Literature DB >> 17426988

Long-term actuarial survivorship analysis of an interspinous stabilization system.

Jacques Sénégas1, Jean-Marc Vital, Vincent Pointillart, Paolo Mangione.   

Abstract

In 1986, an interspinous dynamic stabilization system (the prototype of the current Wallis implant) was designed to stiffen unstable operated degenerate lumbar segments with a hard interspinous blocker to limit extension and a tension band around the spinous processes to secure the implant and limit flexion. Restoring physiological mechanical conditions to the treated level(s) while preserving some intervertebral mobility was intended to treat low-back pain related to degenerative instability without increasing stress forces in the adjacent segments. The procedure was easily reversible. If low back pain persisted or recurred, the device was removed and stability was achieved using fusion. The intermediate-term results were promising, but the long-term safety and efficacy of this dynamic interspinous stabilization device has not been previously documented. We retrospectively reviewed the hospital files of all the patients (n = 241) who had this dynamic stabilization system implanted between 1987 and 1995, contacting as many as possible to determine the actuarial survivorship of the system. In this manner, 142 of the 241 patients (58.9%) were contacted by telephone. The endpoints used for the survivorship analysis were 'any subsequent lumbar operation' and 'implant removal'. At 14 years follow-up, values of actuarial survivorship with 95% confidence interval were 75.9 +/- 8.3 and 81.3 +/- 6.8% for the endpoints 'any subsequent lumbar operation' and 'implant removal', respectively. There was no difference in survivorship of multiple-level implants with respect to single-level devices. Although the conclusions of the present study must be tempered by the 41% attrition rate, these findings support the long-term safety of this system, and possibly long-term protective action against adjacent-level degeneration by motion preservation. Outcomes at least equivalent to those of fusion were observed without the primary drawbacks of fusion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17426988      PMCID: PMC2200773          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-007-0359-1

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


  19 in total

1.  Complications associated with pedicle screws.

Authors:  J E Lonstein; F Denis; J H Perra; M R Pinto; M D Smith; R B Winter
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  Dynamic examination of the lumbar spine by using vertical, open magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  H E Vitzthum; A König; V Seifert
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 5.115

3.  Complications and problems related to pedicle screw fixation of the spine.

Authors:  Pavlos Katonis; Joseph Christoforakis; George Kontakis; Agisilaos C Aligizakis; Charalampos Papadopoulos; George Sapkas; Alexander Hadjipavlou; George Katonis
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  The fate of the adjacent motion segments after lumbar fusion.

Authors:  Philippe Gillet
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2003-08

5.  Adjacent segment degeneration in the lumbar spine.

Authors:  Gary Ghiselli; Jeffrey C Wang; Nitin N Bhatia; Wellington K Hsu; Edgar G Dawson
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 6.  Mechanosensing and mechanochemical transduction: how is mechanical energy sensed and converted into chemical energy in an extracellular matrix?

Authors:  Frederick H Silver; Lorraine M Siperko
Journal:  Crit Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2003

Review 7.  Revision strategies for lumbar pseudarthrosis.

Authors:  Mohammad Etminan; Federico P Girardi; Safdar N Khan; Frank P Cammisa
Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 2.472

Review 8.  Dynamic stabilization in the surgical management of painful lumbar spinal disorders.

Authors:  Russ P Nockels
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2005-08-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  A 10-year follow-up evaluation of lumbar spine fusion with pedicle screw fixation.

Authors:  John Glaser; Mark Stanley; Hutha Sayre; Joyce Woody; Ernest Found; Kevin Spratt
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2003-07-01       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Long-term follow-up of lower lumbar fusion patients.

Authors:  T R Lehmann; K F Spratt; J E Tozzi; J N Weinstein; S J Reinarz; G Y el-Khoury; H Colby
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  18 in total

1.  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

2.  [Interspinous implant "InSWing®" for the lumbar spine].

Authors:  Michael Pfeiffer
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.154

3.  [Treatment of dynamic spinal canal stenosis with an interspinous spacer].

Authors:  Christoph J Siepe; Franziska Heider; Rudolf Beisse; H Michael Mayer; Andreas Korge
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.154

4.  The effect of design parameters of interspinous implants on kinematics and load bearing: an in vitro study.

Authors:  Christoph Schilling; M Pfeiffer; T M Grupp; W Blömer; A Rohlmann
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-02-19       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Adjacent segment instability after treatment with a Graf ligament at minimum 8 years' followup.

Authors:  Yongsoo Choi; Kisoo Kim; Kwangyoung So
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-05-19       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Clinical evaluation of a lumbar interspinous dynamic stabilization device (the Wallis system) with a 13-year mean follow-up.

Authors:  Jacques Sénégas; Jean-Marc Vital; Vincent Pointillart; Paolo Mangione
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2009-04-22       Impact factor: 3.042

7.  Critical analysis of lumbar interspinous devices failures: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Francesco Ciro Tamburrelli; Luca Proietti; Carlo Ambrogio Logroscino
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-03-15       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Intractable Chronic Low-Back Pain Caused by Ligamentopathia Treated Using a Spinous Process Plate (S-plate).

Authors:  Koichi Iwatsuki; Toshiki Yoshimine; Kazuhiro Yoshimura; Masahiro Ishihara; Yu-Ichiro Ohnishi; Yuko Goto
Journal:  Clin Med Insights Arthritis Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2010-03-10

9.  Efficacy and safety of posteromedial translation for correction of thoracic curves in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using a new connection to the spine: the Universal Clamp.

Authors:  Keyvan Mazda; Brice Ilharreborde; Julien Even; Yan Lefevre; Franck Fitoussi; Georges-François Penneçot
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-12-16       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  The effect of dynamic, semi-rigid implants on the range of motion of lumbar motion segments after decompression.

Authors:  Tobias L Schulte; Christof Hurschler; Marcel Haversath; Ulf Liljenqvist; Viola Bullmann; Timm J Filler; Nani Osada; Eva-Maria Fallenberg; Lars Hackenberg
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-05-21       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.