Aims. The aims of this study were to evaluate the clinical and radiological
outcomes of instrumented
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. . Methods. No patient underwent spinal decompression or instrumentation
placement. Mean surgical time was 1.5 hours (1 to 1.8) and intra-operative
blood loss 200 ml (150 to 340). There was one wound infection treated
with antibiotics but no other complication. Radiological assessment
included standing posteroanterior and lateral, Ferguson and lateral flexion/extension
views, as well as CT scans. . Results. A solid
Aims. Chronic low back pain due to degenerative disc disease is sometimes treated with fusion. We compared the outcome of three different fusion techniques in the Swedish Spine Register: noninstrumented
Aims. To determine the effectiveness of prone traction radiographs in predicting postoperative slip distance, slip angle, changes in disc height, and lordosis after surgery for degenerative spondylolisthesis of the lumbar spine. Methods. A total of 63 consecutive patients with a degenerative spondylolisthesis and preoperative prone traction radiographs obtained since 2010 were studied. Slip distance, slip angle, disc height, segmental lordosis, and global lordosis (L1 to S1) were measured on preoperative lateral standing radiographs, flexion-extension lateral radiographs, prone traction lateral radiographs, and postoperative lateral standing radiographs. Patients were divided into two groups:
Aim. Many aspects of the surgical treatment of patients with tuberculosis
(TB) of the spine, including the use of instrumentation and the
types of graft, remain controversial. Our aim was to report the
outcome of a single-stage posterior procedure, with or without posterior
decompression, in this group of patients. Patients and Methods. Between 2001 and 2010, 51 patients with a mean age of 62.5 years
(39 to 86) underwent long posterior instrumentation and short posterior
or
We evaluated the impact of lumbar instrumented
circumferential fusion on the development of adjacent level vertebral
compression fractures (VCFs). Instrumented posterior lumbar interbody
fusion (PLIF) has become a popular procedure for degenerative lumbar
spine disease. The immediate rigidity produced by PLIF may cause
more stress and lead to greater risk of adjacent VCFs. However,
few studies have investigated the relationship between PLIF and
the development of subsequent adjacent level VCFs. . Between January 2005 and December 2009, a total of 1936 patients
were enrolled. Of these 224 patients had a new VCF and the incidence
was statistically analysed with other covariants. In total 150 (11.1%)
of 1348 patients developed new VCFs with PLIF, with 108 (72%) cases
at adjacent segment. Of 588 patients, 74 (12.5%) developed new subsequent
VCFs with conventional
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. 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 mm2 at the operated level (restenosis) and/or at the level above (proximal adjacent level stenosis).Aims
Methods
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. The Swedish Spinal Stenosis Study was a multicentre randomized controlled trial with recruitment from September 2006 to February 2012. A total of 247 patients with one- or two-level central lumbar spinal stenosis, stratified by the presence of DS, were randomized to decompression alone or decompression with fusion. The five-year Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were the EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), visual analogue scales for back and leg pain, and patient-reported satisfaction, decreased pain, and increased walking distance. The reoperation rate was recorded.Aims
Methods
The presacral retroperitoneal approach for axial lumbar interbody fusion (presacral ALIF) is not widely reported, particularly with regard to the mid-term outcome. This prospective study describes the clinical outcomes, complications and rates of fusion at a follow-up of two years for 26 patients who underwent this minimally invasive technique along with further stabilisation using pedicle screws. The fusion was single-level at the L5-S1 spinal segment in 17 patients and two-level at L4–5 and L5-S1 in the other nine. The visual analogue scale for pain and Oswestry Disability Index scores were recorded pre-operatively and during the 24-month study period. The evaluation of fusion was by thin-cut CT scans at six and 12 months, and flexion-extension plain radiographs at six, 12 and 24 months. Significant reductions in pain and disability occurred as early as three weeks postoperatively and were maintained. Fusion was achieved in 22 of 24 patients (92%) at 12 months and in 23 patients (96%) at 24 months. One patient (4%) with a pseudarthrosis underwent successful revision by augmentation of the
People with severe, persistent low back pain (LBP) may be offered lumbar spine fusion surgery if they have had insufficient benefit from recommended non-surgical treatments. However, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 2016 guidelines recommended not offering spinal fusion surgery for adults with LBP, except as part of a randomized clinical trial. This survey aims to describe UK clinicians’ views about the suitability of patients for such a future trial, along with their views regarding equipoise for randomizing patients in a future clinical trial comparing lumbar spine fusion surgery to best conservative care (BCC; the FORENSIC-UK trial). An online cross-sectional survey was piloted by the multidisciplinary research team, then shared with clinical professional groups in the UK who are involved in the management of adults with severe, persistent LBP. The survey had seven sections that covered the demographic details of the clinician, five hypothetical case vignettes of patients with varying presentations, a series of questions regarding the preferred management, and whether or not each clinician would be willing to recruit the example patients into future clinical trials.Aims
Methods
High-grade dysplastic spondylolisthesis is a disabling disorder for which many different operative techniques have been described. The aim of this study is to evaluate Scoliosis Research Society 22-item (SRS-22r) scores, global balance, and regional spino-pelvic alignment from two to 25 years after surgery for high-grade dysplastic spondylolisthesis using an all-posterior partial reduction, transfixation technique. SRS-22r and full-spine lateral radiographs were collected for the 28 young patients (age 13.4 years (SD 2.6) who underwent surgery for high-grade dysplastic spondylolisthesis in our centre (Scottish National Spinal Deformity Service) between 1995 and 2018. The mean follow-up was nine years (2 to 25), and one patient was lost to follow-up. The standard surgical technique was an all-posterior, partial reduction, and S1 to L5 transfixation screw technique without direct decompression. Parameters for segmental (slip percentage, Dubousset’s lumbosacral angle) and regional alignment (pelvic tilt, sacral slope, L5 incidence, lumbar lordosis, and thoracic kyphosis) and global balance (T1 spino-pelvic inclination) were measured. SRS-22r scores were compared between patients with a balanced and unbalanced pelvis at final follow-up.Aims
Methods
We analysed the complications encountered in 102 consecutive patients who had
The aim of this study was to explore risk factors for complications associated with dural tear (DT), including the types of DT, and the intra- and postoperative management of DT. Between 2012 and 2017, 12 171 patients with degenerative lumbar diseases underwent primary lumbar spine surgery. We investigated five categories of potential predictors: patient factors (sex, age, body mass index, and primary disease), surgical factors (surgical procedures, operative time, and estimated blood loss), types of DT (inaccessible for suturing/clipping and the presence of cauda equina/nerve root herniation), repair techniques (suturing, clipping, fibrin glue, polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel, and polyglycolic acid sheet), and postoperative management (drainage duration). Postoperative complications were evaluated in terms of dural leak, prolonged bed rest, headache, nausea/vomiting, delayed wound healing, postoperative neurological deficit, surgical site infection (SSI), and reoperation for DT. We performed multivariable regression analyses to evaluate the predictors of postoperative complications associated with DT.Aims
Patients and Methods
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
has issued guidelines that state fusion for non-specific low back
pain should only be performed as part of a randomised controlled
trial, and that lumbar disc replacement should not be performed.
Thus, spinal fusion and disc replacement will no longer be routine
forms of treatment for patients with low back pain. This annotation
considers the evidence upon which these guidelines are based. Cite this article:
We compared the clinical and radiological outcomes of using a
polyetheretherketone cage with (TiPEEK) and without a titanium coating
(PEEK) for instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). We conducted a randomised clinical pilot trial of 40 patients
who were scheduled to undergo a TLIF procedure at one or two levels
between L2 and L5. The Oswestry disability index (ODI), EuroQoL-5D,
and back and leg pain were determined pre-operatively, and at three,
six, and 12 months post-operatively. Fusion rates were assessed
by thin slice CT at three months and by functional radiography at
12 months.Aims
Materials and Methods
Wrong-level surgery is a unique pitfall in spinal
surgery and is part of the wider field of wrong-site surgery. Wrong-site
surgery affects both patients and surgeons and has received much
media attention. We performed this systematic review to determine
the incidence and prevalence of wrong-level procedures in spinal
surgery and to identify effective prevention strategies. We retrieved
12 studies reporting the incidence or prevalence of wrong-site surgery
and that provided information about prevention strategies. Of these,
ten studies were performed on patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery
and two on patients undergoing lumbar, thoracic or cervical spine procedures.
A higher frequency of wrong-level surgery in lumbar procedures than
in cervical procedures was found. Only one study assessed preventative
strategies for wrong-site surgery, demonstrating that current site-verification protocols
did not prevent about one-third of the cases. The current literature
does not provide a definitive estimate of the occurrence of wrong-site
spinal surgery, and there is no published evidence to support the
effectiveness of site-verification protocols. Further prevention
strategies need to be developed to reduce the risk of wrong-site surgery.
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.
In a prospective observational study we compared the two-year outcome of lumbar fusion by a simple technique using translaminar screws (n = 57) with a more extensive method using transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and pedicular screw fixation (n = 63) in consecutive patients with degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Outcome was assessed using the validated multidimensional Core Outcome Measures Index. Blood loss and operating time were significantly lower in the translaminar screw group (p <
0.01). The complication rates were similar in each group (2% to 4%). In all, 91% of the patients returned their questionnaire at two-years. The groups did not differ in Core Outcome Measures Index score reduction, 3.6 ( The two fusion techniques differed markedly in their extent and the cost of the implants, but were associated with almost identical patient-orientated outcomes. Extensive three-point stabilisation is not always required to achieve satisfactory patient-orientated results at two years.
There have been few reports regarding the efficacy
of posterior instrumentation alone as surgical treatment for patients
with pyogenic spondylitis, thus avoiding the morbidity of anterior
surgery. We report the clinical outcomes of six patients with pyogenic
spondylitis treated effectively with a single-stage posterior fusion
without anterior debridement at a mean follow-up of 2.8 years (2
to 5). Haematological data, including white cell count and level
of C-reactive protein, returned to normal in all patients at a mean
of 8.2 weeks (7 to 9) after the posterior fusion. Rigid bony fusion
between the infected vertebrae was observed in five patients at
a mean of 6.3 months (4.5 to 8) post-operatively, with the remaining
patient having partial union. Severe back pain was immediately reduced
following surgery and the activities of daily living showed a marked
improvement. Methicillin-resistant Single-stage posterior fusion may be effective in patients with
pyogenic spondylitis who have relatively minor bony destruction.