6. Do parameters of provocative discography predict clinical outcome in lumbar interbody fusion for discogenic back pain?

2003 ◽  
Vol 3 (5) ◽  
pp. 69
Author(s):  
Matthew Pollard ◽  
Louis Jenis ◽  
Robert Banco ◽  
Scott Tromanhauser ◽  
Brian Agganis
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Provocative Discography

scholarly journals Best versus worst surgical outcomes after single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 230949902098303
Author(s):  
Se-Jun Park ◽  
Keun-Ho Lee ◽  
Chong-Suh Lee ◽  
Ki-Tack Kim ◽  
Dong Hyeon Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Individual Treatment ◽  
Symptom Duration ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Characteristic Analysis ◽  
Single Level ◽  
Patient Reported

Purpose: Previous studies have shown conflicting results regarding the factors affecting the clinical outcome after fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis. However, no study has compared the best and worst clinical outcome groups using patient-reported outcome measures. We aimed to compare the characteristics of patients with best and worst outcomes following single-level lumbar fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis. Methods: 200 patients underwent single-level interbody fusion with a minimum 2-years follow-up were included. We excluded patients with surgical complications already-known to be associated with poor postoperative outcomes, including pseudoarthrosis and postoperative infection. According to 2-year postoperative Oswestry disability index scores, patients were divided into two groups; Best and Worst. Demographic, clinical and radiographic variables were compared between the two groups. Results: Compared with patients in the Best group, those in the Worst group were older (59.5 and 67.0 years, respectively; p = 0.012; odds ratio [OR], 1.143; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.030–1.269) and had a longer duration of pain from onset (2.6 and 7.2 years, respectively; p = 0.041; OR, 1.021; 95% CI, 1.001–1.041). The cutoff value of pain duration from onset was measured as ≥3.5 years on Receiver operating characteristic analysis. Patients in the Worst group had a lower preoperative angular motion compared to those in the Best group (12.7° and 8.3°, respectively; p = 0.016; OR, 0.816; 95% CI, 0.691–0.963). Conclusions: Degenerative spondylolisthesis patients of good clinical outcome after single-level lumbar interbody fusion were relatively young, had a short symptom duration before surgery, and a high preoperative instability compared with the patient having poor postoperative clinical outcome. Therefore, these findings should be considered preoperatively when deciding the appropriate individual treatment plan.

Outcomes of 2-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion for 2-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 90-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hironobu Sakaura ◽  
Tomoya Yamashita ◽  
Toshitada Miwa ◽  
Kenji Ohzono ◽  
Tetsuo Ohwada
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Sagittal Alignment ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Single Level ◽  
The Mean

Object A systematic review concerning surgical management of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) showed that a satisfactory clinical outcome was significantly more likely with adjunctive spinal fusion than with decompression alone. However, the role of adjunctive fusion and the optimal type of fusion remain controversial. Therefore, operative management for multilevel DS raises more complicated issues. The purpose of this retrospective study was to elucidate clinical and radiological outcomes after 2-level PLIF for 2-level DS with the least bias in determination of operative procedure. Methods Since 2005, all patients surgically treated for lumbar DS at the authors' hospital have been treated using posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with pedicle screws, irrespective of severity of slippage, patient age, or bone quality. The authors conducted a retrospective review of 20 consecutive cases involving patients who underwent 2-level PLIF for 2-level DS and had been followed up for 2 years or longer (2-level PLIF group). They also analyzed data from 92 consecutive cases involving patients who underwent single-level PLIF for single-level DS during the same time period and had been followed for at least 2 years (1-level PLIF group). This second group served as a control. Clinical status was assessed using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score. Fusion status and sagittal alignment of the lumbar spine were assessed by comparing serial plain radiographs. Surgery-related complications and the need for additional surgery were evaluated. Results The mean JOA score improved significantly from 12.8 points before surgery to 20.4 points at the latest follow-up in the 2-level PLIF group (mean recovery rate 51.8%), and from 14.2 points preoperatively to 22.5 points at the latest follow-up in the single-level PLIF group (mean recovery rate 55.3%). At the final follow-up, 95.0% of patients in the 2-level PLIF group and 96.7% of those in the 1-level PLIF group had achieved solid spinal fusion, and the mean sagittal alignment of the lumbar spine was more lordotic than before surgery in both groups. Early surgery-related complications, including transient neurological complications, occurred in 6 patients in the 2-level PLIF group (30.0%) and 11 patients in the 1-level PLIF group (12.0%). Symptomatic adjacent-segment disease was found in 4 patients in the 2-level PLIF group (20.0%) and 10 patients in the 1-level PLIF group (10.9%). Conclusions The clinical outcome of 2-level PLIF for 2-level lumbar DS was satisfactory, although surgery-related complications including symptomatic adjacent-segment disease were not negligible.

Extraforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion at the L5–S1 Level: Technical Considerations and Feasibility

2017 ◽  
Vol 78 (05) ◽  
pp. 507-512
Author(s):  
Denis Kaech ◽  
Pawel Baranowski ◽  
Alicja Baranowska ◽  
Didier Recoules-Arche ◽  
Arthur Kurzbuch
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Intervertebral Disk ◽  
Spinal Diseases ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Postoperative Result ◽  
Disk Space ◽  
Intervertebral Disk Space

Background Extraforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (ELIF) surgery is a muscle-sparing approach that allows the treatment of various degenerative spinal diseases. It is technical challenging to perform the ELIF approach at the L5–S1 level because the sacral ala obstructs the view of the intervertebral disk space. Methods We reported earlier on the ELIF technique in which the intervertebral disk is targeted at an angle of 45 degrees relative to the midline. In this article we describe the technical process we developed to overcome the anatomic relation between the sacral ala and the intervertebral disk space L5–S1 that hinders the ELIF approach at this level. We then report in a retrospective analysis on the short-term clinical and radiologic outcome of 100 consecutive patients with degenerative L5–S1 pathologies who underwent ELIF surgery. Results The L5–S1 ELIF approach could be realized in all patients. The short-term clinical outcome was evaluated 5 months after surgery: 92% of the patients were satisfied with their postoperative result; 8% had a poor result. Overall, 17% of the patients presented light radicular or low back pain not influencing their daily activity, and 82% of the patients working before surgery returned to work 3 to 7 months after surgery. The radiologic outcome was documented by computed tomography at 5 months after surgery and showed fusion in 99% of the patients. Lumbar magnetic resonance imaging performed in 5 patients at 6 months after surgery revealed the integrity of the paraspinal muscles. Conclusions ELIF surgery at the L5–S1 level is technically feasible for various degenerative spinal diseases. Analysis of the clinical and radiologic data in a consecutive retrospective cohort of patients who underwent this surgical procedure showed a good short-term clinical outcome and fusion rate.

Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cages: an independent review of 71 cases

1999 ◽  
Vol 91 (2) ◽  
pp. 186-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siviero Agazzi ◽  
Alain Reverdin ◽  
Daniel May
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Fixation Techniques ◽  
Independent Review ◽  
Fine Print

Object. The authors conducted a retrospective study to provide an independent evaluation of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in which impacted carbon cages were used. Interbody cages have been developed to replace tricortical interbody grafts in anterior and PLIF procedures. Superior fusion rates and clinical outcomes have been claimed by the developers. Methods. In a retrospective study, the authors evaluated 71 consecutive patients in whom surgery was performed between 1995 and 1997. The median follow-up period was 28 months. Clinical outcome was assessed using the Prolo scale. Fusion results were interpreted by an independent radiologist. The fusion rate was 90%. Overall, 67% of the patients were satisfied with their outcome and would undergo the same operation again. Based on the results of the Prolo scale, however, in only 39% of the patients were excellent or good results achieved. Forty-six percent of the work-eligible patients resumed their working activity. Clinical outcome and return-to-work status were significantly associated with socioeconomic factors such as preoperative employment (p = 0.03), compensation issues (p = 0.001), and length of preoperative sick leave (p = 0.01). Radiographically demonstrated fusion was not statistically related to clinical outcome (p = 0.2). Conclusions. This is one of the largest independent series in which PLIF with cages has been evaluated. The results show that the procedure is safe and effective with a 90% fusion rate and a 66% overall satisfaction rate, which compare favorably with those of traditional fixation techniques but fail to match the higher results claimed by the innovators of the cage techniques. The authors' experience confirms the reports of others that many patients continue to experience incapacitating back pain despite successful fusion and neurological recovery.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcome After Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion With a New Osteoinductive Bone Substitute Material

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (7) ◽  
pp. E319-E325
Author(s):  
Marcus Rickert ◽  
Christoph Fleege ◽  
Ioannis Papachristos ◽  
Marcus R. Makowski ◽  
Michael Rauschmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Bone Substitute ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Bone Substitute Material ◽  
Substitute Material

Surgical treatment of adult degenerative spondylolisthesis by instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the Han nationality

2009 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 496-499 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hao Xu ◽  
Hao Tang ◽  
Zhonghai Li
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Han Nationality

Object The transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedure was developed to provide the surgeon with a fusion procedure that may reduce many of the risks and limitations associated with posterior lumbar interbody fusion, yet produce similar stability in the spine. There are few large series with long-term follow-up data regarding instrumented TLIF and placement of 1 diagonal polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage. The authors performed a prospective study to evaluate the outcome and safety of instrumented TLIF with 1 diagonal PEEK cage for degenerative spondylolisthesis in the Han nationality in China. Methods Between May 2001 and April 2006, 60 patients (35 men and 25 women; mean age 55.5 years, range 45–70 years) with symptomatic degenerative spondylolisthesis underwent the TLIF procedure with 1 diagonal PEEK cage and additional pedicle screw internal fixation at the authors' institution. The inclusion criteria involved degenerative spondylolisthesis (Grades I and II) in patients with chronic low-back pain with or without leg pain. Results One patient had a postoperative temporary motor and sensory deficit of the adjacent nerve root. Reoperation was required in 1 patient because of pedicle screw migration. One patient developed a pseudarthrosis and had increasing complaints of low-back pain 1 year postoperatively and underwent a subsequent revision surgery. Two patients had nerve root symptomatic compression resulting from cage migration and insufficient decompression after surgery, and they underwent revision. Two patients had a dural tear that required fibrin glue application during surgery. No implant fracture or subsidence occurred in any patient. Clinically, the pain index and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score improved significantly from before surgery to the 2-year follow-up. In the TLIF group, the pain index improved from 69 to 25 (p < 0.001). The postoperative ODI showed a significant postoperative reduction of disability during the whole period of follow-up (p < 0.001). The preoperative mean ODI score was 32.3 (16–80), and postoperative 13.1 (0–28). Disc space height and foraminal height were restored by the surgery and maintained at the latest follow-up time. Conclusions In the authors' experience, instrumented TLIF with 1 diagonal PEEK cage can be a surgical option for treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis in the Han nationality in China.

Intramuscular pressure of the multifidus muscle and low-back pain after posterior lumbar interbody fusion: comparison of mini-open and conventional approaches

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 651-657 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshihiro Mukai ◽  
Shota Takenaka ◽  
Noboru Hosono ◽  
Toshitada Miwa ◽  
Takeshi Fuji
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Intramuscular Pressure ◽  
Multifidus Muscle ◽  
Screw Insertion ◽  
Mini Open

Object This randomized study was designed to elucidate the time course of the perioperative development of intramuscular multifidus muscle pressure after posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and to investigate whether the route of pedicle screw insertion affects this pressure and resultant low-back pain. Although several studies have focused on intramuscular pressure associated with posterior lumbar surgery, those studies examined intramuscular pressure generated by the muscle retractors during surgery. No study has investigated the intramuscular pressure after PLIF. Methods Forty patients with L4–5 degenerative spondylolisthesis were randomly assigned to undergo either the mini-open PLIF procedure with pedicle screw insertion between the multifidus and longissimus muscles (n = 20) or the conventional PLIF procedure via a midline approach only (n = 20). Intramuscular pressure was measured 5 times (at 30 minutes and at 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours after surgery) with an intraoperatively installed sensor. Concurrently, the FACES Pain Rating Scale score for low-back pain and the total dose of postoperative analgesics were recorded. Results With the patients in the supine position, for both groups the mean pressure values were consistently 40–50 mm Hg, which exceeded the critical capillary pressure of the muscle. With the patients in the lateral decubitus position, the pressure decreased over time (from 14 to 9 mm Hg in the mini-open group and from 20 to 10 mm Hg in the conventional group). Among patients in the mini-open group, the pressure was lower, but the difference was not statistically significant. Postoperative pain and postoperative analgesic dosages were also lower . Conclusions To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate postoperative intramuscular pressure after PLIF. Although the results did not demonstrate a significant difference in the intramuscular pressure between the 2 types of PLIF, mini-open PLIF was associated with less pain after surgery. Clinical trial registration no.: UMIN000010069 (www.umin.ac.jp/ctr/index.htm).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document