Degenerative disc disease treated with combined anterior and posterior arthrodesis and posterior instrumentation.

STUDY
DESIGN: This study retrospectively reviewed the outcome of 58 patients all diagnosed with severe low back pain secondary to degenerative disc disease and treated with anterior arthrodesis and posterior instrumented arthrodesis.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcome of a select group of patients with degenerative disc disease treated with this surgical intervention at a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Patients with degenerative disc disease who fail nonoperative treatment generally have disappointing outcomes with traditional surgical intervention. The literature analyzing posterior instrumented arthrodesis tends to exhibit the best results, but the numbers of patients with degenerative disc disease in these articles are few, and their outcomes are worse than the other low back conditions. Even patients with solid posterior arthrodesis have been noted to have continued low back pain. No articles have evaluated this specific surgical procedure in a group of patients all with the diagnosis of degenerative disc disease and no previous surgery.
METHODS: All patients were diagnosed with degenerative disc disease and had failed prolonged nonoperative treatment (average 4.9 years). Fusion levels were delineated by MRI and provocative discography in correlation with history and physical examination. The senior author (M.R.P.) performed the identical operative procedure on all patients, under a single anesthetic. The arthrodesis solidity was evaluated with radiographic studies and operative posterior exploration when necessary. Final outcomes were determined using a functional and satisfaction questionnaire, return to work, narcotic use, and the rate of solid arthrodesis. Charts, radiographs, and questionnaires were reviewed by an independent evaluator at final follow-up (average 35 months).
RESULTS: The solid arthrodesis rate was 95%. The three pseudoarthroses were all in patients with a three-level arthrodesis. Eighty-eight percent of the patients were able to return to work. Nineteen percent of patients required long-term narcotics, whereas 48% of the patient population were on narcotics before surgery. Eighty-six percent of the patients had a "better" rating at final follow-up. This included patients with decreased pain by visual analog scale, improved functional questionnaire, and those who would recommend the procedure to a friend or family member. Ten percent of the patients were "the same," and 3% were "worse." Lumbar lordosis was maintained or improved. Complications did not exceed literature controls.
CONCLUSIONS: Selected patients with discography-proven severe low back pain secondary to degenerative disc disease, who failed extensive nonoperative treatment, were treated successfully with anterior-posterior instrumented arthrodesis. The good arthrodesis rate, return to work rate, and patient satisfaction may justify the consideration of this aggressive treatment option in this specific patient population.