Literature DB >> 9306536

Surgical management of severe spondylolisthesis in children and adolescents. Anterior fusion in situ versus anterior spondylodesis with posterior transpedicular instrumentation and reduction.

M Muschik1, H Zippel, C Perka.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A clinical and radiologic retrospective follow-up examination of patients treated surgically for severe juvenile spondylolisthesis.
OBJECTIVE: To compare two different surgical techniques in the management of severe (degree of slip > 30%) juvenile spondylolisthesis (anterior spondylodesis in situ versus combined anterior spondylodesis and posterior transpedicular instrumentation including reduction of the slipping vertebra) to determine if the advantages of the repositioning of the slipping vertebra and a decreased number of pseudarthroses because of the transpedicular instrumentation lead to clinical improvement despite showing better alignment radiologically.
METHODS: This study included 59 children and adolescents with severe spondylolisthesis of L5 who were treated surgically at the authors' orthopedic department between 1980 and 1992. Twenty-nine children received anterior spondylodesis (AS group), and 30 children received, in addition, a posterior reduction and transpedicular instrumentation (posteroanterior spondylodesis, PAS group).
RESULTS: Distribution of age, gender, preoperative clinical symptoms, and preoperative radiologic classification of the spondylolisthesis were comparable in both groups (average degree of slip for the AS group, 66%; that for the PAS group, 75%; angle of slip, 28 degrees and 36 degrees, respectively; sacral inclination, 31 degrees and 25 degrees, respectively). The postoperative follow-up period of the AS group lasted 125 +/- 22 months, considerably longer than that of the PAS group at 67 +/- 20 months. At the time of the follow-up assessment, the PAS group showed a reduced rate of pseudarthrosis (7% versus 24%), a reduced degree of slip (36% versus 59%), and a reduced lumbosacral kyphosis (14 degrees versus 26 degrees) in comparison with the AS group. The transpedicular instrumentation decreased the fusion time of osseous consolidation of the spondylodesis markedly (7 months versus 17 months, on average). Adverse effects and rate of complications were equal in both groups. The results failed to show any differences in favor of either of the two surgical techniques used either subjectively to the patient or objectively by means of clinical examination.
CONCLUSION: Anterior spondylodesis including posterior instrumentation and reduction was superior to the simple anterior fusion in situ for normalization of the lumbosacral profile and osseous consolidation of the spondylodesis. This result was not reflected in the clinical evaluation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9306536     DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199709010-00020

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


  21 in total

1.  Biomechanics of high-grade spondylolisthesis with and without reduction.

Authors:  Wenhai Wang; Carl-Eric Aubin; Patrick Cahill; George Baran; Pierre-Jean Arnoux; Stefan Parent; Hubert Labelle
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2015-08-02       Impact factor: 2.602

2.  One-stage posterior spinal shortening by L5 partial spondylectomy for spondyloptosis or L5-S1 high-grade spondylolisthesis management.

Authors:  Ibrahim Obeid; Féthi Laouissat; Anouar Bourghli; Louis Boissière; Jean-Marc Vital
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  A proposal for a surgical classification of pediatric lumbosacral spondylolisthesis based on current literature.

Authors:  Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong; Hubert Labelle
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2006-06-07       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  [Surgical therapy for spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis].

Authors:  A Wild; K Seller; R Krauspe
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 1.087

5.  Surgical treatment of high-grade lumbosacral spondylolisthesis in childhood, adolescent and young adult by the "double-plate" technique: a past experience.

Authors:  Raphaël Vialle; Sebastian Charosky; Jean-Paul Padovani; Pierre Rigault; Christophe Glorion
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2006-01-21       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Single segment of posterior lumbar interbody fusion for adult isthmic spondylolisthesis: reduction or fusion in situ.

Authors:  Xiao-Feng Lian; Tie-Sheng Hou; Jian-Guang Xu; Bing-Fang Zeng; Jie Zhao; Xiao-Kang Liu; Er-Zhu Yang; Cheng Zhao
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-06-14       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Criteria for surgical reduction in high-grade lumbosacral spondylolisthesis based on quality of life measures.

Authors:  Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong; M Timothy Hresko; Abdulmajeed Alzakri; Stefan Parent; Dan J Sucato; Lawrence G Lenke; Michelle Marks; Hubert Labelle
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-03-26       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Return of motor evoked potentials after knee flexion in the setting of high-grade spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Justin Tilan; Lindsay M Andras; Mark D Krieger; David L Skaggs
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-11-17       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Outcome of L5 radiculopathy after reduction and instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion of high-grade L5-S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis and the role of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring.

Authors:  Ralph T Schär; Martin Sutter; Anne F Mannion; Andreas Eggspühler; Dezsö Jeszenszky; Tamas F Fekete; Frank Kleinstück; Daniel Haschtmann
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-01-31       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Novel concepts in the evaluation and treatment of high-dysplastic spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Claudio Lamartina; Joseph M Zavatsky; Maria Petruzzi; Nicola Specchia
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-04-28       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.