PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Sadrameli, Saeed S.
AU  - Blaskiewicz, Donald J.
AU  - Asghar, Jahangir
AU  - Ames, Christopher P.
AU  - Mundis, Gregory M.
AU  - Osorio, Joseph A.
AU  - Smith, Justin S.
AU  - Yen, Chun-Po
AU  - Berven, Sigurd H.
AU  - Patel, Ashvin I.
AU  - Temple-Wong, Michele
AU  - Nicolau, Rodrigo J.
AU  - Kent, Roland S.
TI  - Predictability in Achieving Target Intervertebral Lordosis Using Personalized Interbody Implants
AID  - 10.14444/8637
DP  - 2024 Aug 23
TA  - International Journal of Spine Surgery
PG  - 8637
4099  - https://www.ijssurgery.com/content/early/2024/08/19/8637.short
4100  - https://www.ijssurgery.com/content/early/2024/08/19/8637.full
AB  - Background Lumbar lordosis distribution has become a pivotal factor in re-establishing the foundational alignment of the lumbar spine. This can directly influence overall sagittal alignment, leading to improved long-term outcomes for patients. Despite the wide availability of hyperlordotic stock cages intended to achieve optimal postoperative alignment, there is a lack of correlation between the lordotic shape of a cage and the resultant intervertebral alignment. Recently, personalized spine surgery has witnessed significant advancements, including 3D-printed personalized interbody implants, which are customized to the surgeon’s treatment and alignment goals. This study evaluates the reliability of 3D-printed patient-specific interbody implants to achieve the planned postoperative intervertebral alignment.Methods This is a retrospective study of 217 patients with spinal deformity or degenerative conditions. Patients were included if they received 3D-printed personalized interbody implants. The desired intervertebral lordosis (IVL) angle was prescribed into the device design for each personalized interbody (IVL goal). Standing postoperative radiographs were measured, and the IVL offset was calculated as IVL achieved minus IVL goal.Results In this patient population, 365 personalized interbodies were implanted, including 145 anterior lumbar interbody fusions (ALIFs), 99 lateral lumbar interbody fusions (LLIFs), and 121 transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions. Among the 365 treated levels, IVL offset was 1.1° ± 4.4° (mean ± SD). IVL was achieved within 5° of the plan in 299 levels (81.9%). IVL offset depended on the approach of the lumbar interbody fusion and was achieved within 5° for 85.9% of LLIF, 82.6% of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions and 78.6% of ALIFs. Ten levels (2.7%) missed the planned IVL by >10°. ALIF and LLIF levels in which the plan was missed by more than 5° tended to be overcorrected.Conclusions This study supports the use of 3D-printed personalized interbody implants to achieve planned sagittal intervertebral alignment.Clinical Relevance Personalized interbody implants can consistently achieve IVL goals and potentially impact foundational lumbar alignment.Level of Evidence 4.