The October 2015 Spine Roundup360 looks at: Traumatic spinal cord injury under the spotlight; The odontoid peg nonunion; Driving and spinal surgery; Drains and antibiotics post-spinal surgery; Vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty equally effective; Who will benefit from steroid injections?; Back pain following lumbar discectomy

The June 2013 Spine Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: the benefit of MRI in the follow-up of lumbar disc prolapse; gunshot injury to the spinal cord; the link between depression and back pain; floating dural sack sign; short segment fixation at ten years; whether early return to play is safer than previously thought; infection in diabetic spinal patients; and dynesis.

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate the time course of changes in parameters of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) such as fractional anisotropy (FA) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) in patients with symptomatic lumbar disc herniation. We also investigated the correlation between the severity of neurological symptoms and these parameters.

Aims

The aims of this study were to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of instrumented posterolateral fusion (PLF) performed in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

The effective capture of outcome measures in the healthcare setting can be traced back to Florence Nightingale’s investigation of the in-patient mortality of soldiers wounded in the Crimean war in the 1850s.

Only relatively recently has the formalised collection of outcomes data into Registries been recognised as valuable in itself.

With the advent of surgeon league tables and a move towards value based health care, individuals are being driven to collect, store and interpret data.

Following the success of the National Joint Registry, the British Association of Spine Surgeons instituted the British Spine Registry. Since its launch in 2012, over 650 users representing the whole surgical team have registered and during this time, more than 27 000 patients have been entered onto the database.

There has been significant publicity regarding the collection of outcome measures after surgery, including patient-reported scores. Over 12 000 forms have been directly entered by patients themselves, with many more entered by the surgical teams.

Questions abound: who should have access to the data produced by the Registry and how should they use it? How should the results be reported and in what forum?

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:871–4.

Aims

We reviewed 34 consecutive patients (18 female-16 male) with isthmic spondylolysis and grade I to II lumbosacral spondylolisthesis who underwent in situ posterolateral arthodesis between the L5 transverse processes and the sacral ala with the use of iliac crest autograft. Ten patients had an associated scoliosis which required surgical correction at a later stage only in two patients with idiopathic curves unrelated to the spondylolisthesis.

Between March 2000 and February 2006, we carried out a prospective study of 100 patients with a low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis (Meyerding grade II or below), who were randomised to receive a single-level and instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion with either one or two cages. The minimum follow-up was for two years. At this stage 91 patients were available for review. A total of 47 patients received one cage (group 1) and 44 two cages (group 2). The clinical and radiological outcomes of the two groups were compared.

There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of post-operative pain, Oswestry Disability Score, clinical results, complication rate, percentage of post-operative slip, anterior fusion rate or posterior fusion rate. On the other hand, the mean operating time was 144 minutes (100 to 240) for patients in group 1 and 167 minutes (110 to 270) for those in group 2 (p = 0.0002). The mean blood loss up to the end of the first post-operative day was 756 ml (510 to 1440) in group 1 and 817 ml (620 to 1730) in group 2 (p < 0.0001).

Our results suggest that an instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion performed with either one or two cages in addition to a bone graft around the cage has a low rate of complications and a high fusion rate. The clinical outcomes were good in most cases, regardless of whether one or two cages had been used.

The October 2014 Spine Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: microdiscectomy is not exactly a hands-down winner; lumbar spinal stenosis unpicked; Wallis implant helpful in lumbosacral decompression; multidisciplinary rehabilitation is good for back pain; and understanding the sciatic stretch test.

Whether to combine spinal decompression with fusion in patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis remains controversial. We performed a cohort study to determine the effect of the addition of fusion in terms of patient satisfaction after decompressive spinal surgery in patients with and without a degenerative spondylolisthesis.

The National Swedish Register for Spine Surgery (Swespine) was used for the study. Data were obtained for all patients in the register who underwent surgery for stenosis on one or two adjacent lumbar levels. A total of 5390 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and completed a two-year follow-up. Using multivariable models the results of 4259 patients who underwent decompression alone were compared with those of 1131 who underwent decompression and fusion. The consequence of having an associated spondylolisthesis in the operated segments pre-operatively was also considered.

At two years there was no significant difference in patient satisfaction between the two treatment groups for any of the outcome measures, regardless of the presence of a pre-operative spondylolisthesis. Moreover, the proportion of patients who required subsequent further lumbar surgery was also similar in the two groups.

In this large cohort the addition of fusion to decompression was not associated with an improved outcome.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:960–5.

We investigated the spinopelvic morphology and global sagittal balance of patients with a degenerative retrolisthesis or anterolisthesis. A total of 269 consecutive patients with a degenerative spondylolisthesis were included in this study. There were 95 men and 174 women with a mean age of 64.3 years (sd 10.5; 40 to 88). A total of 106 patients had a pure retrolisthesis (R group), 130 had a pure anterolisthesis (A group), and 33 had both (R+A group).

A backward slip was found in the upper lumbar levels (mostly L2 or L3) with an almost equal gender distribution in both the R and R+A groups. The pelvic incidence and sacral slope of the R group were significantly lower than those of the A (both p < 0.001) and R+A groups (both p < 0.001). The lumbar lordosis of the R+A group was significantly greater than that of the R (p = 0.025) and A groups (p = 0.014). The C7 plumb line of the R group was located more posteriorly than that of the A group (p = 0.023), but was no different from than that of the R+A group (p = 0.422). The location of C7 plumb line did not differ between the three groups (p = 0.068). The spinosacral angle of the R group was significantly smaller than that of the A group (p < 0.001) and R+A group (p < 0.001).

Our findings imply that there are two types of degenerative retrolisthesis: one occurs primarily as a result of degeneration in patients with low pelvic incidence, and the other occurs secondarily as a compensatory mechanism in patients with an anterolisthesis and high pelvic incidence.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1244–9.

The October 2012 Spine Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: a Japanese questionnaire at work in Iran; curve progression in degenerative lumbar scoliosis; the cause of foot drop; the issue of avoiding the spinal cord at scoliosis surgery; ballistic injuries to the cervical spine; minimally invasive oblique lumbar interbody fusion; readmission rates after spinal surgery; clinical complications and the severely injured cervical spine; and stabilising the thoracolumbar burst fracture.

Traumatic unilateral facet dislocation of the lumbosacral junction without fracture or with non-displaced fractures of adjacent vertebrae is extremely rare. We describe a case of a young male who sustained a unilateral facet dislocation of the lumbosacral junction in a motor vehicle accident. The unusual features of this case include an unremarkable physical and neurological examination on presentation and absence of other substantial vertebral or extra-vertebral injuries.

Diastematomyelia is a rare congenital abnormality of the spinal cord. This paper summarises more than 30 years’ experience of treating this condition. Data were collected retrospectively on 138 patients with diastematomyelia (34 males, 104 females) who were treated at our hospital from May 1978 to April 2010. A total of 106 patients had double dural tubes (type 1 diastematomyelia), and 32 patients had single dural tubes (type 2 diastematomyelia). Radiographs, CT myelography, and MRI showed characteristic kyphoscoliosis, widening of the interpedicle distance, and bony, cartilaginous, and fibrous septum. The incidences of symptoms including characteristic changes of the dorsal skin, neurological disorders, and congenital spinal or foot deformity were significantly higher in type 1 than in type 2. Surgery is more effective for patients with type 1 diastematomyelia; patients without surgery showed no improvement.

Fracture of a pedicle is a rare complication of spinal instrumentation using pedicular screws, but it can lead to instability and pain and may necessitate extension of the fusion. Osteosynthesis of the fractured pedicle by cerclage-wire fixation and augmentation of the screw fixation by vertebroplasty or temporary elongation of the fixation, allows stabilisation without sacrifice of the adjacent healthy segment. We describe three patients who developed a fracture of the pedicle in the most caudal instrumented vertebra early after lumbar spinal fusion.

During revision surgery the pedicles were reduced and secured by a soft cerclage wire bilaterally. Fusion was obtained at the site of the primary instrumentation and healing of the pedicles was achieved. Cerclage wiring of the fractured pedicle seems to be safe and avoids permanent extension of the fusion without the sacrifice of an otherwise healthy segment.

We examined the reliability of radiological findings in predicting segmental instability in 112 patients (56 men, 56 women) with a mean age of 66.5 years (27 to 84) who had degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. They underwent intra-operative biomechanical evaluation using a new measurement system. Biomechanical instability was defined as a segment with a neutral zone > 2 mm/N. Risk factor analysis to predict instability was performed on radiographs (range of segmental movement, disc height), MRI (Thompson grade, Modic type), and on the axial CT appearance of the facet (type, opening, vacuum and the presence of osteophytes, subchondral erosion, cysts and sclerosis) using multivariate logistic regression analysis with a forward stepwise procedure. The facet type was classified as sagittally orientated, coronally orientated, anisotropic or wrapped.

Stepwise multivariate regression analysis revealed that facet opening was the strongest predictor for instability (odds ratio 5.022, p = 0.009) followed by spondylolisthesis, MRI grade and subchondral sclerosis. Forward stepwise multivariate logistic regression indicated that spondylolisthesis, MRI grade, facet opening and subchondral sclerosis of the facet were risk factors. Symptoms evaluated by the Short-Form 36 and visual analogue scale showed that patients with an unstable segment were in significantly more pain than those without. Furthermore, the surgical procedures determined using the intra-operative measurement system were effective, suggesting that segmental instability influences the symptoms of lumbar degenerative disease.

A 48-year old man presented with back pain that was resistant to treatment. An MR scan showed spondylolisthesis at L4-5 and narrowing of the exit foraminae. He had a posterior fusion which did not relieve his symptoms. He continued to have back pain and developed subcutaneous nodules in both forearms. Biopsy from the skin revealed cutaneous sarcoidosis, and one from the lumbar spine showed sarcoidosis granuloma between the bone trabeculae. A CT scan of the abdomen and chest revealed axillary lymphadenopathy, mediastinal enlarged nodes, apical nodular nodes and splenomegaly. The patient was started on large doses of methotrexate and steroids. His angiotensin-converting enzyme and calcium levels returned to normal and the back pain resolved.

A review of the current literature shows that there is a lack of consensus regarding the treatment of spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis in children and adolescents. Most of the views and recommendations provided in various reports are weakly supported by evidence. There is a limited amount of information about the natural history of the condition, making it difficult to compare the effectiveness of various conservative and operative treatments. This systematic review summarises the current knowledge on spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis and attempts to present a rational approach to the evaluation and management of this condition in children and adolescents.

We compared a group of 46 somatised patients with a control group of 41 non-somatised patients who had undergone elective surgery to the lumbar spine in an attempt to identify pre-operative factors which could predict the outcome. In a prospective single-centre study, the Distress and Risk Assessment method consisting of a modified somatic perception questionnaire and modified Zung depression index was used pre-operatively to identify somatised patients. The type and number of consultations were correlated with functional indicators of outcome, such as the Oswestry disability index and a visual analogue score for pain in the leg after follow-up for six and 12 months.

Similar improvements in the Oswestry disability index were found in the somatised and non-somatised groups. Somatised patients who had a good outcome on the Oswestry disability index had an increased number of orthopaedic consultations (50 of 83 patients (60%) vs 29 of 73 patients (39.7%); p = 0.16) and waited less time for their surgery (5.5 months) (sd 5.26) vs 10.1 months (sd 6.29); p = 0.026). No other identifiable factors were found. A shorter wait for surgery appeared to predict a good outcome. Early review by a spinal surgeon and a reduced waiting time to surgery appear to be of particular benefit to somatised patients.