| Literature DB >> 26286579 |
Wen-jing Li1, Shi-gong Guo2, Zhi-jian Sun3, Yu Zhao4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Thoracic ossification of ligamentum flavum (TOLF) is a progressively disabling disease. Isolated or continuous TOLF has been frequently reported in literature, however there are very few reports of multilevel or non-continuous TOLF. The purpose of the study was to discuss the surgical strategy of multilevel TOLF and evaluate safety and efficacy of a two-stage operation regimen.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26286579 PMCID: PMC4545777 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-015-0672-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Fig. 1Connectors applied in the junctional area. A 54-year-old female patient with spinal stenosis in thoracic and lumbar regions underwent staged surgeries (case 7). During the first stage of surgery, we deliberately left the cranial stump of the rods approximately 2.0 cm in length. During the second stage of surgery, two series of connectors (marked by the white arrow) were applied to the junctional connection
Fig. 2Surgical Sequences. A 61-year-old female patient with multilevel TOLF at the level of T3-T4 and T9-T12 was treated the upper lesion first, followed by the lower one
Clinical information of the 11 cases associated with multilevel TOLF
| Case | Age(years) | Sex | Body Mass Index | Coexisting Disease | Symptoms duration (months) | Acute Exacerbation Duration (months) | Preoperative Symptoms | Urinary Dysfunction | Etiology of TSS | Number of Involved | Follow-up Period (months) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 34 | M | 32.7 | N | 6 | 2 | Spastic paraparesis, pyramidal signs, sensory dysfunction | N | OLF, DO | 4 | 55 |
| 2 | 56 | F | 26.7 | N | 60 | 6 | Low back and leg pain, lower limb numbness, sensory dysfunction | N | OLF | 5 | 17 |
| 3 | 65 | F | 29.3 | Y | 120 | 2 | lower limb numbness, spastic paraparesis, sensory dysfunction, sphincter dysfunction, pyramidal signs | Y | OLF, OPLL, DO | 7 | 14 |
| 4 | 49 | F | 21.6 | N | 6 | 1 | lower limb numbness, sensory dysfunction, spastic paraparesis, pyramidal signs | Y | OLF, OPLL, DO | 8 | 23 |
| 5 | 58 | F | 29.7 | Y | 120 | 12 | low back and leg pain, lower limb numbness, sensory dysfunction, pyramidal signs, sphincter dysfunction | Y | OLF, OPLL | 9 | 21 |
| 6 | 30 | M | 35.1 | N | 6 | 3 | lower limb numbness, sensory dysfunction, spastic paraparesis, pyramidal signs, sphincter dysfunction | Y | OLF, OPLL | 9 | 14 |
| 7 | 54 | F | 30 | N | 6 | 3 | low back and leg pain, lower limb numbness, intermittent claudication | N | OLF | 4 | 18 |
| 8 | 61 | F | 29.6 | N | 13 | 9 | low back pain, lower limb numbness, sensory dysfunction, spastic paraparesis, pyramidal signs, sphincter dysfunction | Y | OLF, OPLL, DO | 4 | 18 |
| 9 | 56 | F | 29.3 | N | 2 | 2 | lower limb numbness, sensory dysfunction, pyramidal signs, sphincter dysfunction | Y | OLF, OPLL DO | 9 | 13 |
| 10 | 54 | M | 21.9 | N | 36 | 0.3 | lower limb numbness, sensory dysfunction, spastic paraparesis, pyramidal signs, sphincter dysfunction | Y | OLF, DO | 13 | 28 |
| 11 | 35 | M | 41 | Y | 3 | 3 | lower limb numbness, sensory dysfunction, pyramidal signs, sphincter dysfunction | Y | OLF, OPLL | 5 | 12 |
| Average | 50.2 | 29.7 | 24.4 | 4.2 | 7 | 21.2 | |||||
| SD | 11.8 | 5.5 | 36.3 | 4.1 | 2.9 | 12.2 |
Fig. 3Distribution of the OLF in relation to the intervertebral disc level
Summary of operative data obtained in the 11 patients of multilevel TOLF
| Surgical Sequence | Time Interval between Two Operations | Operated Levels | Number of Operated Levels | Operation Time (min) | Operation Time per Level (min) | Blood Loss (ml) | Blood Loss per Level (ml) | Hospital Stays (days) | Complications | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st Stage | 2nd Stage | 1st Stage | 2nd Stage | 1st Stage | 2nd Stage | 1st Stage | 2nd Stage | 1st Stage | 2nd Stage | 1st Stage | 2nd Stage | 1st Stage | 2nd Stage | 1st Stage | 2nd Stage | |||
| 1 | LL | 34 | T9-T11 | T2-T4 | 3 | 3 | 280 | 270 | 93.3 | 90 | 600 | 1600 | 200 | 533 | 35 | 19 | N | N |
| 2 | UL | 6 | T8-T11 | L3-L5 | 4 | 3 | 175 | 115 | 43.8 | 38.3 | 500 | 250 | 125 | 83 | 15 | 13 | N | N |
| 3 | UL | 1 | T1-T3 | T4-T9 | 3 | 6 | 150 | 234 | 50 | 39 | 400 | 800 | 133 | 133 | 10 | 25 | N | N |
| 4 | LL | 37 | T4-T11 | T1-T2 | 8 | 2 | 400 | 245 | 50 | 122.5 | 1200 | 1500 | 150 | 750 | 23 | 19 | N | CSF leakage |
| 5 | LL | 6 | L2-L5 | T4-T10 | 4 | 7 | 140 | 230 | 35 | 32.9 | 700 | 1200 | 175 | 171 | 23 | 18 | CSF leakage | CSF leakage |
| 6 | LL | 5 | T5-T12 | T2-T4 | 8 | 3 | 310 | 205 | 38.9 | 68.3 | 1500 | 500 | 188 | 167 | 14 | 15 | CSF leakage | CSF leakage |
| 7 | LL | 5 | L2-L5 | T9-T10 | 4 | 2 | 230 | 175 | 57.5 | 87.5 | 800 | 800 | 200 | 400 | 15 | 22 | N | N |
| 8 | UL | 5 | T3-T4 | T9-T12 | 2 | 4 | 295 | 235 | 147.5 | 58.8 | 2000 | 1000 | 1000 | 250 | 13 | 26 | CSF leakage | CSF leakage |
| 9 | UL | 8 | T1-T7 | T9-T12 | 7 | 4 | 425 | 240 | 60.7 | 60 | 900 | 600 | 129 | 150 | 67 | 27 | Acute epidural hematoma,wound infection | CSF leakage |
| 10 | LL | 0.5 | T8-L5 | T3-T7 | 10 | 5 | 400 | 425 | 40 | 85 | 600 | 1000 | 60 | 200 | 40 | _ | CSF leakage, screw malposition | CSF leakage |
| 11 | LL | 15 | T10-L1 | T3-T5 | 4 | 3 | 210 | 335 | 52.5 | 111.7 | 4000 | 2500 | 1000 | 833 | 8 | 14 | N | N |
| Average | _ | 11.1 | _ | _ | 5.2 | 3.8 | 274 | 246 | 60.8 | 72.2 | 1200 | 1068 | 305.5 | 334 | 22.3 | 19.8 | _ | _ |
| SD | _ | 12.6 | _ | _ | 2.6 | 1.6 | 103 | 81 | 32.8 | 29.9 | 1044 | 625 | 345.8 | 261 | 17.6 | 5.1 | _ | _ |
| P value | _ | _ | _ | 0.154 | 0.488 | 0.407 | 0.723 | 0.831 | 0.371 | _ | ||||||||
upper lesion first, lower lesion first
modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score
| mJOA | mJOA Improvement Rate at the final follow-up | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Case | 1 week before 1st surgery | 3 months after 1st surgery | before 2nd operation | at the final follow-up | |
| 1 | 4 | 10 | 6 | 10 | 85.7 % |
| 2 | 6 | — | 7 | 9 | 60.0 % |
| 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 50.0 % |
| 4 | 3 | 6 | 5 | 7.5 | 56.3 % |
| 5 | 4 | 6 | 6 | 7.5 | 50.0 % |
| 6 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 5 | 45.5 % |
| 7 | 7 | 8 | 8 | 10 | 75.0 % |
| 8 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 7 | 55.6 % |
| 9 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 12.5 % |
| 10 | 1 | — | 1 | 8 | 70.0 % |
| 11 | 6 | 9 | 6 | 10 | 80.0 % |
| Average | 3.5 | 5.5 | 4.6 | 7.5 | 58.2 % |
| SD | 2.2 | 3.1 | 2.3 | 2.2 | 20.1 % |
Fig. 4modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score