Purpose of study and background. We have previously reported the development of injectable hydrogels for potential disc regeneration (NPgel) or bone formation which could be utilized in spinal fusion (Bgel). As there are multiple sources of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), this study investigated the incorporation of patient matched hMSCs derived from adipose tissue (AD) and bone marrow (BM) to determine their ability to differentiate within both hydrogel systems under different culture conditions. Methods and Results. Human fat pad and bone marrow derived MSCs were isolated from femoral heads of patients undergoing hip replacement surgery for osteoarthritis with informed consent. MSCs were encapsulated into either NPgel or Bgel and cultured for up to 6 weeks in 5% (NPgel) or 21% (Bgel) O. 2. Histology and immunohistochemistry was utilized to determine phenotype. Both fat and bone marrow derived MSCs, were able to differentiate into both cell lineages. NPgel culture conditions increased expression of matrix components such as collagen II and aggrecan and NP phenotypic markers FOXF1 and PAX1, whereas Bgel induced expression of collagen I and osteopontin, indicative of osteogenic differentiation. Conclusion. NPgel and Bgel were able to differentiate patient derived MSCs from different sources into both NP and osteogenic lineages, which may give rise to novel treatment strategies for IVD degeneration and spinal fusion, enabling choice for cell source according to patients' circumstances and needs. C Le Maitre and C Sammon hold a patent for the hydrogel described. Funded by MRC and Versus Arthritis

Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) is indicated for many patients with pain and/or instability of the lumbar spine. We performed 36 PLIF procedures using the patient’s lumbar spinous process and laminae, which were inserted as a bone graft between two vertebral bodies without using a cage. The mean lumbar lordosis and mean disc height to vertebral body ratio were restored and preserved after surgery. There were no serious complications.

These results suggest that this procedure is safe and effective.

The presacral retroperitoneal approach for axial lumbar interbody fusion (presacral ALIF) is not widely reported, particularly with regard to the mid-term outcome. This prospective study describes the clinical outcomes, complications and rates of fusion at a follow-up of two years for 26 patients who underwent this minimally invasive technique along with further stabilisation using pedicle screws. The fusion was single-level at the L5-S1 spinal segment in 17 patients and two-level at L4–5 and L5-S1 in the other nine. The visual analogue scale for pain and Oswestry Disability Index scores were recorded pre-operatively and during the 24-month study period. The evaluation of fusion was by thin-cut CT scans at six and 12 months, and flexion-extension plain radiographs at six, 12 and 24 months. Significant reductions in pain and disability occurred as early as three weeks postoperatively and were maintained. Fusion was achieved in 22 of 24 patients (92%) at 12 months and in 23 patients (96%) at 24 months. One patient (4%) with a pseudarthrosis underwent successful revision by augmentation of the posterolateral fusion mass through a standard open midline approach.

There were no severe adverse events associated with presacral ALIF, which in this series demonstrated clinical outcomes and fusion rates comparable with those of reports of other methods of interbody fusion.