Low-grade Isthmic Spondylolisthesis Research Articles

Standalone Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Without Supplementary Posterior Fixation Is Effective for Treatment of Symptomatic Grade 1 Isthmic Spondylolisthesis.

There is a paucity of data examining anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) with pedicle-screw fixation (ALIF-PSF) or without (standalone, sa-ALIF) for the treatment of low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS). Treating pathology with sa-ALIF reduces costs, operative times, and posterior access morbidity. This study aimed to investigate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of sa-ALIF for the management of low-grade IS compared with an ALIF-PSF cohort. Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. Consecutive patients from 1 senior spine surgeon performing sa-ALIF or ALIF-PSF for management of low-grade IS. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected at baseline, then postoperatively at 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, and a final follow-up timepoint. Computed tomography was conducted at 6 months, 12 months, or until interbody fusion was confirmed. Two cohorts comprised 51 patients (sa-ALIF 22 and ALIF-PSF 29). Both cohorts' PROMs improved from baseline to 12 months postoperatively. There were no significant differences (P = 0.05) in PROMs between the 2 cohorts at 6 months postoperatively, 12 months postoperatively, or at a final follow-up timepoint. There were no significant differences in mean fusion rates 12 months postoperatively (sa-ALIF 82% and ALIF-PSF 88%). Compared with preoperative measurements in sa-ALIF and ALIF-PSF cohorts, listhesis and segmental lordosis showed no significant changes, while disc height significantly increased (P = 0.0001). There were no significant differences in disc L5/S1 radiographic measurements between the cohorts at 12 months. There were 12 complications (sa-ALIF 2 and ALIF-PSF 10). Only 1 patient in the ALIF-PSF cohort required revision surgery. In appropriately selected patients with normal bone density, sacral slope <40°, and a body mass index <35, sa-ALIF is a safe and effective treatment option for grade I IS. The additional morbidity and cost of PSF may not be justified given the satisfactory clinical and radiographic outcomes of sa-ALIF for grade I IS. Clinically, this research continues to suggest that sa-ALIF is a safe and effective method of treatment for low grade IS.

Can minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion achieve a better clinical and radiological outcome than traditional open technique in isthmic spondylolisthesis?

BackgroundSpondylolisthesis is a prevalent condition in the lumbar spine that can cause low back pain, leg pain, neurogenic claudication, and impact health-related quality of life in symptomatic individuals.Aimto assess the results of minimally invasive TLIF (MIS-TLIF) versus open-TLIF and the impact of correcting spino-pelvic parameters on the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) in patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. The primary objective was to compare the effectiveness of both methods in correcting spinopelvic parameters. The secondary objectives involved comparing clinical improvement, operating time, blood loss, complications, and postoperative hospital stays between the two procedures.Patients and methodsSeventy-two patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis were enrolled in this retrospective cohort-control study, with a minimum follow-up period of 18 months. Disability was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), while back and leg discomfort were rated using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for each patient. The measurements comprised the sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI), and Meyerding slip grades. We measured lumbar lordosis (LL), and segmental lordosis.ResultsThe seventy-two patients were 60 female and 12 males. There was no statistically significant difference in the duration of operation between the two groups. In the MIS group, there was a notable reduction in blood loss, higher radiation exposure, and a shorter hospital stay (P < 0.001). The back VAS showed more favorable outcomes in the MIS-TLIF, while the leg VAS showed better results in the Open-TLIF in the early outcome. Both procedures significantly reduced leg and back pain VAS scores and ODI, with no notable difference between the two groups at the final follow-up. Post-surgery, the pelvic incidence (PI) and lumbar lordosis (LL) matched properly in all patients, showing a rise in LL and sacral slope along with a decrease in pelvic tilt.ConclusionBoth open-TLIF and MIS-TLIF are effective methods for correcting spino-pelvic parameters and improving HRQoL in patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. The rapid improvement in back pain experienced by these patients favored the use of MIS-TLIF. However, the cost-effectiveness of this approach must be carefully evaluated.

P265. Is standalone ALIF a safe and effective treatment for low grade Isthmic spondylolisthesis?

P265. Is standalone ALIF a safe and effective treatment for low grade Isthmic spondylolisthesis?

Surgical Innovation: Comparative Efficacy of Navigation-Assisted Modified Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MIS-TLIF) and Traditional MIS-TLIF in Treating Low-Grade Isthmic Spondylolisthesis in the Elderly

To compare the efficacy of navigation-assisted modified MIS-TLIF (Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion) and MIS-TILF in the treatment of low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis in the elderly. We retrospectively included elderly patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis who underwent surgical treatment at our hospital from January 2019 to January 2022. Based on the surgical method chosen according to the patient's personal preference, the patients were divided into the modified MIS-TLIF group and the MIS-TLIF group. The modified MIS-TLIF group underwent navigation-assisted MIS-TLIF, while the MIS-TLIF group underwent conventional MIS-TLIF. A total of 54 patients (34 males and 20 females) were included in this study, with 26 cases in the modified MIS-TLIF group and 28 cases in the MIS-TLIF group. Relevant data for this study were collected by an independent observer. The demographic characteristics, including age, gender, BMI, comorbidities, surgical level, Meyerding grade, and duration of symptoms before admission, were recorded and compared between the two groups. Perioperative parameters, such as operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, bed rest time, and hospital stay, were also recorded and compared. The lumbar pain visual analog scale (BP-VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and lumbar JOA scores were recorded preoperatively and at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively to evaluate functional recovery in both groups. At 12 months postoperatively, patient satisfaction was assessed using the Macnab criteria (with satisfaction defined as the number of excellent and good outcomes divided by the total number in the group × 100%). The rate of vertebral slippage was recorded preoperatively, at 1 week postoperatively, and at 12 months postoperatively. The accuracy of screw placement was evaluated by CT scan at 1 week postoperatively, and interbody fusion was assessed by CT scan at 12 months postoperatively. Surgical complications were recorded, and their incidence was calculated. The intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, bed rest time and hospital stay in the modified MIS-TLIF group were less than those in the MIS-TLIF group (P< 0.05). The BP-VAS (Back Pain Visual Analogue Scale), ODI (Oswestry Disability Index), and JOA (Japanese Orthopaedic Association) modified MIS-TLIF groups improved significantly compared with the MIS-TLIF group at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months after surgery, and the differences between groups were statistically significant (P<0.05). The excellent and good rate of modified MIS-TLIF group was higher than that of MIS-TLIF group, and the difference had statistical significance (P<0.05). The accuracy of screw placement in the modified MIS-TLIF group was higher than that in the MIS-TLIF group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The fusion rate in the modified MIS-TLIF group was higher than that in the MIS-TLIF group at 12 months after surgery, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). No statistical difference in the incidence rate of complications between the two groups. Compared with MIS-TLIF, navigation-assisted modified MIS-TLIF has the advantages of less trauma, rapid recovery, accurate screw placement, high fusion rate, high surgical satisfaction and good safety.

Posterolateral Fusion Versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Adult Low-Grade Isthmic Spondylolisthesis: Analysis of Sagittal Radiographic Parameters - A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Randomized controlled trial. To compare the effect of posterolateral fusion (PLF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) on sagittal radiographic parameters in patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. Additionally, to explore the correlation between changes in these parameters and clinical outcomes. Forty-six consecutive patients with single-level low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis were initially enrolled. They were randomly assigned to undergo either PLF or PLIF. Patients were followed up for at least 24 months. Radiographic outcomes included pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, sacral slope, lumbar lordosis, sagittal vertical axis, T1 pelvic angle, slip angle, slip degree and disc height. Clinical outcomes were assessed by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS). Four participants were lost to follow-up. Of the remaining 42 patients, 29 were female. The mean age was 40.23 ± 10.25 years in the PLF group and 35.81 ± 10.58 years in the PLIF group. There was a statistically significant greater correction of all radiographic parameters in the PLIF group. The ODI and VAS improved significantly in both groups, with no significant differences between the two groups. Changes in the ODI and VAS were significantly correlated with changes in disc height, slip angle and lumbar lordosis. In patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis, PLIF demonstrates superior efficacy compared to PLF in correcting sagittal radiographic parameters. Nevertheless, this distinction does not seem to influence short-term clinical results. Restoring disc height, correcting the slip angle, and reestablishing normal lumbar lordosis are crucial steps in the surgical management of isthmic spondylolisthesis.

L4/5 Disc Herniation: Not Unusually Accompanied with L5/S1 Low-Grade Spondylolytic Spondylolisthesis.

Isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS) is distinguished by a congenital defect or acquired fracture of the pars interarticularis. Numerous studies on L5 low-grade IS have been carried out; however, there is a paucity of data regarding the condition of L5 IS concomitant with L4/5 disc herniation. This study aimed to identify the incidence rate and to illustrate the possible risk factors for L4/5 disc herniation in L5 low-grade IS patients. A total of 268 consecutive patients diagnosed as L5/S1 low-grade IS between May 2017 and May 2022 were retrospectively enrolled in this study. Depending on the presence of L4/5 disc herniation or not, patients were divided into an L4/5 disc herniation group (L4/5 DH) and an L4/5 non-disc herniation group (L4/5 non-DH). Radiographic parameters were measured, and the ratios of L4-S1 segmental lordosis (SL) to lumbar lordosis (LDI), L4 inferior endplate (IEP) to L5 superior endplate (SEP) (L4 IEP/L5 SEP), and L5 IEP to S1 SEP (L5 IEP/S1 SEP) were compared between groups. The Pfirrmann grade of the L4/5 disc and the L5/S1 disc, and Roussouly classifications of each patient were also recorded. Univariate analysis (including independent-samples t-test and χ2 -test) and multiple logistic regression analysis were performed to analyze the data. There were 40 patients (14.9%) in the L4/5 DH group. The Roussouly classification differed significantly between groups. As demonstrated by the Pfirrmann grade, the L4/5 DH group showed more advanced disc degeneration at L4/5 than the L4/5 non-DH group. In contrast to the L4/5 non-DH group, the L4/5 DH group had a significantly larger L4 IEP, L4 IEP/L5 SEP, S1 SEP, and LDI while smaller L4/5 disc angle, L4/5 disc height, slip percentage, lumbar lordosis, and sacral slope. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that higher L4/5 disc Pfirrmann grade (p = 0.004), decreased L4/5 disc height (p < 0.001), and lower L5 slip percentage (p = 0.022) were significantly associated with the occurrence of L4/5 DH. L4/5 disc herniation is not unusually accompanied by L5/S1 low-grade IS. Advanced L4/5 disc degeneration, decreased L4/5 disc height, and lower L5 slip percentage might be significantly associated with L4/5 disc herniation.

Standalone anterior lumbar interbody fusion without supplementary posterior fixation is sufficient for treatment of symptomatic low grade isthmic spondylolisthesis in appropriately selected patients

Standalone anterior lumbar interbody fusion without supplementary posterior fixation is sufficient for treatment of symptomatic low grade isthmic spondylolisthesis in appropriately selected patients

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with a tantalum cage: lumbar lordosis redistribution and sacral slope restoration with a modified posterior technique

BackgroundTransforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), a commonly used procedure in spine surgery, has the advantage of a lower incidence of nerve lesions compared to the posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) technique. The intersomatic arthrodesis has always been carried out with a single tantalum cage normally used for PLIF. Tantalum is a metal that is particularly used in orthopedic surgery. It has a modulus of elasticity similar to marrow and leads to high primary stability of the implant.Materials and methodsOur study was a retrospective monocentric observational study evaluating clinical and radiological outcomes of tantalum cages in a modified TLIF technique with posterior instrumentation and autologous and/or homologous posterolateral bone grafting. The aim of the study was to evaluate clinical outcomes and the increase in or redistribution of lumbar lordosis. The intersomatic arthrodesis was always carried out with a single tantalum cage normally used for PLIF to reduce the neurological risk. We retrospectively studied 105 patients who were treated with a modified unilateral TLIF approach by two surgeons between 2013 and 2018. We evaluated the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for back pain, global lumbar lordosis, lordosis of L4–sacrum, segmental lordosis of functional motion units that underwent arthrodesis, pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, and the sacral slope in 77 patients. All patients were suffering from grade III or IV Pfirrmann, instability, or foraminal post-laminectomy stenosis and/or grade I–II degenerative spondylolisthesis or low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. They had no significant sagittal imbalance, with a sagittal vertical axis (SVA) of < 5 mm. The average follow-up duration was 30 months.ResultsWe achieved excellent clinical results, with only four cases of failure (5.2%). Moreover, we noticed a statistically significant redistribution of lumbar lordosis, with an average percentage increase in L4–S1 lordosis equal to 19.9% (P < 0.001), an average increase in the L4–S1/Lumbar lordosis (LL) ratio from 0.53 to 0.63 (P < 0.001), and a mean percentage increase in sacral slope equal to 7.6% (P < 0.001).Conclusion Thanks to the properties of tantalum, our modified single-portal TLIF technique is a valid surgical solution to obtain a solid arthrodesis and restore the correct lumbar lordosis distribution while reducing neurological complications and the number of failures.Level of evidence: 4Trial registration statement: retrospective observational study, no trial registration.

Surgical management of isthmic spondylolisthesis: A comparative study of postoperative outcomes between ALIF and TLIF

IntroductionCircumferential fusion by the anterior (ALIF) or transforaminal (TLIF) approach combined with posterior instrumentation is currently used for the surgical treatment of low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. But few studies have compared the clinical and radiological outcomes of various interbody fusion techniques. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological results at 2 years postoperative of two fusion techniques–TLIF versus ALIF plus posterior instrumentation–for low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults. Materials and methodsThis was an observational multicenter study done at nine French healthcare facilities specialized in spine surgery. The inclusion criteria were minimum age of 18 years, grade 1–3 isthmic spondylolisthesis, ALIF+posterior fixation (ALIF+PS) or TLIF, minimum follow-up of 2 years. Clinical and radiological evaluations were done preoperatively and at 2 years of follow-up. A lumbar CT scan was done at 1 year postoperative to evaluate fusion. ResultsThe cohort consisted of 89 patients (50 women, 39 men) with a mean age of 47.7±12.3 (18–79) years. The patients in the ALIF groups (n=71) had a significantly longer hospital stay than those in the TLIF group (n=18): 5.7 days versus 4.6 days (p=.04). However, their medical leave from work was significantly shorter: 31.0 weeks versus 40.7 (p=.003). Lumbar pain VAS diminished faster in the ALIF groups, with a significantly larger drop than the TLIF group in the first 3 months postoperative. Only the increase in lumbar disc lordosis was larger in the ALIF group: 11.7°±12.0° versus 6.0°±11.7° (p=.036). There was a significant correlation between the increase in global lordosis and reduction in lumbar VAS at 2 years postoperative (ρ=−0.3295; p=.021). ConclusionALIF+PS provides a faster relief of postoperative low back pain than TLIF but there are no significant clinical differences between techniques at 2 years of follow-up. Despite better restoration of disc lordosis in the ALIF+PS group, there was no difference in the restoration of global lordosis. Level of evidenceIII; multicenter comparative study.

Fusion and clinical outcomes of lumbar interbody fusion for low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis

IntroductionLow-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis (ISPL) is generally treated by circumferential fusion with interbody graft, although there is no consensus on technique. HypothesisThe various interbody fusion strategies provide satisfactory fusion rates and clinical results. MethodsA multicenter retrospective study analyzed lumbar interbody fusion for low-grade ISPL performed between March 2016 and March 2019. Techniques comprised: circumferential fusion on a posterior or a transforaminal approach (PLIF, TLIF: n=57), combined anterior (ALIF)+posterolateral fusion (ALIF+PLF: n=60), and ALIF+percutaneous posterior fixation (ALIF+PPF: n=55). Function was assessed on a lumbar and a radicular visual analog scale (AVS-L, VAS-R), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Short Form 12 (SF12). ResultsAmong the 129 patients, 85.3% showed fusion (Lenke 1 or 2), with no significant differences between the ALIF-PLF or ALIF-PPF groups and the PLIF or TLIF groups (p=0.3). Likewise, there was no difference in fusion rates between the ALIF-PPF and ALIF-PLF subgroups (p=0.28). VAS-L (p<0.001) and VAS-R (p<0.0001), ODI (p<0.001) and SF12 physical (PCS) (p<0.01) and mental component sores (MCS) (p<0.001) all showed significant improvement at 12months. Combined approaches provided greater clinical efficacy than TLIF or PLIF for lumbar (p<0.0001) and radicular pain (p<0.05), ODI (p<0.0001) and SF12 PCS (p<0.01). At 12months, there was no clinical difference between the ALIF-PPF and ALIF-PLF subgroups. However, patents with interbody non-union (Lenke 3 or 4) had lower SF12 PCS scores (p<0.004) and VAS-L ratings (p<0.001) than Lenke 1-2 patients. ConclusionLow-grade ISPL treated by circumferential arthrodesis and interbody graft showed 85.3% consolidation at 2years, with equivalent outcomes between anterior and posterior techniques. Successful fusion was associated with better clinical results. Level of evidenceIV.

Is quality of life after surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis affected by the presence of a concomitant low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis non-surgically treated? A retrospective cohort study.

The HRQoL after surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is not affected by the presence of concomitant isthmic spondylolisthesis non-surgically treated. Improvement in QoL after surgery was similar for AIS patients with and without concomitant spondylolisthesis. The purpose is to compare preoperative and postoperative Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) scores in operated AIS patients with and without concomitant isthmic spondylolisthesis. A retrospective study of a prospective cohort of 464 individuals undergoing AIS surgery between 2008 and 2018 was performed. All patients undergoing surgery for AIS with a minimum 2-year follow-up were included. We excluded patients with prior or concomitant surgery for spondylolisthesis. HRQoL scores were measured using the SRS-22 questionnaire. Comparisons were performed between AIS patients with versus without concomitant spondylolisthesis treated non-surgically. AIS surgery was performed for 36 patients (15.2 ± 2.5 y.o) with concomitant isthmic spondylolisthesis, and 428 patients (15.5 ± 2.4 y.o) without concomitant spondylolisthesis. The two groups were similar in terms of age, sex, preoperative and postoperative Cobb angles. Preoperative and postoperative HRQoL scores were similar between the two groups. HRQoL improved significantly for all domains in both groups, except for pain in patients with spondylolisthesis. There was no need for surgical treatment of the spondylolisthesis and no slip progression during the follow-up duration after AIS surgery. Patients undergoing surgical treatment of AIS with non-surgical management of a concomitant isthmic grade I spondylolisthesis can expect improvement in HRQoL scores, similar to that observed in patients without concomitant spondylolisthesis.

Surgical Reduction and Direct Repair Using Pedicle Screw-Rod-Hook Fixation in Adult Patients with Low-Grade Isthmic Spondylolisthesis.

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. Methods Sixty-four adult patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis underwent reduction and direct repair using a pedicle screw-rod-hook system in our department from September 2009 to April 2018. The clinical efficacy was evaluated by clinical and radiological assessments. Results The average follow-up was 52.15 ± 9.96 months. The visual analog scale (VAS) scores (VAS-lumbar and VAS-leg) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at the final follow-up (FFU) were significantly lower than the preoperative levels (P < 0.05). The modified Prolo score was “excellent” for 60 patients (93.75%) and “good” for 4 patients (6.25%). The slip distance and slipping percentage showed significant decreases postoperatively and FFU compared to preoperatively (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the disc height, slip angle, and range of motion of the surgical intervertebral space or upper intervertebral space between preoperation and FFU (P < 0.05). Successful bony fusion had a 96.86% success rate. Conclusion Reduction of slip and direct repair using pedicle screw-rod-hook fixation combined with autogenous iliac bone grafting in adult patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis is a safe and effective technique.

Does minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) influence functional outcomes and spinopelvic parameters in isthmic spondylolisthesis?

PurposeWe assessed the efficacy of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis.MethodsWe included 24 symptomatic patients who underwent MIS-TLIF between December 2017 and December 2020. Patients were followed up clinically by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for back and VAS for leg pain, as well as radiological radiographs after 6 weeks, 6 months, and at final follow-up (at least 12 months). Measured parameters included C7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI), sacral slope (SS), Meyerding slip grades, lumbar lordosis (LL), L1–L4 angle, L4–S1 angle, and segmental lordosis (SL) of the affected segment. The mismatch between the PI and LL was also measured.ResultsVAS for back, VAS for leg pain, and ODI significantly improved postoperatively (all p < 0.001). We observed significantly decreased mean values of PT and slip percentage and increased mean values of SS and LL (all p < 0.05). We observed a significant reduction in L1–L4 lordosis and a significant increase in L4–S1 lordosis. The final PT, SS, and LL (total and L1–L4) were significantly higher in group III patients (n = 15) than the values of group II patients (n = 9). None of the patients became unbalanced postoperative, and all patients had a normal matching between the PI and the LL postoperatively.ConclusionsMIS-TLIF is a safe procedure for managing low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis with significant improvement in clinical and radiological outcomes. It can correct and maintain a proper spinopelvic alignment.

Safety and efficacy of stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion in low-grade L5-S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis

IntroductionSurgical management of isthmic spondylolisthesis is controversial and reports on anterior approaches in the literature are scarce. Research questionTo evaluate the safety and efficacy of stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) in patients with symptomatic low-grade L5-S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis. Material and methodsAll adult patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis of the lumbosacral junction treated in a single institution between 2008 and 2019 with stand-alone ALIF were screened. A titan cage was inserted at L5-S1 with vertebral anchoring screws. Prospectively collected surgical, clinical and radiographic data were analyzed retrospectively. Results34 patients (19 men, 15 women, mean age 52.5 ​± ​11.5 years) with a mean follow-up of 3.2 (±2.5) years were analyzed. 91.2% (n ​= ​31) of patients had a low-grade spondylolisthesis and 8.8% (n ​= ​3) grade III according to Meyerding classification. Mean COMI and ODI scores improved significantly from 6.9 (±1.5) and 35.5 (±13.0) to 2.0 (±2.5) and 10.2 (±13.0), respectively after one year, and to 1.7 (±2.5) and 8.2 (±9.6), respectively, after two years. The COMI and ODI scores improved in 86.4% and 80%, respectively, after one year and 92.9% of patients after two years by at least the minimal clinically important difference. No intraoperative complications were recorded. 8.8% (n ​= ​3) of patients needed a reoperation. Discussion and conclusionAfter stand-alone ALIF for symptomatic isthmic spondylolisthesis, the patients improved clinically important after one and two years. Stand-alone ALIF is a safe and effective surgical treatment option for low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis.

Decompression alone versus decompression and instrumented fusion for the treatment of isthmic spondylolisthesis: a randomized controlled trial.

The most advocated surgical technique to treat symptoms of isthmic spondylolisthesis is decompression with instrumented fusion. A less-invasive classical approach has also been reported, which consists of decompression only. In this study the authors compared the clinical outcomes of decompression only with those of decompression with instrumented fusion in patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis. Eighty-four patients with lumbar radiculopathy or neurogenic claudication secondary to low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis were randomly assigned to decompression only (n = 43) or decompression with instrumented fusion (n = 41). Primary outcome parameters were scores on the Roland Disability Questionnaire (RDQ), separate visual analog scales (VASs) for back pain and leg pain, and patient report of perceived recovery at 12-week and 2-year follow-ups. The proportion of reoperations was scored as a secondary outcome measure. Repeated measures ANOVA according to the intention-to-treat principle was performed. Decompression alone did not show superiority in terms of disability scores at 12-week follow-up (p = 0.32, 95% CI -4.02 to 1.34), nor in any other outcome measure. At 2-year follow-up, RDQ disability scores improved more in the fusion group (10.3, 95% CI 3.9-8.2, vs 6.0, 95% CI 8.2-12.4; p = 0.006, 95% CI -7.3 to -1.3). Likewise, back pain decreased more in the fusion group (difference: -18.3 mm, CI -32.1 to -4.4, p = 0.01) on a 100-mm VAS scale, and a higher proportion of patients perceived recovery as showing "good results" (44% vs 74%, p = 0.01). Cumulative probabilities for reoperation were 47% in the decompression and 13% in the fusion group (p < 0.001) at the 2-year follow-up. In patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis, decompression with instrumented fusion resulted in comparable short-term results, significantly better long-term outcomes, and fewer reoperations than decompression alone. Decompression with instrumented fusion is a superior surgical technique that should in general be offered as a first treatment option for isthmic spondylolisthesis, but not for degenerative spondylolisthesis, which has a different etiology.

Trans-isthmic pars interarticularis screw fixation under CT and fluoroscopic guidance: technical success and clinical outcome in patients with symptomatic low-grade lumbar isthmic lysis.

To assess the technical success of trans-isthmic screw fixation with simultaneous CT and fluoroscopic guidance in patients with symptomatic low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. Fifty patients (28 women and 22 men; mean age ± standard deviation: 50 years ± 18.9) presenting with symptomatic low back pain with isthmic spondylolisthesis refractory to medical management were treated by means of trans-isthmic pars interarticularis percutaneous screw fixation. The procedure was performed under local anesthesia with double CT and fluoroscopic guidance. Primary outcome was technical success of the procedure, which was assessed with a post-procedure CT using the same success criteria as surgical screw placement with regard to entry point, trajectory, and screw tip. Secondary outcome was pain decrease assessed by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Ninety-nine procedures were performed in 50 patients and 99 screws were inserted. Postoperative CT assessment showed satisfactory screw placement in 96 cases, reflecting a technical success rate of 96.9%. No complications occurred during or after the procedure. Pain assessment showed a pain decrease of VAS score from a median of 7 (min 5, max 10; MAD 1.4) to 2 (p < 0.0001) (min 0, max 7, MAD 1.7) with a mean follow-up of 39 months. Trans-isthmic screw fixation performed under CT and fluoroscopic guidance presents a high technical success and appears as a safe procedure and effective procedure in patients with symptomatic low-grade isthmic lysis. • Trans-isthmic pars interarticularis percutaneous screw insertion is feasible under double CT and fluoroscopic guidance by a radiologist with a high technical success. • This technique can be performed under local anesthesia only. • In patients with chronic low back pain, isthmic screwing allows long-term pain improvement.

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion for the treatment of low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults

Background Isthmic spondylolisthesis means slippage of one vertebra relative to the next caudal vertebra as a result of an abnormality in the pars interarticularis. Isthmic spondylolisthesis has three subtypes: subtype A in which there is stress fracture of the pars (spondylolysis), subtype B in which the pars is elongated, and subtype C in which there is acute fracture of the pars. Isthmic spondylolisthesis is the most common cause of low back pain in adolescents. Spinal fusion is the mainstay of the surgical treatment of low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. Spinal fusion can be achieved by posterolateral fusion (PLF) or circumferential fusion. The three basic techniques for circumferential fusion include anterior lumbar interbody fusion, posterior lumbar interbody fusion, and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). Patients and methods Fifty patients with low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis managed with spinal fusion at the Zagazig University Hospital. Patients were divided into two groups: group I included patients managed by TLIF and group II included patients managed by PLF. The mean age of patients was 34.6 years (range: 26–43 years) in group I and 36.8 years (range: 28–46) in group II. Sex distribution was nine males and 16 females in group I and seven males and 18 females in group II. Exclusion criteria included patients with high-grade spondylolisthesis, traumatic spondylolisthesis, degenerative spondylolisthesis, neoplastic spondylolisthesis, patients with acute or chronic infection, and congenital malformation. Results No patients were dropped in the follow-up. In both groups, the mean visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain and leg pain and the Oswestry disability index (ODI) showed statistically significant difference between the values obtained preoperatively and the values obtained at the 1-year follow-up visit. In comparison between both groups for the change in the VAS for back and leg pain and ODI score, group I gave a significant difference regarding the change in the VAS for back pain compared to group II. However, the change in the VAS for leg pain and ODI was not statistically significant. Conclusion Both TLIF and PLF are effective options for the treatment of low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults. However, TLIF gives better clinical outcome, so it is considered a better option.

Direct Pars Defect Tubular Decompression and TLIF for the Treatment of Low-Grade Adult Isthmic Spondylolisthesis: Surgical Challenges and Nuances of a Muscle-Sparing Minimally Invasive Approach.

We present an illustrative report on the use of a minimally invasive, muscle-sparing, direct pars defect decompression with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and instrumentation for the treatment of low-grade adult isthmic spondylolysis with spondylolisthesis and discuss the surgical challenges and nuances associated with the technique.

Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Comparison of Grade I Versus Grade II Isthmic Spondylolisthesis.

Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) is often used to treat low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS). No studies have compared surgical outcomes for grade I and II IS following MIS-TLIF. Therefore, the objective of the current study was to compare outcomes between patients with grade I and II IS following MIS-TLIF. A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent a primary 1-level MIS-TLIF for treatment of IS between 2007 and 2015. Grade I patients underwent a unilateral tubular approach with a single interbody cage and bilateral pedicle screw instrumentation. Grade II patients underwent a bilateral tubular approach with bilateral interbody cage and pedicle screw placement. Baseline patient demographics and characteristics were compared using Student t test and χ2 analysis. Differences in peri- and postoperative outcomes were assessed using Poisson regression with robust error variance or linear regression adjusted for perioperative variables. A total of 58 patients with IS underwent MIS-TLIF; 21 (36.2%) were grade I and 37 (63.8%) were grade II. The grade I cohort was younger (42.2 versus 50.6 years, P = .029); no other differences in preoperative variables were observed. No significant differences in operative time, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, postoperative visual analogue scale scores, or complication and revision rates were demonstrated between cohorts. Arthrodesis rate was lower in the grade I cohort, though not statistically significant. Despite the grade I cohort being younger with less-severe diagnoses, the grade II cohort experienced similar outcomes. This finding may be due to the grade II cohort receiving bilateral cages, potentially providing a better fusion environment. These results suggest that MIS-TLIF provides sufficient stabilization and fusion for treatment of grade II IS despite increased vertebral body displacement. In addition, MIS-TLIF with bilateral approach and interbody cage placement should be examined for treatment of high-grade IS cases.

What Is the Optimal Surgical Treatment for Low-Grade Isthmic Spondylolisthesis? ALIF or TLIF?

What Is the Optimal Surgical Treatment for Low-Grade Isthmic Spondylolisthesis? ALIF or TLIF?