scholarly journals Clinical Validity of 3 Different Grading Systems for Facet Joint Violation: A Retrospective Study and In-Depth Review

2021 ◽  
pp. 219256822110060
Author(s):  
Yiwei Zhao ◽  
Suomao Yuan ◽  
Wubo Liu ◽  
Yonghao Tian ◽  
Xinyu Liu
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Ct Reconstruction ◽  
3 Dimensional ◽  
Percutaneous Pedicle Screw ◽  
Grading Systems ◽  
Lumbar Spinal ◽  
Facet Joint Violation ◽  
Violation Rate

Study Design: Retrospective. Objectives: To study the violation rate of 3 different types of facet joint violation (FJV) grading systems (Babu, Shah, and Park), and to evaluate the accuracy, reliability, and association with clinical outcomes of the above 3 grading systems. Methods: 152 patients of lumbar spinal stenosis treated with percutaneous pedicle screw placement were enrolled in our study. FJV was evaluated on 3-dimensional lumbar CT reconstruction. Three types of grading systems were used to evaluate FJV: Babu’s system (grading by the severity of violation), Shah’s system (grading by side of violation), and modified Park’s system (grading by different components to cause violation). The violation rate and observer consistency of the 3 grading systems were analyzed. Clinical outcomes were evaluated by visual analog score (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI) score. Results: Kappa coefficients of interobserver consistency on Babu, Shah, and Park grading systems were 0.726,0.849,0.692, respectively. The violation rate of Babu, Shah, and Park grading systems were comparable, which were 34.54%, 32.57%, 33.55%, respectively. In all 3 grading systems, the postoperative VAS low-back pain and ODI scores in non-FJV groups were lower than those in FJV groups ( P < .05), and there were no significant differences between 2 groups in VAS leg pain( P >.05). Conclusions: Babu, Shah and modified Park grading system are reliable grading systems, and it reported comparable violation rate. The self-reported clinical outcomes of patients with FJV were worse at 2-year follow-up. For clinical application, it is recommended to use 2 or even 3 different grading systems together to evaluate the FJV.

Comparison of clinical outcomes following minimally invasive or lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 491-499 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynn B. McGrath ◽  
Gabrielle A. White-Dzuro ◽  
Christoph P. Hofstetter
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Visual Analog Scale Score ◽  
Endoscopic Technique ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Safe Alternative ◽  
Endoscopic Techniques ◽  
Pain Disability Index ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

OBJECTIVEMinimally invasive lumbar unilateral tubular laminotomy for bilateral decompression has gradually gained acceptance as a less destabilizing but efficacious and safe alternative to traditional open decompression techniques. The authors have further advanced the principles of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) by utilizing working-channel endoscope–based techniques. Full-endoscopic technique allows for high-resolution off-axis visualization of neural structures within the lateral recess, thereby minimizing the need for facet joint resection. The relative efficacy and safety of MIS and full-endoscopic techniques have not been directly compared.METHODSA retrospective analysis of 95 consecutive patients undergoing either MIS (n = 45) or endoscopic (n = 50) unilateral laminotomies for bilateral decompression in cases of lumbar spinal stenosis was performed. Patient demographics, operative details, clinical outcomes, and complications were reviewed.RESULTSThe patient cohort consisted of 41 female and 54 male patients whose average age was 62 years. Half of the patients had single-level, one-third had 2-level, and the remaining patients had 3- or 4-level procedures. The surgical time for endoscopic technique was significantly longer per level compared to MIS (161.8 ± 6.8 minutes vs 99.3 ± 4.6 minutes; p < 0.001). Hospital stay for MIS patients was on average 2.4 ± 0.5 days compared to 0.7 ± 0.1 days for endoscopic patients (p = 0.001). At the 1-year follow-up, endoscopic patients had a significantly lower visual analog scale score for leg pain than MIS patients (1.3 ± 0.3 vs 3.0 ± 0.5; p < 0.01). Moreover, the back pain disability index score was significantly lower in the endoscopic cohort than in the MIS cohort (20.7 ± 3.4 vs 35.9 ± 4.1; p < 0.01). Two patients in the MIS group (epidural hematoma) and one patient in the endoscopic group (disc herniation) required a return to the operating room acutely after surgery (< 14 days).CONCLUSIONSLumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression is a safe and effective surgical procedure with favorable complication profile and patient outcomes.

scholarly journals Comparison of facet joint violation in lumbar posterior spinal instrumentation using different techniques including cortical bone trajectory

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-62
Author(s):  
CY To ◽  
P Cheung ◽  
W Ng ◽  
WY Mok
Keyword(s):  
Cortical Bone ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Spinal Instrumentation ◽  
Entry Site ◽  
Cortical Bone Trajectory ◽  
Percutaneous Pedicle Screw ◽  
Iatrogenic Damage ◽  
Percutaneous Screws ◽  
Facet Joint Violation

Study background: A retrospective study to compare the rate of facet joint violation (FJV) in lumbar posterior spinal instrumentation using open pedicle screw, percutaneous pedicle screw, and cortical bone trajectory (CBT) technique. CBT is a new posterior spinal instrumentation technique in which a more caudal entry point can minimize iatrogenic damage to the cranial facet joint. Only one recent study reports incidence of FJV of 11%; however, no previous reports comment on radiological outcomes comparing to traditional open and percutaneous screws. Methods: We reviewed 90 patients who underwent lumbar posterior spinal instrumentation from January 2016 to June 2017. Postoperative computer tomography scans were performed to evaluate FJV. Incidence of FJV was graded by three reviewers according to Seo classification. Results: Totally, 446 screws (open 43.4%, percutaneous 37.8%, CBT 18.9%) were inserted. Among these, 6.3% (28/446) had screw head or rod in contact with facet joint and 0.9% (4/446) had screws directly invaded the facet joint. Overall, FJV was 7.2% (CTB = 3.4%, open = 10.4%, and percutaneous = 4.5%, p = 0.075). Conclusion: CBT technique has potential advantage in reducing FJV. It has a unique entry site at lateral aspect of pars interarticular with a caudomedial to craniolateral pathway. It is a reasonable alternative to open or percutaneous techniques in lumbar posterior spinal instrumentation.

scholarly journals Revision decompression with fusion as a treatment for same level restenosis after laminotomy for lumbar spinal stenosis

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-9
Author(s):  
Zhuohao Chow Liang ◽  
Wing Ngai Yim ◽  
Chung Ting Martin Wong ◽  
Hung On Cheng ◽  
Ka Kin Cheung
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Revision Surgery ◽  
Japanese Orthopaedic Association ◽  
Japanese Orthopaedic Association Score ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Salvage Procedure ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Background/Purpose: Laminotomy is an established procedure to relieve symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis. However, there is a group of patients with symptomatic recurrence. Re-decompression and fusion could be an effective salvage procedure but the results are seldom found in the literature. In this study, we focused on investigating the clinical outcomes and complication rates of revision decompression with fusion in this patient group. Methods: A retrospective study including patients who had undergone revision decompression with fusion for recurrent symptoms due to same level restenosis after primary laminotomy for lumbar spinal stenosis was performed. Patients with recurrent symptoms due to prolapsed intervertebral disc, trauma, infection, and neoplasm were excluded. Demographics, clinical outcomes, and complications were retrieved. Results: Twenty-eight patients with a total number of 42 levels of revision decompression and fusion were included. With a mean follow-up time of 27 months after revision surgery, there were statistically significant improvement of 63, 49, and 13% in Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, visual analog scale for leg pain, and Roland-Morris disability questionnaire score, respectively. There were 6(21%), 2(7%), 0(0%), and 2(7%) cases of dural tear, infection requiring reoperation, new neurological deficit, and other complications, respectively, in these revision cases. Conclusion: Bearing potential complications in mind, re-decompression with fusion is a viable option with reasonable clinical outcomes for patients with recurrent symptoms after laminotomy for lumbar spinal stenosis. As a treatment option for symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis, primary laminotomy could have the potential benefit of lower complication rates in revision surgery.

scholarly journals Short-term effectiveness of precise safety decompression via double percutaneous lumbar foraminoplasty and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression for lateral lumbar spinal canal stenosis: a prospective cohort study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Wang ◽  
Mingyan Deng ◽  
Hao Wu ◽  
Ye Wu ◽  
Chuan Guo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Prospective Cohort ◽  
Spinal Canal ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Postoperative Mri ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Abstract Purpose This prospective cohort study reports on a new technique, namely precise safety decompression via double percutaneous lumbar foraminoplasty (DPLF) and percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression (PELD) for lateral lumbar spinal canal (LLSC) stenosis, and its short-term clinical outcomes.Methods The study analyzed 69 patients with single-level LLSC stenosis simultaneously occurring in both zones 1 and 2 (defined as retrodiscal space and upper bony lateral recess respectively by new LLSC classification) who underwent DPLF–PELD from November 2018 to April 2019. Clinical outcomes were evaluated according to preoperative, three months postoperatively, and last follow-up, via leg pain/low back pain (LBP) visual analog scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores, and the Macnab criteria. The postoperative MRI and CT were used to confirm the complete decompression, and flexion-extension x-rays at the last follow-up were used to observe lumbar stability.Results All patients successfully underwent DPLF–PELD, and the stenosis was completely decompressed, confirmed by postoperative MRI and CT. The mean follow-up duration was 13 months (range: 8–17 months). The mean preoperative leg pain VAS score is 7.05 ± 1.04 (range 5–9), which decreased to 1.03 ± 0.79(range: 0–3) at three months postoperatively and to 0.75 ± 0.63 (range: 0–2) by the last follow-up visit(p < 0.05). The mean preoperative ODI was 69.8 ± 9.05 (range: 52–85), which decreased to 20.3 ± 5.52 (range: 10–35) at the third month postoperatively and to 19.6 ± 5.21 (range: 10–34) by the final follow-up visit(p < 0.05). The satisfactory (excellent or good) results were 94.2%. There was one patient with aggravated symptoms, which were relieved after an open surgery. Two patients had a dural tear, and two patients suffered postoperative LBP. No recurrence or segmental instability was observed at the final follow-up.Conclusion DPLF–PELD could be a good alternative for the treatment of LLSC stenosis patients whose stenosis occurred in both zones 1 and 2.Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR1800019551). Registered 18 November 2018.

scholarly journals Dynesys dynamic stabilization–related facet arthrodesis

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. E4 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li-Yu Fay ◽  
Peng-Yuan Chang ◽  
Jau-Ching Wu ◽  
Wen-Cheng Huang ◽  
Chun-Hao Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Japanese Orthopaedic Association ◽  
Dynamic Stabilization ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Clinical Evaluations ◽  
Radiological Data ◽  
Spinal Segments ◽  
Lumbar Spinal ◽  
Limited Motion

OBJECTIVE Dynamic stabilization devices are designed to stabilize the spine while preserving some motion. However, there have been reports demonstrating limited motion at the instrumented level of the lumbar spine after Dynesys dynamic stabilization (DDS). The causes of this limited motion and its actual effects on outcomes after DDS remain elusive. In this study, the authors investigate the incidence of unintended facet arthrodesis after DDS and clinical outcomes. METHODS This retrospective study included 80 consecutive patients with 1- or 2-level lumbar spinal stenosis who underwent laminectomy and DDS. All medical records, radiological data, and clinical evaluations were analyzed. Imaging studies included pre- and postoperative radiographs, MR images, and CT scans. Clinical outcomes were measured by a visual analog scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores. Furthermore, all patients had undergone postoperative CT for the detection of unintended arthrodesis of the facets at the indexed level, and range of motion was measured on standing dynamic radiographs. RESULTS A total of 70 patients (87.5%) with a mean age of 64.0 years completed the minimum 24-month postoperative follow-up (mean duration 29.9 months). Unintended facet arthrodesis at the DDS instrumented level was demonstrated by CT in 38 (54.3%) of the 70 patients. The mean age of patients who had facet arthrodesis was 9.8 years greater than that of the patients who did not (68.3 vs 58.5 years, p = 0.009). There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes, including VAS back and leg pain, ODI, and JOA scores between patients with and without the unintended facet arthrodesis. Furthermore, those patients older than 60 years were more likely to have unintended facet arthrodesis (OR 12.42) and immobile spinal segments (OR 2.96) after DDS. Regardless of whether unintended facet arthrodesis was present or not, clinical evaluations demonstrated improvement in all patients (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS During the follow-up of more than 2 years, unintended facet arthrodesis was demonstrated in 54.3% of the patients who underwent 1- or 2-level DDS. Older patients (age > 60 years) were more likely to have unintended facet arthrodesis and subsequent immobile spinal segments. However, unintended facet arthrodesis did not affect the clinical outcomes during the study period. Further evaluations are needed to clarify the actual significance of this phenomenon.

scholarly journals “Slalom”: Microsurgical Cross-Over Decompression for Multilevel Degenerative Lumbar Stenosis

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Michael Mayer ◽  
Franziska Heider
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Spinal Canal ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Canal Stenosis ◽  
Microsurgical Decompression ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Canal ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Objective.Selective, bilateral multisegmental microsurgical decompression of lumbar spinal canal stenosis through separate, alternating cross-over approaches.Indications. Two-segmental and multisegmental degenerative central and lateral lumbar spinal stenosis.Contraindications. None.Surgical Technique.Minimally invasive, muscle, and facet joint-sparing bilateral decompression of the lumbar spinal canal through 2 or more alternating microsurgical cross-over approaches from one side.Results.From December 2010 until December 2015 we operated on 202 patients with 2 or multisegmental stenosis (115 f; 87 m; average age 69.3 yrs, range 51–91 yrs). All patients were suffering from symptoms typical of a degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. All patients complained about back pain; however the leg symptoms were dominant in all cases. Per decompressed segment, the average OR time was 36 min and the blood loss 45.7 cc. Patients were mobilized 6 hrs postop and hospitalization averaged 5.9 days. A total of 116/202 patients did not need submuscular drainage. 27/202 patients suffered from a complication (13.4%). Dural tears occurred in 3.5%, an epidural hematoma in 5.5%, a deep wound infection in 1.98%, and a temporary radiculopathy postop in 1.5%. Postop follow-up ranged from 12 to 24 months. There was a significant improvement of EQ 5 D, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), VAS for Back and Leg Pain, and preoperative standing times and walking distances.

scholarly journals Facet joint changes after application of lumbar nonfusion dynamic stabilization

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. E6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Soo Eon Lee ◽  
Tae-Ahn Jahng ◽  
Hyun Jib Kim
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Surgery ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Dynamic Stabilization ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Facet Joints ◽  
Joint Degeneration ◽  
Facet Joint Degeneration ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Surgery ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

OBJECTIVE The long-term effects on adjacent-segment pathology after nonfusion dynamic stabilization is unclear, and, in particular, changes at the adjacent facet joints have not been reported in a clinical study. This study aims to compare changes in the adjacent facet joints after lumbar spinal surgery. METHODS Patients who underwent monosegmental surgery at L4–5 with nonfusion dynamic stabilization using the Dynesys system (Dynesys group) or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screw fixation (fusion group) were retrospectively compared. Facet joint degeneration was evaluated at each segment using the CT grading system. RESULTS The Dynesys group included 15 patients, while the fusion group included 22 patients. The preoperative facet joint degeneration CT grades were not different between the 2 groups. Compared with the preoperative CT grades, 1 side of the facet joints at L3–4 and L4–5 had significantly more degeneration in the Dynesys group. In the fusion group, significant facet joint degeneration developed on both sides at L2–3, L3–4, and L5–S1. The subjective back and leg pain scores were not different between the 2 groups during follow-up, but functional outcome based on the Oswestry Disability Index improved less in the fusion group than in the Dynesys group. CONCLUSIONS Nonfusion dynamic stabilization using the Dynesys system had a greater preventative effect on facet joint degeneration in comparison with that obtained using fusion surgery. The Dynesys system, however, resulted in facet joint degeneration at the instrumented segments and above. An improved physiological nonfusion dynamic stabilization system for lumbar spinal surgery should be developed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document