26° per degree; [0.15, 0.36]; P < .001), L5/S1 [vs L4/5] implantation (β = 3.97°; [2.72, 5.21]; P < .001), use of supplementary posterior fixation (β = 1.80°; [0.70, 2.89]; P < .001), and greater implant lordosis (β = 0.62° per degree; [0.44, 0.79]; P < .001).CONCLUSION: – Postoperative IDL after 1- or 2-level ALIF is best predicted by placement of larger interbody sizes, L5/S1 implantation, greater baseline IDL, and use of adjunct posterior fixation. Patients with higher preoperative lordosis experienced smaller postoperative increases in IDL, though this was likely influenced by a treatment bias.
KW - ALIF
KW - Anterior lumbar interbody fusion
KW - Indirect decompression
KW - Sagittal alignment
KW - Segmental lordosis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105028620288&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1227/ons.0000000000001868
DO - 10.1227/ons.0000000000001868
M3 - Article
C2 - 41460067
AN - SCOPUS:105028620288
SN - 2332-4260
JO - Operative neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.)
JF - Operative neurosurgery (Hagerstown, Md.)
ER -