Pear-Shaped Disc as a Risk Factor for Postoperative Sclerotic Modic Changes After Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Abstract

Objective: Pear-shaped disc could increase the risk of intraoperative end-plate injury, which may lead to postoperative sclerotic Modic Changes (MCs). However, there are no studies on the relationship between pear-shaped disc and postoperative sclerotic MCs. Therefore, this study investigates the risk factors for postoperative sclerotic MCs following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Specifically, the study focuses on the impact of pear-shaped disc on the occurrence of postoperative sclerotic MCs and evaluates its influence on clinical outcomes.

Methods: A total of 411 patients undergoing TLIF between January 2018 and January 2022 were included. Among them, 50 developed postoperative sclerotic MCs, while 361 did not. The two groups were matched based on various parameters. Clinical and radiographic evaluations, including visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), lumbar X-ray, CT, and MRI, were performed. Statistical analysis included independent sample t test, Pearson's chi-square test, and binary logistic regression analysis.

Results: After pairing, a total of 100 patients were included, including 50 patients in postoperative sclerotic MCs group and 50 patients in non-MCs group. There were 27 pear-shaped discs in the postoperative sclerotic MCs group, significantly higher than 7 in the non-MCs group (p < 0.001). Besides, BMI, endplate injury, and cage subsidence in the postoperative sclerotic MCs group were significantly higher than those in the non-MCs group, but the fusion rate was significantly lower than that in the non-MCs group. The postoperative and follow-up SL and surgical corrections of SL in postoperative sclerotic MCs group were significantly higher than those in non-MCs group. The independent risk factors identified for postoperative sclerotic MCs include pear-shaped disc and higher BMI.

Conclusion: Pear-shaped disc and higher body mass index (BMI) as independent risk factors for postoperative sclerotic MCs. Patients with sclerotic MCs exhibited a lower fusion rate, increased cage subsidence, and poorer symptom improvement compared to those without MCs.

Keywords

Endplate–cage mismatch / Lumbar degenerative disease / Pear-shaped disc / Postoperative sclerotic Modic changes / Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

References

[1] M. T. Modic, P. M. Steinberg, J. S. Ross, T. J. Masaryk, and J. R. Carter, “Degenerative Disk Disease: Assessment of Changes in Vertebral Body Marrow With MR Imaging,” Radiology 166 (1988): 193-199.

[2] M. T. Modic, T. J. Masaryk, J. S. Ross, and J. R. Carter, “Imaging of Degenerative Disk Disease,” Radiology 168, no. 1 (1988): 177-186.

[3] F. P. Mok, D. Samartzis, J. Karppinen, D. Y. Fong, K. D. Luk, and K. M. Cheung, “Modic Changes of the Lumbar Spine: Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Association With Disc Degeneration and Low Back Pain in a Large-Scale Population-Based Cohort,” Spine Journal 16, no. 1 (2016): 32-41.

[4] J. H. Määttä, S. Wadge, A. MacGregor, J. Karppinen, and F. M. Williams, “ISSLS Prize Winner: Vertebral Endplate (Modic) Change is an Independent Risk Factor for Episodes of Severe and Disabling Low Back Pain,” Spine 40, no. 15 (2015): 1187-1193.

[5] J. H. Määttä, M. Kraatari, L. Wolber, et al., “Vertebral Endplate Change as a Feature of Intervertebral Disc Degeneration: A Heritability Study,” European Spine Journal 23, no. 9 (2014): 1856-1862.

[6] E. E. Özcan-Ekşi, A. Yayla, Ö. Orhun, V. U. Turgut, H. N. Arslan, and M. Ekşi, “Is the Distribution Pattern of Modic Changes in Vertebral End-Plates Associated With the Severity of Intervertebral Disc Degeneration?: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of 527 Caucasians,” World Neurosurgery 150 (2021): e298-e304.

[7] Y. M. Kwon, D. K. Chin, B. H. Jin, K. S. Kim, Y. E. Cho, and S. U. Kuh, “Long Term Efficacy of Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Standard Cages Alone in Lumbar Disc Diseases Combined With Modic Changes,” Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Association 46, no. 4 (2009): 322-327.

[8] H. Li, S. Chen, H. Wei, et al., “Type 2 Sclerotic Modic Change Affect Fusion Result in Patients Undergoing PLIF With Pedicle Screw Instrumentation: A Retrospective Study,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 22, no. 1 (2021): 598.

[9] J. L. Gum, D. Reddy, and S. Glassman, “Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF),” JBJS Essential Surgical Techniques 6, no. 2 (2016): e22.

[10] J. Liu, R. Xie, C. T. Chin, et al., “Comparison of Lumbosacral Fusion Grade in Patients After Transforaminal and Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up,” Orthopaedic Surgery 15, no. 9 (2023): 2334-2341.

[11] J. Liu, B. Huang, L. Hao, et al., “Association Between Modic Changes and Endplate Sclerosis: Evidence From a Clinical Radiology Study and a Rabbit Model,” Journal of Orthopaedic Translation 16 (2019): 71-77.

[12] L. Xu, B. Chu, Y. Feng, F. Xu, and Y. F. Zou, “Modic Changes in Lumbar Spine: Prevalence and Distribution Patterns of End Plate Oedema and End Plate Sclerosis,” British Journal of Radiology 89, no. 1060 (2016): 20150650.

[13] P. R. Landham, A. S. Don, and P. A. Robertson, “Do Position and Size Matter? An Analysis of Cage and Placement Variables for Optimum Lordosis in PLIF Reconstruction,” European Spine Journal 26, no. 11 (2017): 2843-2850.

[14] Z. Zhang, B. W. Hu, L. Wang, et al., “Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes Between the n-HA/PA66 Cage and the PEEK Cage Used in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Matched-Pair Case Control Study,” Orthopaedic Surgery 15, no. 1 (2023): 152-161.

[15] T. Ge, Z. Xu, J. Wu, and Y. Sun, “Pear-Shaped Disk as a Risk Factor for Intraoperative End Plate Injury in Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion,” World Neurosurgery 165 (2022): e43-e50.

[16] P. C. McAfee, J. J. Regan, W. P. Geis, and I. L. Fedder, “Minimally Invasive Anterior Retroperitoneal Approach to the Lumbar Spine. Emphasis on the Lateral BAK,” Spine 23, no. 13 (1998): 1476-1484.

[17] J. H. Lee, J. H. Lee, J. W. Park, and H. S. Lee, “Fusion Rates of a Morselized Local Bone Graft in Polyetheretherketone Cages in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion by Quantitative Analysis Using Consecutive Three-Dimensional Computed Tomography Scans,” Spine Journal 11, no. 7 (2011): 647-653.

[18] Q. Li, Q. Gao, L. Wang, L. Liu, H. Yang, and Y. Song, “Comparison of Long-Term Follow-Up of n-HA PA66 Cage and PEEK Cage of Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Multi-Level Degenerative Lumbar Diseases: A Stepwise Propensity Score Matching Analysis,” Orthopaedic Surgery 16, no. 1 (2024): 17-28.

[19] W. H. Curry, F. A. Pintar, N. B. Doan, et al., “Lumbar Spine Endplate Fractures: Biomechanical Evaluation and Clinical Considerations Through Experimental Induction of Injury,” Journal of Orthopaedic Research 34, no. 6 (2016): 1084-1091.

[20] H. Kimura, J. Shikata, S. Odate, T. Soeda, and S. Yamamura, “Risk Factors for Cage Retropulsion After Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Analysis of 1070 Cases,” Spine 37, no. 13 (2012): 1164-1169.

[21] M. K. Park, K. T. Kim, W. S. Bang, et al., “Risk Factors for Cage Migration and Cage Retropulsion Following Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion,” Spine Journal 19, no. 3 (2019): 437-447.

[22] J. P. Grant, T. R. Oxland, and M. F. Dvorak, “Mapping the Structural Properties of the Lumbosacral Vertebral Endplates,” Spine 26, no. 8 (2001): 889-896.

[23] J. Zhou, J. Mi, Y. Peng, H. Han, and Z. Liu, “Causal Associations of Obesity With the Intervertebral Degeneration, Low Back Pain, and Sciatica: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study,” Frontiers in Endocrinology 12 (2021): 740200.

[24] S. Schuller, Y. P. Charles, and J. P. Steib, “Sagittal Spinopelvic Alignment and Body Mass Index in Patients With Degenerative Spondylolisthesis,” European Spine Journal 20, no. 5 (2011): 713-719.

[25] J. A. Coppock, S. T. Danyluk, Z. A. Englander, C. E. Spritzer, A. P. Goode, and L. E. DeFrate, “Increasing BMI Increases Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Deformation Following a Treadmill Walking Stress Test,” Journal of Biomechanics 121 (2021): 110392.

[26] A. Siccoli, V. E. Staartjes, A. M. Klukowska, J. P. Muizelaar, and M. L. Schröder, “Overweight and Smoking Promote Recurrent Lumbar Disk Herniation After Discectomy,” European Spine Journal 31, no. 3 (2022): 604-613.

[27] C. Wang, L. Tian, K. Zhang, et al., “Interleukin-6 Gene Knockout Antagonizes High-Fat-Induced Trabecular Bone Loss,” Journal of Molecular Endocrinology 57, no. 3 (2016): 161-170.

[28] A. J. Fields, E. C. Liebenberg, and J. C. Lotz, “Innervation of Pathologies in the Lumbar Vertebral End Plate and Intervertebral Disc,” Spine Journal 14, no. 3 (2014): 513-521.

[29] E. M. Pinto, J. R. Neves, M. Laranjeira, and J. Reis, “The Importance of Inflammatory Biomarkers in Non-Specific Acute and Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review,” European Spine Journal 32, no. 9 (2023): 3230-3244.

[30] I. Altun, “Cytokine Profile in Degenerated Painful Intervertebral Disc: Variability With Respect to Duration of Symptoms and Type of Disease,” Spine Journal 16, no. 7 (2016): 857-861.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2025 The Author(s). Orthopaedic Surgery published by Tianjin Hospital and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.