Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Hybrid construct for two levels disc disease in lumbar spine

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Prospective study. To study the validity of Hybrid construction (Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion) ALIF at one level and total disc arthroplasty (TDA) at adjacent, for two levels disc disease in lumbar spine as surgical strategy. With growing evidence that fusion constructs in the treatment of degenerative disc disease (DDD) may alter sagittal balance and contribute to undesirable complications in the long-term, total disc arthroplasty (TDA) slowly becomes an accepted treatment option for a selected group of patients. Despite encouraging early and intermediate term results of single-level total disc arthroplasty reported in the literature, there is growing evidence that two-level arthroplasty does not fare as well. Hybrid fusion is an attempt to address two-level DDD by combining the advantages of a single-level ALIF with those of a single-level arthroplasty. 42 patients (25 females and 17 males) underwent Hybrid fusion and had a median follow-up of 26.3 months. The primary functional outcomes were assessed before and after surgery with Oswestry Disability Index and the visual analogue score of the back and legs. Patients were divided into four groups according to the percentage improvement between preop and postop ODI scores. A total of 42 patients underwent a hybrid fusion as follows: 35 L5-S1 ALIF/L4-5 prosthesis, 3 L4-5 ALIF/L3-4 prosthesis, 2 L5-S1 ALIF/L4-5 prosthesis/L3-4 prosthesis, 1 L5-S1 prosthesis/L4-5 ALIF, and 1 L5-S1 ALIF/L4-5 ALIF/L3-4 prosthesis. At 2-years clinical outcomes, mean reduction in ODI is 24.9 points (53.0% improvement compared to preop ODI). The visual analogue score for the back is 64.6% improvement. At 2-year clinical outcomes, Hybrid fusion is a viable surgical alternative for the treatment of two-level DDD in comparison with two-level TDA and with two-level fusion.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andersson GB (1978) Epidemiological features of chronic low back pain. Lancet 354:581–585

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Fritzell P, Hägg O, Wessberg P, Nordwall A, Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group (2001) Volvo award winner in clinical studies: lumbar fusion versus nonsurgical treatment for chronic low back pain: a multicenter randomized controlled trial from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. Spine 26:2521–2532 discussion 32-34

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Aunoble S, Hoste D, Donkersloot P, Liquois F, Basso Y, Le Huec JC (2006) Video-assisted ALIF with cage and anterior plate fixation for L5–S1 spondylolisthesis. J Spinal Disord Tech 19(7):471–476

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Burkus JK, Transfeldt EE, Kitchel SH, Watkins RG, Balderston RA (2002) Clinical and radiographic outcomes of anterior lumbar interbody fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2. Spine 27(21):2396–2408

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Pellisé F, Hernández A, Vidal X, Minguell J, Martínez C, Villanueva C (2007) Radiologic assessment of all unfused lumbar segments 7.5 years after instrumented posterior spinal fusion. Spine 32(5):574–579

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Schlegel JD, Smith JA, Schleusener RL (1996) Lumbar motion segment pathology adjacent to thoracolumbar, lumbar, and lumbosacral fusions. Spine 21:970–981

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hilibrand AS, Robbins M (2004) Adjacent segment degeneration and adjacent segment disease: the consequences of spinal fusion? Spine J 4(6 Suppl):190S–194S

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bertagnoli R, Tropiano P, Zigler J, Karg A, Voigt S (2005) Hybrid constructs. Orthop Clin North Am 36(3):379–388

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Goel VK, Grauer JN, TCH Patel, Biyani A, Sairyo K, Vishnubhotla S, Matyas A, Cowgill I, Shaw M, Long R, Dick D, Panjabi MM, Serhan H (2005) Effects of charité artificial disc on the implanted and adjacent spinal segments mechanics using a hybrid testing protocol. Spine 30(24):2755–2764

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Panjabi M, Henderson G, Abjornson C, Yue J (2007) Multidirectional testing of one- and two- level ProDisc-L versus simulated fusions. Spine 2007:20; 32:1311–1319

    Google Scholar 

  13. Geisler FH, Blumenthal SL, Guyer RD et al (2004) Neurological Complications of lumbar artificial disc replacement and comparison of clinical results with those related to lumbar arthrodesis in the literature: results of a multicenter, prospective, randomised investigational device exemption study of Charite intervertebral disc. From the Joint Section Meeting on Disorders of the Spine and peripheral Nerves. J Neurosurg Spine 1:143–154

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lemaire JP, Carrier H, Sariali El-H, Skalli W, Lavaste F (2005) Clinical and radiological outcomes with the Charité artificial disc: a 10-year minimum follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech 18(4):353–359

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lemaire JP, Skalli W, Lavaste F, Templier A, Mendes F, Diop A, Sauty V, Laloux E (1997) Intervertebral disc prosthesis: results and prospects for the year 2000. Clin Orthop Relat Res 337:64–76

    Google Scholar 

  16. McAfee PC, Fedder IL, Saiedy S, Shucosky EM, Cunningham BW (2003) SB Charité disc replacement: report of 60 prospective randomized cases in a US center. J Spinal Disord Tech 16:424–433

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Tropiano P, Huang RC, Girardi FP, Cammisa FP Jr, Marnay T (2005) Lumbar total disc replacement: seven to eleven-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(3):490–496

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tropiano P, Huang RC, Girardi FP, Marnay T (2003) Lumbar disc replacement: preliminary results with ProDisc II after a minimum follow-up period of 1 year. J Spinal Disord Tech 16:362–368

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Zigler JE, Burd TA, Vialle EN, Sachs BL, Rashbaum RF, Ohnmeiss DD (2003) Lumbar spine arthroplasty: early results using the ProDisc II: a prospective randomized trial of arthroplasty versus fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech 16:352–361

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Siepe CJ, Mayer HM, Heinz-Leisenheimer M, Korge A (2007) Total lumbar disc replacement: different results for different levels. Spine 32:782–790

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Aunoble S, Hoste D, Donkersloot P, Liquois F, Basso Y, Le Huec JC (2006) Video-assisted ALIF with cage and anterior plate fixation for L5–S1 spondylolisthesis. J Spinal Disord Tech 19:471–476

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Regan JJ, Yuan H, McAfee PC (1999) Laparoscopic fusion of the lumbar spine: minimally invasive spine surgery: a prospective multicenter study evaluating open and laparoscopic lumbar fusion. Spine 15:402–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Glassman S, Gornet MF, Branch C, Polly D Jr, Peloza J, Schwender JD, Carreon L (2006) MOS short form 36 and Oswestry Disability Index outcomes in lumbar fusion: a multicenter experience. Spine J 6:21–26

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Barrick WT, Schofferman JA, Reynolds JB, Goldthwaite ND, McKeehen M, Keaney D, White AH (2000) Anterior lumbar fusion improves discogenic pain at levels of prior posterolateral fusion. Spine 25:853–857

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Christensen FB (2004) Lumbar spinal fusion: outcome in relation to surgical methods, choice of implant and postoperative rehabilitation. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 75:2–43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Fritzell P, Hägg O, Wessberg P, Nordwall A, Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group (2002) Chronic low back pain and fusion: a comparison of three surgical techniques: a prospective multicenter randomized study from the Swedish lumbar spine study group. Spine 27:1131–1141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Jang JS, Lee SH, Min JH, Kim SK, Han KM, Maeng DH (2007) Surgical treatment of failed back surgery syndrome due to sagittal imbalance. Spine 32(26):3081–3087

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lazennec JY, Ramaré S, Arafati N, Laudet CG, Gorin M, Roger B, Hansen S, Saillant G, Maurs L, Trabelsi R (2000) Sagittal alignment in lumbosacral fusion: relations between radiological parameters and pain. Eur Spine J 9(1):47–55

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Le Huec J, Basso Y, Mathews H, Mehbod A, Aunoble S, Friesem T, Zdeblick T (2005) The effect of single-level, total disc arthroplasty on sagittal balance parameters: a prospective study. Eur Spine J 14(5):480–486

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Tournier C, Aunoble S, Le Huec JC, Lemaire JP, Tropiano P, Lafage V, Skalli W (2007) Total disc arthroplasty: consequences for sagittal balance and lumbar spine movement. Eur Spine J 16(3):411–421

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Park CK, Ryu KS, Jee WH (2008) Degenerative changes of discs and facet joints in lumbar total disc replacement using ProDisc II: minimum two-year follow-up. Spine 33:1755–1761

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Boulay C, Tardieu C, Hecquet J, Benaim C, Mouilleseaux B, Marty C, Prat-Pradal D, Legaye J, Duval-Beaupère G, Pélissier J (2006) Sagittal alignment of spine and pelvis regulated by pelvic incidence: standard values and prediction of lordosis. Eur Spine J 15(4):415–422

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Roussouly P, Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J (2003) Geometrical and mechanical analysis of lumbar lordosis in an asymptomatic population: proposed classification. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 89(7):632–639 French

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Gornet MF, Burkus JK, Mathews HH, et al. (2007) MAVERICK total disc replacement vs. anterior lumbar interbody fusion with the infuse bone graft/LT-CAGE device: A prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter trial. Presented at the 22nd annual North American Spine Society, Austin, Texas, October 23–27

  35. Panjabi M, Malcolmson G, Teng E, Tominaga Y, Henderson G, Serhan H (2007) Hybrid testing of lumbar CHARITE discs versus fusions. Spine 32(9):959–966 discussion 967

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Bertagnoli R, James Y, Rahul S et al. (2006) The treatment of disabling single-level lumbar discogenic low back pain with total disc arthroplasty utilizing the prodisc prosthesis: a prospective study with 2-year minimum follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine 4(2):91

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean-Charles Le Huec.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aunoble, S., Meyrat, R., Al Sawad, Y. et al. Hybrid construct for two levels disc disease in lumbar spine. Eur Spine J 19, 290–296 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-1182-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-1182-7

Keywords

Navigation