| Literature DB >> 35991588 |
Yongjian Gao1, Chen Zhao1, Lei Luo1, Liehua Liu1, Lichuan Liang1, Dianming Jiang1, Pei Li1, Qiang Zhou1.
Abstract
Background: Although direct pars repair using a pedicle screw-rod-hook system has achieved satisfactory results in patients with spondylolysis, its application in adults with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis is rarely reported. Objective: To assess the surgical effect of reduction and direct repair surgery with a pedicle screw-rod-hook system combined with autogenous bone grafts in adult patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35991588 PMCID: PMC9385336 DOI: 10.1155/2022/8410519
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pain Res Manag ISSN: 1203-6765 Impact factor: 2.667
General data (mean ± SD/M ± IQR).
| Direct repair ( | |
|---|---|
| Age in years (range) | 36.50 ± 21.00 (15–51) |
|
| |
| Gender, | |
| Male | 36 (56.25) |
| Female | 28 (43.75) |
|
| |
| Follow-up in months (range) | 52.15 ± 9.96 (32–76) |
|
| |
| Leg pain, | 14 (21.88) |
|
| |
| Level treated, | |
| L5 | 51 (79.69) |
| L4 | 13 (20.31) |
|
| |
| Operation time (range) (min) | 187.00 ± 71.00 (120–347) |
|
| |
| Blood loss (range) (ml) | 65.00 ± 31.00 (30–180) |
n, number of patients; SD, standard deviation; M, median; IQR, interquartile range. Note. Values in the age, operation time, and blood loss data represent M ± IQR, and follow-up time represents mean ± SD.
Clinical outcome assessments (M ± IQR).
| Preoperative | Postoperative | FFU | |
|---|---|---|---|
| VAS-LBP | 6.00 ± 1.00ab | 2.00 ± 1.00ac | 0 ± 1.00bc |
| VAS-leg | 3.00 ± 1.25ab | 0 ± 1.00a | 0 ± 0b |
| ODI | 48.00 ± 6.25ab | 20.00 ± 7.30ac | 10.00 ± 8.00bc |
ODI, Oswestry Disability Index; VAS, visual analog scale (VAS); LBP, low back pain; FFU, final follow-up. aPreoperative vs. postoperative (P < 0.05); bpreoperative vs. FFU (P < 0.05); cpostoperative vs. FFU (P < 0.05). Note. Values in the VAS-LBP, VAS-leg, and ODI data represent M ± IQR.
Radiological assessments (mean ± SD/M ± IQR).
| Preoperative | Postoperative | Postoperative 6 months | FFU | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DH (mm) | 12.33 ± 2.25 | 14.12 ± 2.16 | 12.90 ± 2.11¢¤ | 12.04 ± 2.12£¤ |
| SD (mm) | 8.80 ± 3.50 | 3.50 ± 5.10 | 3.70 ± 5.00# | 3.80 ± 5.00& |
| SP (%) | 21.88 ± 7.90 | 8.70 ± 13.00 | 9.13 ± 12.60# | 9.08 ± 12.20& |
| SA (°) | 12.16 ± 6.24# | 11.23 ± 5.42 | 10.28 ± 5.09# | 10.58 ± 4.80 |
| UISA (°) | 12.07 ± 2.58 | 9.31 ± 2.78 | 11.00 ± 2.95¢ | 11.39 ± 2.56£ |
| LL (°) | 52.16 ± 12.39 | 41.82 ± 12.72 | 48.90 ± 16.72#¢¤ | 54.35 ± 14.20£¤ |
| ROMSIS (°) | 13.62 ± 6.65# | — | 7.63 ± 4.80#¤ | 11.50 ± 9.50¤ |
| ROMUIS (°) | 10.46 ± 5.45 | — | 8.74 ± 4.39¤ | 10.81 ± 4.96¤ |
DH, disc height; SD, slip distance; SP, slipping percentage; SA, slip angle; UISA, upper intervertebral space angle; LL, lumbar lordosis; ROMSIS, range of motion of the surgical intervertebral space; ROMUIS, range of motion of the upper intervertebral space. Preoperative vs. postoperative (P < 0.05); #preoperative vs. post-6 months (P < 0.05); &preoperative vs. FFU (P < 0.05); ¢postoperative vs. post-6 months (P < 0.05); £postoperative vs. FFU (P < 0.05); ¤post-6 months vs. FFU (P < 0.05). Note. Values in SA, UISA, ROMUIS, and DH results except for postoperative 6 months, LL results except for postoperative 6 months and the last follow-up, and ROMSIS results except for the last follow-up represent mean ± SD, and other results use M ± IQR.
Lumbar disc degeneration observed on MRIs by the Pfirrmann grading system.
| Pregrades | FFU of SSD ( | FFU of USD ( | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 7 | 1 | ||||||
| 2 | 16 | 2 | 35 | 13 | ||||||
| 3 | 20 | 21 | 1 | 5 | 2 | |||||
N, number of patients; FFU, final follow-up; SSD, surgical segmental disc; USD, upper segmental disc.
Figure 1A 16-year-old male patient with LGIS of L5 had LBP of 7 points (VAS scores), without sciatica pain, and underwent direct pars repair using the PSRH system. (a)–(f) The X-rays of the lumbar spine in anteroposterior, sagittal, hyperextension and flexion, and double oblique positions, suggesting LGIS of the L5 with isthmic defect. The disc height and ROM of L5-S1 are 12.95 mm and 23.9°, respectively. (g) The surgical segment and the upper segment are both grade 2 of Pfirrmann's criteria by magnetic resonance imaging (T2-weighted MRI). (h)-(i) The postoperative X-rays, indicating that the isthmic defect has been repaired and lumbar 5 spondylolisthesis has been reset. (j) CT scan of the lumbar spine 12 months after surgery, showing that the isthmic defect has bony fusion. (k)-(l) X-ray films of hyperextension and flexion before removal of internal fixation at 42 months after the operation. (m)–(o) Re-examinations of the lumbar spine X-ray at 78 months after the operation, suggesting that the internal fixation has been removed. The disc height and ROM of the affected level were 10.6 mm and 16.6°, respectively, and the ROM of the upper segment was 12.10°. (p) The lumbar spine MR at the FFU was grade 1 for the L4-5 discs and grades 2-3 for L5-S1 discs.
Complications.
| Postoperative complications |
|
|---|---|
| Nonunion | 2 (3.13%) |
| Postoperative sciatica | 1 (1.56%) |
| Superficial wound infections | 1 (1.56%) |
N is the total number of patients; n is the number of patients with complications.