Biomedical subjects

Tomomichi Kajino

Publications and source records attributed to Tomomichi Kajino.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Comparative study of radiographic disc height changes using two different interbody devices for transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: open box vs. fenestrated tube interbody cage.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective comparative study of the postoperative subsidence of two interbody devices following posterior or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF/TLIF) for degenerative spondylolisthesis of the lumbar spine. OBJECTIVE: To assess certain radiograph characteristics of PLIF/TLIF using two interbody fusion devices at L4-L5. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: PLIF can achieve spinal stabilization with vertebral body support and direct neural decompression. Although various interbody devices have been used in PLIF procedures, no radiographic studies have compared the load-bearing capabilities of open box and fenestrated tube interbody cages. METHODS: Seventy-five patients who underwent one-level PLIF in the L4-L5 [corrected] segment for degenerative spondylolisthesis were retrospectively reviewed with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Fenestrated tube (Group FT: n = 30 [corrected]) or open box (Group OB: n = 45 [corrected]) cages were used for the PLIF procedure. The following radiographic parameters were evaluated to compare the load-bearing capabilities: disc space height (DH); percent increase and decrease of disc height (% IDH and % DDH, respectively); and percent coverage of the cage on the endplate (% CC). RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the baseline data, including age, segmental instability and osteoporotic status, between the two groups. Anterior %IDH and % CC were significantly higher in Group OB than in Group FT (% IDH: 69.4% vs. 57.3%; % OC: 24.5% vs. 12.9%), and anterior and posterior % DDH were significantly higher in Group FT than in Group OB (anterior: -2.9% vs. -.1%; posterior: -6.6% vs. -.3%). Although the restored DH gradually reduced over time in both groups, significant reduction to the preoperative level only occurred in Group FT. CONCLUSIONS: The load-bearing capabilities of the open box cage are superior to those of the fenestrated tube cage. Since there were no significant differences between the baseline status of the two groups, the larger cross-sectional area and stable framework design of the open box cage appears to bring about a greater load-bearing capability. Therefore, the open box cage seems to be biomechanically more advantageous as an interbody device for PLIF than the fenestrated tube cage.

Aged↗

PubMed2006

Unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and bilateral anterior-column fixation with two Brantigan I/F cages per level: clinical outcomes during a minimum 2-year follow-up period.

OBJECT: There are no published reports of unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in which two Brantigan I/F cages were placed per level through a single portal to achieve bilateral anterior-column support. The authors describe such a surgical technique and evaluate the clinical outcomes of this procedure. METHODS: Data obtained in 86 (93.5%) of the first 92 consecutive patients who underwent the procedure were retrospectively reviewed; the minimum follow-up duration was 2 years. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scoring system. Disc height, disc angle, cage positioning in the axial plane, and fusion status were radiographically evaluated. The mean follow-up period was 33.8 months. The mean improvement in the JOA score was 77.2%. Fusion was successful in 93% of the cases. According to the Farfan method, the mean anterior and posterior disc heights increased from 20.2 and 16.9% preoperatively to 35.9 and 22.7% at follow up, respectively (p < 0.01). The mean disc angle increased from 4.8degrees preoperatively to 7.5degrees at last follow-up examination (p < 0.01). Two cages were correctly placed to achieve bilateral anterior-column support in greater than 85% of the cases. The following complications occurred: hardware migration in two patients and deep infection cured by intravenous antibiotic therapy in one patient. CONCLUSIONS: Unilateral TLIF involving the placement of two Brantigan cages per level led to good clinical results. Two Brantigan cages were adequately placed via a single portal, and reliable bilateral anterior-column support was achieved. Although the less invasive unilateral approach was used, the outcomes were as good as those in many reported series of posterior lumbar interbody fusion in which the Brantigan cages were placed via the bilateral approach.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Traumatically induced vertebral artery occlusion associated with cervical spine injuries: prospective study using magnetic resonance angiography.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective study using magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) on a consecutive cohort of patients with cervical spine injuries. OBJECTIVE: To investigate clinical and radiographic features of vertebral artery injury/occlusion associated with nonpenetrating cervical spine trauma. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: With the popularization of MRA, vertebral artery injury has been a common complication of cervical spine trauma. However, detailed clinical features such as restoration of blood flow in occluded vessels and collateral circulation have not been fully evaluated. METHODS: During a 2-year period, 64 consecutive patients with cervical spine fractures and/or dislocations were prospectively evaluated for patency of the vertebral artery and collateral circulation. Extracranial and intracranial MRAs were conducted at initial injury and follow-up. RESULTS: Vertebral artery occlusion occurred in 11 patients, including 10 with unilateral and 1 with bilateral. Only the patient with bilateral occlusion was symptomatic but had no permanent neurologic deficit as a result of brain ischemia. He had complete circle of Willis, which provides sufficient collateral blood supply from anterior circulation. Follow-up MRAs revealed restoration of blood flow in occluded vessel(s) in 3 patients. All of them had compressive injuries. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of traumatically induced vertebral artery occlusion was 17.2%. The potential for blood flow restoration was higher in compressive injuries than in distractive injuries. The mechanism of occlusion in compressive injuries is likely to be vasospasm or minor artery dissection, which may cause reversible occlusion because vessels are subjected to relatively minor stretching in compressive injuries. Vertebral artery occlusion was rarely symptomatic because of sufficient collateral blood supply through not only contralateral vertebral artery but also the circle of Willis.

Adult↗