European Spine Journal

, 18:1637 | Cite as

Risk factors for adjacent segment disease after lumbar fusion

  • Choon Sung Lee
  • Chang Ju HwangEmail author
  • Sung-Woo Lee
  • Young-Joon Ahn
  • Yung-Tae Kim
  • Dong-Ho Lee
  • Mi Young Lee
Original Article


The incidence of adjacent segment problems after lumbar fusion has been found to vary, and risk factors for these problems have not been precisely verified, especially based on structural changes determined by magnetic resonance imaging. The purpose of this retrospective clinical study was to describe the incidence and clinical features of adjacent segment disease (ASD) after lumbar fusion and to determine its risk factors. We assessed the incidence of ASD in patients who underwent lumbar or lumbosacral fusions for degenerative conditions between August 1995 and March 2006 with at least a 1-year follow-up. Patients less than 35 years of age at the index spinal fusion, patients with uninstrumented fusion, and patients who had not achieved successful union were excluded. Of the 1069 patients who underwent fusions, 28 (2.62%) needed secondary operations because of ASD and were included in this study. In order to identify the risk factors, we matched a disease group and a control group. The disease group consisted of 26 of the 28 patients with ASD, excluding the 2 patients for whom we did not have initial MRI data. Each patient in the disease group was matched by age, sex, fusion level and follow-up period with a control patient. The assumed risk factors included disc and facet degeneration, instability, listhesis, rotational deformity, and disc wedging. The mean age of the 28 patients with ASD requiring surgical treatment was 58.4 years, which did not differ significantly from that of the population in which ASD did not develop (58.2 years, p = 0.894). Of the 21 patients who underwent floating fusion, only 1 developed distal ASD. Facet degeneration was a significant risk factor (p < 0.01) on logistic regression analysis. The incidence of distal ASD was much lower than that of proximal ASD. Pre-existing facet degeneration may be associated with a high risk of adjacent segment problems following lumbar fusion procedures.


Adjacent segment Degeneration Lumbar fusion Risk factor 



The authors thank Keunpyo Kim, PhD (MedImmune, Gaithersburg, MD) and Joseph Hong, DO (Rothman Institute, Philadelphia, PA) for their help in the preparation of this manuscript.


  1. 1.
    Aiki H, Ohwada O, Kobayashi H, Hayakawa M, Kawaguchi S, Takebayashi T, Yamashita T (2005) Adjacent segment stenosis after lumbar fusion requiring second operation. J Orthop Sci 10:490–495. doi: 10.1007/s00776-005-0919-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aota Y, Kumano K, Hirabayashi S (1995) Postfusion instability at the adjacent segments after rigid pedicle screw fixation for degenerative lumbar spinal disorders. J Spinal Disord 8:464–473. doi: 10.1097/00002517-199512000-00008 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bastian L, Lange U, Knop C, Tusch G, Blauth M (2001) Evaluation of the mobility of adjacent segments after posterior thoracolumbar fixation: a biomechanical study. Eur Spine J 10:295–300. doi: 10.1007/s005860100278 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen WJ, Lai PL, Niu CC, Chen LH, Fu TS, Wong CB (2001) Surgical treatment of adjacent instability after lumbar spine fusion. Spine 26:E519–E524. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200111150-00024 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chou WY, Hsu CJ, Chang WN, Wong CY (2002) Adjacent segment degeneration after lumbar spinal posterolateral fusion with instrumentation in elderly patients. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 122:39–43PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dekutoski MB, Schendel MJ, Ogilvie JW, Olsewski JM, Wallace LJ, Lewis JL (1994) Comparison of in vivo and in vitro adjacent segment motion after lumbar fusion. Spine 19:1745–1751. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199408000-00015 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Etebar S, Cahill DW (1999) Risk factors for adjacent-segment failure following lumbar fixation with rigid instrumentation for degenerative instability. J Neurosurg 90:163–169PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ghiselli G, Wang JC, Bhatia NN, Hsu WK, Dawson EG (2004) Adjacent segment degeneration in the lumbar spine. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86:1497–1503PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ghiselli G, Wang JC, Hsu WK, Dawson EG (2003) L5-S1 segment survivorship and clinical outcome analysis after L4-L5 isolated fusion. Spine 28:1275–1280. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200306150-00011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gillet P (2003) The fate of the adjacent motion segments after lumbar fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech 16:338–345PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ha KY, Schendel MJ, Lewis JL, Ogilvie JW (1993) Effect of immobilization and configuration on lumbar adjacent-segment biomechanics. J Spinal Disord 6:99–105. doi: 10.1097/00002517-199304000-00002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hilibrand AS, Robbins M (2004) Adjacent segment degeneration and adjacent segment disease: the consequences of spinal fusion? Spine J 4:190S–194S. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2004.07.007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kumar MN, Baklanov A, Chopin D (2001) Correlation between sagittal plane changes and adjacent segment degeneration following lumbar spine fusion. Eur Spine J 10:314–319. doi: 10.1007/s005860000239 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Landis RJ, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174. doi: 10.2307/2529310 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lee CK, Langrana NA (1984) Lumbosacral spinal fusion. A biomechanical study. Spine 9:574–581. doi: 10.1097/00007632-198409000-00007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Miyakoshi N, Abe E, Shimada Y, Okuyama K, Suzuki K, Sato K (2000) Outcome of one-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis and postoperative intervertebral disc degeneration adjacent to the fusion. Spine 25:1837–1842. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200007150-00016 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Okuda S, Iwasaki M, Miyauchi A, Aono H, Morita M, Yamamoto T (2004) Risk factors for adjacent segment degeneration after PLIF. Spine 29:1535–1540. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000131417.93637.9D CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Park P, Garton HJ, Gala VC, Hoff JT, McGillicuddy JE (2004) Adjacent segment disease after lumbar or lumbosacral fusion: review of the literature. Spine 29:1938–1944. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000137069.88904.03 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pellise F, Hernandez A, Vidal X, Minguell J, Martinez C, Villanueva C (2007) Radiologic assessment of all unfused lumbar segments 7.5 years after instrumented posterior spinal fusion. Spine 32:574–579. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000256875.17765.e6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Perdriolle R (1991) The torsion meter: a critical review. J Pediatr Orthop 11:789PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pfirrmann CWA, Metzdorf A, Zanetti M, Hodler J, Boos N (2001) Magnetic resonance classification of lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration. Spine 26:1873–1878. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200109010-00011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Phillips FM, Carlson GD, Bohlman HH, Hughes SS (2000) Results of surgery for spinal stenosis adjacent to previous lumbar fusion. J Spinal Disord 13:432–437. doi: 10.1097/00002517-200010000-00011 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rahm MD, Hall BB (1996) Adjacent-segment degeneration after lumbar fusion with instrumentation: a retrospective study. J Spinal Disord 9:392–400. doi: 10.1097/00002517-199610000-00005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shono Y, Kaneda K, Abumi K, McAfee PC, Cunningham BW (1998) Stability of posterior spinal instrumentation and its effects on adjacent motion segments in the lumbosacral spine. Spine 23:1550–1558. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199807150-00009 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Throckmorton TW, Hilibrand AS, Mencio GA, Hodge A, Spengler DM (2003) The impact of adjacent level disc degeneration on health status outcomes following lumbar fusion. Spine 28:2546–2550. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000092340.24070.F3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Umehara S, Zindrick MR, Patwardhan AG, Havey RM, Vrbos LA, Knight GW, Miyano S, Kirincic M, Kaneda K, Lorenz MA (2000) The biomechanical effect of postoperative hypolordosis in instrumented lumbar fusion on instrumented and adjacent spinal stenosis. Spine 25:1617–1624. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200007010-00004 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Weishaupt D, Zanetti M, Boos N, Hodler J (1999) MR imaging and CT in osteoarthritis of the lumbar facet joints. Skeletal Radiol 28:215–219. doi: 10.1007/s002560050503 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wiltse LL, Radecki SE, Biel HM, DiMartino PP, Oas RA, Farjalla G, Ravessoud FA, Wohletz C (1999) Comparative study of the incidence and severity of degenerative change in the transition zone after instrumented versus noninstrumented fusions of the lumbar spine. J Spinal Disord 12:27–33. doi: 10.1097/00002517-199902000-00004 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Choon Sung Lee
    • 1
  • Chang Ju Hwang
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sung-Woo Lee
    • 2
  • Young-Joon Ahn
    • 3
  • Yung-Tae Kim
    • 1
  • Dong-Ho Lee
    • 1
  • Mi Young Lee
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryAsan Medical Center, College of Medicine, University of UlsanSeoulKorea
  2. 2.Department of Orthopaedic SurgerySeoul Chuk Spine HospitalSeoulKorea
  3. 3.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryNational Police HospitalSeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations