Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020 Dec;6(4):752-761.
doi: 10.21037/jss-20-492.

Trends in lumbar spinal fusion-a literature review

Marie-Jacqueline Reisener  1   2 , Matthias Pumberger  2 , Jennifer Shue  1 , Federico P Girardi  1 , Alexander P Hughes  1
Affiliations
Review

Trends in lumbar spinal fusion-a literature review

Marie-Jacqueline Reisener et al. J Spine Surg. 2020 Dec.

Abstract

Over the past several decades, there has been an upward trend in the total number of spinal fusion procedures worldwide. Advanced spinal fusion techniques with or without internal fixation, additional innovations in surgical approaches, innovative implants including a wide variety of interbody devices, and new alternatives in bone grafting materials are some reasons for the increasing number of spine fusion procedures. Moreover, the indications for spinal fusion have broadened over time. Initially developed for the treatment of instability and deformity due to tuberculosis, scoliosis, and traumatic injury, spinal fusion surgery has now a wide range of indications like spondylolisthesis, congenital or degenerative deformity, spinal tumors, and pseudarthrosis, with degenerative disorders as the most common indication. This review emphasizes current lumbar fusion techniques and their development in the past decades.

Keywords: Utilization; biologics; bone graft; lumbar spine fusion; trends.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jss-20-492). The series “Postoperative Spinal Implant Infection” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. MP served as the unpaid Guest Editor of the series and serves as an unpaid editorial board member of Journal of Spine Surgery from Nov 2018 to Nov 2020. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Utilization of spinal fusion procedures per year in the United States from 1998 to 2014 (1,4).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Utilization trend of hip and knee replacement (per 100,000 persons) in the United States from 1998 to 2008 (1).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Rajaee SS, Bae HW, Kanim LEA, Delamarter RB. Spinal fusion in the United States: Analysis of trends from 1998 to 2008. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2012;37:67-76. 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31820cccfb - DOI - PubMed
    1. Deyo RA, Nachemson A, Mirza SK. Spinal-Fusion Surgery - The Case for Restraint. N Engl J Med 2004;350:722-6. 10.1056/NEJMsb031771 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Camillo FX. Arthrodesis of the Spine. In: Campbell WC, Canale ST, Beaty JH. Campbell's operative orthopaedics. 11th edition. Philadelphia, PA: Mosby/Elsevier, 2008.
    1. Sheikh SR, Thompson NR, Benzel E, et al. Can We Justify It? Trends in the Utilization of Spinal Fusions and Associated Reimbursement. Neurosurgery 2020;86:E193-202. - PubMed
    1. Ilyas H, Udo-Inyang I, Jr, Savage J. Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Review of the SPORT Literature. Clin Spine Surg 2019;32:272-8. 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000841 - DOI - PubMed