scholarly journals A Prospective, Randomized Study Evaluating Clinical and Radiographic Efficacy of Lumbar Interbody Fusion Performed Using a Truss Technology–Based Interbody Fusion Device With Homologous Bone or Bone Marrow Aspirate

10.14444/7141 ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 7141
Author(s):  
Benjamin Chatterjee ◽  
Michael Rauschmann ◽  
Christoph Fleege ◽  
Mohammad Arabmotlagh ◽  
Sven Schmidt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Bone Marrow Aspirate ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Prospective Randomized Study ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Device ◽  
Interbody Fusion Device

75. Prospective, randomized study of lumbar facet replacement and lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (9) ◽  
pp. S36-S37
Author(s):  
Michael P. Steinmetz ◽  
Paul M. Arnold ◽  
William C. Welch ◽  
Domagoj Coric ◽  
Ahmad N. Nassr
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Prospective Randomized Study ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Facet

A New Stand-Alone Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Device: Biomechanical Comparison with Established Fixation Techniques

Spine ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 30 (23) ◽  
pp. 2631-2636 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher M. J. Cain ◽  
Philip Schleicher ◽  
Rene Gerlach ◽  
Robert Pflugmacher ◽  
Matti Scholz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Device ◽  
Fixation Techniques ◽  
Biomechanical Comparison ◽  
Interbody Fusion Device

Multimodal versus Intravenous Patient Controlled Analgesia for Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Prospective Randomized Study

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (10) ◽  
pp. S262
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Park ◽  
Junyoung Ahn ◽  
Asokumar Buvanendran ◽  
Spencer Leblang ◽  
Mark F. Kurd ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Prospective Randomized Study ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Patient Controlled Analgesia

scholarly journals Efficacy of lumbar orthoses after posterior lumbar interbody fusion—a prospective randomized study

Medicine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 98 (15) ◽  
pp. e15183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hiroyasu Fujiwara ◽  
Takahiro Makino ◽  
Kazuo Yonenobu ◽  
Yu Moriguchi ◽  
Takenori Oda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Prospective Randomized Study ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion

scholarly journals Comparison of outcome in lumbar spine instability treated surgically with pedicle screw fixation with or without interbody fusion device (cage)

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 937
Author(s):  
Sandeep Kumar Mishra ◽  
Kushal Haresh Gori ◽  
Deepak C. E.
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Fusion Device ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Female Predominance ◽  
Interbody Fusion Device

Background: Lumbar spinal fusion was introduced approximately 70 years ago and has evolved as a treatment option for symptomatic spinal instability, spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, and degenerative scoliosis. Broader applications including use as a treatment of chronic low back pain and recurrent radiculopathy have resulted in a dramatic increase in the rates of lumbar fusion procedures within the last decade.Methods: A retrospective and prospective study to be carried out for 40 patients who were assigned in the following groups: Group 1 (n=20) consisted of patients who underwent lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screw and bone graft, and Group 2 (n=20) consisted of patients treated by lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screw and interbody cage.Results: Most of patients with lumbar spine instability were in 4th and 5th decade of life with average age of 46.75 yrs and female predominance with 26 (65%) cases.65% of Instability was found due to Spondylolisthesis. PLIF with Cage showed better scores than BG in terms of ODI, VAS, SF-36, Benzel’s modified Japanese scores at end of 1 year, which is statistically not significant.Conclusions: Lumbar spine instability is more common in 4th and 5th decade of life with female predominance, commonest level of instability being L4-L5 and commonest mode was Spondylolisthesis. PLIF with Cage is associated with greater operative time and lesser blood loss. Patients with PLIF + Cage had better neurological improvement, pain reduction, reduced disability, generalised well-being and satisfaction as evident by Modified Benzel’s Japanese scales, VAS, ODI, and SF-36 scores respectively, which is statistically not significant. Addition of an interbody fusion device (Cage) helps in greater stability, lower implant failure, higher fusion rate and better functional outcome in patient treated with PLIF for lumbar spine instability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document