A M Lehr1, D Delawi2, J L C van Susante3, N Verschoor4, N Wolterbeek2, F C Oner5, M C Kruyt5. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands. a.m.lehr@umcutrecht.nl. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Despite the rapid increase in instrumented spinal fusions for a variety of indications, most studies focus on short-term fusion rates. Long-term clinical outcomes are still scarce and inconclusive. This study investigated clinical outcomes > 10 years after single-level instrumented posterolateral spinal fusion for lumbar degenerative or isthmic spondylolisthesis with neurological symptoms. METHODS: Cross-sectional long-term follow-up among the Dutch participants of an international multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing osteogenic protein-1 with autograft. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EQ-5D-3L and visual analogue scale (VAS) for leg and back pain, as well as questions on satisfaction with treatment and additional surgery. RESULTS: The follow-up rate was 73% (41 patients). At mean 11.8 (range 10.1-13.7) years after surgery, a non-significant deterioration of clinical outcomes compared to 1-year follow-up was observed. The mean ODI was 20 ± 19, mean EQ-5D-3L index score 0.784 ± 0.251 and mean VAS for leg and back pain, respectively, 34 ± 33 and 31 ± 28. Multiple regression showed that diagnosis (degenerative vs. isthmic spondylolisthesis), graft type (OP-1 vs. autograft) and 1-year fusion status (fusion vs. no fusion) were not predictive for the ODI at long-term follow-up (p = 0.389). Satisfaction with treatment was excellent and over 70% of the patients reported lasting improvement in back and/or leg pain. No revision surgeries for non-union were reported. CONCLUSION: This study showed favourable clinical outcomes > 10 years after instrumented posterolateral spinal fusion and supports spondylolisthesis with neurological symptoms as indication for fusion surgery.
PURPOSE: Despite the rapid increase in instrumented spinal fusions for a variety of indications, most studies focus on short-term fusion rates. Long-term clinical outcomes are still scarce and inconclusive. This study investigated clinical outcomes > 10 years after single-level instrumented posterolateral spinal fusion for lumbar degenerative or isthmic spondylolisthesis with neurological symptoms. METHODS: Cross-sectional long-term follow-up among the Dutch participants of an international multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing osteogenic protein-1 with autograft. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EQ-5D-3L and visual analogue scale (VAS) for leg and back pain, as well as questions on satisfaction with treatment and additional surgery. RESULTS: The follow-up rate was 73% (41 patients). At mean 11.8 (range 10.1-13.7) years after surgery, a non-significant deterioration of clinical outcomes compared to 1-year follow-up was observed. The mean ODI was 20 ± 19, mean EQ-5D-3L index score 0.784 ± 0.251 and mean VAS for leg and back pain, respectively, 34 ± 33 and 31 ± 28. Multiple regression showed that diagnosis (degenerative vs. isthmic spondylolisthesis), graft type (OP-1 vs. autograft) and 1-year fusion status (fusion vs. no fusion) were not predictive for the ODI at long-term follow-up (p = 0.389). Satisfaction with treatment was excellent and over 70% of the patients reported lasting improvement in back and/or leg pain. No revision surgeries for non-union were reported. CONCLUSION: This study showed favourable clinical outcomes > 10 years after instrumented posterolateral spinal fusion and supports spondylolisthesis with neurological symptoms as indication for fusion surgery.
Authors: James N Weinstein; Jon D Lurie; Tor D Tosteson; Brett Hanscom; Anna N A Tosteson; Emily A Blood; Nancy J O Birkmeyer; Alan S Hilibrand; Harry Herkowitz; Frank P Cammisa; Todd J Albert; Sanford E Emery; Lawrence G Lenke; William A Abdu; Michael Longley; Thomas J Errico; Serena S Hu Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-05-31 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sanjay S Dhall; Tanvir F Choudhri; Jason C Eck; Michael W Groff; Zoher Ghogawala; William C Watters; Andrew T Dailey; Daniel K Resnick; Alok Sharan; Praveen V Mummaneni; Jeffrey C Wang; Michael G Kaiser Journal: J Neurosurg Spine Date: 2014-07
Authors: Veli Turunen; Timo Nyyssönen; Hannu Miettinen; Olavi Airaksinen; Timo Aalto; Juhana Hakumäki; Heikki Kröger Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Zoher Ghogawala; James Dziura; William E Butler; Feng Dai; Norma Terrin; Subu N Magge; Jean-Valery C E Coumans; J Fred Harrington; Sepideh Amin-Hanjani; J Sanford Schwartz; Volker K H Sonntag; Fred G Barker; Edward C Benzel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-04-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Andrew L Alejo; Scott McDermott; Yusuf Khalil; Hope C Ball; Gabrielle T Robinson; Ernesto Solorzano; Amanda M Alejo; Jacob Douglas; Trinity K Samson; Jesse W Young; Fayez F Safadi Journal: J Orthop Sports Med Date: 2022-09-05