Low-grade Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Research Articles

Vertebropexy as a Ligamentous Stabilization for Degenerative Low-Grade Spondylolisthesis: A Report of 3 Cases.

Three patients with low-grade spondylolisthesis were treated with vertebropexy, a new surgical technique that replaces rigid fusion with ligamentous stabilization. Clinical outcomes, functional radiographs, and magnetic resonance imaging were used to document the early clinical results of this biomechanically established and promising new surgical method. Vertebropexy may be a valuable alternative to rigid fusion in the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Symptomatic lumbar stenosis due to low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis can effectively be treated with mere decompression.

Adding instrumented spondylodesis to decompression in symptomatic spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis is subject of debate. The presence of spondylolisthesis due to degeneration is an indicator of severe facet joint and intervertebral disc degeneration, and this may fit increased instability of the spine. We aim to establish the incidence of degenerative spondylolisthesis in spinal stenosis surgical candidates and to evaluate the incidence of failure of decompressive surgery without concomitant spondylodesis as initial treatment. Medical files of all operated patients for spinal stenosis between 2007 and 2013 were evaluated. Demographic characteristics, pre-operative radiological characteristics (level of stenosis, presence, and grade of spondylolisthesis), surgical technique, incidence, and indication for reoperation were summarised, as well as the type of reoperation. Patient satisfaction was classified as 'satisfied' or 'unsatisfied' after initial and secondary surgery. The follow-up was 6 to 12 years. Nine hundred thirty-four patients were included, and 253 (27%) had a spondylolisthesis. Seventeen percent of the spondylolisthesis patients receiving decompression were reoperated versus 12% of the stenosis patients (p=.059). Reoperation in the spondylolisthesis group concerned instrumented spondylodesis in 38 versus 10% in the stenosis group. The satisfaction percentage was comparable in the stenosis and the spondylolisthesis group two months after surgery (80 vs. 74%). Of the 253 spondylolisthesis patients, 1% initially received instrumented spondylodesis and 6% in a second operation. Lumbar stenosis with and without (low-grade) degenerative spondylolisthesis can usually effectively be treated with mere decompression. Instrumented surgery in a second surgical procedure does not lead to less satisfaction with surgical outcomes.

Minimally Invasive Decompression With Noninstrumented Facet Fusion Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Stenosis Associated With Grade 1 Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis.

Retrospective matched cohort study. With a growing interest in minimally invasive spine surgery (MIS), the question of which technique is the most advantageous for patients with low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) still remains unclear. To compare patient-reported outcomes, perioperative morbidity, and rates of reoperation between MIS decompression with either unilateral noninstrumented facet fusion (MIS-F) or with transforaminal interbody fusion (MIS-T) for grade 1 DLS. Twenty patients who underwent MIS-T and 20 patients with MIS-F were matched based on age, sex, and preoperative ODI, VAS back, and VAS leg. All patients had DLS with at least 4 millimeters of translation on standing radiographs. Exclusion criteria included prior level surgery, multilevel instability, disk impinging on the exiting nerve root, spondylolisthesis from significant facet arthropathy, or foraminal compromise from disk collapse. ODI, VAS back, VAS leg, and patient satisfaction measured by the North American Spine Society questionnaire were tracked at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Minimum clinically important differences and substantial clinical benefits were calculated. MIS-F and MIS-T resulted in decreased ODI at 3, 6, and 12 months following the index procedure. Sixty percent of MIS-F and 83% of MIS-T patients reached minimum clinically important difference at 1 year postoperatively; however, using the threshold of 30% ODI reduction from baseline, 67% of MIS-F and 83% MIS-T ( P = 0.25) achieved this goal. Forty-three percent of MIS-F and 59% of MIS-T patients met substantial clinical benefits. Satisfaction at 1 year, measured by a score of 1 or 2 on the North American Spine Society questionnaire, was 64% for MIS-F and 83% for MIS-T. MIS-F and MIS-T are effective treatment options for spinal stenosis associated with low-grade DLS. Both techniques result in comparable patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction up to 2 years and have similar long-term reoperation rates. More evidence is required to delineate optimal selection characteristics for MIS-F versus MIS-T.

Radiological factors affecting functional outcome after the implantation of BDYN™ dynamic stabilization system for low-grade lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis

BackgroundThe objectives of this study are to identify radiological factors associated with good functional outcomes after the implantation of BDYN™ dynamic stabilization system in the setting of painful low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). Material and methodsIn this monocentric, retrospective study, we followed 50 patients, a 5-years period, with chronic lower back pain, radiculopathy and/or neurogenic claudication evolving for at least one year that failed conservative treatment. All patients presented low-grade DLS and underwent lumbar dynamic stabilization. Radiological and clinical outcomes were assessed preoperatively and 24months after surgery. Functional evaluation was based on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), and the Walking Distance (WD). Radiological analysis was based on lumbar X-rays and MRI parameters. Patients were divided into two groups according to the reduction in the postoperative ODI score (more or less than 15 points), and statistical analysis was performed between both groups to find predictive radiological factors for a satisfying functional outcome. ResultsClinically, 80% (40 patients) had a satisfying functional result, and 20% (10 patients) were considered having a poor outcome according to the ODI score. Radiologically, the loss in segmental lordosis was statistically associated with bad functional outcomes (18° for ODI decrease>15 versus 11° for ODI decrease<15). There is also a tendency showing that a higher Pfirmann disc signal grade (grade IV) and a severe canal stenosis according to Schizas classification (grade C & D) are predictive of a poor clinical result, but that must be confirmed in future studies. ConclusionsBDYN™ appears safe and well-tolerated. This new device should be effective for the treatment of patients with low-grade DLS. It provides significant improvement in terms of daily life activity and pain. Moreover, we have been able to deduce that a kyphotic disc is associated with a bad functional outcome after BDYN™ device implantation. It may represent a contraindication for the implantation of such DS device. Moreover, it seems that it is better to implant BDYN™ in DLS with mild or moderate disc degeneration and canal stenosis.

Full-endoscopic foraminotomy in low-grade degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis: a patient-specific tailored approach.

To describe the surgical technique and methodology to successfully plan and execute an endoscopic foraminotomy in patients with isthmic or degenerative spondylolisthesis, according to each patient's unique characteristics. Thirty patients with degenerative or isthmic spondylolisthesis (SL) with radicular symptoms were included from March 2019 to September 2022. Treating physician registered patients' baseline and imaging characteristics, as well as preoperative back pain VAS, leg pain VAS and ODI. Subsequently, authors treated the included patients with an endoscopic foraminotomy according to a "patient-specific" tailored approach. Nineteen patients (63.33%) had isthmic SL and 11 patients (36.67%) had degenerative SL. 75.86% of the cases had a Meyerding Grade 1 listhesis. One of the transforaminal foraminotomies with lateral recess decompression in degenerative SL had to be aborted because of intense osseous bleeding. Of the remaining 29 patients, one patient experienced recurrence of the sciatica pain that required subsequent reintervention and fusion. No other intraoperative or post-operative complications were observed. None of the patients developed post-operative dysesthesia. In 86.67% of the patients, the foraminotomy was implemented using a transforaminal approach. In the remaining 13.33% of the cases, an interlaminar contralateral approach was used. Lateral recess decompression was performed in half of the cases. Mean follow-up time was 12.69months, reaching a maximum of 40months in some patients. Outcome variables such as VAS for leg and back pain, as well as ODI, showed statistically significant reduction since the 3-month follow-up visit. In the presented case series, endoscopic foraminotomy achieved satisfactory outcomes without sacrificing segmental stability. The proposed patient-specific "tailored" approach allowed to successfully design and execute the surgical strategy to perform an endoscopic foraminotomy through transforaminal or interlaminar contralateral approaches.

Clinical efficacy of midline lumbar interbody fusion arthrodesis with neuronavigation-guided cortical bone trajectory screws in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis:a prospective randomized controlled trial

Introduction. Currently, the standard treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis involves pedicle screw fixation to enhance the success of intervertebral fusion. The traditional pedicle screw techniques require extensive lateral muscle dissection, resulting in significantly increased surgical-related morbidity. To address some of these shortcomings, the Midline Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MIDLIF®) technique has recently been developed. It involves the combination of the cortical bone trajectory screw fixation of the spine with intervertebral cage placement to achieve a solid interbody fusion. So far, the clinical efficacy of the MIDLIF technique in the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis is still unknown. All existing publications are studies with a low level of relevance or scientific evidence. Materials and methods. A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted between 2017 and 2022. The study analyzed the clinical and radiological effectiveness of the MIDLIF arthrodesis technique compared to the traditional lumbar interbody fusion techniques, used exclusively in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Results. The study enrolled 112 eligible patients with degenerative low-grade spondylolisthesis, randomly assigned into two groups. At 1 year post-operatively, MIDLIF provided a significantly better improvement in postoperative relief of low back pain and radiating pain, as well as a significantly better functional recovery. Additionally, MIDLIF resulted in lower surgical morbidity compared to traditional fusion techniques. Conclusions. The success rate of MIDLIF arthrodesis is similar to that associated with traditional fusion techniques. At the same time, MIDLIF offers all the specific benefits of a minimally invasive approach, such as less postoperative pain, faster functional recovery, less bleeding, and fewer blood transfusions. Thus, MIDLIF might be a good alternative to the traditional intervertebral fusion techniques in the treatment of degenerative low-grade spondylolisthesis.

Decompression alone versus decompression with fusion in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Surgical decompression is standard care in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis in patients with symptomaticlumbar spinal stenosis, but there remains controversy over the benefits of adding fusion. The persistent lack of consensus on this matter and the availability of new data warrants a contemporary systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Multiple online databases were systematically searched up to October 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective studies comparing outcomes of decompression alone versus decompression with fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis. Primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index. Secondary outcomes included leg and back pain, surgical outcomes, and radiological outcomes. Pooled effect estimates were calculated and presented as mean differences (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) at two-year follow-up. Of the identified 2403 studies, eventually five RCTs and two prospective studies were included. Overall, most studies had a low or unclear risk of selection bias and most studies were focused on low grade degenerative spondylolisthesis. All patient-reported outcomes showed low statistical heterogeneity. Overall, there was high-quality evidence suggesting no difference in functionality at two years of follow-up (MD - 0.31, 95% CI - 3.81 to 3.19). Furthermore, there was high-quality evidence of no difference in leg pain (MD - 1.79, 95% CI - 5.08 to 1.50) or back pain (MD - 2.54, 95% CI - 6.76 to 1.67) between patients undergoing decompression vs. decompression with fusion. Pooled surgical outcomes showed less blood loss after decompression only, shorter length of hospital stay, anda similar reoperation ratecompared to decompression with fusion. Based on the current literature, there is high-quality evidence of no difference in functionality after decompression alone compared to decompression with fusion in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis at 2years of follow-up. Further studies should focus on long-term comparative outcomes, health economic evaluations, and identifying those patients that may benefit more from decompression with fusion instead of decompression alone. This review was registered at Prospero (CRD42021291603).

327 To Fuse or Not to Fuse: The Elderly Patient with Lumbar Stenosis and Low-Grade Spondylolisthesis. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Abstract Aim The optimum surgical intervention for elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis(LSS) and low-grade degenerative-spondylolisthesis(LGDS) has been extensively debated. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised-controlled-trials(RCTs) comparing the effectiveness of decompression-alone against gold-standard decompression-with-fusion(D+F) in elderly patients with LSS and LGDS. Method A systematic literature search was performed on published databases from inception to October-2021. English-language RCTs of elderly patients (mean age over-65) with LSS and LGDS, who had undergone DA or D+F were included. The quality and weight of evidence was assessed, and a meta-analysis performed. Results Seven RCTs (n=581; mean age:65.9 years; 59.9% female) were included. There was no difference in visual-analogue-scale(VAS) scores of back-pain(BP) or leg-pain(LP) at mean follow-up of 28.6 months between both DA and D+F groups (BP: mean-difference (MD)-0.22, 95%CI:-0.76–0.32; LP: MD:-0.26, 95%CI:-0.79–0.27). In addition, subgroup analysis of long-term follow-up (&amp;gt;3 years) showed lower VAS scores for BP and LP in patients who underwent DA (BP MD:-1.70, 95%CI:-2.8-(-0.60); LP MD:-1.00, 95%CI:-1.77-(-0.23)). No difference in disability, measured by Oswestry-Disability-Index(ODI) scores, was found between both groups (MD:0.50, 95%CI: -3.31–4.31). However, patients in DA group had less hospital complications and fewer adverse events (total-surgical-complications OR:0.57, 95%CI:0.36–0.90), despite a higher rate of post-operative DS (OR:8.63, 95%CI:3.35–22.26). Conclusions DA is not inferior to D+F in elderly patients with LSS and LGDS. DA has better pain outcomes at three-years follow-up and carries lower risk hospital-complications and fewer adverse-events. Surgeons should weigh these findings with increased risk of DS-progression.

Long-term Radiological and Clinical Outcome after Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery in Patients with Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Prospective 6-Year Follow-up Study.

ObjectiveTo assess which radiological alignment parameters are associated with a satisfactory long‐term clinical outcome after performing lumbar spinal fusion for treating degenerative spondylolisthesis.MethodsThis single‐center prospective study assessed the relation between radiological alignment parameters measured on standing lateral lumbar spine radiographs and the patient‐reported outcome using four different questionnaires (COMI, EQ‐5D, ODI and VAS) as primary outcome measures (level of evidence: II). The following spinopelvic alignment parameters were used: gliding angle, sacral inclination, anterior displacement, sagittal rotation, lumbar lordosis, sacral slope, pelvic tilt and pelvic incidence. Furthermore, the length of stay and perioperative complications were documented. Only cases from 2013 to 2015 of low‐grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (Meyerding grades I and II) were considered. The patients underwent open posterior lumbar fusion surgery by pedicle screw instrumentation and cage insertion. The operative technique was either a posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) or a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) performed by three different senior orthopedic surgeons. Exclusion criteria were spine fractures, minimally invasive techniques, underlying malignant diseases or acute infections, previous or multisegmental spine surgery as well as preoperative neurologic impairment. Of 89 initially contacted patients, 17 patients were included for data analysis (11 males, six females).ResultsThe data of 17 patients after mono‐ or bisegmental lumbar fusion surgery to treat low‐grade lumbar spondylolisthesis and with a follow‐up time of least 72 months were analyzed. The mean age was 66.7 ± 11.3 years. In terms of complications two dural tears and one intraoperative bleeding occurred. The average body mass index (BMI) was 27.6 ± 4.4 kg/m2 and the average inpatient length of stay was 12.9 ± 3.8 days (range: 8–21). The long‐term clinical outcome correlated significantly with the change of the pelvic tilt (r s = −0.515, P < 0.05) and the sagittal rotation (r s = −0.545, P < 0.05). The sacral slope was significantly associated with the sacral inclination (r s = 0.637, P < 0.01) and the pelvic incidence (r s = 0.500, P < 0.05). In addition, the pelvic incidence showed a significant correlation with the pelvic tilt (r s = 0.709, P < 0.01). The change of the different clinical scores over time also correlated significantly between the different questionnaires.ConclusionsThe surgical modification of the pelvic tilt and the sagittal rotation are the two radiological alignment parameters that can most accurately predict the long‐term clinical outcome after lumbar interbody fusion surgery.

Quality of life in osteoporotic patients with low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis

Degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) and osteoporosis (Op) are two complex diseases affecting the spine in the general population over the age of 50 years and can cause an accumulating clinical-dysfunctional impact that ultimately impacts on quality of life. The aim of the present study is to investigate whether our rehabilitation program relieves pain and restores physical function and quality of life in 52 females with postmenopausal Op and DS with a degree of slip ranging from 5%–25%, Meyerding grade Ⅰ, during a six-month period. All patients were randomized (Study group—25 patients, Control group—27 patients) and completely assessed. Functional parameters were measured at admission to inpatient rehabilitation (T1), after 4 weeks (T2), and 6 months (T3) following the commencement of rehabilitation. We used student’s t-test to compare the study and control groups for each variable measured and each time, and ANOVA (Analysis of variance) to compare the three sets of result obtained for each measured variable over time. The values for VAS (Visual Analogue Scale), SRM (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire) and SF-MOS (Medical Outcomes Study Questionnaire Short Form 36 Health Survey) improved in a highly significant manner over the duration of the study, both for the study and control groups. The results confirmed the complexity in the level of functionality and the results had no statistical significance in the T2 and T3 assessment. The effectiveness of the rehabilitation program for the study group was supported by the development of the differences between VAS and SRM. We found that non-surgical care and rehabilitation program is one of the optimal choices for osteoporotic patients with minimal DS, especially after 60 years of age.

Stable Low-Grade Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Does Not Compromise Clinical Outcome of Minimally Invasive Tubular Decompression in Patients with Spinal Stenosis.

Background and Objectives: In recent literature, the routine addition of arthrodesis to decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with concomitant stable low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis remains controversial. The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical outcome, complication and re-operation rates following minimally invasive (MIS) tubular decompression without arthrodesis in patients suffering from LSS with or without concomitant stable low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis. Materials and Methods: This study is a retrospective review of prospectively collected data. Ninety-six consecutive patients who underwent elective MIS lumbar decompression with a mean follow-up of 27.5 months were included in the study. The spondylolisthesis (S) group comprised 53 patients who suffered from LSS with stable degenerative spondylolisthesis, and the control (N) group included 43 patients suffering from LSS without spondylolisthesis. Outcome measures included complications and revision surgery rates. Pre- and post-operative visual analog scale (VAS) for both back and leg pain was analyzed, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was used to evaluate functional outcome. Results: The two groups were comparable in most demographic and preoperative variables. VAS for back and leg pain improved significantly following surgery in both groups. Both groups showed significant improvement in their ODI scores, at one and two years postoperatively. The average length of hospital stay was significantly higher in patients with spondylolisthesis (p-value< 0.01). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of post-operative complications rates or re-operation rates. Conclusions: Our results indicate that MIS tubular decompression may be an effective and safe procedure for patients suffering from LSS, with or without degenerative stable spondylolisthesis.

Outcome of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis treated with or without instrumentation

Spondylolisthesis is the anterior translation of cephalad vertebra, in relation to the adjacent caudal vertebra with an intact neural arch. The majority of low-grade listhesis be treated conservatively in the early stages of the disease. In the end, the problem is further compounded by the development of secondary spinal canal stenosis, which leads to the operating room. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a study to compare the functional and effectiveness of a decompression, with or without instrumentation, for a low-grade, single-level degenerative spondylolisthesis with canal stenosis. Purpose: The study was carried out to compare the functional and clinical outcome of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis with a secondary canal stenosis, with or without the instrument. Methods: 40 patients were enrolled and assigned into instrumented or non-instrumented group, 20 patients in each group. The outcome measures were (1) The visual analogue scale to assess the clinical outcome and (2) the Modified Oswestry Disability Index to assess the functional outcome. Results: The improvement in VAS for low back ache was greater in the instrumented group than in the non-instrumented group (91.3% vs 90.5%) with no significant differences (p

Comparing long-term outcomes between minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and extreme lateral interbody fusion in the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis

Comparing long-term outcomes between minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and extreme lateral interbody fusion in the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis

Clinical outcome after lumbar spinal fusion surgery in degenerative spondylolisthesis: a 3-year follow-up

IntroductionLumbar spinal fusion surgery is a widely accepted surgical treatment in degenerative causes of lumbar spondylolisthesis. The benefit of reduction of anterior displacement and restoration of sagittal parameters is still controversially debated. Purpose of the underlying publication was to analyze the influence of radiographic sagittal parameters of the spine in aspects of changes in postoperative clinical outcome.Materials and methodsBy prospective analysis, we included patients with low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (Meyerding grades I and II) with mono- or bisegmental fusion surgery with a minimum follow-up data of 3 years. For clinical outcome measures, COMI, ODI and EQ-5D were used. Spinopelvic parameters (sacral inclination, pelvic tilt, sacral slope and pelvic incidence, lumbar lordosis and lumbar index as well as anterior displacement and sagittal rotation) were measured on plain radiographs.ResultsWe could observe a significant benefit in clinical outcome after lumbar fusion surgery in low-grade spondylolisthesis in our mid-term follow-up data including 32 patients. By surgical reduction, we could see significant restoration of anterior displacement and sagittal rotation. Interestingly, a significant correlation between restoration of both sagittal rotation and sacral inclination and clinical outcome score was observed in the 3-year follow-up.ConclusionIn low-grade spondylolisthesis, spinal fusion surgery is a well-established surgical procedure; however, the impact of sagittal parameters and reduction of anterior displacement remains controversial. Within our findings, restoration of sagittal parameters showed significant correlation to improvement in clinical outcome in our mid-term follow-up data.

Minimally invasive versus traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis: a retrospective study

This was a retrospective study. We aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety between minimally invasive and traditional open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of low-grade lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS). 81 patients with LDS grades 1 and 2 treated in our spinal department from January 2014 to July 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. The MIS-TLIF group included 23 males and 11 females, while the TO-TLIF group included 29 males and 18 females. Follow-up points were set at 7 days, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months postoperatively and the last follow-up. Various clinical and radiological indicators were used to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety between the two procedures. 8 cases (3 in the MIS-TLIF group and 5 in the TO-TLIF group) were loss of follow-up after discharge. And the remaining 73 patients were followed up for at least 2 years. No statistically significant difference was observed in the terms of age, sex, BMI, slippage grade, and surgical segments. The MIS-TLIF group had a longer operation and fluoroscopy time compared with the TO-TLIF group. But the MIS-TLIF group was associated with less blood loss, ambulation time, hospital stay, and time of return to work. In each group, significant improvement were observed in BP-VAS, ODI and vertebral slip ratio at any time-point of follow-up when compared with the preoperative condition. When the time-point of follow-up was less than 1 year, the MIS-TLIF group had significant advantages in the BP-VAS and ODI compared with TO-TLIF group. But no significant difference was observed in the BP-VAS and ODI at either 12 month follow-up or the last follow-up. Besides, no statistical difference was detected in vertebral slip ratio at any time-point of follow-up between the two groups. Successful intervertebral bone fusion was found in all patients and no significant difference was found in the incidence of total complications. Thus, we considered that MIS-TLIF and TO-TLIF both achieve satisfactory clinical efficacy in the treatment of low-grade single-segment LDS. But MIS-TLIF appears to be a more efficacious and safe technique with reduced tissue damage, less blood loss and quicker recovery.

Open Lumbar Microdiscectomy and Posterolateral Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy for Antero- and Retrospondylolisthesis

Background: Posterolateral endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PLELD) or percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy has been reported to be effective as treatment for herniated lumbar disc in degenerative spondylolisthesis. Few studies have investigated the outcomes of open lumbar microdiscectomy (OLM) and PLELD for antero- and retrospondylolisthesis with mild slippage and instability. Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of OLM and PLELD for antero- and retrospondylolisthesis with mild slippage and instability. Study Design: This study used a retrospective design. Setting: Research was conducted in a hospital and outpatient surgical center. Methods: This study enrolled 84 patients aged 20 to 60 years with low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis who underwent OLM or PLELD for antero- or retrospondylolisthesis at our hospital between March 2007 and August 2014 and who were followed up for at least 3 years. Telephone survey and chart review, with a particular focus on pre- and postoperative radiographic parameters, were conducted. Additionally, patients were invited to undergo reexamination to update their clinical and radiological data. Results: Telephone surveys and clinical/imaging evaluation were conducted on the OLM and PLELD groups at a mean of 71.44 and 74.69 months, respectively. Out of 43 patients who underwent OLM, 34 responded to the telephone survey, 17 of whom then underwent reexamination. Among 41 patients who underwent PLELD, 32 responded to the telephone survey, 19 of whom then underwent reexamination. Based on telephone surveys and patient charts, reoperation at the same vertebral level was confirmed in 8 patients (23.5%) who underwent OLM and one patient (4.4%) who underwent PLELD, with a significantly higher rate of reoperation in the OLM group (P = .028). Vertebral disc height decreased more after OLM than after PLELD. Compared to PLELD, OLM was associated with significantly worse rates of iatrogenic endplate damage, endplate defect scores, and alterations in subchondral bone signal intensity. However, the final clinical outcomes did not differ between OLM and PLELD. Limitations: The limitations of this study include its relatively small sample size and the possibility of bias owing to nonrandomized patient selection. Conclusions: In patients with spondylolisthesis who have a herniated lumbar disc as mild slippage with instability, PLELD may be a good treatment option to reduce recurrence rates and mitigate disc degeneration. IRB approval number: 2016-12-WSH-011 Key words: Anterospondylolisthesis, disc degeneration, endplate, herniated lumbar disc, open lumbar discectomy, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy, posterolateral endoscopic lumbar discectomy, retrospondylolisthesis, slippage

Clinical, radiological and functional results of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative spondylolisthesis

PurposeTo evaluate the clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) in degenerative low-grade spondylolisthesis. Materials and MethodsA prospective observational study of 120 consecutive patients (M:F = 24:96) with spondylolisthesis operated with TLIF. Clinical and functional outcome was assessed on Visual analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index(ODI). The radiological outcome was assessed on sagittal alignment at a specific level, radiologic bony fusion/non-union, intervertebral disc heights and percentage of a slip in relation to the endplate. Clinical and radiological data were collected and analysed. ResultsThe mean age was 50.97 years. The average follow-up was 14.5 months (12 to 18 months). Mean preoperative ODI was 38.73 and postoperatively 21.30. Analysing the radiological fusion with clinical scores, poorer radiological fusion grades correlated with higher VAS scores for pain. 70% of patients achieved >50% reduction in pain and 60% achieved > 30% reduction in ODI. Pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS) and lumbar lordosis (LL) were significantly greater in spondylolisthesis. PI, PT, and SS did not change statistically from the baseline postoperatively but increased LL and Segmental LL (P < 0.001). The results of our study showed a close relation between satisfactory clinical outcome (90%) and solid fusion (80%). There was however a significant number of patients with instrument failure that was found in association with fusion failure. There were no intra-operative complications. ConclusionTLIF is an effective option to achieve circumferential fusion without severe complications. An increased pelvic incidence may be an important factor predisposing to progression in developmental spondylolisthesis. TLIF increases global and segmental LL and provides a satisfactory outcome in symptomatic low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Slip progression in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis following minimally invasive decompression surgery is not associated with increased functional disability.

The aim of this study is to determine whether there is a relationship between radiographic slip progression and symptomatic worsening after decompression without fusion for low-grade degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). A retrospective review of 1-2-level minimally invasive surgical decompression for grade I-II DLS was performed. Included subjects had a minimum of 1-year follow-up with prospectively collected baseline and follow-up Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Fifty-six patients (33 females, 58.9%), having a mean age 65.6years (SD 10.0), met inclusion criteria. Spondylolisthesis slip percentage increased in 55.4% (31/56) of patients. Slip percentage increased significantly (p = 0.002) from baseline (mean 17.2; SD 8.0) to follow-up (mean 20.1; SD 9.6). A logistic regression model identified that females were more likely to have progressive slips compared to males (odd ratio 6.09, 95% CI 1.77-21.01; p = 0.004). ODI scores and spondylolisthesis slip percentage did not correlate at baseline (r = 0.0170; p = 0.90) nor follow-up (r = 0.094; p = 0.49). There was no correlation between the change in ODI scores and change in slip percentage from baseline to final follow-up (r = 0.0474; p = 0.73). Of the 31 patients with slip progression, there was no difference in mean ODI score changes (p = 0.91) for those with 1-5% progression (13/31 [41.9%]; - 18.0 [SD 19.7]) compared to those with > 5% slip progression (18/31 [58.1%]; - 18.7 [SD 16.4]). Despite a small degree of slip progression in the majority of patients, there was no correlation with symptom worsening, as measured by the ODI. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Does the Number of Levels Fused Affect Spinopelvic Parameters and Clinical Outcomes Following Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion for Low-Grade Spondylolisthesis?

Study Design:Retrospective cohort.Objectives:To determine how the number of fused intervertebral levels affects radiographic parameters and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing open posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) for low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis.Methods:This was a retrospective cohort study on patients who underwent open PLF for low-grade spondylolisthesis at a single institution from 2011 to 2018. Patients were divided into groups based on number of levels fused during their procedure (1, 2, or 3 or more). Preoperative and postoperative spinopelvic radiographic parameters, patient-reported outcomes (Visual Analog Scale [VAS]-back, VAS-leg, Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]), and postoperative complications were compared.Results:Of the 316 patients eligible (203 one-level, 95 two-level, 18 three or more levels), change in initial postoperative to final pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis was greatest in 2-level fusions (P = .039), while 3 or more level fusions had worse final pelvic tilt measures (P = .021). In addition, multilevel fusions had worse final VAS-back scores (2-level: P = .015; 3 or more levels: P = .011), higher rates of dural tears (2-level: P = .001), reoperation (2-level: P = .039), and discharge to facility (3 or more levels: P = .047) when compared with 1-level fusions.Conclusions:Patients in multilevel fusions experienced less improvement in back pain, had more complications, and were more commonly discharged to a facility compared with single-level PLF patients. These findings are important for operative planning, for setting appropriate preoperative expectations, and for risk stratification in patients undergoing posterior lumbar fusion for low-grade spondylolisthesis.

Lumbar spinal fusion of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis (Meyerding grade I and II): Do reduction and correction of the radiological sagittal parameters correlate with better clinical outcome?

Lumbar and lumbosacral spinal fusion is an established procedure for the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis. However, the impact of reduction in the affected segment and of improvement in the radiological sagittal parameters on the clinical outcome remains unclear. Purpose of the study is to analyze the correlation between the radiological sagittal parameters and clinical outcome after lumbar spinal fusion in low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis. In a monocentric prospective, clinical study, patients with low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis of a single lumbar segment have been included. All patients received a lumbar spinal fusion according to the pathology of the treated segment. Patients attended clinical and radiological follow-up examination 1 and 2years postoperatively. Clinical outcome was assessed using the Core Outcome Measurement Index (COMI), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the EuroQol 5D. The sagittal spinopelvic radiological parameters, sagittal rotation and anterior displacement of the affected segment and lumbar lordosis were assessed. The correlation between the sagittal radiological parameters and clinical outcome was analyzed using Spearman-Rho bi-serial test. Sixty-two patients (35 female and 27 male) with an average age of 59.3years were included in the study. All patients completed the follow-up examinations. Significant improvement in COMI, ODI and EuroQol 5D scores was shown in all follow-up examinations. Significant reduction in the anterior displacement was measured postoperatively, which was preserved during the follow-up. However, no correlation could be demonstrated between reduction in anterior displacement and improvement in clinical outcome. Nonetheless, correlation between correction of sagittal rotation and clinical outcome was shown. Reduction in anterior displacement of the affected segment in the surgical treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis does not have an impact on the clinical outcome.