Literature DB >> 15682014

Clinical experience with the Dynesys semirigid fixation system for the lumbar spine: surgical and patient-oriented outcome in 50 cases after an average of 2 years.

Dieter Grob1, Arnoldo Benini, Astrid Junge, Anne F Mannion.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective study on a consecutive series of patients.
OBJECTIVES: To examine patient-oriented outcome after Dynesys implantation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The dynamic neutralization system for the spine, Dynesys, is a nonfusion pedicle screw stabilization system, which was developed in an attempt to overcome the inherent disadvantages of rigid instrumentation and fusion. Although the system has been in clinical use for more than 5 years, no studies from disinterested research groups have reported on patient-oriented outcome after surgery with Dynesys.
METHODS: A total of 50 consecutive patients instrumented with Dynesys over the preceding 40 months were invited to complete a postal, patient-oriented follow-up questionnaire. The data from 31 of 31 of these, with at least 2 years' follow-up, were analyzed (mean age, 50 years; SD, 13 years; 20 women, 11 men). The primary indication for surgery was degenerative disease (disc/stenosis) with associated "instability"; 11 of 31 (35%) patients had had prior spinal surgery. In 32% cases, 1 level was instrumented, in 52% 2 levels, 13% 3 levels, and 3% 4 levels. Thirteen of 31 (42%) patients underwent additional decompression.
RESULTS: Within the 2-year follow-up period, 6 of 31 (19%) patients had required or were scheduled for a further surgical intervention. At follow-up, mean (SD) back and leg pain (0-10 VAS) were 4.7 (3.2) and 3.8 (3.6), respectively. The following global outcomes were reported: back symptoms, 67% improved, 30% same, 3% worse; leg symptoms, 64% improved, 21% same, 14% worse; ability to do physical activities/sports, 40% improved, 33% same, 27% worse; quality of life, 50% improved, 37% same, 13% worse; how much the operation helped, 29% helped a lot, 23% helped, 10% only helped a little, 35% didn't help, 3% made things worse.
CONCLUSION: The results of the present study indicate that both back and leg pain are, on average, still moderately high 2 years after instrumentation with the Dynesys system. Only half of the patients declared that the operation had helped and had improved their overall quality of life; less than half reported improvements in functional capacity. The reoperation rate after Dynesys was relatively high. The results provide no support for the notion that semirigid fixation of the lumbar spine results in better patient-oriented outcomes than those typical of fusion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15682014     DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000152584.46266.25

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  77 in total

1.  [Long-term results of the Dynesys implant].

Authors:  C Klöckner
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  Posterior dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine with the Accuflex rod system as a stand-alone device: experience in 20 patients with 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  Alejandro Reyes-Sánchez; Barón Zárate-Kalfópulos; Isabel Ramírez-Mora; Luis Miguel Rosales-Olivarez; Armando Alpizar-Aguirre; Guadalupe Sánchez-Bringas
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-05-22       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Biomechanical evaluation of posterior lumbar dynamic stabilization: an in vitro comparison between Universal Clamp and Wallis systems.

Authors:  Brice Ilharreborde; Miranda N Shaw; Lawrence J Berglund; Kristin D Zhao; Ralph E Gay; Kai-Nan An
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-12-04       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  The effect of design parameters of dynamic pedicle screw systems on kinematics and load bearing: an in vitro study.

Authors:  C Schilling; S Krüger; T M Grupp; G N Duda; W Blömer; A Rohlmann
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-11-26       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  [Dynamic posterior stabilization with the pedicle screw system DYNESYS®].

Authors:  Othmar Schwarzenbach; Ulrich Berlemann
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.154

6.  Clinical and Radiological Comparison of Semirigid (WavefleX) and Rigid System for the Lumbar Spine.

Authors:  Do-Keun Kim; Hyunkeun Lim; Dae Cheol Rim; Chang Hyun Oh
Journal:  Korean J Spine       Date:  2016-06-30

7.  Comparison of the effects of bilateral posterior dynamic and rigid fixation devices on the loads in the lumbar spine: a finite element analysis.

Authors:  Antonius Rohlmann; Nagananda K Burra; Thomas Zander; Georg Bergmann
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-01-06       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 8.  Predictors of surgical outcome and their assessment.

Authors:  Anne F Mannion; Achim Elfering
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-12-01       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  In-vivo degradation of poly(carbonate-urethane) based spine implants.

Authors:  E Cipriani; P Bracco; S M Kurtz; L Costa; M Zanetti
Journal:  Polym Degrad Stab       Date:  2013-06-01       Impact factor: 5.030

10.  [Current short- and long-term results of lumbar disc replacement : update 2008].

Authors:  B Wiedenhöfer; V Ewerbeck; A J Suda; C Carstens
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 0.955

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.