Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Fusion rate according to mixture ratio and volumes of bone graft in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: minimum 2-year follow-up

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

Hydroxyapatite (HA) is commonly used as bone substitute in clinical practices. However, only few studies have compared the relationship between the mixture ratio of bone graft in the actual clinical field and fusion rate according to bone graft volume. The study aimed to analyze the fusion rate according to the mixture ratio and the amount of bone graft in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF).

Methods

A total number of 88 subjects who completed a 2-year follow-up after MI-TLIF participated in this study. Subjects were divided into three groups: Group 1 with local autograft, Group II with a mixture of HA and autobone of over 50 %, and Group III with a mixture of HA and autobone of less than 50 %. Subjects were also grouped into two groups: Group A with a graft volume of less than 12 ml and Group B with more than 12 ml. The correlation of mixture ratio and the graft volume with fusion rate was analyzed. For clinical analysis, visual analogue scale for pain and Oswestry Disability Index were used. Bone integration was evaluated based on the classification methods described in the Burkus study.

Results

Fusion rates are increased according to the ratio of autograft in all groups: 90.9 % in Group I, 87.8 % in Group II, and 85.7 % in Group III. However, there were no significant differences between groups (p = 0.22). The fusion rates significantly increased as the amount of bone graft increased to over 12 ml, showing 81.5 % in Group A and 92.0 % in Group B (p = 0.03).

Conclusions

A high rate of fusion was achieved in MI-TLIF in graft volume of more than 12 ml. We therefore recommend at least 12 ml of bone graft volume for successful fusion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dhall SS, Wang MY, Mummaneni PV (2008) Clinical and radiographic comparison of mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in 42 patients with long-term follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine 9(6):560–565. doi:10.3171/SPI.2008.9.08142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Isaacs RE, Podichetty VK, Santiago P, Sandhu FA, Spears J, Kelly K, Rice L, Fessler RG (2005) Minimally invasive microendoscopy-assisted transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with instrumentation. J Neurosurg Spine 3(2):98–105. doi:10.3171/spi.2005.3.2.0098

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Mummaneni PV, Rodts GE, Jr (2005) The mini-open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurgery 57(4):256–261 discussion 256–261

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Park P, Foley KT (2008) Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with reduction of spondylolisthesis: technique and outcomes after a minimum of 2 years’ follow-up. Neurosurg Focus 25(2):E16. doi:10.3171/FOC/2008/25/8/E16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Park Y, Ha JW, Lee YT, Sung NY (2011) The effect of a radiographic solid fusion on clinical outcomes after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J 11(3):205–212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Aspenberg P, Albrektsson T, Thorngren KG (1989) Local application of growth-factor IGF-1 to healing bone. Experiments with a titanium chamber in rabbits. Acta Orthop Scand 60(5):607–610. doi:10.3109/17453678909150132

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cook SD, Dalton JE, Prewett AB, Whitecloud TS, 3rd (1995) In vivo evaluation of demineralized bone matrix as a bone graft substitute for posterior spinal fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 20 (8):877–886. doi:10.1097/00007632-199504150-00002

  8. Cook SD, Dalton JE, Tan EH, Whitecloud TS, 3rd, Rueger DC (1994) In vivo evaluation of recombinant human osteogenic protein (rhOP-1) implants as a bone graft substitute for spinal fusions. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 19 (15):1655–1663. doi:10.1097/00007632-199408000-00002

  9. Louis-Ugbo J, Murakami H, Kim HS, Minamide A, Boden SD (2004) Evidence of osteoinduction by Grafton demineralized bone matrix in nonhuman primate spinal fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29(4):360–366 discussion Z361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Martin GJ, Jr, Boden SD, Titus L, Scarborough NL (1999) New formulations of demineralized bone matrix as a more effective graft alternative in experimental posterolateral lumbar spine arthrodesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 24(7):637–645

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Choi DJAD, Lee SL et al (2008) The effect of demineralized bone matrix as a graft enhancer in posterior lumbar interbody fusion using cage and local bone chips. J Korean Soc Spine Surg 15(3):97. doi:10.4184/jkss.2008.15.3.157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Spivak JM, Hasharoni A (2001) Use of hydroxyapatite in spine surgery. Eur Spine J 10(Suppl 2):S197–S204. doi:10.1007/s005860100286

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chung JMCB, Lee CK, Lee JH et al (2009) Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using hydroxyapatite block—comparison with metal and PEEK cages. J Korean Soc Spine Surg 16(4):7. doi:10.4184/jkss.2009.16.4.243

    Google Scholar 

  14. Burkus JK, Foley K, Haid RW, LeHuec JC (2001) Surgical Interbody Research Group—radiographic assessment of interbody fusion devices: fusion criteria for anterior lumbar interbody surgery. Neurosurg Focus 10(4):E11

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Foley KT, Holly LT, Schwender JD (2003) Minimally invasive lumbar fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28 (15 Suppl):S26–35. doi:10.1097/01.BRS.0000076895.52418.5E

  16. Schwender JD, Holly LT, Rouben DP, Foley KT (2005) Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF): technical feasibility and initial results. J Spinal Disord Tech 18(Suppl):S1–S6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Thalgott JS, Giuffre JM, Fritts K, Timlin M, Klezl Z (2001) Instrumented posterolateral lumbar fusion using coralline hydroxyapatite with or without demineralized bone matrix, as an adjunct to autologous bone. Spine J 1(2):131–137

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hwang CJBJ, Koo KH, Lee JH, Yeom JS, Chang BS, Lee CK (2007) A comparative experimental study of allograft and porous hydroxyapatite as bone substitutes. J Korean Orthop Assoc 42:7. doi:10.4055/jkoa.2007.42.4.545

    Google Scholar 

  19. Finkemeier CG (2002) Bone-grafting and bone-graft substitutes. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A(3):454–464. doi:10.3923/javaa.2010.1055.1067

  20. Sartoris DJ, Gershuni DH, Akeson WH, Holmes RE, Resnick D (1986) Coralline hydroxyapatite bone graft substitutes: preliminary report of radiographic evaluation. Radiology 159(1):133–137. doi:10.1016/S1067-2516(96)80058-5

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Cheng USKD, Cho JL et al (2008) Comparison of the effect of hydroxyapatite and allogeneous bone as an adjunct to autogenous iliac bone grafting in posterolateral spinal fusion. J Korean Orthop Assoc 43:5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kang HJKT, Kweon SH et al (2011) The usefulness of hydroxyapatite bone transposition in treatment of metaphyseal fracture with bone defect. J Korean Musculoskelet Transpl Soc 11(1):5

    Google Scholar 

  23. Korovessis P, Koureas G, Zacharatos S, Papazisis Z, Lambiris E (2005) Correlative radiological, self-assessment and clinical analysis of evolution in instrumented dorsal and lateral fusion for degenerative lumbar spine disease. Autograft versus coralline hydroxyapatite. Eur Spine J 14(7):630–638. doi:10.1007/s00586-004-0855-5

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bucholz RW (2002) Nonallograft osteoconductive bone graft substitutes. Clin Orthop Relat Res 395:44–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Boden SD, Martin GJ, Jr., Morone M, Ugbo JL, Titus L, Hutton WC (1999) The use of coralline hydroxyapatite with bone marrow, autogenous bone graft, or osteoinductive bone protein extract for posterolateral lumbar spine fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 24(4):320–327

  26. Karabekir HS, Gocmen-Mas N, Edizer M, Ertekin T, Yazici C, Atamturk D (2011) Lumbar vertebra morphometry and stereological assesment of intervertebral space volumetry: a methodological study. Ann Anat 193(3):231–236. doi:10.1016/j.aanat.2011.01.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Pfirrmann CW, Metzdorf A, Elfering A, Hodler J, Boos N (2006) Effect of aging and degeneration on disc volume and shape: a quantitative study in asymptomatic volunteers. J Orthop Res 24(5):1086–1094. doi:10.1002/jor.20113

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Riouallon G, Lachaniette CH, Poignard A, Allain J (2013) Outcomes of anterior lumbar interbody fusion in low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults: a continuous series of 65 cases with an average follow-up of 6.6 years. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 99(2):155–161. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2012.12.009

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Zairi F, Arikat A, Allaoui M, Assaker R (2013) Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: comparison between open and mini-open approaches with two years follow-up. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 74(3):131–135. doi:10.1055/s-0032-1330956

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

No conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Dankook University College of Medicine, 16-5 Anseo-dong, Cheonan, 330-715, Korea

    Jae-Sung Yoo, Sang-Hyuk Min & Sung-Hyun Yoon

Authors
  1. Jae-Sung Yoo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sang-Hyuk Min
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sung-Hyun Yoon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sang-Hyuk Min.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yoo, JS., Min, SH. & Yoon, SH. Fusion rate according to mixture ratio and volumes of bone graft in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: minimum 2-year follow-up. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 25 (Suppl 1), 183–189 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-014-1529-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-014-1529-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation