OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical results of revision interbody fusion surgery between lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with propensity score (PS) adjustments and to investigate the efficacy of indirect decompression with LLIF in previously decompressed segments on the basis of radiological assessment. METHODS: A retrospective study of patients who underwent revision surgery for recurrence of neurological symptoms after posterior decompression surgery was performed. Postoperative complications and operative factors were evaluated and compared between LLIF and PLIF/TLIF. Moreover, postoperative improvement in cross-sectional areas (CSAs) in the spinal canal and intervertebral foramen was evaluated in LLIF cases. RESULTS: A total of 56 patients (21 and 35 cases of LLIF and PLIF/TLIF, respectively) were included. In the univariate analysis, the LLIF group had significantly more endplate injuries (p = 0.03) and neurological deficits (p = 0.042), whereas the PLIF/TLIF group demonstrated significantly more dural tears (p < 0.001), surgical site infections (SSIs) (p = 0.02), and estimated blood loss (EBL) (p < 0.001). After PS adjustments, the LLIF group still showed significantly more endplate injuries (p = 0.03), and the PLIF/TLIF group demonstrated significantly more dural tears (p < 0.001), EBL (p < 0.001), and operating time (p = 0.04). The PLIF/TLIF group showed a trend toward a higher incidence of SSI (p = 0.10). There was no statistically significant difference regarding improvement in the Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores between the 2 surgical procedures (p = 0.77). The CSAs in the spinal canal and foramen were both significantly improved (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: LLIF is a safe, effective, and less invasive procedure with acceptable complication rates for revision surgery for previously decompressed segments. Therefore, LLIF can be an alternative to PLIF/TLIF for restenosis after posterior decompression surgery.

Background: Most of the previous studies about the surgical treatment of dropped head syndrome (DHS) are small case series, and their primary outcome measures were cervical alignment parameters. Therefore, little is known about the associations between pre- and postoperative global sagittal alignment in the whole spine and the clinical outcomes of the surgical treatment of DHS. In this study, we investigated the surgical outcomes of DHS, including correction of cervical and global spinal sagittal alignment. Methods: This study was a retrospective observational study. Fifteen patients with DHS who had undergone correction surgery were enrolled. Surgical outcomes, including complications and implant failures, were investigated. We assessed cervical alignment parameters as well as spinopelvic global alignment parameters, including pelvic incidence (PI), lumbar lordosis (LL), and C7-sacral sagittal vertical axis (SVA). We examined the changes in these parameters using pre- and posoperative whole spine lateral radiographs. The parameters were compared between the failure and nonfailure groups. Results: Recurrence of sagittal imbalance and horizontal gaze difficulty was observed in 6 cases (40%). In all, 3 cases (20%) exhibited a distal junctional failure and required multiple surgeries with extension of fusion. Of all the radiographic parameters compared between the failure and nonfailure groups, significant differences were only observed in pre and postoperative SVA and PI-LL. Conclusions: Our results suggest that the global sagittal alignment parameters, including PI-LL and SVA, were different between the patients with failure and non failure, and these parameters might have notable impacts on surgical outcomes. Surgeons should consider PI-LL and SVA while determining the surgical course for patients with DHS.

Since vertebral kyphosis and abdominal circumference are thought to influence sarcopenia and fall risk in osteoporosis, we evaluated sarcopenia and fall risk in patients with different measurements of abdominal circumference and sagittal longitudinal axis (SVA). In this post hoc study, 227 patients aged 65 years or more who visited an outpatient osteoporosis clinic were included in the analysis. Sarcopenia was determined from lean body mass, grip strength, and walking speed by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry; SVA (median 40 mm) and abdominal circumference (median 80 cm) were compared between the four groups, each divided into two groups. Nutritional management, falls, and fall anxiety scores were also examined. The incidence of sarcopenia was significantly increased in those with abdominal circumference < 80 cm in both the SVA < 40 mm and SVA ≥ 40 mm groups (p < 0.05). Nonetheless, the fall scores of those with SVA < 40 mm were lower than those of individuals with SVA ≥ 40 mm (p < 0.01). Based on the results of this study, SVA and abdominal circumference values may predict the risk of sarcopenia and falls. More research is needed before our results can be translated into clinical practice.

Aims: The localization of necrotic areas has been reported to impact the prognosis and treatment strategy for osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH). Anteroposterior localization of the necrotic area after a femoral neck fracture (FNF) has not been properly investigated. We hypothesize that the change of the weight loading direction on the femoral head due to residual posterior tilt caused by malunited FNF may affect the location of ONFH. We investigate the relationship between the posterior tilt angle (PTA) and anteroposterior localization of osteonecrosis using lateral hip radiographs.Methods: Patients aged younger than 55 years diagnosed with ONFH after FNF were retrospectively reviewed. Overall, 65 hips (38 males and 27 females; mean age 32.6 years (SD 12.2)) met the inclusion criteria. Patients with stage 1 or 4 ONFH, as per the Association Research Circulation Osseous classification, were excluded. The ratios of anterior and posterior viable areas and necrotic areas of the femoral head to the articular surface were calculated by setting the femoral head centre as the reference point. The PTA was measured using Palm’s method. The association between the PTA and viable or necrotic areas of the femoral head was assessed using Spearman’s rank correlation analysis (median PTA 6.0° (interquartile range 3 to 11.5)).Results: We identified a negative correlation between PTA and anterior viable areas (rho −0.477; p = 0.001), and no correlation between PTA and necrotic (rho 0.229; p = 0.067) or posterior viable areas (rho 0.204; p = 0.132).Conclusion: Our results suggest that residual posterior tilt after FNF could affect the anteroposterior localization of necrosis.Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(5):394–400.