scholarly journals Biomechanical Evaluation of Pedicle Screw-Based Dynamic Stabilization Devices for the Lumbar Spine: A Systematic Review

2008 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 159-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cédric Y. Barrey ◽  
Ravi K. Ponnappan ◽  
Jason Song ◽  
Alexander R. Vaccaro
SAS Journal ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 159-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cédric Y. Barrey ◽  
Ravi K. Ponnappan ◽  
Jason Song ◽  
Alexander R. Vaccaro

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 398-405
Author(s):  
Yi-Hsuan Kuo ◽  
Chao-Hung Kuo ◽  
Hsuan-Kan Chang ◽  
Tsung-Hsi Tu ◽  
Li-Yu Fay ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVECigarette smoking has been known to increase the risk of pseudarthrosis in spinal fusion. However, there is a paucity of data on the effects of smoking in dynamic stabilization following lumbar spine surgery. This study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes and the incidence of screw loosening among patients who smoked.METHODSConsecutive patients who had lumbar spondylosis, recurrent disc herniations, or low-grade spondylolisthesis that was treated with 1- or 2-level surgical decompression and pedicle screw–based Dynesys dynamic stabilization (DDS) were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who did not complete the minimum 2 years of radiological and clinical evaluations were excluded. All screw loosening was determined by both radiographs and CT scans. Patient-reported outcomes, including visual analog scale (VAS) scores of back and leg pain, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), were analyzed. Patients were grouped by smoking versus nonsmoking, and loosening versus intact screws, respectively. All radiological and clinical outcomes were compared between the groups.RESULTSA total of 306 patients (140 women), with a mean age of 60.2 ± 12.5 years, were analyzed during an average follow-up of 44 months. There were 34 smokers (9 women) and 272 nonsmokers (131 women, 48.2% more than the 26.5% of smokers, p = 0.017). Postoperatively, all the clinical outcomes improved (e.g., VAS back and leg pain, JOA scores, and ODI, all p < 0.001). The overall rate of screw loosening was 23.2% (71 patients), and patients who had loosened screws were older (61.7 ± 9.6 years vs 59.8 ± 13.2 years, p = 0.003) and had higher rates of diabetes mellitus (33.8% vs 21.7%, p = 0.038) than those who had intact DDS screws. Although the patients who smoked had similar clinical improvement (even better VAS scores in their legs, p = 0.038) and a nonsignificantly lower rate of screw loosening (17.7% and 23.9%, p = 0.416), the chances of secondary surgery for adjacent segment disease (ASD) were higher than for the nonsmokers (11.8% vs 1.5%, p < 0.001).CONCLUSIONSSmoking had no adverse effects on the improvements of clinical outcomes in the pedicle screw–based DDS surgery. For smokers, the rate of screw loosening trended lower (without significance), but the chances of secondary surgery for ASD were higher than for the nonsmoking patients. However, the optimal surgical strategy to stabilize the lumbar spine of smoking patients requires future investigation.


Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 479
Author(s):  
Tatiana Sidiropoulou ◽  
Kalliopi Christodoulaki ◽  
Charalampos Siristatidis

A pre-procedural ultrasound of the lumbar spine is frequently used to facilitate neuraxial procedures. The aim of this review is to examine the evidence sustaining the utilization of pre-procedural neuraxial ultrasound compared to conventional methods. We perform a systematic review of randomized controlled trials with meta-analyses. We search the electronic databases Medline, Cochrane Central, Science Direct and Scopus up to 1 June 2019. We include trials comparing a pre-procedural lumbar spine ultrasound to a non-ultrasound-assisted method. The primary endpoints are technical failure rate, first-attempt success rate, number of needle redirections and procedure time. We retrieve 32 trials (3439 patients) comparing pre-procedural lumbar ultrasounds to palpations for neuraxial procedures in various clinical settings. Pre-procedural ultrasounds decrease the overall risk of technical failure (Risk Ratio (RR) 0.69 (99% CI, 0.43 to 1.10), p = 0.04) but not in obese and difficult spinal patients (RR 0.53, p = 0.06) and increase the first-attempt success rate (RR 1.5 (99% CI, 1.22 to 1.86), p < 0.0001, NNT = 5). In difficult spines and obese patients, the RR is 1.84 (99% CI, 1.44 to 2.3; p < 0.0001, NNT = 3). The number of needle redirections is lower with pre-procedural ultrasounds (SMD = −0.55 (99% CI, −0.81 to −0.29), p < 0.0001), as is the case in difficult spines and obese patients (SMD = −0.85 (99% CI, −1.08 to −0.61), p < 0.0001). No differences are observed in procedural times. Ιn conclusion, a pre-procedural ultrasound provides significant benefit in terms of technical failure, number of needle redirections and first attempt-success rate. Τhe effect of pre-procedural ultrasound scanning of the lumbar spine is more significant in a subgroup analysis of difficult spines and obese patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document