scholarly journals The clinical and radiological outcomes of multilevel posterior lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of degenerative scoliosis: a consecutive case series with minimum 2 years follow up

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 520-528
Author(s):  
Silviu Sabou ◽  
Roberto Carrasco ◽  
Rajat Verma ◽  
Irfan Siddique ◽  
Saeed Mohammad
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Consecutive Case ◽  
Degenerative Scoliosis

scholarly journals Adjacent-segment disease after L3–4 posterior lumbar interbody fusion: does L3–4 fusion have cranial adjacent-segment degeneration similar to that after L4–5 fusion?

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 455-460
Author(s):  
Hiroyuki Aono ◽  
Shota Takenaka ◽  
Hidekazu Tobimatsu ◽  
Yukitaka Nagamoto ◽  
Masayuki Furuya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adjacent Segment Degeneration ◽  
Adjacent Segment Disease ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Degenerative Lumbar Diseases ◽  
Caudal Segment

OBJECTIVEPosterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) is a widely accepted procedure for degenerative lumbar diseases, and there have been many reports concerning adjacent-segment disease (ASD) after PLIF. In the reports of ASD in which the fusion level was limited to 1 segment, all reports describe ASD of the L3–4 segment after L4–5 PLIF. On the basis of these reports, it is thought that ASD mainly occurs at the cranial segment. However, no report has covered ASD after L3–4 PLIF. Therefore, the authors investigated ASD after L3–4 PLIF.METHODSIn conducting a retrospective case series analysis, the authors reviewed a surgical database providing details of all spine operations performed between 2006 and 2017 at a single institution. During that period, PLIF was performed to treat 632 consecutive patients with degenerative lumbar diseases. Of these patients, 71 were treated with L3–4 PLIF alone, and 67 who were monitored for at least 2 years (mean 5.8 years; follow-up rate 94%) after surgery were enrolled in this study. Radiological ASD (R-ASD), symptomatic ASD (S-ASD), and operative ASD (O-ASD) were evaluated. These types of ASD were defined as follows: R-ASD refers to radiological degeneration adjacent to the fusion segment as shown on plain radiographs; S-ASD is a symptomatic condition due to neurological deterioration at the adjacent-segment degeneration; and O-ASD refers to S-ASD requiring revision surgery.RESULTSAll patients had initial improvement of neurological symptoms after primary PLIF. R-ASD was observed in 32 (48%) of 67 patients. It occurred at the cranial segment in 12 patients and at the caudal segment in 24; R-ASD at both adjacent segments was observed in 4 patients. Thus, the occurrence of R-ASD was more significant in the caudal segment than in the cranial segment. S-ASD was observed in 10 patients (15%), occurring at the cranial segment in 3 patients and at the caudal segment in 7. O-ASD was observed in 6 patients (9%): at the cranial segment in 1 patient and at the caudal segment in 5. Thus, the rate of involvement of the caudal segment was 67% in R-ASD, 70% in S-ASD, and 83% in O-ASD.CONCLUSIONSThe incidences of R-ASD, S-ASD, and O-ASD were 48%, 15%, and 9%, respectively, after L3–4 PLIF for degenerative lumbar diseases. In contrast to ASD after L4–5 PLIF, ASD after L3–4 PLIF was more frequently observed at the caudal segment than at the cranial segment. In follow-up for patients with L3–4 PLIF, surgeons should pay attention to ASD in the caudal segment.

Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using an En-Bloc Resected Lamina as an Interbody Spacer in Combination with Spinal Instruments

1998 ◽  
Vol 02 (04) ◽  
pp. 325-332
Author(s):  
Shigeru Hirabayashi ◽  
Kiyoshi Kumano ◽  
Takeshi Uchida
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Spinous Process ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Spinal Instrumentation ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Bony Union ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Time Of Operation

We developed a new method of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) using an en-bloc resected lamina with or without a hydroxyapatite block as an interbody spacer instead of auto-iliac bone, in combination with rigid-type spinal instrumentation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of our method. There were 23 patients (13 males, 10 females, age at the time of operation: 21–71 years, mean 50.5 years; follow-up: 1–4 years, mean 2 years and 3 months). In 10 patients with spondylolitic spondylolisthesis and 3 patients with spondylolysis, the floating lamina was resected enbloc by mid-line splitting. In 7 patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis and 3 patients with unstable spine, a cleavage was made at the isthmus and then the complex of lamina and inferior spinous process was resected en-bloc. Seventeen patients with olisthesis underwent reduction. PLIF was performed at the L4/L5 level in 10 patients and the L5/S1 level in 13 patients. Sixteen patients with preoperative low back pain recovered, except for one patient with instability at the adjacent vertebra. All of the seven patients with preoperative gait disturbance recovered. The ratio of olisthesis changed from preoperative 30% to postoperative 18% on average. Good bony union was obtained in both the patients with and those without a hydroxyapatite spacer. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using an en-bloc resected lamina as an interbody spacer in combination with rigid-type spinal instrumentation was useful.

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.

scholarly journals Computerized tomography evaluation of a resorbable implant after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

2004 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy R. Kuklo ◽  
Michael K. Rosner ◽  
David W. Polly
Keyword(s):  
Computerized Tomography ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Ct Scanning ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Delayed Union ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Disc Space ◽  
Screw Breakage

Object Synthetic bioabsorbable implants have recently been introduced in spinal surgery; consequently, the indications, applications, and results are still evolving. The authors used absorbable interbody spacers (Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis, TN) packed with recombinant bone morphogenetic protein (Infuse; Medtronic Sofamor Danek) for single- and multiple-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) procedures over a period of 18 months. This is a consecutive case series in which postoperative computerized tomography (CT) scanning was used to assess fusion status. Methods There were 22 patients (17 men, five women; 39 fusion levels) whose mean age was 41.6 years (range 23–70 years) and in whom the mean follow-up duration was 12.4 months (range 6–18 months). Bridging bone was noted as early as the 3-month postoperative CT scan when obtained; solid arthrodesis was routinely noted between 6 and 12 months in 38 (97.4%) of 39 fusion levels. In patients who underwent repeated CT scanning, the fusion mass appeared to increase with time, whereas the disc space height remained stable. Although the results are early (mean 12-month follow-up duration), there was only one noted asymptomatic delayed union/nonunion at L5–S1 in a two-level TLIF with associated screw breakage. There were no infections or complications related to the cages. Conclusions The bioabsorbable cages appear to be a viable alternative to metal interbody spacers, and may be ideally suited to spinal interbody applications because of their progressive load-bearing properties.

scholarly journals Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cortical bone trajectory screw fixation versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion using traditional pedicle screw fixation for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a comparative study

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 591-595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hironobu Sakaura ◽  
Toshitada Miwa ◽  
Tomoya Yamashita ◽  
Yusuke Kuroda ◽  
Tetsuo Ohwada
Keyword(s):  
Cortical Bone ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Surgical Outcomes ◽  
Recovery Rate ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Screw Fixation ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Cortical Bone Trajectory

OBJECTIVE Several biomechanical studies have demonstrated the favorable mechanical properties of the cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw. However, no reports have examined surgical outcomes of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with CBT screw fixation for degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) compared with those after PLIF using traditional pedicle screw (PS) fixation. The purposes of this study were thus to elucidate surgical outcomes after PLIF with CBT screw fixation for DS and to compare these results with those after PLIF using traditional PS fixation. METHODS Ninety-five consecutive patients underwent PLIF with CBT screw fixation for DS (CBT group; mean followup 35 months). A historical control group consisted of 82 consecutive patients who underwent PLIF with traditional PS fixation (PS group; mean follow-up 40 months). Clinical status was assessed using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scale score. Fusion status was assessed by dynamic plain radiographs and CT. The need for additional surgery and surgery-related complications was also evaluated. RESULTS The mean JOA score improved significantly from 13.7 points before surgery to 23.3 points at the latest follow-up in the CBT group (mean recovery rate 64.4%), compared with 14.4 points preoperatively to 22.7 points at final follow-up in the PS group (mean recovery rate 55.8%; p < 0.05). Solid spinal fusion was achieved in 84 patients from the CBT group (88.4%) and in 79 patients from the PS group (96.3%, p > 0.05). Symptomatic adjacent-segment disease developed in 3 patients from the CBT group (3.2%) compared with 9 patients from the PS group (11.0%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS PLIF with CBT screw fixation for DS provided comparable improvement of clinical symptoms with PLIF using traditional PS fixation. However, the successful fusion rate tended to be lower in the CBT group than in the PS group, although the difference was not statistically significant between the 2 groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document