Literature DB >> 17216227

Quantitative analysis in outcome assessment of instrumented lumbosacral arthrodesis.

Sabina Champain1, Christian Mazel, Anca Mitulescu, Wafa Skalli.   

Abstract

The outcome assessment in instrumented lumbosacral fusion mostly focuses on clinical criteria, complications and scores, with a high variability of imaging means, methods of fusion grading and parameters describing degenerative changes, making comparisons between studies difficult. The aim of this retrospective evaluation was to evaluate the interest of quantified radiographic analysis of lumbar spine in global outcome assessment and to highlight the key biomechanical factors involved. Clinical data and Beaujon-Lassale scores were collected for 49 patients who underwent lumbosacral arthrodesis after prior lumbar discectomy (mean follow-up: 5 years). Sagittal standing and lumbar flexion-extension X-ray films allowed quantifying vertebral, lumbar, pelvic and kinematic parameters of the lumbar spine, which were compared to reference values. Statistics were performed to assess evolution for all variables. At long-term follow-up, 90% of patients presented satisfactory clinical outcomes, associated to normal sagittal alignment; vertebral parameters objectified adjacent level degeneration in four cases (8%). Clinical outcome was correlated (r = 0.8) with fusion that was confirmed in 80% of cases, doubtful in 16% and pseudarthrosis seemed to occur in 4% (2) of cases. In addition to clinical data (outcomes comparable to the literature), quantitative analysis accurately described lumbar spine geometry and kinematics, highlighting parameters related to adjacent level's degeneration and a significant correlation between clinical outcome and fusion. Furthermore, criteria proposed to quantitatively evaluate fusion from lumbar dynamic radiographs seem to be appropriate and in agreement with surgeon's qualitative grading in 87% of cases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17216227      PMCID: PMC2200791          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-006-0302-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  36 in total

1.  Adjacent segment degeneration after lumbar spinal posterolateral fusion with instrumentation in elderly patients.

Authors:  Wen-Ying Chou; Chien-Jen Hsu; Wei-Ning Chang; Chi-Yin Wong
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 3.067

2.  Validation of new clinical quantitative analysis software applicable in spine orthopaedic studies.

Authors:  S Champain; K Benchikh; A Nogier; C Mazel; J De Guise; W Skalli
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-06-17       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  A comparison of manual versus computer-assisted radiographic measurement. Intraobserver measurement variability for Cobb angles.

Authors:  K G Shea; P M Stevens; M Nelson; J T Smith; K S Masters; S Yandow
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1998-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Instantaneous axes of rotation of the lumbar intervertebral joints.

Authors:  M J Pearcy; N Bogduk
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Hardware failure in an unconstrained lumbar pedicle screw system. A 2-year follow-up study.

Authors:  F T Wetzel; M Brustein; F M Phillips; S Trott
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1999-06-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Rigid, semirigid versus dynamic instrumentation for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a correlative radiological and clinical analysis of short-term results.

Authors:  Panagiotis Korovessis; Zisis Papazisis; Georgios Koureas; Elias Lambiris
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2004-04-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 7.  Risk factors for adjacent segment degeneration after PLIF.

Authors:  Shin'ya Okuda; Motoki Iwasaki; Akira Miyauchi; Hiroyuki Aono; Masahiro Morita; Tomio Yamamoto
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2004-07-15       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Biomechanical evaluation of different instrumentation for spinal stabilisation.

Authors:  A G Graftiaux; B Wattier; P Gentil; C Mazel; W Skalli; A Diop; P H Kehr; F Lavaste
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  1995-12

9.  [Long-term results of the surgical treatment of lumbar stenosis].

Authors:  B Lassale; A Deburge; M Benoist
Journal:  Rev Rhum Mal Osteoartic       Date:  1985-01

10.  Reciprocal angulation of vertebral bodies in a sagittal plane: approach to references for the evaluation of kyphosis and lordosis.

Authors:  P Stagnara; J C De Mauroy; G Dran; G P Gonon; G Costanzo; J Dimnet; A Pasquet
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1982 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Do in vivo kinematic studies provide insight into adjacent segment degeneration? A qualitative systematic literature review.

Authors:  Masoud Malakoutian; David Volkheimer; John Street; Marcel F Dvorak; Hans-Joachim Wilke; Thomas R Oxland
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Pedicle-Screw-Based Dynamic Systems and Degenerative Lumbar Diseases: Biomechanical and Clinical Experiences of Dynamic Fusion with Isobar TTL.

Authors:  Cédric Barrey; Gilles Perrin; Sabina Champain
Journal:  ISRN Orthop       Date:  2013-01-21

3.  Incidence of Osteoporosis-Related Complications Following Posterior Lumbar Fusion.

Authors:  Benjamin T Bjerke; Mohammad Zarrabian; Ilyas S Aleem; Jeremy L Fogelson; Bradford L Currier; Brett A Freedman; Mohamad Bydon; Ahmad Nassr
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2017-12-10
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.