Abstract
Introduction: The radiographic criteria for successful lumbar arthrodesis remains controversial. Plain radiographs including flexion-extension views are commonly used to assess fusion, but there is disagreement on the degree of apparent motion that is significant. Helical CT assessment of bridging bone between vertebrae is considered to be the most accurate method currently available. This study compared the use of plain radiographs including flexion-extension views with helical CT scans in the assessment of lumbar interbody fusion.
Methods: Plain radiographs (including flexion-extension views) and helical CT scans were performed on 32 patients (47 levels) five years after ALIF using carbon fibre cages and autologous bone. A radiologist assessed fusion utilising the Hutter method to detect movement, whilst a spinal surgeon measured movement in degrees using the Simmons method. Helical CT scans (with sagittal and coronal reformatting) were assessed for the presence of bridging trabecular bone.
Results: The radiographic fusion rate was 85% based on the presence of bridging bone, and also 85% with the Hutter method. The fusion rate was 74% when movement of at least two degrees was considered significant, but was 98% with the five degrees cut off adopted by the FDA. Fusion as determined by the presence of bridging trabeculae on helical CT Scans occurred in 67%. Concordance rates were as follows: between plain films and helical CT, 69.5%; between Hutter method and plain films, 76%; between Simmon’s method (two degrees) and helical CT, 67%; and between Simmon’s method with the FDA cut-off of five degrees and CT, 65%.
Discussion: The assessment of fusion with radiographs appears to be unreliable. The use of plain films and flexion-extension radiographs clearly overestimated the actual fusion rates. Furthermore, there was low concordance between these methods and the more reliable helical CT. This disparity between fusion rates from radiographs and with helical CT supports the view that plain radiographs, including flexion-extension films are of limited value in the assessment of spinal arthrodesis.
The abstracts were prepared by Dr Robert J. Moore. Correspondence should be addressed to him at The Spine Society of Australia, Institute of Medical and Veterinary Science, The Adelaide Centre for Spinal Research, Frome Road, Adelaide, South Australia 5000
