Literature DB >> 19330364

Treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis: potential impact of dynamic stabilization based on imaging analysis.

Thomas W Lawhorne1, Federico P Girardi, Curtis A Mina, Iaonnis Pappou, Frank P Cammisa.   

Abstract

Intraspinous and pedicle screw-based (PSB) dynamic instrumentation systems have been in use for a decade now. By direct or indirect decompression, these devices theoretically establish less painful segmental motion by diminishing pathologic motion and unloading painful disks. Ideally, dynamics should address instability in the early stages of degenerative spondylolisthesis before excessive translation occurs. Evidence to date indicates that Grade II or larger slips requiring decompression should be fused. In addition, multiple segment listhesis, severe coronal plane deformities, increasing age, and osteoporosis have all been listed as potential contraindications to dynamic stabilization. We reviewed the exclusion and inclusion criteria found in various dynamic stabilization studies and investigational drug exemption (IDE) protocols. We summarize the reported limitations for both pedicle- and intraspinous-based systems. We then conducted a retrospective chart and imaging review of 100 consecutive cases undergoing fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis. All patients in our cohort had been indicated for and eventually underwent decompression of lumbar stenosis secondary to spondylolisthesis. We estimated how many patients in our population would have been candidates for dynamic stabilization with either interspinous or pedicle-based systems. Using the criteria for instability outlined in the literature, 32 patients demonstrated translation requiring fusion surgery and 24 patients had instability unsuitable for dynamic stabilization. Six patients had two-level slips and were excluded. Two patients had coronal imbalance too great for dynamic systems. Twelve patients were over the age of 80 and 16 demonstrated osteoporosis as diagnosed by bone scan. Finally, we found two of our patients to have vertebral compression fractures adjacent to the site of instrumentation, which is a strict exclusion criteria in all dynamic trials. Thirty-four patients had zero exclusion criteria for intraspinous devices and 23 patients had none for PSB dynamic stabilization. Therefore, we estimate that 34 and 23% of degenerative spondylolisthesis patients indicated for surgery could have been treated with either intraspinous or pedicle-based dynamic devices, respectively.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19330364      PMCID: PMC2899657          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-009-0941-9

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


  27 in total

1.  Dynamic neutralisation of the lumbar spine confirmed on a new lumbar spine simulator in vitro.

Authors:  S Freudiger; G Dubois; M Lorrain
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 3.067

2.  How to stabilize a single level lesion of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  J Mochida; K Suzuki; M Chiba
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  [Posterior dynamic stabilization as an alternative for dorso-ventral fusion in spinal stenosis with degenerative instability].

Authors:  B Cakir; B Ulmar; H Koepp; K Huch; W Puhl; M Richter
Journal:  Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb       Date:  2003 Jul-Aug

4.  [Application of a dynamic pedicle screw system (DYNESYS) for lumbar segmental degenerations - comparison of clinical and radiological results for different indications].

Authors:  M Putzier; S V Schneider; J Funk; C Perka
Journal:  Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb       Date:  2004 Mar-Apr

Review 5.  Dynamic interspinous process technology.

Authors:  Sean D Christie; John K Song; Richard G Fessler
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2005-08-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 6.  Patient outcomes after lumbar spinal fusions.

Authors:  J A Turner; M Ersek; L Herron; J Haselkorn; D Kent; M A Ciol; R Deyo
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1992-08-19       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 7.  Pedicle screw fixation in spinal disorders: a European view.

Authors:  N Boos; J K Webb
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  A prospective randomized multi-center study for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with the X STOP interspinous implant: 1-year results.

Authors:  J F Zucherman; K Y Hsu; C A Hartjen; T F Mehalic; D A Implicito; M J Martin; D R Johnson; G A Skidmore; P P Vessa; J W Dwyer; S Puccio; J C Cauthen; R M Ozuna
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2003-12-19       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 9.  Indications for surgical fusion of the cervical and lumbar motion segment.

Authors:  Nicholas C Bambakidis; Iman Feiz-Erfan; Jeffrey D Klopfenstein; Volker K H Sonntag
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2005-08-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 10.  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

View more
  5 in total

1.  [Pedicle screw-based systems for dynamic stabilization : An insight into the philosophy, technique, indications and success of these systems].

Authors:  J Richolt; M Rauschmann
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  The value of (18)F-fluoride PET/CT in the assessment of screw loosening in patients after intervertebral fusion stabilization.

Authors:  Tanja Seifen; Margarida Rodrigues; Lukas Rettenbacher; Wolfgang Piotrowski; Johannes Holzmannhofer; Mark Mc Coy; Christian Pirich
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2014-09-16       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Mobility-Preserving Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: WFNS Spine Committee Recommendations.

Authors:  Ben Roitberg; Mehmet Zileli; Salman Sharif; Carla Anania; Maurizio Fornari; Francesco Costa
Journal:  World Neurosurg X       Date:  2020-03-19

4.  Decompression with fusion is not in superiority to decompression alone in lumbar stenosis based on randomized controlled trials: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis.

Authors:  Shuai Xu; Jinyu Wang; Yan Liang; Zhenqi Zhu; Kaifeng Wang; Yalong Qian; Haiying Liu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.817

5.  The Effect of Lumbar Lordosis on Screw Loosening in Dynesys Dynamic Stabilization: Four-Year Follow-Up with Computed Tomography.

Authors:  Chao-Hung Kuo; Peng-Yuan Chang; Tsung-Hsi Tu; Li-Yu Fay; Hsuan-Kan Chang; Jau-Ching Wu; Wen-Cheng Huang; Henrich Cheng
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-12-08       Impact factor: 3.411

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.