PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Ames, Christopher P.
AU  - Smith, Justin S.
AU  - Nicolau, Rodrigo J.
TI  - Tomographic Assessment of Fusion Rate, Implant-Endplate Contact Area, Subsidence, and Alignment With Lumbar Personalized Interbody Implants at 1-Year Follow-Up
AID  - 10.14444/8640
DP  - 2024 Aug 27
TA  - International Journal of Spine Surgery
PG  - 8640
4099  - https://www.ijssurgery.com/content/early/2024/08/27/8640.short
4100  - https://www.ijssurgery.com/content/early/2024/08/27/8640.full
AB  - Background Incongruity between irregularly shaped vertebral endplates and the uniform surfaces of stock interbody fusion cages has been identified as contributing to cage subsidence, pseudarthrosis, and unpredictable alignment. Advances in manufacturing techniques have driven the development of personalized interbody cages (PICs) that can match individual endplate morphology and provide the exact shape and size needed to fill the disc space and achieve the planned correction. This study used computed tomography (CT) imaging to evaluate the implant-endplate contact area, fusion, subsidence, and achievement of planned alignment correction in patients receiving PIC devices.Methods This retrospective study included patients treated for adult spinal deformity at a single site and implanted with PIC devices at L4 to L5 or L5 to S1 for segmental stabilization and alignment correction, who received 1-year postoperative CT images as part of their standard of care. An evaluation using 3-dimensional thin-section scans was conducted. Implant-endplate contact and signs of fusion were assessed in each CT slice across both endplates. The degree of subsidence as well as measures of segmental and global lumbar alignment were also assessed.Results Fifteen patients were included in the study, with a mean age of 68.2 years. Follow-up ranged between 9 and 14 months. Twenty-six total lumbar levels were implanted; 20 with PIC devices via the anterior lumbar interbody fusion approach, 2 with stock cages via the anterior lumbar interbody fusion approach, and 4 with PIC devices via the transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion approach. CT analysis of PIC-implanted levels found an overall implant-endplate contact area ratio of 93.9%, a subsidence rate of 4.5%, a fusion rate of 100%, and satisfactory segmental and global lumbar correction compared with the preoperative plan.Conclusions PIC implants can provide nearly complete contact with endplate surfaces regardless of the individual endplate morphology. Subsidence, fusion, and alignment assessments in this tomographic study illustrated results consistent with the benefits of a personalized interbody implant.Level of Evidence 4.