Vertebral osteolytic defect due to cellulose particles derived from gauze fibers after posterior lumbar interbody fusion

2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 877-881 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shota Takenaka ◽  
Yoshihiro Mukai ◽  
Noboru Hosono ◽  
Kosuke Tateishi ◽  
Takeshi Fuji
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Histopathological Examination ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Body Type ◽  
Initial Surgery

Vertebral cystic lesions may be observed in pseudarthroses after lumbar fusion surgery. The authors report a rare case of pseudarthrosis after spinal fusion, accompanied by an expanding vertebral osteolytic defect induced by cellulose particles. A male patient originally presented at the age of 69 years with leg and low-back pain caused by a lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis. He underwent a posterior lumbar interbody fusion, and his neurological symptoms and pain resolved within a year but recurred 14 months after surgery. Radiological imaging demonstrated a cystic lesion on the inferior endplate of L-5 and the superior endplate of S-1, which rapidly enlarged into a vertebral osteolytic defect. The patient underwent revision surgery, and his low-back pain resolved. A histopathological examination demonstrated foreign body–type multinucleated giant cells, containing 10-μm particles, in the sample collected just below the defect. Micro–Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy revealed that the foreign particles were cellulosic, presumably originating from cotton gauze fibers that had contaminated the interbody cages used during the initial surgery. Vertebral osteolytic defects that occur after interbody fusion are generally presumed to be the result of infection. This case suggests that some instances of vertebral osteolytic defects may be aseptically induced by foreign particles. Hence, this possibility should be carefully considered in such cases, to help prevent contamination of the morselized bone used for autologous grafts by foreign materials, such as gauze fibers.

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).

scholarly journals Analysis of Spinopelvic Sagittal Balance and Persistent Low Back Pain (PLBP) for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis (DS) following Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF)

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Shuangjun He ◽  
Yijian Zhang ◽  
Wei Ji ◽  
Hao Liu ◽  
Fan He ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Sagittal Balance ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Spinopelvic Parameters

Objective. To investigate the change of spinopelvic sagittal balance and clinical outcomes after posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS), especially the relationship between sagittal spinopelvic parameters and persistent low back pain (PLBP). Methods. 107 patients who were diagnosed with DS and underwent PLIF in our department were enrolled retrospectively in the present study. Sagittal spinopelvic parameters including lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), height of the disc (HOD), sacral slope (SS), pelvic incidence (PI), and pelvic tilt (PT) were recorded pre- and postoperatively. Sagittal balance and clinical outcomes were compared between patients with and without PLBP. Pearson correlation was used to analyze the change of sagittal balance parameters and clinical functions. Logistic regression analysis was performed to examine the risk factors of PLBP. Results. It showed significant improvements of SL, HOD, and PT postoperatively. Both the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) had significant improvement postoperatively. Change of PT and SL also differed observably between patients with and without PLBP. SL and PT were correlated with NRS and ODI, and insufficient restoration of PT was an independent factor for PLBP. Conclusion. The sagittal balance parameters and clinical outcomes can be improved markedly via PLIF for treating DS. Restoration of SL and PT was correlated with satisfactory outcomes, and adequate improvement of PT may have positive impact on reducing PLBP.

Dorsal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Chronic Axial, Mechanical Low Back Pain: A Modification of Two Established Techniques

2008 ◽  
Vol 63 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. ONS102-ONS107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert F. Heary ◽  
Sanjeev Kumar ◽  
Reza J. Karimi
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Modified Technique ◽  
Nerve Roots ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages

Abstract LUMBAR SPINAL FUSION is a popular method for treating degenerative disc disease leading to chronic low back pain. Some of the techniques most commonly undertaken are posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. These techniques have their own advantages and disadvantages. In this article, we briefly describe a modified technique, dorsal lumbar interbody fusion, which retains the advantages and avoids the disadvantages of the others. The goal of this procedure is to combine the aggressive decompression of both the thecal sac and bilateral nerve roots and symmetrical bilateral graft placement obtained via the posterior lumbar interbody fusion with the transforaminal placement of interbody grafts obtained via the transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion procedure. This modification has several advantages: it permits more aggressive removal of the disc bilaterally, larger and more symmetrical lordotic-shaped carbon fiber cages and structural allograft can be placed bilaterally, and the nerve roots can be aggressively decompressed bilaterally.

scholarly journals Comparison between topping-off technology and posterior lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of chronic low back pain

Medicine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 99 (5) ◽  
pp. e18885 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Wang ◽  
Xiangyao Sun ◽  
Tongtong Zhang ◽  
Siyuan Sun ◽  
Chao Kong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Topping Off

scholarly journals Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Spinal Decompression using Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery in the Treatment of Symptomatic Degenerative Spinal Stenosis

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (C) ◽  
pp. 43-46
Author(s):  
Michael Rothmans Silaban ◽  
Pranajaya Dharma Kadar
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Introduction Lumbar spinal stenosis is often the result of advanced degeneration of motion segments of the lumbar spine. The incidence of this case is 3.57% (3570 per 100,000) population in Southeast Asia. The main symptoms are low back pain, numbness, and weakness in the lower extremity that occur and intensify on walking caused by the load of the body weight on the spine. Loss of disc height, facet displacement and hypertrophy, spondylosis, and spondylolisthesis , all contribute to impact the spinal canal and intervertebral foramen in lumbar stenosis . There is a subgroup of patients with spinal stenosis in whom the spine is unstable preoperatively or become destabilized following decompression who would benefit from fusion procedure. Objective Surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis by posterior lumbar interbody fusion is indicated for patients with symptoms of low back pain and lower limb radicular pain, that are unsuccessful treated with medicines and /or patients with persisting or worsening neurological deficit.However, this procedure may lead to possible complications. This case report study was conducted to show how our hospital handling spinal stenosis case. Case A 67-year-old woman presented with low back pain that has occured for two years, and had been worsening for the past 3 months. She described the pain as an intermitten ache down on her leg, the pain was severe and worsened when the patient is standing, sitting, or walking for a long time , The pain severity was measured by visual analog score (vas), graded between 7/10 to 9/10. She also complained numbness from the bilateral gluteal region to the lateral side of lower extremities, when she feel too tired. On the physical examination, She was found to have limited range of motion for flexion and extension, on the lumbar spine, due to pain. The motoric strength of both lower limbs were decreased, so did the sensory function. The Radiological examination showed a severe stenosis at lumbar spinal bone region on L4-L5 area. After the examination, the patient agreed to undergo the suggested operative procedure and gare the consent at the hospital.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document