Application of Ultrasonic Osteotome in Segmental Resection and Removal of Cage During Revision Surgery for Intervertebral Disc Space Infection After Lumbar Fusion

Junhui Liu , Yunyun Ouyang , Xuyang Zhang , Qibin Zhang , Chudi Fu , Fengdong Zhao

Orthopaedic Surgery ›› 2026, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (6) : 1216 -1222.

PDF (428KB)
Orthopaedic Surgery ›› 2026, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (6) :1216 -1222. DOI: 10.1111/os.70325
CLINICAL ARTICLE
Application of Ultrasonic Osteotome in Segmental Resection and Removal of Cage During Revision Surgery for Intervertebral Disc Space Infection After Lumbar Fusion
Author information +
History +
PDF (428KB)

Abstract

Objective: Cage removal is essential in revision surgery for intervertebral disc space infection (IVDS). The aim of this study is to investigate the effectiveness and safety of using ultrasonic osteotome in segmental resection and removal of cage during revision surgery for IVDS after lumbar fusion.

Method: We retrospectively reviewed 32 patients who underwent revision surgery for IVDS infection after lumbar fusion in our hospital from June 2018 to November 2024. The operation time, blood loss, nerve damage, success rate of removal, infection control, and fusion rate were compared between the traditional whole removal method (n = 15) and the ultrasonic osteotome-based segmental excision method (n = 17).

Results: The average incision length and hospital stay were not significantly different between the two groups (p > 0.05). Nevertheless, the time taken for removing the cage, the success rate of cage removal, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative drainage were significantly improved in the ultrasonic osteotome group compared with the traditional surgery group (p < 0.05). The assessment of postoperative recovery at 7 days and 1, 3, 12 months postoperation demonstrated significant improvements in VAS and ODI scores compared with the preoperative values in both groups. However, within-group and between-group analyses did not reveal significant differences at these intervals, even up to the 12-month evaluation (p > 0.05). Contrast-enhanced lumbar MRI scans conducted for the 32 patients at 3 months postoperation confirmed successful infection control among all patients. Both groups demonstrated no incidence of dural tears, cerebrospinal fluid leakages, or wound infection. In contrast, incisional fat liquefaction occurred in one and two patients in the ultrasonic osteotome and traditional surgery group, respectively, with all patients exhibiting satisfactory resolution following appropriate wound care. Moreover, a slight deterioration in the extensor muscle strength of the great toe was observed in two patients and an exacerbation of foot dorsum numbness was detected in one patient in the traditional surgery group, with all symptoms fully resolving within the 3-month follow-up period. In contrast, the ultrasonic osteotome group showed no such significant neurological function impairments. At 1-year postoperation, bone fusion was confirmed in both groups via CT reconstructions of the lumbar spine.

Conclusion: Compared with the traditional whole removal method, the ultrasonic osteotome-based segmental excision method has the advantages of shorter and controllable operation time, lower blood loss, higher success rate of removal, and lower risk of nerve damage, making it uniquely valuable in the revision surgery for IVDS infection after lumbar fusion.

Keywords

cage / postoperative IVDS infection / segmental resection / the ultrasonic osteotome

Cite this article

Download citation ▾
Junhui Liu, Yunyun Ouyang, Xuyang Zhang, Qibin Zhang, Chudi Fu, Fengdong Zhao. Application of Ultrasonic Osteotome in Segmental Resection and Removal of Cage During Revision Surgery for Intervertebral Disc Space Infection After Lumbar Fusion. Orthopaedic Surgery, 2026, 18 (6) : 1216-1222 DOI:10.1111/os.70325

登录浏览全文

4963

注册一个新账户 忘记密码

References

[1]

A. F. Pull ter Gunne, A. S. Mohamed, R. L. Skolasky, C. J. van Laarhoven, and D. B. Cohen, “The Presentation, Incidence, Etiology, and Treatment of Surgical Site Infections After Spinal Surgery,” Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35 (2010): 1323–1328.

[2]

K. Kobayashi, K. Ando, F. Kato, et al., “Reoperation Within 2 Years After Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Multicenter Study,” European Spine Journal 27 (2018): 1972–1980.

[3]

C. W. Chang, T. S. Fu, W. J. Chen, C. W. Chen, P. L. Lai, and S. H. Chen, “Management of Infected Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cage in Posterior Degenerative Lumbar Spine Surgery,” World Neurosurgery 126 (2019): e330–e341.

[4]

Y. D. Li, J. E. Chi, P. Y. Chiu, F. C. Kao, P. L. Lai, and T. T. Tsai, “The Comparison Between Anterior and Posterior Approaches for Removal of Infected Lumbar Interbody Cages and a Proposal Regarding the Use of Endoscope-Assisted Technique,” Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research 16 (2021): 386.

[5]

M. L. Lu, C. C. Niu, T. T. Tsai, T. S. Fu, L. H. Chen, and W. J. Chen, “Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Debridement and Fusion for the Treatment of Infective Spondylodiscitis in the Lumbar Spine,” European Spine Journal 24 (2015): 555–560.

[6]

S. Stübinger, J. Kuttenberger, A. Filippi, R. Sader, and H. F. Zeilhofer, “Intraoral Piezosurgery: Preliminary Results of a New Technique,” Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 63 (2005): 1283–1287.

[7]

T. Vercellotti and A. S. Pollack, “A New Bone Surgery Device: Sinus Grafting and Periodontal Surgery,” Compendium of Continuing Education in Dentistry 27 (2006): 319–325.

[8]

M. R. Sanborn, J. Balzer, P. C. Gerszten, P. Karausky, B. C. Cheng, and W. C. Welch, “Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Ultrasonic Osteotome Device in an Ovine Model,” Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 18 (2011): 1528–1533.

[9]

J. Liu, Z. Shan, Y. Chen, and F. Zhao, “Laminectomy for the Removal of Thoracic Ossification of the Ligamentum Flavum (TOLF) Using Ultrasonic and Conventional Osteotomes,” Journal of Visualized Experiments 194 (2023): e64339.

[10]

T. Mattikalli, K. Margetis, J. D. Lin, and J. Steinberger, “Recent Advances in Robotic-Assisted Laminectomy in Spine Surgery: A Narrative Review,” Asian Spine Journal (2025).

[11]

H. Wang, Z. Hu, G. Fan, and X. Liao, “Ultrasonic Osteotome in Posterior Endoscopic Cervical Discectomy for Cervical Radiculopathy,” Journal of Visualized Experiments 14 (2025): 224.

[12]

J. P. Segerlind, V. E. Staartjes, V. G. El-Hajj, E. Edström, and A. Elmi-Terander, “High-Frequency Ultrasonic Osteotomy in the Treatment of Intradural Spinal Tumors: Matched Cohort Study,” European Spine Journal 34 (2025): 3570–3577.

[13]

A. Krishnan, V. Chauhan, S. Agarawal, et al., “The Technique of a Modified Ponte Osteotomy Using Ultrasonic Bone Scalpel in Spinal Deformity Correction: Does It Save Time and Reduce Blood Loss?,” Cureus 17 (2025): e77858.

[14]

S. Koutsoumbelis, A. P. Hughes, F. P. Girardi, et al., “Risk Factors for Postoperative Infection Following Posterior Lumbar Instrumented Arthrodesis,” Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume 93 (2011): 1627–1633.

[15]

S. J. Janssen, Y. Braun, K. B. Wood, T. D. Cha, and J. H. Schwab, “Allogeneic Blood Transfusions and Postoperative Infections After Lumbar Spine Surgery,” Spine Journal 15 (2015): 901–909.

[16]

H. H. Lin, P. H. Chou, H. H. Ma, Y. W. Chang, S. T. Wang, and M. C. Chang, “Efficacy of Povidone Iodine Solution in the Prevention of Surgical Site Infections in Minimally Invasive Instrumented Spinal Fusion Surgery,” Global Spine Journal 12 (2022): 1058–1065.

[17]

F. Y. Chang, M. C. Chang, S. T. Wang, W. K. Yu, C. L. Liu, and T. H. Chen, “Can Povidone-Iodine Solution Be Used Safely in a Spinal Surgery?,” European Spine Journal 15 (2006): 1005–1014.

[18]

W. Hsiung, Y. C. Yao, H. H. Lin, et al., “Reducing Surgical Site Infections After Spine Surgery: The Optimal Amount of Normal Saline for Intra-Wound Irrigation,” Spine Journal 23 (2023): 1580–1585.

[19]

G. M. Ghobrial, D. W. Cadotte, K. Williams, M. G. Fehlings, and J. S. Harrop, “Complications From the Use of Intrawound Vancomycin in Lumbar Spinal Surgery: A Systematic Review,” Neurosurgical Focus 39 (2015): E11.

[20]

C. Eder, S. Schenk, J. Trifinopoulos, et al., “Does Intrawound Application of Vancomycin Influence Bone Healing in Spinal Surgery?,” European Spine Journal 25 (2016): 1021–1028.

[21]

E. Goldschmidt, J. Rasmussen, J. D. Chabot, et al., “The Effect of Vancomycin Powder on Human Dural Fibroblast Culture and Its Implications for Dural Repair During Spine Surgery,” Journal of Neurosurgery. Spine 25 (2016): 665–670.

[22]

P. J. Cahill, D. E. Warnick, M. J. Lee, et al., “Infection After Spinal Fusion for Pediatric Spinal Deformity: Thirty Years of Experience at a Single Institution,” Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35 (2010): 1211–1217.

[23]

A. Abdul-Jabbar, S. H. Berven, S. S. Hu, et al., “Surgical Site Infections in Spine Surgery: Identification of Microbiologic and Surgical Characteristics in 239 Cases,” Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38 (2013): E1425-1431.

[24]

W. J. Wang, W. K. Chen, Y. G. Yan, N. Z. Yao, and C. Wang, “Application of Anterior Debridement and Reconstruction With Anatomical Screw-Plate Fixation for Lumbosacral Tuberculosis: A 2-Year-Plus Follow-Up,” Medicine 96 (2017): e7103.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2026 The Author(s). Orthopaedic Surgery published by Tianjin Hospital and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.

PDF (428KB)

0

Accesses

0

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/