Effect of Minimally Invasive Lumbar Posterolateral Fusion Using Percutaneous Pedicle Screw on Paravertebral Muscle Change and Postoperative Residual Low Back Pain

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. S103-S104
Author(s):  
Yoshihisa Kotani ◽  
Kuniyoshi Abumi ◽  
Hideki Sudo ◽  
Ken Nagahama ◽  
Akira Iwata ◽  
...  
2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. s-0034-1376724-s-0034-1376724
Author(s):  
K. Vladimirovich Tyulikov ◽  
K. Korostelev ◽  
V. Manukovsky ◽  
V. Litvinenko ◽  
V. Badalov

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael W. Groff ◽  
Andrew T. Dailey ◽  
Zoher Ghogawala ◽  
Daniel K. Resnick ◽  
William C. Watters ◽  
...  

The utilization of pedicle screw fixation as an adjunct to posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) has become routine, but demonstration of a definitive benefit remains problematic. The medical evidence indicates that the addition of pedicle screw fixation to PLF increases fusion rates when assessed with dynamic radiographs. More recent evidence, since publication of the 2005 Lumbar Fusion Guidelines, suggests a stronger association between radiographic fusion and clinical outcome, although, even now, no clear correlation has been demonstrated. Although several reports suggest that clinical outcomes are improved with the addition of pedicle screw fixation, there are conflicting findings from similarly classified evidence. Furthermore, the largest contemporary, randomized, controlled study on this topic failed to demonstrate a significant clinical benefit with the use of pedicle screw fixation in patients undergoing PLF for chronic low-back pain. This absence of proof should not, however, be interpreted as proof of absence. Several limitations continue to compromise these investigations. For example, in the majority of studies the sample size is insufficient to detect small increments in clinical outcome that may be observed with pedicle screw fixation. Therefore, no definitive statement regarding the efficacy of pedicle screw fixation as a means to improve functional outcomes in patients undergoing PLF for chronic low-back pain can be made. There appears to be consistent evidence suggesting that pedicle screw fixation increases the costs and complication rate of PLF. High-risk patients, including (but not limited to) patients who smoke, patients who are undergoing revision surgery, or patients who suffer from medical conditions that may compromise fusion potential, may appreciate a greater benefit with supplemental pedicle screw fixation. It is recommended, therefore, that the use of pedicle screw fixation as a supplement to PLF be reserved for those patients in whom there is an increased risk of nonunion when treated with only PLF.


2004 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 479-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Cahana ◽  
Philippe Mavrocordatos ◽  
Jos WM Geurts ◽  
Gerbrand J Groen

1998 ◽  
Vol 02 (02) ◽  
pp. 109-122
Author(s):  
Kam Kong Chan

From July 1990 to June 1993, 35 patients suffering lumbar spondylolisthesis (21 degenerative; 14 isthmic) were operated on and reviewed. They all had single-level involvement either L4-5 or L5-S1 and only this level was confined for operation. The operative procedures included decompression, posterolateral fusion and pedicle screw instrumentation for fixation and reduction of the vertebral slip. The age ranged from 42 to 65 years old, with an average of 55 years. There were 21 patients with grade 1 slip; 13 with grade II; and 1 with grade III. The follow-up periods ranged from 30 to 55 months with an average of 42 months. The clinical results were evaluated according to the improvement of low back pain, radicular pain, claudication and the incidence of fusion. Twenty-four patients (74%) were rated good to excellent and the fusion rate was 88%. However, there were 16 patients who still suffered from significant low back pain and who had reportd that such pain adversely affected the rating of clinical result. Loss of reduction were found in 16 patients, but there was no difference in clinical outcome between patients with or without reduction loss after the operation. The purpose of this paper is to report the clinical outcomes of the treatment of symptomatic spondylolisthesis with decompression, posterolateral fusion and instrumental reduction of the slip. The incidence of reduction loss and the prevalence of remaining low back pain are two important factors to consider in doing such reduction procedure. We inferred that slip reduction may not be a worthwile procedure in the treatment of adult spondylolisthesis if ordinary posterolateral fusion with short segment instrumentation is contemplated.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document