Improvement In Oswestry Disability Index Research Articles

Systematic Review: Is Intradiscal Injection of Bone Marrow Concentrate for Lumbar Disc Degeneration Effective?

Current studies evaluating the outcomes of an intradiscal injection of bone marrow concentrate (BMC) for lumbar disc degeneration are limited. The purpose of this review was to determine if an intradiscal injection of BMC for lumbar disc degeneration results in a statistically significant improvement in clinical outcomes. A systematic review was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Levels I-IV investigations of intradiscal BMC injections in symptomatic lumbar disc degeneration were included in the analysis. Modified Coleman Methodology Scores (MCMS) were used to analyze study methodological quality. Only outcome measurements used by more than 50% of included studies, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months, were eligible for final data analysis. Pre-injection and post-injection visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were compared using two-sample Z-tests. Seven articles (97 subjects (47 males, 38 females, 12 unspecified), mean age 33.9 ± 14.3 years, mean follow-up 44.4 ± 25.4 months) were analyzed. Six articles were level IV evidence and one article was level II. Mean MCMS was 56.6 ± 9.1. All subjects received single injections into the nucleus pulposus of one or more affected discs. VAS (66.0 mm to 20.9 mm; p<0.001) and ODI (44.4 to 19.1; p<0.001) significantly improved following the intradiscal BMC injection. One patient (1.0%) experienced herniated nucleus pulposus (HNP) following treatment. No other complications or re-injections were reported. In conclusion, despite our skepticism regarding the efficacy of the procedure, intradiscal injection of BMC for lumbar disc degeneration resulted in statistically significant improvement in VAS and ODI with low re-injection and complication rates in the studies assessed. Given that this study is limited to level IV evidence, the findings suggest that further randomized controlled studies may be worthwhile to evaluate the true efficacy of this treatment.

Preoperative patient activation is predictive of improvements in patient-reported outcomes following minimally invasive lumbar decompression.

To determine whether there is an association between preoperative 10-Item Patient Activation Measure (PAM-10) scores and clinical outcomes following MIS LD. Patients undergoing a primary MIS LD were retrospectively reviewed and stratified according to their preoperative PAM-10 scores: "low PAM," "moderate PAM," and "high PAM." Preoperative PAM score cohorts were tested for improvements in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 12-Item Short-Form Physical Component Score (SF-12 PCS), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) back and leg pain using multivariate linear regression. Eighty-nine patients were included: 29 had a low PAM score, 32 had a moderate PAM score, and 28 had a high PAM score. Cohorts experienced similar preoperative VAS back pain, VAS leg pain, ODI, and SF-12 PCS. Patients with low PAM scores experienced a trend of higher pain scores throughout 6 months with VAS back pain being significant at 3 months and VAS leg pain being significant at 6-week and 3-month follow-up. Patients with lower PAM scores experienced a worse improvement in ODI at 6-week, 3-month, and 6-month timepoints. Lastly, patients with lower PAM scores demonstrated less improvement in SF-12 PCS at 3-month and 6-month follow-up. Lower preoperative PAM scores were associated with worse improvement in clinical outcomes following MIS LD. Patients with lower PAM scores had diminished improvement in long-term patient-reported outcomes including ODI, SF-12, and VAS back and leg pain. Our investigation suggests that preoperative PAM assessments may be an effective tool to predict postoperative outcomes following MIS LD.

The Association of Preoperative Opioid Usage With Patient-Reported Outcomes, Adverse Events, and Return to Work After Lumbar Fusion: Analysis From the Michigan Spine Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MSSIC).

It is important to delineate the relationship between opioid use and spine surgery outcomes. To determine the association between preoperative opioid usage and postoperative adverse events, patient satisfaction, return to work, and improvement in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) in patients undergoing lumbar fusion procedures by using 2-yr data from a prospective spine registry. Preoperative opioid chronicity from 8693 lumbar fusion patients was defined as opioid-naïve (no usage), new users (<6 wk), short-term users (6 wk-3 mo), intermediate-term users (3-6 mo), and chronic users (>6 mo). Multivariate generalized estimating equation models were constructed. All comparisons were to opioid-naïve patients. Chronic opioid users showed less satisfaction with their procedure at 90 d (Relative Risk (RR) 0.95, P=.001), 1 yr (RR 0.89, P=.001), and 2 yr (RR 0.89, P=.005). New opioid users were more likely to show improvement in ODI at 90 d (RR 1.25, P<.001), 1 yr (RR 1.17, P<.001), and 2 yr (RR 1.19, P=.002). Short-term opioid users were more likely to show ODI improvement at 90 d (RR 1.25, P<.001). Chronic opioid users were less likely to show ODI improvement at 90 d (RR 0.90, P=.004), 1 yr (RR 0.85, P<.001), and 2 yr (RR 0.80, P=.003). Chronic opioid users were less likely to return to work at 90 d (RR 0.80, P<.001). In lumbar fusion patients and when compared to opioid-naïve patients, new opioid users were more likely and chronic opioid users less likely to have improved ODI scores 2 yr after surgery. Chronic opioid users are less likely to be satisfied with their procedure 2 yr after surgery and less likely to return to work at 90 d. Preoperative opioid counseling is advised.

Clinical and Radiographic Comparison Between Open Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Bilateral Facetectomies.

Study Design:Age- and sex-matched cohort study.Objectives:To compare outcomes after open versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) with bilateral facetectomies.Methods:We retrospectively compared patients who underwent single- or 2-level MIS-TLIF with an age- and sex-matched open-TLIF cohort. Surgical data was collected for operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), and drain use. Clinical outcomes included the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), length of stay (LOS), complications, and reoperations. Lumbar radiographs were measured for changes in global lumbar lordosis (LL) and segmental lordosis (SL).Results:Between 2016 and 2020, 38 MIS-TLIF patients were compared with 38 open-TLIF patients. No subfascial drain was used in the MIS-TLIF group (P < .001). The MIS-TLIF group had longer operative time (310.8 vs 276.5 minutes; P = .046) but less EBL (282.4 vs 420.8 mL; P = .007). LOS (P = .15), complication rates (P = .50), and revision rates (P = .17) were equivalent. VAS and ODI improved but did not differ between groups. In the open-TLIF group, LL and SL were restored or improved in 81.6% and 86.9% of cases, respectively. In the MIS-TLIF group, LL and SL were restored or improved in 86.8% and 97.4% of cases, respectively. There were no differences in changes in LL and SL between groups.Conclusions:Compared with the age- and sex-matched open-TLIF cohort, patients undergoing MIS-TLIF had reduced EBL and subfascial drain use but increased operative time. There were no differences in complications, reoperations, or LOS. Both groups demonstrated improvement in VAS and ODI. MIS-TLIF with bilateral facetectomies provided equivalent improvements in global and segmental LL.

Comparative Effectiveness of Laterally Placed Expandable versus Static Interbody Spacers: A 1-Year Follow-Up Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes Study.

Study DesignRetrospective chart review.PurposeThis study compared the clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients treated with expandable and static interbody spacers following minimally invasive lateral lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-LLIF) with 12-month follow-up.Overview of LiteratureA common surgical option for the treatment of degenerative disk disease (DDD) is MIS-LLIF using static or expandable spacers to restore disk height (DH), neuroforaminal height (NH), and segmental lordosis. Static spacers may require excessive trialing and aggressive impaction, potentially leading to endplate disruption and subsidence. Expandable spacers allow for in situ expansion to help address complications associated with static spacers.MethodsThis is an Institutional Review Board-exempt review of 69 patients (static, n=32; expandable, n=37) diagnosed with DDD who underwent MIS-LLIF at 1–2 contiguous level(s) using static or expandable spacers. Radiographic and clinical outcomes were collected and compared at pre- and postoperative time points up to 12 months.ResultsThe expandable group had a significantly higher mean change in Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months vs. static (∆VAS at 12 months: expandable, 6.7±1.3; static, 5.1±2.6). Mean improvement of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores at 3, 6, and 12 months were significantly better for the expandable group vs. static (∆ODI at 12 months: expandable, 63.2±13.2; static, 29.8±23.4). Mean DH and NH significantly increased at final follow-up for both groups, with no significant difference in DH improvement between groups. The expandable mean NH improvement at 6 weeks and 6 months was significantly greater vs. static. Segmental lordosis significantly improved in the expandable group at all time intervals vs static. Subsidence rate at 12 months was significantly lower in the expandable group (1/46, 2.2%) vs. static (12/37, 32.4%).ConclusionsExpandable spacers resulted in a significantly lower subsidence rate, improve segmental lordosis, and VAS and ODI outcomes at 12 months vs. static.

Effectiveness of a short functional restoration program for patients with chronic low back pain: A cohort study of 193 patients.

Functional restoration programs (FRPs) are integrative programs to improve function in chronic low back pain (cLBP). They are costly and time-consuming. The aim was to assess the effectiveness of a condensed FRP (CFRP) for patients with cLBP in professional activity. Longitudinal 3 months study of patients with cLBP in one tertiary care hospital, participating in a CFRP over 4 separate days. The primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Secondary outcomes included pain, quality of life (EQ5D), patient acceptable symptom state, presenteeism, absenteeism and psychological distress. Outcomes were compared using paired sample Student's t-test or Chi2 between baseline and last follow-up. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with better response (improvement of ODI higher than 12.8). In all, 193 patients were analysed, mean age 44.6 (standard deviation (SD) 10.4) years, mean cLBP duration 9.0 (SD 8.8) years. A small improvement was observed for ODI (mean difference -5.9, 95% confidence interval: -7.6, -4.1), as well as most other outcomes. Multivariate analysis showed an association between ODI improvement and higher duration of low back pain (odds ratio for 5 years: 1.41 (1.06,1.88)) and lower baseline back strength (Sorensen, odds ratio for 1min: 0.54 [0.29,0.99]). This CFRP showed small effect to improve function, pain and other quality of life, in cLBP. Four-day programs may be an interesting option in cLBP patients still in professional activity for whom a long 1-month FRP is difficultly manageable. Further studies with randomized controlled designs are needed to confirm the benefits.

Risk Factors of Cage Subsidence in Patients Received Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

A retrospective cohort study. To determine the risk factors of cage subsidence in patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) and its correlation with patient-reported outcomes. Cage subsidence is among the cage-related complications after TLIF and may lead to poor outcomes. Few studies have addressed the incidence of cage subsidence in MI-TLIF. This retrospective study of a prospectively collected database was conducted from October 2015 to October 2017. All patients received MI-TLIF with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. All levels were separated into the cage subsidence (CS group) and no cage subsidence (non-CS group) groups. Cage subsidence was evaluated using lateral radiographs and defined as more than 2 mm migration of the cage into the endplate of adjacent vertebral body. Patient demographics, perioperative details, and radiographic parameters were recorded. Cage-related parameters were cage height, cage insertion level, and cage position. Cage position was recorded using central point ration (CPR). Patient-reported outcome was analyzed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) questionnaire and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively. Ninety-three patients (126 levels) were included. Mean age was 66.5 years with an average follow-up of 36.9 months. Overall incidence of cage subsidence was 34.1%. The CS group had significantly higher body mass index, less bone mineral density (BMD), shorter disc height, and higher CPR than the non-CS group. BMD, disc height, and CPR were significantly negatively correlated with depth of cage subsidence. ODI improvement was significantly lesser in the CS group than in the non-CS group. Fusion rate and complications were unrelated to cage subsidence. The BMD, disc height, and cage position were the most significant risk factors that were negatively correlated with depth of cage subsidence. Placing a TLIF cage anteriorly if possible may reduce the risk of cage subsidence. 3.

How Does Smoking Influence Patient-reported Outcomes in Patients After Lumbar Fusion?

A retrospective cohort study. The goal of this study was to determine the effect of smoking on patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) after lumbar fusion surgery. Although smoking is known to decrease fusion rates after lumbar fusion, there is less evidence regarding the influence of smoking on PROMs after surgery. Patients undergoing between 1 and 3 levels of lumbar fusion were divided into 3 groups on the basis of preoperative smoking status: never smokers (NS); current smokers (CS); and former smokers (FS). PROMs collected for analysis include the Physical Component Score (PCS-12), Mental Component Score (MCS-12), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Visual Analogue Scale back (VAS back) and leg (VAS leg) pain scores. Preoperative and postoperative PROMs were compared between groups. A multiple linear regression analysis was performed to determine whether preoperative smoking status was a predictor of change in PROM scores. A total of 220 (60.1%) NS, 52 (14.2%) CS, and 94 (25.7%) FS patients were included. Patients in most groups improved within each of the PROMs analyzed (P<0.05). VAS leg pain (P=0.001) was found to significantly differ between groups, with NS and FS having less disability than CS (3.6 vs. 2.0, P=0.010; and 3.6 vs. 2.4, P=0.022; respectively). Being a CS significantly predicted less improvement in ODI (P=0.035), VAS back (P=0.034), and VAS leg (P<0.001) compared with NS. In addition, NS had a significantly lower 30-day readmission rate than CS or FS (3.2% vs. 5.8% and 10.6%, respectively, P=0.029). CS exhibited worse postoperative VAS leg pain and a lower recovery ratio than never smokers. In addition, being in the CS group was a significant predictor of decreased improvement in ODI, VAS back, and VAS leg scores. Level III.

Patient Reported Outcomes in Patients Who Stop Following Up: Are They Doing Better or Worse Than the Patients That Come Back?

Follow-up study. To determine whether minimally invasive lumbar spine surgery outcomes are different between those who are lost to follow-up and those who are not. Lost to follow-up patients are a common source of selection bias for clinical outcomes research. Currently, there are no US based studies that evaluate the differences in outcomes of lost to follow-up patients after spine surgeries. A retrospective review of prospectively collected data of 289 patients who underwent minimally invasive lumbar surgery and were at least 1 year postsurgery was performed. Patients were divided into two groups: (1) lost to follow-up (LTF), defined as patients who had missed more than two consecutive follow-up visits and had not attended their 1-year follow-up appointment; and (2) not lost to follow-up. For the not-LTF cohort, patient response outcome measures (PROMs) (oswestry disability index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) back/leg, Short Form-12 (SF-12) Physical/Mental, PROMIS) and return to activities data were collected prospectively at each follow-up. For LTF patients, data were collected through emailed surveys or telephone interviews. PROMs and return to activities data of the two groups were compared. Sub-group analysis by type of surgery (decompression or fusion) was also performed. For the entire cohort, independent t test analysis showed LTF patients had greater improvement in PROMIS Physical Function scores than those who were not-LTF (15.08 vs. 10.38, P = 0.026). For fusion surgeries, LTF patients showed a greater improvement in ODI (-30.94 vs. -16.23, P = 0.003) VAS back (-4.92 vs. -2.99, P = 0.044), and PROMIS-PF (16.09 vs. 10.38, P = 0.049). There were no significant differences in complication rates between LTF and not LTF patients. Patients undergoing minimally invasive lumbar surgery-in particular lumbar fusions-who are lost to follow-up and responded to subsequent email and phone interviews showed greater improvements in self-reported outcomes than those who continued to follow-up. Thus, our results suggest that a substantial subset of patients who are lost to follow-up do not fare worse than those who do follow-up. However, an opposite response cannot be excluded in those who did not respond to email and phone interviews. 3.

Comparative Effectiveness of Adjustable Lordotic Expandable versus Static Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Devices: One Year Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes

Aims:This study aims to understand the clinical and radiographic outcomes between patients treated with static and expandable interbody spacers with adjustable lordosis for minimally invasive (MIS) lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF).Background:The use of large interbody spacers in MIS LLIF offers favorable clinical and radiographic results. Static interbody spacers may cause iatrogenic endplate damage and implant subsidence due to forceful impaction and excessive trialing. Expandable interbody spacers with adjustable lordosis offerin situexpansion that may optimize endplate contact and maximize and maintain sagittal alignment correction until fusion occurs.Objective:The objective of this study is to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes between patients treated with static and expandable interbody spacers with adjustable lordosis for MIS LLIF.Methods:This is a multi-surgeon, retrospective, Institutional Review Board-exempt chart review of consecutive patients who underwent MIS LLIF at 1-2 contiguous level(s) using either a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) static (32 patients) or a titanium expandable spacer with adjustable lordosis (57 patients). The mean differences of radiographic and clinical functional outcomes were collected and compared from preoperative up to 12-month postoperative follow-up. Statistical results were significant if P&lt;0.05.Results:The mean improvement of VAS back pain scores from preoperative to 6 and 12 months was significantly higher in the expandable group compared to the static group (P&lt;0.05). Mean improvement of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores from preoperative to 3, 6, and 12 months were significantly higher in the expandable group compared to the static group (P&lt;0.001). The expandable group had a significantly greater mean improvement in segmental lordosis from preoperative to 6 weeks, 3, 6, and 12 months (P&lt;0.001). For disc height, the mean improvement from preoperative to 6 weeks and 3 months was more significant in the expandable group compared to the static group (P&lt;0.05). In the expandable group, the mean improvement from preoperative to 6 weeks, 3, and 6 months was significantly greater compared to the static group for neuroforaminal height (P&lt;0.001). Subsidence was 0% in the expandable group and 32.4% (12/37) in the static group.Conclusion:This study showed significant positive clinical and radiographic outcomes for patients who underwent MIS LLIF using titanium expandable interbody spacers with adjustable lordosis based on significant changes in VAS back pain scores, ODI scores, and radiographic parameters at 12-month follow-up. There was a 0% subsidence rate in the expandable group, compared to a 32% subsidence rate in the static group.

Resultados a 10 años de la artrodesis lumbar circunferencial medidos por la escala de Oswestry.

Circumferential arthrodesis is postulated as the surgical treatment of choice in some de-generative and disc diseases of the lumbar spine, both in primary surgery and especially in revision surgery. Objective: To measure pain and functionality using the ODI scale, in patients with low back and / or radicular pain who have had a comprehensive transforaminal surgical ap-proach together with anterior and posterior arthrodesis (TLIF). Material and methods: In our series, we performed TLIF(transforaminal interbody fusión lumbar) on 38 patients during 2-000-2.003 years and evaluated the long-term results, ten years, using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Results: They show improvement in ODI by comparing the baseline figures, prior to the intervention, with the 10-year follow-up (34.21 +/- 9.31 to 11.82 +/- 7.62 points, p = 0.000) . This improvement is also observed in each of the ODI sections in a significant way: pain intensity, personal care, ability to get up, walk, sit, stand, sleep, sex life, social life and travel (p = 0.000, in all of them).Conclusion: In our case series, in patients with low back and / or radicular pain, the use of the TLIF technique may have contributed to a significant improvement in the test score by improving pain, sleep, functionality and social aspects, maintained at least up to 10 years of follow-up.

Analysis of Lumbar Sagittal Curvature in Spinal Decompression and Fusion for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Patients under Roussouly Classification.

To evaluate the clinical significance of spinal decompression and fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis in old patients under Roussouly classification, 160 old patients (>60 year old) with lumbar spinal stenosis underwent spinal decompression, and fusion were retrospectively studied. According to Roussouly classification, patients were divided into 4 groups, in which Roussouly types I, II, and IV were the nonstandard group and Roussouly type III was the standard group. Visual analog scale (waist, leg) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores were recorded before operation and at the final follow-up. All patients improved the sagittal curvature: for patients in Roussouly types I and II, there were statistically significant differences in terms of postoperative global lordosis (GL), global kyphosis (GK), sacral slope (SS), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), and pelvic tilt (PT) compared with that before surgery (all P < 0.001); patients in Roussouly type IV obtained similar results with type III after surgery. The four groups showed significant improvement in ODI and VAS scores at final follow-up (all P < 0.001). After regrouping at the final follow-up, the proportion of the standard type (Roussouly type III) patients was increased compared with preoperative. In conclusion, Roussouly classification has important guiding significance in spinal decompression and fusion for old patients (>60 years) with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Correlation Between the Oswestry Disability Index and the North American Spine Surgery Patient Satisfaction Index

The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is a widely used patient-reported outcome instrument in lumbar spine surgery, but its relationship to the increasingly scrutinized but still heterogeneous patient satisfaction metrics has not been well described. One popular metric is the North American Spine Society (NASS) patient satisfaction index. This study aimed to determine whether change in ODI predicts patient satisfaction. Adult patients at a neurosurgery spine clinic completed the ODI and NASS questionnaires at various times in their care between September 2014 and November 2018. Scores were retrospectively analyzed using ordinal logistic regression. One thousand thirty-seven patients were identified (mean age 59.3 ± 14.7 years, 54.2% male). At 3, 12, and 24 months postoperatively, 684 (84.5%), 400 (83.3%), and 215 (80.9%) patients, respectively, expressed satisfaction (NASS score 1 or 2). Mean ± standard deviation improvements in ODI at 3, 12, and 24 months postoperatively were 16.8 ± 17.5 (n=675), 18.4 ± 17.5 (n= 396), and 19.7 ± 17.7 (n= 213). For every unit improvement in ODI, the odds of selecting the next most satisfied NASS score at 3, 12, and 24 months postoperatively increased by 6.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.6%-8.1%), 5.8% (95% CI 4.4%-7.1%), and 6.0% (95% CI 4.2%-7.9%), respectively. Every 10-unit improvement increased the odds, respectively, by 93.8% (95% CI 73.2%-117.0%), 75.0% (95% CI 53.8%-99.1%), and 79.4% (95% CI 50.3%-114.1%). Improvements in ODI are predictive of increased patient satisfaction as defined by the NASS index. A 10-point improvement in ODI nearly doubled the odds of increased satisfaction 3 months postoperatively.

Low-grade spondylolisthesis: is transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion superior to posterolateral fusion

&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background:&lt;/strong&gt; Spondylolisthesis is anterior translation of the cephalad vertebra relative to the adjacent caudal segment. Both posterolateral fusion (PLF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and have shown high fusion rates with good clinical outcomes. But it is not clear which treatment leads to better outcomes, as limited studies have been done to compare PLF and TLIF in low grade spondylolisthesis. Our objective is to determine whether PLF or TLIF was associated with better clinical and radiological outcomes in patients with low grade spondylolisthesis.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods:&lt;/strong&gt; Fourty patients were enrolled and assigned into PLF (n=20) or TLIF (n=20) group. The outcome measures were: clinical outcomes as assessed with a visual analogue scale and the modified Oswestry disability index, the fusion rate based on radiographs.&lt;strong&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results:&lt;/strong&gt; The improvement of visual analog score (VAS) of low back pain was greater in TLIF than in PLF (89.6% versus 88.7%, p=0.79). The improvement of VAS of leg pain was greater in TLIF than in PLF (96.5% versus 94.8%; p=0.27). The improvement of Oswestry disability index (ODI) was greater in TLIF than in PLF (71.7% vs 69.8%, p=0.32). The fusion rate was 85% in TLIF and 75% in PLF (p=0.43). Overall outcome was excellent in 80% in TLIF compared to 65% in PLF (p=0.29).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions:&lt;/strong&gt; Fusion rates are higher in TLIF and average functional outcomes (VAS and ODI) were better in TLIF compared to PLF. Larger and longer studies may provide a significant outcome. Based on our results and literature review, we conclude that TLIF is superior to PLF.&lt;/p&gt;

A comparative study of clinical and radiological outcome between cages and morselized bone graft in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery: a hospital-based study

&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background:&lt;/strong&gt; Degenerative spinal diseases resulting in neuropathic backache are managed by nerve root decompression with instrumented interbody fusion is the treatment of choice for these groups of patients when not managed conservatively.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods:&lt;/strong&gt; Hospital based, comparative, retrospective study was carried out in such patients who underwent transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with either cage with bone graft or stand-alone autologous morselized bone graft. The clinical and radiological outcomes were compared in these two methods of interbody fusion to assess any significant difference between them. A total of 20 patients with lumbar canal stenosis and degenerative grade 1/2 spondylolisthesis who failed conservative management were operated by TLIF approach and were evaluated for post-operative improvement in Oswestry disability index (ODI) and interbody fusion on imaging at 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. Vertebral level of surgical intervention, intra-operative blood loss and duration of surgery were recorded for each patient along with complications, if any.&lt;strong&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results:&lt;/strong&gt; In our study there was no significant difference in the clinical and radiological outcome between the two methods of interbody fusion. Although the group which was offered morselized bone graft with cage showed slightly better clinical outcome at 6 months of follow up, both showed no significant difference in ODI at 1 year of follow up.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions:&lt;/strong&gt; With this study, we can conclude that both the methods have similar clinical and radiological outcome with similar patient satisfaction and can be interchangeably employed for interbody fusion according to surgeon’s and patient’s preferences.&lt;/p&gt;

Minimally versus conventional-invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in patients with failed back surgery syndrome.

Failed back surgery syndrome is an important cause of back and leg pain after spinal surgery. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) is commonly used in revision surgery for failed back surgery syndrome. In the literature, there is a lack of evidence concerning the minimally and conventional-invasive TLIF and debates are ongoing. The purpose of the present study was to compare efficacy and safety of minimally versus conventional-invasive TLIF for failed back surgery syndrome. This study was conducted according to the STROBE Statement. Between 2011 and 2014, thirty patients with failed back surgery syndrome underwent TLIF. Group I (15 patients) received minimally invasive TLIF through paramedian approach using microscopy and fluoroscopy. Group II (15 patients) received conventional-invasive TLIF. Minimum follow-up was 12months. There was a significant improvement of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) in both groups postoperatively. There was no statistically significant difference between both groups regarding ODI, VAS, leg and back pain pre- and postoperatively. There was a tendency to better postoperative ODI and VAS scores in group I; however this did not reach the statistical significance. One case showed adjacent segment degeneration in group I. In group II, one case had screw mal-positioning with foot drop. Another case had dural injury with postoperative fistula. TLIF is a valuable option after failed back surgery syndrome providing statistically significant improvement postoperatively. Both minimally and conventional-invasive TLIF represent a safe and reliable treatment of patients with failed back syndrome, achieving satisfactory outcome along with low rate of complications. Although the minimally invasive TLIF scored better, these differences did not reach the threshold of significance.

Intermediate-term clinical and radiographic outcomes with less invasive adult spinal deformity surgery: patients with a minimum follow-up of 4 years

Little information exists regarding longer-term outcomes with minimally invasive spine surgery (MISS), particularly regarding long-segment and deformity procedures. We aimed to evaluate intermediate-term outcomes of MISS for adult spinal deformity (ASD). This retrospective review of a prospectively collected multicenter database examined outcomes at 4 or more years following circumferential MIS (cMIS) or hybrid (HYB) surgery for ASD. A total of 53 patients at 8 academic centers satisfied the following inclusion criteria: age >18years and coronal Cobb > 20°, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) > 10°, or sagittal vertical axis (SVA) > 5cm. Radiographic outcomes demonstrated improvements of PI-LL from 16.8° preoperatively to 10.8° and coronal Cobb angle from 38° preoperatively to 18.2° at 4years. The incidence of complications over the follow-up period was 56.6%. A total of 21 (39.6%) patients underwent reoperation in the thoracolumbar spine, most commonly for adjacent level disease or proximal junctional kyphosis, which occurred in 11 (20.8%) patients. Mean Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at baseline and years 1 through 4 were 49.9, 33.1, 30.2, 32.7, and 35.0, respectively. The percentage of patients meeting minimal clinically important difference (MCID) (defined as 12% or more from baseline) decreased over time, with leg pain reduction more durable than back pain reduction. Intermediate-term clinical and radiographic improvement following MISS for ASD is sustained, but extent of improvement lessens over time. Outcome variability exists within a subset of patients not meeting MCID, which increases over time after year two. Loss of improvement over time was more notable in back than leg pain. However, average ODI improvement meets MCID at 4years after MIS ASD surgery.

Clinical Efficacy of Laminectomy with Instrumented Fixation in Treating Thoracolumbar Intradural Extramedullary Schwannomas: A Comparative Study.

BackgroundThis study investigated the clinical effect of laminectomy plus pedicle screw fixation in treating thoracolumbar intradural extramedullary schwannomas.Material/MethodsBetween October 2011 and May 2017, 57 patients undergoing resection of thoracolumbar schwannomas were retrospectively identified and included in the study. Based on the surgical procedures used, all participants were assigned to either the laminectomy-only group (n=33) or the combination group (laminectomy plus pedicle screw fixation, n=24). All participants were followed up for over 2 years. In the laminectomy, the spinal process, vertebral laminae, and bilateral upper articular processes of the surgical segments were completely resected and the lower articular processes were reserved. For further analysis, we evaluated the pain levels using visual analogue scale (VAS) score. The assessment of neurological function was performed with Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score and Oswestry disability index (ODI). The comparisons of Cobb angle changes were carried out pre-surgery and post-surgery.ResultsThe demographic data were well matched between the laminectomy-only group and combination group, without significant differences (P>0.05). After surgery, both surgical procedures achieved significant improvement in VAS score, ODI, and JOA score (P<0.001), but no significant differences were found between these 2 surgical procedures (P>0.05). The postoperative change in Cobb angle indicated a significant difference in the laminectomy-only group, but not in the combination group (P<0.05). In addition, postoperative spinal instability/deformity was found in the laminectomy-only group (P<0.05).ConclusionsIn conclusion, the combination of laminectomy and pedicle screw fixation is a safe and effective surgical procedure when used to treat thoracolumbar schwannoma, and appears to be superior to the laminectomy-only procedure.

Clinical Outcome of Spine Surgery Complicated by Accidental Dural Tears: Meta-Analysis of the Literature.

Study Design:Systemic review and meta-analysis.Objectives:Several studies have reported the impact of accidental dural tears (DT) on the outcome of spinal surgery, some with conflicting results. Therefore, the aim of this study was to carry out a systemic review and meta-analysis of the literature to establish the overall clinical outcome of spinal surgery following accidental DT.Method:A systemic literature search was carried out. Postoperative improvement in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short-Form 36 survey (SF36), leg pain visual analogue scale (VAS), and back pain VAS were compared between patients with and without DT at different time intervals.Results:Eleven studies were included in this meta-analysis. There was a slightly better improvement in ODI and leg VAS score (standardized mean difference of −0.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.12 to −0.01, and −0.06, 95% CI −0.09 to −0.02, respectively) in patients without DT at 12 months postsurgery, but this effect was not demonstrated at any other time intervals up to 4 years. There were no differences in the overall SF36 (function) score at any time interval or back pain VAS at 12 months.Conclusion:Based on this study, accidental DT did not have an overall significant adverse impact on the short-term clinical outcome of spinal surgery. More studies are needed to address the long-term impact and other outcome measures including other immediate complications of DT.

Association Between Opioid Use and Patient-Reported Outcomes in a Randomized Trial Evaluating Basivertebral Nerve Ablation for the Relief of Chronic Low Back Pain

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a primary indication for opioid therapy. To evaluate the hypothesis that CLBP patients reporting reduced opioid use have superior functional outcomes following basivertebral nerve (BVN) radiofrequency ablation. This post hoc analysis from a sham-controlled trial examined short-acting opioid use from baseline through 1 yr. Opioid use was stratified into 3 groups by two blinded external reviewers. Two-sample t-tests were used to compare Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) measurements between those patients who increased or decreased their opioid usage compared to baseline. Actively treated patients with decreased opioid use at 12 mo had a mean ODI improvement of 24.9±16.0 (n=27) compared to 7.3±9.8 (n=18) for patients reporting increased opioid use (P<.001). In the sham arm, the improvements in ODI were 17.4±16.1 (n=19) and 1.2±14.3 (n=5; P=.053) for the patients reporting decreased vs increased opioid usage, respectively. Actively treated patients reporting decreased opioid use had a mean improvement in VAS of 3.3±2.5 (n=27) compared to 0.6±1.8 (n=18) for patients reporting increased opioid use (P<.001). In the sham arm, the improvements in VAS were 2.5±2.6 (n=19) and 1.4±1.9 (n=5; P=.374) for patients reporting decreased vs increased opioid use, respectively. Subjects undergoing BVN ablation who decreased opioid use had greater improvement in ODI and VAS scores compared with those reporting increased opioid usage. There is an association between functional benefit from BVN ablation and reduced opioid use.