Research ArticleNovel Techniques & Technology

Axial Lumber Interbody Fusion as an Alternative “Salvage” Approach to Lumbosacral Fixation: A Case Series

Paul D. Korytkowski, John Panzone, Sean J. Cannizzaro, William F. Lavelle and Richard A. Tallarico
International Journal of Spine Surgery March 2025, 8728; DOI: https://doi.org/10.14444/8728

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Figure 1
    Figure 1

    (A and B) Patient A presented following a recent posterior lumbar decompression, instrumentation, and fusion of L2 to S1. (C and D) Preoperative x-ray images reveal dorsal extrusion of the interbody cage. (E and F) Postoperative x-ray images at 12-month follow-up.

  • Figure 2
    Figure 2

    Clinical image depicting the soft tissue damage from Patient A’s boating accident, with scarring crossing the subsequent incision site. Extensive scarring across anterior abdomen precluded traditional anterior retroperitoneal approaches.

  • Figure 3
    Figure 3

    (A) Patient B presented with distal junctional failure following T10 to L5 fusion. (B and C) Her fusion was extended to the ilium, which subsequently progressed to pseudoarthrosis and rod fracture. (D and E) Postoperative x-ray images following the axiaLIF procedure. (F and G) Most recent x-ray images more than 4 years postoperatively.

  • Figure 4
    Figure 4

    (A) Patient C preoperative x-ray image. (B and C) Postoperative x-ray images following the axial lumbar interbody fusion procedure. (D) X-ray image at 6-month follow-up.

  • Figure 5
    Figure 5

    (A and B) Patient D presented with significant kyphoscoliosis and a history of L3 to S1 lumbar decompression and fusion. (C and D) Postoperative x-ray images following the first stage of realignment/reconstructive surgery. (E and F) Postoperative x-ray images following axial lumbar interbody fusion procedure. (G) X-ray image at 15-month follow-up.

  • Figure 6
    Figure 6

    (A) Patient E presented with a history of decompression with instrumented fusion from T8-ilium. (B) Lateral preoperative x-ray image showing rod fracture and pseudarthrosis at the L5 to S1 level. (C and D) Postoperative x-ray images following the axial lumbar interbody fusion procedure. (E and F) X-ray images at 3-year follow-up.

  • Figure 7
    Figure 7

    (A) Patient F presented with a history of a T10 to L1 fusion. (B) Postoperative x-ray image following the extension of fusion to L5. (C) Postoperative x-ray image after extension of fusion to the ilium. (D and E) Postoperative x-ray images following axial lumbar interbody fusion procedure. (F) X-ray image at 5-year follow-up.

Tables

  • Table

    Operative summary of case presentations of AxiaLIF procedures.

    PatientSexAge, ya Surgical LevelsOperative Time, minEstimated Blood Loss, ccFluoroscopy Time, s
    AMan54L5–S18225222.7
    BWoman48L4–S112925n/a
    CMan75L4–S19225405.8
    DWoman67L4–S187350158.3
    EWoman68L5–S1318500262.8
    FMan66L4–S19825339.5
    Mean-63-134158.3277.8

    • Abbreviation: AxiaLIF, axial lumbar interbody fusion.

    • ↵a At time of operation.

Back to top

In this issue

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Email Article
Citation Tools
Axial Lumber Interbody Fusion as an Alternative “Salvage” Approach to Lumbosacral Fixation: A Case Series
Paul D. Korytkowski, John Panzone, Sean J. Cannizzaro, William F. Lavelle, Richard A. Tallarico
International Journal of Spine Surgery Mar 2025, 8728; DOI: 10.14444/8728
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo

Jump to section

Keywords