Literature DB >> 7899967

The case for pedicle fixation of the lumbar spine.

N Ransom1, S H La Rocca, J Thalgott.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: This was a retrospective review of one surgeon's results using three different lumbosacral arthrodesis techniques: Group 1, no instrumentation; Group 2, Luque Rod and sublaminar wire technique; and Group 3, AO intrapedicular screw and plate technique.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of metal implants results in a higher fusion rate. Once a solid arthrodesis is achieved, is this correlated with a good clinical result? SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Controversy persists regarding the value of the use of intrapedicular fixation to augment arthrodesis of the lumbosacral junction. Controversy also exists regarding the correlation of solid arthrodesis with relief of preoperative symptoms.
METHODS: Three serial sequential populations (50 subjects each) undergoing varied primary multiple-level lumbosacral arthrodesis procedures were studied retrospectively. The ultimate clinical results of these three different surgical populations were studied after prolonged follow-up.
RESULTS: Group one had a 14% fusion rate and a 4% complication rate. Group two had a 36% fusion rate and an 8% complication rate. Group three had a 64% fusion rate and an 18% complication rate. Complications were intraoperative dural tears and nerve root injuries. Patient satisfaction with each operative procedure to relieve preoperative low back pain was statistically correlated with whether a solid arthrodesis was obtained.
CONCLUSION: Intrapedicular fixation technique is the most reliable method for obtaining a solid multiple-level lumbosacral arthrodesis. Solid arthrodesis is correlated with a successful clinical result. Complications associated with the use of intrapedicular fixation were frequent but their occurrence demonstrated a "learning curve pattern."

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7899967

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  5 in total

1.  Neurological recovery and its influencing factors in thoracic and lumbar spine fractures after surgical decompression and stabilization.

Authors:  Stefan Arthur Rath; John Festo Kahamba; Thomas Kretschmer; Ulrich Neff; Hans-Peter Richter; Gregor Antoniadis
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2004-10-06       Impact factor: 3.042

2.  Combined anterior interbody fusion and posterior pedicle screw fixation in patients with degenerative lumbar disc disease.

Authors:  M A El Masry; W S Badawy; P Rajendran; D Chan
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2004-08-11       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Intraoperative 3-dimensional imaging (O-arm) for assessment of pedicle screw position: Does it prevent unacceptable screw placement?

Authors:  Jonathan N Sembrano; David W Polly; Charles Gerald T Ledonio; Edward Rainier G Santos
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2012-12-01

4.  Biomaterials in Spinal Implants: A Review.

Authors:  Andrew Warburton; Steven J Girdler; Christopher M Mikhail; Amy Ahn; Samuel K Cho
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2019-11-04

5.  Stress distribution of different lumbar posterior pedicle screw insertion techniques: a combination study of finite element analysis and biomechanical test.

Authors:  Mingzhi Song; Kebin Sun; Zhonghai Li; Junwei Zong; Xiliang Tian; Kai Ma; Shouyu Wang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-06-21       Impact factor: 4.379

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.