Introduction. The biomechanical behavior of lumbar spine instrumentation is critical in understanding its efficacy and durability in clinical practice. In this study, we aim to compare the biomechanics of the lumbar spine instrumented with single-level posterior rod and screw systems employing two distinct screw designs: paddle screw versus conventional screw system. Method. A fully cadaveric-validated 3D ligamentous model of the lumbopelvic spine served as the foundation for our comparative biomechanical analysis. 1. To simulate instrumentation, the intact spine was modified at the L4L5 level, employing either paddle screws or standard pedicle screws (SPS). The implants were composed of Ti-6AL-4V. Fixation at the S1 ensured consistency across loading scenarios. Loading conditions included a 400-N compressive load combined with a 10 N.m pure bending moment at the level of L1, replicating physiological motions of flexion-extension, lateral bending and axial rotation. We extracted data across various scenarios, focusing on the segmental range of motion at both implanted and adjacent levels. Result. In the flexion of L4L5, the applied force ranged from -29.2 to 29.3 N in the paddle screw, while it ranged from -25 to 25 N in the PS system. Similarly, the extension of L4L5 ranged from -3.1 to 2.6 N in the paddle and ranged from -4.5 to 3.9 N in the SPS system. In terms of stress distributions on the screw, stress concentrations decreased in several cases in the paddle design compared to the SPS systems. Top of Form. Conclusion. The paddle screw enhanced the range of motion overall in both the upper adjacent segment (L3L4) and the lower adjacent segment (L5S1) compared to the conventional SPS system. The stability of the aimed segment was increased by 33% on average with the paddle screw compared to conventional PS. Increasing the stability of the host segment decreases the possibility of non-union and the rate of fusion failure . 2.

Aims

We compared decompression alone to decompression with fusion surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis, with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). The aim was to evaluate if five-year outcomes differed between the groups. The two-year results from the same trial revealed no differences.

Low back pain is the single most common cause for disability in individuals aged 45 years or younger, it carries tremendous weight in socioeconomic considerations. Degenerative aging of the structural components of the spine can be associated with genetic aspects, lifetime of tissue exposure to mechanical stress & loads and environmental factors. Mechanical consequences of the disc degenerative include loss of disc height, segment instability and increase the load on facets joints. All these can lead to degenerative changes and osteophytes that can narrow the spinal canal. Surgery is indicated in patients with spinal stenosis who have intractable pain, altered quality of life, substantially diminished functional capacity, failed non-surgical treatment and are not candidates for non-surgical treatment. The aim was to determine the reasons for refusal of surgery in patients with established degenerative lumber spine pathology eligible for surgery. All patients meeting the study criteria, patients older than 18 years, patients with both clinical and radiological established symptomatic degenerative lumbar spine pathology and patients eligible for surgery but refusing it were recruited. Questionnaire used to investigate reasons why they are refusing surgery. Results 59 were recruited, fifty-one (86.4 %) females and eight (13.6 %) males. Twenty (33.8 %) were between the age of 51 and 60 years, followed by nineteen (32.2 %) between 61 and 70 years, and fourteen (23.7 %) between 71 and 80 years. 43 (72 %) patients had lumber spondylosis complicated by lumber spine stenosis, followed by nine (15.2 %) with lumbar spine spondylolisthesis and four (6.7 %) had adjacent level disease. 28 (47.4 %) were scared of surgery, fifteen (25.4 %) claimed that they are too old for surgery and nine (15.2 %) were not ready. Findings from this study outlined that patients lack information about the spinal surgery. Patients education about spine surgery is needed

Aims

Symptomatic spinal stenosis is a very common problem, and decompression surgery has been shown to be superior to nonoperative treatment in selected patient groups. However, performing an instrumented fusion in addition to decompression may avoid revision and improve outcomes. The aim of the SpInOuT feasibility study was to establish whether a definitive randomized controlled trial (RCT) that accounted for the spectrum of pathology contributing to spinal stenosis, including pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch and mobile spondylolisthesis, could be conducted.

The primary objective is to compare revision rates for lumbar disc replacement (LDR) and fusion at the same or adjacent levels in Ontario, Canada. The secondary objectives include acute complications during hospitalization and in 30 days, and length of hospital stay. A population-based cohort study was conducted using health administrative databases including patients undergoing LDR or single level fusion between October 2005 to March 2018. Patients receiving LDR or fusion were identified using physician claims recorded in the Ontario Health Insurance Program database. Additional details of surgical procedure were obtained from the Canadian Institute for Health Information hospital discharge abstract. Primary outcome measured was presence of revision surgery in the lumbar spine defined as operation greater than 30 days from index procedure. Secondary outcomes were immediate/ acute complications within the first 30 days of index operation. A total of 42,024 patients were included. Mean follow up in the LDR and fusion groups were 2943 and 2301 days, respectively. The rates of revision surgery at the same or adjacent levels were 4.7% in the LDR group and 11.1% in the fusion group (P=.003). Multivariate analysis identified risk factors for revision surgery as being female, hypertension, and lower surgeon volume. More patients in the fusion group had dural tears (p<.001), while the LDR group had more “other” complications (p=.037). The LDR group had a longer mean hospital stay (p=.018). In this study population, the LDR group had lower rates of revision compared to the fusion group. Caution is needed in concluding its significance due to lack of clinical variables and possible differences in indications between LDR and posterior decompression and fusion

Aims. The aims of this study were first, to determine if adding fusion to a decompression of the lumbar spine for spinal stenosis decreases the rate of radiological restenosis and/or proximal adjacent level stenosis two years after surgery, and second, to evaluate the change in vertebral slip two years after surgery with and without fusion. Methods. The Swedish Spinal Stenosis Study (SSSS) was conducted between 2006 and 2012 at five public and two private hospitals. Six centres participated in this two-year MRI follow-up. We randomized 222 patients with central lumbar spinal stenosis at one or two adjacent levels into two groups, decompression alone and decompression with fusion. The presence or absence of a preoperative spondylolisthesis was noted. A new stenosis on two-year MRI was used as the primary outcome, defined as a dural sac cross-sectional area ≤ 75 mm. 2. at the operated level (restenosis) and/or at the level above (proximal adjacent level stenosis). Results. A total of 211 patients underwent surgery at a mean age of 66 years (69% female): 103 were treated by decompression with fusion and 108 by decompression alone. A two-year MRI was available for 176 (90%) of the eligible patients. A new stenosis at the operated and/or adjacent level occurred more frequently after decompression and fusion than after decompression alone (47% vs 29%; p = 0.020). The difference remained in the subgroup with a preoperative spondylolisthesis, (48% vs 24%; p = 0.020), but did not reach significance for those without (45% vs 35%; p = 0.488). Proximal adjacent level stenosis was more common after fusion than after decompression alone (44% vs 17%; p < 0.001). Restenosis at the operated level was less frequent after fusion than decompression alone (4% vs 14%; p = 0.036). Vertebral slip increased by 1.1 mm after decompression alone, regardless of whether a preoperative spondylolisthesis was present or not. Conclusion. Adding fusion to a decompression increased the rate of new stenosis on two-year MRI, even when a spondylolisthesis was present preoperatively. This supports decompression alone as the preferred method of surgery for spinal stenosis, whether or not a degenerative spondylolisthesis is present preoperatively. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(12):1343–1351

Aims

Lumbar disc prolapse is a frequent indication for surgery. The few available long-term follow-up studies focus mainly on repeated surgery for recurrent disease. The aim of this study was to analyze all reasons for additional surgery for patients operated on for a primary lumbar disc prolapse.

Aims

The aim of this study was to determine the differences in spinal imaging characteristics between subjects with or without lumbar developmental spinal stenosis (DSS) in a population-based cohort.

Currently, between 17% of patients undergoing surgery for adult spinal deformity experience severe instrumentation related problems such as screw pullout or proximal junctional failure necessitating revision surgery. Cables may be used to reinforce pedicle screw fixation as an additive measure or may provide less rigid fixation at the construct end levels in order to prevent junctional level problems. The purpose of this study is to provide insight into the maximum expected load during flexion in UHMWPE cable in constructs intended for correction of adult spine deformity (degenerative scoliosis) in the PoSTuRe first-in-man clinical trial. Following the concept of toppinoff, a new construct is proposed with screw/cable fixation of rods at the lower levels and standalone UHMWPE cables at the upper level (T11). A parametric FE model of the instrumented thoracolumbar spine, which has been previously validated, was used to represent the construct. Pedicle screws are modeled by assigning a rigid tie constraint between the rod and the lamina of the corresponding spinal level. Cables are modeled using linear elastic line elements, fixing the rod to the lamina medially at the cranial laminar end and laterally at the caudal laminar end. A Youngs modulus was assigned such that the stiffness of the line element was the same as that of the cable. An 8 Nm flexion moment was applied to the cranial endplate. The maximum value of the force in the wire (80 N) is found at the T11 (upper) level. At the other levels, forces in the cable are very small because most of the force is carried by the screw (T12) or because the wires are force shielded by the contralateral and adjacent level pedicle screws (L2, L3). The model provides first estimates of the forces that can be expected in the UHMWPE cables in constructs for kyphosis correction during movement. It is expected that this approach can help in defining the number of wires for optimal treatment

Aims

To study the associations of lumbar developmental spinal stenosis (DSS) with low back pain (LBP), radicular leg pain, and disability.

Aims. Whether to perform hybrid surgery (HS) in contrast to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) when treating patients with multilevel cervical disc degeneration remains a controversial subject. To resolve this we have undertaken a meta-analysis comparing the outcomes from HS with ACDF in this condition. Methods. Seven databases were searched for studies of HS and ACDF from inception of the study to 1 September 2019. Both random-effects and fixed-effects models were used to evaluate the overall effect of the C2-C7 range of motion (ROM), ROM of superior/inferior adjacent levels, adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), heterotopic ossification (HO), complications, neck disability index (NDI) score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, Odom’s criteria, blood loss, and operating and hospitalization time. To obtain more credible results contour-enhanced funnel plots, Egger’s and Begg’s tests, meta-regression, and sensitivity analyses were performed. Results. In total, 17 studies involving 861 patients were included in the analysis. HS was found to be superior to ACDF in maintaining C2-C7 ROM and ROM of superior/inferior adjacent levels, but HS did not reduce the incidence of associated level ASD. Also, HS did not cause a higher rate of HO than ACDF. The frequency of complications was similar between the two techniques. HS failed to achieve more favourable outcomes than ACDF using the NDI, VAS, JOA, and Odom’s scores. HS did not show any more advantages in operating or hospitalization time but did show reduction in blood loss. Conclusion. Although HS maintained cervical kinetics, it failed to reduce the incidence of ASD. This finding differs from previous reports. Moreover, patients did not show more benefits from HS with respect to symptom improvement, prevention of complications, and clinical outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(8):981–996

Cervical spinal arthrodesis is the standard of care for the treatment of spinal diseases induced neck pain. However, adjacent segment disease (ASD) is the primary postoperative complication, which draws great concerns. At present, controversy still exists for the etiology of ASD. Knowledge of cervical spinal loading pattern after cervical spinal arthrodesis is proposed to be the key to answer these questions. Musculoskeletal (MSK) multi-body dynamics (MBD) models have an opportunity to obtain spinal loading that is very difficult to directly measure in vivo. In present study, a previously validated cervical spine MSK MBD model was developed for simulating cervical spine after single-level anterior arthrodesis at C5-C6 disc level. In this cervical spine model, postoperative sagittal alignment and spine rhythms of each disc level, different from normal healthy subject, were both taken into account. Moreover, the biomechanical properties of facet joints of adjacent levels after anterior arthrodesis were modified according to the experimental results. Dynamic full range of motion (ROM) flexion/extension simulation was performed, where the motion data after arthrodesis was derived from published in-vivo kinematic observations. Meanwhile, the full ROM flexion/extension of normal subject was also simulated by the generic cervical spine model for comparative purpose. The intervertebral compressive and shear forces and loading-sharing distribution (the proportions of intervertebral compressive and shear force and facet joint force) at adjacent levels (C3-C4, C4-C5 and C6-C7 disc levels) were then predicted. By comparison, arthrodesis led to a significant increase of adjacent intervertebral compressive force during the head extension movement. Postoperative intervertebral compressive forces at adjacent levels increased by approximate 20% at the later stage of the head extension movement. However, there was no obvious alteration in adjacent intervertebral compressive force, during the head flexion movement. For the intervertebral shear forces in the anterior-posterior direction, no significant differences were found between the arthrodesis subject and normal subject, during the head flexion/extension movement. Meanwhile, cervical spinal loading-sharing distribution after anterior arthrodesis was altered compared with the normal subject's distribution, during the head extension movement. In the postoperative loading-sharing distribution, the percentage of intervertebral disc forces was further increased as the motion angle increased, compared with normal subject. In conclusion, cervical spinal loading after anterior arthrodesis was significantly increased at adjacent levels, during the head extension movement. Cervical spine musculoskeletal MBD model provides an attempt to comprehend postoperative ASD after anterior arthrodesis from a biomechanical perspective

Aims

The aim of this study was to explore the prognostic factors for postoperative neurological recovery and survival in patients with complete paralysis due to neoplastic epidural spinal cord compression.