Objective To investigate the effect of the sagittal alignment of the spine and pelvis after surgical posterior intervertebral fusion combined with pedicle screw fixation for low-grade isthmic lumbar spondylolisthesis, and to assess the effectiveness. Methods Between October 2009 and October 2011, 30 patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis underwent surgical posterior intervertebral fusion combined with pedicle screw fixation, and the clinical data were retrospectively reviewed. There were 14 males and 16 females with an average age of 56.7 years (range, 48-67 years). The pre- and post-operative radiographic parameters, such as percentage of slipping (PS), intervertebral space height, angle of slip (AS), thoracic kyphosis (TK), thoracolumbar junction angle (TLJ), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), lumbar lordosis (LL), spino-sacral angle (SSA), sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT), and pelvic incidence (PI) were measured. The functional evaluation was made using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Pearson correlation were used to investigate the association between all parameters and ODI score. Results PS, intervertebral space height, AS, and ODI were improved significantly compared with properative ones (P lt; 0.05). Significant differences were found in the other parameters between pre- and post-operation (P lt; 0.05) except TLJ and TK. The alteration of SVA showed significant correlation with the changes of PS, PI, PT, LL, SS, AS, SSA, and ODI. The alteration of SSA showed significant correlation with the changes of PS, PI, LL, SS, AS, PT, and ODI. Conclusion Surgical posterior intervertebral fusion combined with pedicle screw fixation for low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis can effectively improve and maintain the spinal sagittal parameters. SVA and SSA are adequate to evaluate pre-and post-operative balance. The good clinical outcome is closely related with the improved of SVA and SSA.
ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of vertebral arch replantation and laminectomy in the treatment of mild to moderate isthmic spondylolisthesis.MethodsThe clinical data of 66 patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis treated with vertebral arch replantation or laminectomy between March 2014 and July 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. They were divided into trial group (34 cases, treated with complete replantation of vertebral arch, intervertebral fusion, and internal fixation) and control group (32 cases, treated with laminectomy with intervertebral fusion and internal fixation) according to different surgical methods. There was no significant difference in general data of gender, age, disease duration, lesion segment, Meyerding grade, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Oswestry disability index (ODI) score, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score between the two groups (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, complications, vertebral arch fusion of trial group, and epidural scar formation of the two groups were recorded. The VAS score, JOA score, and ODI score were evaluated at preoperation, 3, 6, 12 months after operation, and at last follow-up. The effectiveness was evaluated according to HOU Shuxun’s criteria.ResultsAll the patients successfully completed the surgery, without any aggravation of nerve injury, dural tear, infection, etc. There was no significant difference in the operation time between the two groups (t=0.583, P=0.562), but the intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the trial group than that in the control group (t=2.134, P=0.037). All the 66 patients were followed up 13-18 months (mean, 16.2 months). Postoperative clinical symptoms of all patients were significantly improved. In the control group, 7 cases were found to have symptoms of spinal canal stenosis with postoperative posture changes at 3 months after operation, and 5 cases showed mild lower limb numbness at 18 months after operation. No complication such as infection and nerve injury occurred in other patients. In the trial group, 34 cases of epidural scar tissue were completely blocked outside the replantation vertebral arch, while in the control group, 11 cases of epidural scar tissue invaded the spinal canal. At last follow-up, the fusion rate of intervertebral bone grafting and vertebral arch replantation in the trial group was 100%, and the fusion rate of intervertebral bone grafting in the control group was also 100%. The VAS score, ODI score, and JOA score were significantly improved at each time point after operation (P<0.01). The ODI score and JOA score of the trial group were significantly better than those of the control group at 3 months after operation and at last follow-up (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in scores between the two groups at other time points (P>0.05). According to HOU Shuxun’s criteria, the excellent and good rate was 91.2% in the trial group and 84.4% in the control group, showing no significant difference (χ2=1.092, P=0.573).ConclusionCompared with laminectomy, vertebral arch replantation can better improve postoperative neurological symptoms, maximize the reconstruction of the bone spinal canal, restore the stability of the intraspinal environment, and it is a better surgical method for lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis.
Objective To analyze the clinical features and preliminary outcome of posterior operation for traumatic lumbar spondylolisthesis. Methods The clinical data of 11 patients with traumatic lumbar spondylolisthesis who underwent surgeries between January 2008 and June 2012 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 6 male and 5 female patients, aged from 13 to 60 years with a median age of 38 years. The mechanism of injury included heavy pressure injury in 4 cases, falling injury from height in 4 cases, and traffic accident injury in 3 cases. The time of injury to operation was between 3 days and 13 years (median, 20 days). According to Frankel neurological function grading, 2 patients were rated as grade E, 4 as grade D, 3 as grade C, and 2 as grade B before operation; according to Meyerding spondylolisthesis grading, 4 cases were classified as degree I, 4 as degree II, 2 as degree III, and 1 as degree IV preoperatively. The affected segments included L4 in 3 and L5 in 8 patients. The surgical fixation segments were L4, 5 in 2 patients, L5, S1 in 7, and L4-S1 in 2. Eight patients underwent circumferential fusion, while 3 patients underwent posterolateral fusion. The reduction of spondylolisthesis and bone graft fusion were assessed on X-ray films and three-dimensional CT scans during follow-up. The clinical outcomes were evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores. Results All patients achieved primary healing of incision after operation. And all patients were followed up 6-40 months with a median time of 12 months. There was no pulling-out or breaking of internal fixation. The fusion rate was 100% on three-dimensional CT scans, and the fusion time was 3-6 months (mean, 4.5 months). The spondylolisthesis was degree 0 in 10 cases and degree I in 1 case according to Meyerding grading, showing significant difference when compared with preoperative spondylolisthesis grading (Z= — 2.979, P=0.003). The Frankel neurological function grading were E in 6, D in 3, and C in 2 at last follow-up, which were significantly improved when compared with preoperative one (Z= — 2.271, P=0.014). At 1 week after operation and last follow-up, VAS and ODI scores were significantly improved when compared with the preoperative scores (P lt; 0.05); however, no significant difference was found between at 1 week and at last follow-up (P gt; 0.05). Conclusion If lumbar X-ray films suggest multiple fractures of transverses in emergency combined with the mechanism of injury, it bly indicates the diagnosis of traumatic lumbar spondylolisthesis, moreover earlier decompression and fusion can provide the recovering of the neurological function and satisfactory preliminary effectiveness in these patients.
ObjectiveTo review the researches of the role of the facet joint orientation (FJO) in degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). MethodsRelated literature concerning the FJO in patients with DS was extensively reviewed and comprehensively analyzed in 4 terms of the basic concepts, measurement methods, the controversial etiology, and the clinical significance. ResultsThe multiplanar reformation of spiral CT is expected to become a new method of studying the FJO. The causal relationship between the sagittal FJO and DS is still controversial, but further prospective studies are needed to resolve this issue. The sagittal FJO is very important in the prevention of DS and the choice of surgery plan. ConclusionThe etiologic relationship between the FJO and DS need to be further studied.
Objective To compare the effectiveness of percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PE-TLIF) and Wiltse-approach TLIF (W-TLIF) in the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis. MethodsThe clinical data of 47 patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis who met the selection criteria between July 2018 and June 2019 were retrospectively analyzed, in which 21 patients were treated with PE-TLIF (PE-TLIF group) and 26 patients were treated with W-TLIF (W-TLIF group). There was no significant difference between the two groups in age, gender, disease duration, level of spondylolisthesis vertebrae, spondylolisthesis degree, spondylolisthesis type, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back pain and leg pain, lumbar Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, and the disc height (DH), segmental lordosis (SL), and Taillard index (TI) of the operated vertebrae (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage, postoperative bedridden time, and complications were compared between the two groups. The VAS score and JOA score were used to evaluate the improvement of pain and function. At last follow-up, DH, SL, and TI of operated vertebrae were measured by X-ray films, and lumbar CT was performed to evaluate the interbody fusion. Results Compared with W-TLIF group, the operation time in PE-TLIF group was significantly longer, but the intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage were significantly less, and the postoperative bedridden time was significantly shorter (P<0.05). There were 2 cases of transient lower limb radiating pain in PE-TLIF group and 1 case of superficial incision infection in W-TLIF group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications (9.5% vs. 3.8%) between the two groups (χ2=0.037, P=0.848). The patients in both groups were followed up 12-24 months, with an average of 17.3 months in PE-TLIF group and 17.7 months in W-TLIF group. The VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain, and the JOA scores of the two groups significantly improved at each time point after operation when compared with those before operation (P<0.05). Compared with W-TLIF group, the VAS scores of low back pain in PE-TLIF group significantly lower at 3 days and 3 months after operation (P<0.05), and the JOA score of PE-TLIF group was significantly higher at 3 months after operation (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in each score at any other time point between the two groups (P>0.05). At last follow-up, the DH, SL, and TI of operated vertebrae of the two groups significantly improved when compared with those before operation (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in the differences of each parameter between the two groups (P>0.05). According to Suk’s standard, the fusion rates of PE-TLIF group and W-TLIF group were 90.5% (19/21) and 92.3% (24/26), respectively, with no significant difference (χ2=0.000, P=1.000). At last follow-up, there was no case of Cage sunk into the adjacent vertebral body, or dislodgement of Cage anteriorly or posteriorly in both groups. Conclusion PE-TLIF and W-TLIF are both effective in the treatment of grade Ⅰ and Ⅱ lumbar spondylolisthesis. Although the operation time is prolonged, PE-TLIF has less intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage, shorter postoperative bedridden time, and can get more obvious short-term improvement of low back pain and function.
Objective To compare the clinical outcomes of posterior lumbar interbody fusion（PLIF） using simple cage alone fusion with pedicle screw fixationand autogenous bone grafting and cage fusion with pedicle screw fixation in adult spondylolisthesis. Methods From March 2003 to March 2004，Twenty-seven patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis were divided in two groups. In group A, 15 patients were treated by PLIF using simple cage alone fusion with pedicle screw fixation, including 4 males and 11 females, aging 53-68 years. Isthmic defectswere located at L4 in 9 cases, at L5 in 6 cases. Four patients were smokers.Thepreoperative mean disc space height was 5.4±2.3 mm, the mean percentage of slip was 36.8％±7.2%. In group B, 12 patients were treated by PLIF using autogenous bone grafting and cage fusion with pedicle screw fixation, including 3 males and 9 females, aging 56 years. Isthmic defects were located at L4 in 8 cases, atL5 in 4 cases. Five patients were smokers. The preoperative mean disc space height was 5.7±2.5 mm, the mean percentage of slip was 37.8%±6.2%. Two groupswere compared in the amount of blood loss, duration of hospitalization, back pain, radiating pain, fusion rate, the intervertebral disc space height, the postoperative degree of slip and the fusion rate. Results All patientswere followed up for 24-38 months. The mean follow-up was 29(24-36) months in group A and26(24-38) months in group B. There were no statistically significant differences infollow-up period, age,sex, the location of isthmic defects, smoking, the preoperative disc space height and the percentage of slip between two groups (Pgt;0.05).There were no statistically significant differences in the amount of blood loss, the duration of hospitalization, the fusion time between two groups(Pgt;0.05). But there were statistically significant differences in the back pain score, the radiating pain score and the fusion rate between two groups(Plt;0.05).Thepo stoperative disc space height and the degree of slip of the last follow-up were5.8±2.2 mm and 25.6％±7.2% in group A, 6.2±2.5 mm and 24.1％±7.4 % ingroupB, showing statistically significant difference (Plt;0.05). Conclusion The PLIF using autogenous bone grafting and cage fusion with pedicle screw fixations ismore beneficial to improving the fusion rate and preventing longterm instabilities than simple cage alone fusion with pedicle screw fixation in adult spondylolisthesis.
Objective To assess the effectiveness of surgical interventions for lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults.Methods RCTs of surgical treatment for adult lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis were identified from specialized trials registered in Cochrane Back Group, The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2004)，additional electronic search (including MEDLINE (1966 to 2004)，EMBASE (1980 to 2004) and CBM), handsearching for Chinese journals. Two reviewers assessed the quality of the trials and extracted data independently. Meta analysis was conducted using RevMan 4.2. Results Four published trials including a total of 277 patients were included. Three trials compared different operative procedures and one trial considered conservative versus surgical treatment for lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults. Two trials had limitations of trial design which at times gave considerable potential for bias. As very few studies and patients were included, and different score criteria were used to assess the clinical outcomes in the review, we decided to provide a descriptive summary only. All trials drew a conclusion that lumbar posterolateral fusion for adult isthmic spondylolisthesis could relieve pain and improve clinical outcome. There was no significant difference in fusion rate and improvement of clinical outcomes between different operative procedures. One trial showed that the lumbar posterolateral fusion could improve function and relieve pain more efficiently than an exercise program. Three trials indicated there was no difference in fusion rate and improvement of clinical outcomes between different operative methods. One trial suggested that instrumented posterolateral fusion did not improve fusion rate but increased complication rates, operation time and bleeding loss. Two trials considered the role of decompressive laminectomy and reached a conflicting conclusion. Conclusions There is no adequate evidence about the most effective technique of treatment for adult lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis. There is limited evidence that the lumbar posterolateral fusion for adult isthmic spondylolisthesis can efficiently relieve pain and improve clinical outcome. There is no evidence that the use of pedicle screw fixation can improve the fusion rate or the clinical outcome. At present, there is no enough evidence available from randomised trials to support the routine clinical use of instrumented fusion for lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults. As very few studies and patients were included in the review, it was cautious to draw any conclusions from the review. More trials with high quality on methodology are needed.