Risk Factors for Poor Matching of Intervertebral Fusion Devices After Posterior Vertebral Column Resection in Patients With Kyphosis or Kyphoscoliosis

Abstract

Objectives: Numerous studies have reported the manifestations and influencing factors of poor matching of intervertebral fusion devices (IFDs) in patients with cervical and lumbar degenerative diseases. However, there is currently no research addressing the use of IFDs matching in posterior vertebral column resection (PVCR) procedures. The purpose of this retrospective radiographic study was to analyze the risk factors associated with poor matching of IFDs following PVCR.

Methods: Data from 92 patients using IFDs following PVCR between June 2006 and July 2024 were reviewed. IFDs implantation failure, adjacent vertebral fractures, subsidence greater than 5 mm, angle formation exceeding 10°, and malposition (defined as one-third of the IFDs exceeding the outer edge of the matching interface) were used as screening indicators to divide patients into poor matching and matching groups. Potential risk factors of poor matching were assessed through univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. The multiple regression model was evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

Results: Among the 92 patients, 37 (40.2%) experienced poor matching. Univariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the preoperative and postoperative sagittal Cobb angles, the angle between osteotomy surfaces, total instrumented vertebrae, the number of vertebrae resected, the height of IFDs, and the use of titanium mesh or artificial vertebral bodies were potential risk factors for poor matching. Backward stepwise multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that the preoperative sagittal Cobb angle (OR = 1.053, p = 0.001), the angle between osteotomy surfaces (OR = 1.152, p = 0.003), and the height of IFDs (OR = 1.058, p = 0.033) were independent risk factors for poor matching. The overall predictive performance of this multiple regression model (AUC = 0.872) for poor matching was deemed satisfactory.

Conclusion: The use of IFDs in PVCR was associated with a high rate of immediate poor matching. The preoperative sagittal Cobb angle, the angle between osteotomy surfaces, and the height of IFDs are independent risk factors for poor matching.

Keywords

intervertebral fusion devices / poor matching / posterior vertebral column resection / risk factors / spinal deformity

References

[1] S. I. Suk, J. H. Kim, W. J. Kim, S. M. Lee, E. R. Chung, and K. H. Nah, “Posterior Vertebral Column Resection for Severe Spinal Deformities,” Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 27, no. 21 (2002): 2374-2382.

[2] C. Yang, Z. Zheng, H. Liu, J. Wang, Y. J. Kim, and S. Cho, “Posterior Vertebral Column Resection in Spinal Deformity: A Systematic Review,” European Spine Journal 25, no. 8 (2016): 2368-2375.

[3] H. Wang, J. Guo, S. Wang, et al., “Instrumentation Failure After Posterior Vertebral Column Resection in Adult Spinal Deformity,” Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 42, no. 7 (2017): 471-478.

[4] Y. Atici, M. B. Balioglu, D. Kargin, M. Mert, A. Albayrak, and M. A. Kaygusuz, “Analysis of Complications Following Posterior Vertebral Column Resection for the Treatment of Severe Angular Kyphosis Greater Than 100°,” Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica 51, no. 3 (2017): 201-208.

[5] E. Zhou, H. Huang, Y. Zhao, L. Wang, and Y. Fan, “The Effects of Titanium Mesh Cage Size on the Biomechanical Responses of Cervical Spine After Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion: A Finite Element Study,” Clinical Biomechanics (Bristol, Avon) 91 (2022): 105547.

[6] R. J. R. Fernandes, A. Gee, A. J. Kanawati, et al., “Evaluation of the Contact Surface Between Vertebral Endplate and 3D Printed Patient-Specific Cage vs Commercial Cage,” Scientific Reports 12, no. 1 (2022): 12505.

[7] U. K. Dhar, E. L. Menzer, M. Lin, et al., “Factors Influencing Cage Subsidence in Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Discectomy: A Systematic Review,” European Spine Journal 32, no. 3 (2023): 957-968.

[8] H. Kimura, S. Fujibayashi, B. Otsuki, et al., “Risk Factors for Cage Migration Following Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Combined With Posterior Instrumentation: A Multicenter Retrospective Study of 983 Cases,” Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 48 (2023): 1741-1748.

[9] Y. Yu, D. L. Robinson, D. C. Ackland, Y. Yang, and P. V. S. Lee, “Influence of the Geometric and Material Properties of Lumbar Endplate on Lumbar Interbody Fusion Failure: A Systematic Review,” Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research 17, no. 1 (2022): 224.

[10] A. Jaeger, D. Giber, C. Bastard, et al., “Risk Factors of Instrumentation Failure and Pseudarthrosis After Stand-Alone L5-S1 Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Retrospective Cohort Study,” Journal of Neurosurgery. Spine 31, no. 3 (2019): 338-346.

[11] T. Xie, L. Pu, L. Zhao, et al., “Influence of Coronal-Morphology of Endplate and Intervertebral Space to Cage Subsidence and Fusion Following Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 23, no. 1 (2022): 633.

[12] Y. C. Yao, P. H. Chou, H. H. Lin, S. T. Wang, C. L. Liu, and M. C. Chang, “Risk Factors of Cage Subsidence in Patients Received Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion,” Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 45, no. 19 (2020): E1279-E1285.

[13] A. J. Pisano, D. R. Fredericks, T. Steelman, C. Riccio, M. D. Helgeson, and S. C. Wagner, “Lumbar Disc Height and Vertebral Hounsfield Units: Association With Interbody Cage Subsidence,” Neurosurgical Focus 49, no. 2 (2020): E9.

[14] X. Hu, S. Kenan, M. Cheng, W. Cai, W. Huang, and W. Yan, “3D-Printed Patient-Customized Artificial Vertebral Body for Spinal Reconstruction After Total En Bloc Spondylectomy of Complex Multi-Level Spinal Tumors,” International Journal of Bioprinting 8, no. 3 (2022): 576.

[15] H. Igarashi, M. Hoshino, K. Omori, et al., “Factors Influencing Interbody Cage Subsidence Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion,” Clinical Spine Surgery 32, no. 7 (2019): 297-302.

[16] K. Satake, T. Kanemura, H. Yamaguchi, N. Segi, and J. Ouchida, “Predisposing Factors for Intraoperative Endplate Injury of Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion,” Asian Spine Journal 10, no. 5 (2016): 907-914.

[17] T. Kaito, N. Hosono, Y. Mukai, T. Makino, T. Fuji, and K. Yonenobu, “Induction of Early Degeneration of the Adjacent Segment After Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion by Excessive Distraction of Lumbar Disc Space,” Journal of Neurosurgery. Spine 12, no. 6 (2010): 671-679.

[18] A. Kawabata, T. Yoshii, K. Sakai, et al., “Identification of Predictive Factors for Mechanical Complications After Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: A Multi-Institutional Retrospective Study,” Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 45, no. 17 (2020): 1185-1192.

[19] L. Ding, Z. Sun, W. Li, et al., “Risk Factors of Postoperative Coronal Balance Transition in Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis,” Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 49, no. 2 (2024): 97-106.

[20] Y. Atıcı, B. Polat, S. Erdoğan, et al., “Radiologic Outcomes and Complication Analysis of the Posterior Vertebral Column Resection in the Treatment of Previously Operated Severe Kyphoscoliosis: A Retrospective Case Series,” World Neurosurgery 138 (2020): e690-e697.

[21] X. Xin, F. Wang, and X. Liu, “A 3D-Printed Personalized, Combined, Modular Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy Guide Plate System: An Experimental Study,” Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 47, no. 13 (2022): 931-937.

[22] X. Xin, X. Liu, Y. Zhu, J. Li, C. Yue, and D. Hao, “3D-Printed Guide Plate System-Assisted Thoracolumbar Kyphosis Osteotomy: A Technical Case Series,” World Neurosurgery 173 (2023): 28-33.

[23] C. A. Molina, C. F. Dibble, S. L. Lo, T. Witham, and D. M. Sciubba, “Augmented Reality-Mediated Stereotactic Navigation for Execution of en Bloc Lumbar Spondylectomy Osteotomies,” Journal of Neurosurgery. Spine 34, no. 5 (2021): 700-705.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

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