Treatment Of Spondylolisthesis Research Articles

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Spinal Fusion Surgery for Spondylolisthesis Treatment.

In recent years, there has been a growing utilization of minimally invasive (MI) techniques, which provide the potential advantages of minimizing surgical stress, post-operative pain, and hospitalization duration. Nevertheless, the existing body of literature primarily comprises of studies conducted at a single medical site, which are of low quality and lack a comprehensive analysis of treatment techniques exclusively focused on spondylolisthesis. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and open surgery (OS) spinal fusion outcomes for the treatment of spondylolisthesis. OS spinal fusion is an interventional option for patients with spinal illness who have not had success with non-surgical treatments. This systematic review of the literature regarding MI and OS spinal fusion for spondylolisthesis treatment was performed using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines for article identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion. Electronic literature search of Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases yielded 1078 articles. These articles were screened against established criteria for inclusion into this study. A total of eight retrospective and four prospective articles with a total of 3354 patients were found. Reported spondylolisthesis grades were I and II only. Overall, MI was associated with lower operative time (mean difference [MD], -6.44 min; 95% confidence interval [CI], -45.57-32.71; P = 0.0001) and shorter length of hospital stay (MD, -0.49 days; 95% CI, -0.58 to -0.40; P = 0.000). There was no significant difference overall between MIS and OS in terms of functional or pain outcomes. Rates of complications were not significantly different between the MI group and the OS group, though overall 75 and 153 complications were observed in MI group and OS group. Available data indicate that MI spinal fusion is a secure and efficient method for managing Grade I and Grade II spondylolisthesis. Furthermore, whereas prospective trials establish a connection between MI and improved functional outcomes, it is necessary to conduct longer-term and randomized trials to confirm any correlation identified in this study.

Clinical study of isthmic spondylolisthesis treated with Mis-TLIF assisted by preoperative posture reduction and intraoperative lifting reduction

To investigate the clinical effect of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion(Mis-TLIF) technique combined with preoperative position reduction in the treatment of spondylolisthesis and summarize its advantages. Between July 2016 and July 2022, 60 patients with lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis were retrospectively analyzed, including 26 males and 34 females, with an average age of (51.32±4.24) years old ranging from 35 to 72 years old. They were divided into observation group and control group according to the operation methods. There were 30 patients in the observation group, including 12 males and 18 females;the age ranged from 35 to 71 years old with an average of(51.80±6.38) years old, the course of disease ranged from 12 to 60 months with an average of (24.17±1.98) months;there were 18 cases of L4 spondylolisthesis and 12 cases of L5 spondylolisthesis;according to Meyerding classification, there were 20 cases of grade Ⅰ spondylolisthesis and 10 cases of gradeⅡ. The observation group was treated with preoperative postural reduction combined with intraoperative reduction assisted minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar fusion via Quadrant channel(Mis-TLIF). There were 30 patients in the control group, including 14 males and 16 females, with an average of (50.00±4.24) years old ranging from 36 to 72 years old;the course of disease ranged from 12 to 60 months with an average of (23.70±1.53) months;there were 16 cases of L4 spondylolisthesis and 14 cases of L5 spondylolisthesis;according to Meyerding classification, there were 19 cases of grade Ⅰ spondylolisthesis and 11 cases of grade Ⅱ. The control group was treated with open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion(Open-TLIF). The differences of operation time, intraoperative and postoperative blood loss, hospital stay, radiation exposure time and complications between the two groups were analyzed. Visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI) and Japanese Orthopaedic Association(JOA) score were used to evaluate the clinical effect. X-ray and CT were followed up to evaluate the interbody fusion. All patients were followed up for 12 months. There was no significant difference in operation time, VAS of low back pain, slip angle and slip rate between two groups (P>0.05). The intraoperative and postoperative blood loss in the observation group (165.50±15.56) ml and (59.17±10.59) ml were less than those in the control group (259.33±35.32) ml and (165.33 ±29.56) ml (P<0.05). The length of hospital stay in the observation group (3.53±0.68) days was less than that in the control group (5.20±0.41) days (P<0.05).The intervertebral space height, slip angle, slip rate, ODI, VAS and JOA scores were significantly improved in the two groups at the final follow-up (P<0.05). There were significant differences in ODI [(9.93±1.11)% vs (10.93±1.11)%] and JOA [ (26.07±1.01) points vs (25.43±1.25) points] between the observation group and the control group at the final follow-up (P<0.05). In the treatment of spondylolisthesis, preoperative position reduction combined with intraoperative reduction assisted Mis-Tlif technique has advantages of less trauma, less bleeding and shorter hospitalization period than traditional open surgery. It is a safe and effective technique.

Trans-Pars Interarticularis Approach for Lumbar Interbody Fusion: An Efficient, Straightforward, and Minimally Invasive Surgery for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis and Stenosis.

Lumbar interbody fusion is a commonly applied surgical treatment for spondylolisthesis. For this procedure, various minimally invasive (MIS) approaches have been developed, including posterior lumbar interbody fusion, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), oblique lumbar interbody fusion, and anterior lumbar interbody fusion. In this study, we characterized the features of an MIS trans-pars interarticularis lumbar interbody fusion (TPLIF) and compared its surgical outcomes with those of MIS-TLIF. This study included 89 and 44 patients who had undergone MIS-TPLIF and MIS-TLIF, respectively, between September 2016 and December 2022. The following clinical outcomes were analyzed: operative time, blood loss, and hospitalization duration. The average operative time, blood loss, and hospitalization duration for the MIS-TPLIF and MIS-TLIF groups were, respectively, 98.28 and 191.15 minutes, 41.97 and 101.85 mL, and 5.8 and 6.9 days. The MIS-TPLIF approach for lumbar spondylolisthesis or other degenerative diseases involves the use of the commonly available and cost-effective instrument Taylor retractor, thus enabling posterior lumbar interbody fusion to be performed with minimal invasion. This approach also confers the benefits of a short learning curve and an intuitive approach. Our results suggest that although MIS-TPLIF is noninferior to MIS-TLIF, it is easier to learn and perform than MIS-TLIF.

L5–S1 Spondylolisthesis: What Has Changed in 20 Years? A Review of Key Issues in Comparison with Personal Experience

The very first issue of the Russian Journal of Spine Surgery (2004;(1):39–46) published an article entitled “Surgical Treatment for L5 Spondylolisthesis with Transpedicular Fixators”. Twenty years later, the authors analyzed changes in approaches to surgical treatment of spondylolisthesis, taking into account the experience in surgical treatment of this pathology gained at the N.N. Priorov National Medical Research Center of Traumatology and Orthopaedics. The issues of classification, fixation methods, reduction, changes in sagittal balance, the possibility of using additive technologies and possible complications of surgical treatment are considered.In conclusion, it is noted that the development of surgical treatment methods, the study of biomechanical features, the introduction of additive technologies and much more enable improving the outcomes of spondylolisthesis treatment.

Spondylolisthesis is a frequent back disorder in which surgery increases the quality of life of symptomatic patients

This review presents the current updated knowledge of the treatment of spondylolisthesis (SL). The prevalence of SL is dependent on age, gender, and race. Symptoms include lower back pain, radiating pain and neurological deficits. Treatment can be conservative or surgical. Most recent literature advocates surgical treatment after 3-6 months with the inadequate effect of conservative treatment. Diagnosis is obtained with an X-ray or CT. Suspected SL should be admitted to specialised examination by a spine surgeon since progression may lead to worsening in symptoms, and surgery improves life quaility.

Prospective Assessment of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) in Spondylolisthesis: A Radiological and Functional Outcome Study in an Indian Population.

Spondylolisthesis is a common spinal condition in which one vertebra slips over another, leading to pain and disability. Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has emerged as a surgical option for addressing spondylolisthesis; however, limited research exists, especially in the Indian context, evaluating its radiological and functional outcomes. The study aimed to evaluate the radiological and functional outcomes of TLIF in spondylolisthesis using standardized scoring systems, to evaluate the sagittal balance of the spine radiologically in patients who have undergone TLIF for spondylolisthesis, and to evaluate the correlation between the functional and radiological outcomes after TLIF. This prospective observational study included spondylolisthesis patients undergoing TLIF at SRM Medical College Hospital and Research Centre from August 2022 to August 2024. Criteria included Meyerding grade 1-4 spondylolisthesis, single-segment fusion, and willingness for 12-month follow-up. Forty-five patients were included with age 36.6 ± 12.2 years, with 73.3% being female. L4-L5 is the most common level affected in 21 patients (46.7%). Significant improvements were observed in pelvic tilt 19.07 ± 2.05, sacral slope 30.6 ± 4.4, segmental lordosis 18.4 ± 1.4, lumbar lordosis 57.1 ± 1.8, sagittal vertical axis (SVA) 2.5 ± 0.3, Visual Analog Scale for pain 0.4 ± 0.5, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores 5.23 ± 2.6 postoperatively (p < 0.05). At one-year follow-up, 84.4% of patients had good-to-excellent outcomes, and 44.4% had definitive fusion according to modified Lee criteria. However, there was no correlation between ODI score and grade of listhesis, pelvic incidence (PI), or SVA of the spine (p > 0.05). This study provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of TLIF surgery in addressing spondylolisthesis, both in terms of radiological and functional outcomes. However, there was no correlation between improvement in functional and radiological parameters (PI vs. ODI, SVA vs. ODI). TLIF appears to offer significant improvements in patient well-being and quality of life. These findings contribute to understanding TLIF's suitability as a treatment for spondylolisthesis and can inform clinical practice, ultimately benefiting patients suffering from this condition.

Spondylolisthesis treatment using vertaux pedicle screw system, osteobone dual threaded screw, and occipital system: A study

Background: Pedicle screw fixation has its origins in Europe. Spinal screw most commonly pedicle screws, play a major role in different spinal surgeries by providing stabilization to vertebrae that promote healing, and correction of deformities. In the recent era spondylolisthesis issue is more common. So, we have retrospectively analyzed using three different spinal screws of Titanium Alloy as per EN ISO 5832‐3:2021 to treat the spondylolisthesis issue in the lower lumbar spine, which were manufactured by Auxein Medical Private Limited. Materials and Methods: Spinal screws consist of a variety of shapes and sizes. In this analysis total 45 patients with one year follow up were analyzed. The Spondylolisthesis related spinal issue of lower lumbar spine were treated by using different spine screws: VERTAUX Monoaxial Pedicle Screw with Cap (⌀ 5.5 mm, L 35 mm); Osteobone Multiaxial Pedicle Fenestrated Dual Thread Screw (⌀ 5 mm, L 25 mm) and VERTAUX - Occipital Polyaxial Pedicle Screw, Partial Thread (⌀ 5 mm, L 25 mm) of Ti-6Al-4V material which was manufactured by Auxein Medical Private Limited, India. X‐ray was used to examine the pre and post clinical conditions. In addition, the functional outcomes were assessed with Average VAS score. Results: X‐ray showed good outcomes. Prior to the surgery the average VAS score was 8.1 and after one-year completion the average VAS score was seen 0.4 only. After 1 month, 3 months, 5 months and 9 months and 12 months the average VAS score were calculated as 6.2, 4.7, 3.3 and 1.9 respectively. Conclusion: The treatment by using VERTAUX 5.5mm Pedicle Screw System, VERTAUX Osteobone Dual Threaded Screw and VERTAUX Occipital System showed good results with less complications.

EVALUATION OF CLINICAL OUTCOMES AND ACCURACY IN TRANSPEDICULAR SCREW FIXATION USING INTRAOPERATIVE CT-GUIDED NAVIGATION FOR LUMBAR SPONDYLOLISTHESIS

The use of intraoperative navigation and robotic surgery for minimally invasive lumbar fusion has been increasing over the past decade. The aim of this study is to evaluate postoperative clinical outcomes, intraoperative parameters, and accuracy of pedicle screw insertion guided by intraoperative navigation in patients undergoing lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis. Patients who underwent posterior lumbar fusion interbody using intraoperative 3D navigation since December 2021 were included. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Short Form Health Survey-36 (SF-36) were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at 1, 3, and 6 months. Screw placement accuracy, measured by Gertzbein and Robbins classification, and facet joint infringement, measured by Yson classification, were assessed by intraoperative Cone Beam CT scans performed at the end of instrumentation. Finally, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, and screw insertion time were evaluated. This study involved 50 patients with a mean age of 63.7 years. VAS decreased from 65.8±23 to 20±22 (p&lt;.01). ODI decreased from 35.4%±15 to 11.8%±14 (p&lt;.01). An increase of SF-36 from 51.5±14 to 76±13 (p&lt;.01) was demonstrated. The accuracy of “perfect” and “clinically acceptable” pedicle screw fixation was 89.5% and 98.4%, respectively. Regarding facet violation, 96.8% of the screws were at grade 0. Finally, the average screw insertion time was 4.3±2 min, hospital stay was 4.2±0.8 days, operation time was 205±53 min, and blood loss was 169±107 ml. Finally, a statistically significant correlation of operation time with hospital stay, blood loss and placement time per screw was found. We demonstrated excellent results for accuracy of pedicle screw fixation and violation of facet joints. VAS, ODI and SF-36 showed statistically significant improvements from the control at one month after surgery.Navigation with intraoperative 3D images represents an effective system to improve operative performance in the surgical treatment of spondylolisthesis.

The Functional Outcome of Surgical Management of Spondylolisthesis with Posterior Stabilization and Fusion.

Spondylolisthesis is a spinal condition characterized by the forward displacement of one vertebra over another, leading to instability and associated symptoms. Surgical intervention is often recommended for patients with symptomatic spondylolisthesis unresponsive to conservative treatment. The objective of this study was to analyze the functional outcomes of surgical management utilizing posterior stabilization and fusion techniques in patients with spondylolisthesis. This is a prospective study conducted on 30 patients who underwent surgical treatment for spondylolisthesis with posterior trans-pedicular screw fixation with conventional or reduction screws and fusion. Meyerding's grade of listhesis, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, Oswestry disability index (ODI) score and pain scores such as visual analog scale (VAS), numerical rating scale 11 (NRS-11), and pain relief rate were used to analyze the functional outcome. Postoperatively, Meyerding's grade of listhesis and the JOA score had improved significantly. The ODI score and pain scores such as VAS, NRS-11, and pain relief rate were better after surgical interventions. There was full motor recovery in 13 patients and 14 patients had full sensory recovery, while six patients had sensory blunting at the time of the time of the last follow-up. Twenty-six (80.7%) patients had clinically successful results and radiological/clinical fusion while four of the patients did not achieve a clinically successful result and radiological/clinical fusion. The average time for bony fusion was 5.58 months with the earliest being 4 months and the latest 12 months. Intraoperatively, one patient had screw slippage and one had a dural tear. Postoperatively, four patients had infection, two patients were presented with deep infection, and the instrumentation had been removed. This study demonstrated favorable functional outcomes and improvements in pain, disability, and quality of life measures following surgical intervention.

Philosophies and Surgical Techniques for High-Grade Spondylolisthesis Treatment with Literature Review.

High-grade spondylolisthesis is defined as cases with more than 50% displacement and spondylolisthesis with Meyerding grade III and higher. The surgical management of high-grade spondylolisthesis is highly controversial. Many surgical methods have been reported such as posterior in situ fusion, instrumented posterior fusion with or without reduction, combined anterior and posterior procedures, spondylectomy with reduction of L4 to the sacrum (for spondyloptosis), and posterior interbody fusion with trans-sacral fixation. The literature has recently mentioned minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for high-grade spondylolisthesis. This study aimed to review the recent literature that describes the surgical outcomes associated with various surgical techniques used for high-grade spondylolisthesis. Recent articles were searched on search engines such as PubMed and Google Scholar using keywords such as "high-grade spondylolisthesis," "surgical techniques," and "complications." The surgical management of high-grade spondylolisthesis is an area of significant controversy. The literature is replete with regards to the need for reduction, decompression, levels of fusion, the nature of instrumentation, surgical approaches including open, minimally invasive, and "mini-open" procedures, and various techniques for reducing the slip and fusion strategy. The three basic options of high-grade spondylolisthesis include in-situ fusion, partial reduction and fusion, and complete reduction. Various techniques have been described for high-grade spondylolisthesis. Spine deformity study group classification gives guidelines about balanced and unbalanced pelvis and advises reduction and fusion in case of unbalanced pelvis for correction of biomechanical and global sagittal alignment. Each of the surgical techniques has its advantages and disadvantages. However, individual authors' experience, skill levels, and anatomic reduction with fusion techniques have yielded encouraging results.

Lomber spondilolistezis saptanan hastaların radyolojik ve klinik verilerinin karşılaştırılması

Background: Spondylolisthesis is a deformity in which the upper segment is displaced anteriorly or posteriorly in the spine relative to the lower segment. In this pathology, which often causes instability, surgical treatment may be required. Also, patient’s radiological images should be evaluated carefully before treatment. We aimed to analyze clinical and radiological data with spinopelvic angles of the lumbar spondylolisthesis patients in our research.&#x0D; &#x0D; Material Method: 6593 patients who applied to the neurosurgery outpatient clinic with complaints of low back pain between January 2020 - December 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. The radiological findings of patients with spondylolisthesis, whose lumbar MRI and lumbar CT were obtained appropriately along with X-ray were evaluated in detail. Age, gender, listhesis level and degree, Cobb angle, pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, sacral slope angle, Modic degeneration, vacuum phenomenon, annulus rupture, schmorl nodule, facet hypertrophy, osteophyte, maximum AP central canal diameter and joint lysis has been examined in these patient tests. The relationships of these data with each other were evaluated statistically.&#x0D; &#x0D; Results: 58 female and 5 male patients were found to be eligible for the study. Mean age was 59 (min 22, max 81). Grade 1 listhesis was detected in 52 of the patients. Listhesis was observed at the level of L5-S1 in 31 patients, L4-L5 in 24 patients and L3-L4 in 8 patients. A direct correlation was found between age with vacuum phenomenon, osteophyte, presence of L5-S1 listesis and lysis. Similar correlation was between pelvic incidence with sacral slop angle, facet hypertrophy and modic type 2 degeneration. Also, there was a direct correlation between pelvic incidence with pelvic tilt; between facet hypertrophy with vacuum phenomenon and lysis; ligamentum hypertrophy with vacuum phenomenon; and facet hypertrophy with lower level listesis (p 0.05).&#x0D; &#x0D; Discussion and Conclusion: Spondylolisthesis is an important problem that requires treatment in spine surgery. Radiologically determined parameters can give important findings about the severity of this pathology. These findings should be taken into consideration in the treatment of spondylolisthesis.

Simultaneous Single-Position Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery and Unilateral Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation for Spondylolisthesis.

To evaluate the clinical and radiological efficacy of a combine of lateral single screw-rod and unilateral percutaneous pedicle screw fixation (LSUP) for lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) in the treatment of spondylolisthesis. Sixty-two consecutive patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis who underwent minimally invasive (MIS)-TLIF with bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) or LLIF-LSUP were retrospectively studied. Segmental lordosis angle (SLA), lumbar lordosis angle (LLA), disc height (DH), slipping percentage, the cross-sectional areas (CSA) of the thecal sac, screw placement accuracy, fusion rate and foraminal height (FH) were used to evaluate radiographic changes postoperatively. Visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used to evaluate the clinical efficacy. Patients who underwent LLIF-LSUP showed shorter operating time, less length of hospital stay and lower blood loss than MIS-TLIF. No statistical difference was found between the 2 groups in screw placement accuracy, overall complications, VAS, and ODI. Compared with MIS-TLIF-BPS, LLIF-LSUP had a significant improvement in sagittal parameters including DH, FH, LLA, and SLA. The CSA of MIS-TLIF-BPS was significantly increased than that of LLIF-LSUP. The fusion rate of LLIF-LSUP was significantly higher than that of MIS-TLIF-BPS at the follow-up of 3 months postoperatively, but there was no statistical difference between the 2 groups at the follow-up of 6 months, 9 months, and 12 months. The overall clinical outcomes and complications of LLIF-LSUP were comparable to that of MIS-TLIF-BPS in this series. Compared with MIS-TLIF-BPS, LLIF-LSUP for lumbar spondylolisthesis represents a significantly shorter operating time, hospital stay and lower blood loss, and demonstrates better radiological outcomes to maintain lumbar lordosis, and reveal an overwhelming superiority in the early fusion rate.

Surgical treatment of spondylolisthesis by oblique lumbar interbody fusion and transpedicular screw fixation: Comparison between conventional double position versus navigation-assisted single lateral position.

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) procedures involve anterior insertion of interbody cage in lateral position. Following OLIF, insertion of pedicle screws and rod system is performed in a prone position (OLIF-con). The location of the cage is important for restoration of lumbar lordosis and indirect decompression. However, inserting the cage at the desired location is difficult without reduction of spondylolisthesis, and reduction after insertion of interbody cage may limit the amount of reduction. Recent introduction of spinal navigation enabled both surgical procedures in one lateral position (OLIF-one). Therefore, reduction of spondylolisthesis can be performed prior to insertion of interbody cage. The objective of this study was to compare the reduction of spondylolisthesis and the placement of cage between OLIF-one and OLIF-con. We retrospectively reviewed 72 consecutive patients with spondylolisthesis for this study; 30 patients underwent OLIF-one and 42 underwent OLIF-con. Spinal navigation system was used for OLIF-one. In OLIF-one, the interbody cage was inserted after reducing spondylolisthesis, whereas in OLIF-con, the cage was inserted before reduction. The following parameters were measured on X-rays: pre- and postoperative spondylolisthesis slippage, reduction degree, and the location of the cage in the disc space. Both groups showed significant improvement in back and leg pains (p < .05). Transient motor or sensory changes occurred in three patients after OLIF-con and in two patients after OLIF-one. Pre- and postoperative slips were 26.3±7.7% and 6.6±6.2% in OLIF-one, and 23.1±7.0% and 7.4±5.8% in OLIF-con. The reduction of slippage was 74.4±6.3% after OLIF-one and 65.4±5.7% after OLIF-con, with a significant difference between the two groups (p = .04). The cage was located at 34.2±8.9% after OLIF-one and at 42.8±10.3% after OLIF-con, with a significant difference between the two groups (p = .004). Switching the sequence of surgical procedures with OLIF-one facilitated both the reduction of spondylolisthesis and the placement of the cage at the desired location.

Machine learning and lumbar spondylolisthesis

While lumbar spondylolisthesis is one of the most common conditions cared for by spine surgeons, there remains limited evidence guiding its diagnosis, classification, and management. The diversity in its underlying causes, clinical manifestations, and spinal anatomical variations poses a particular challenge in making informed clinical decisions. Machine learning (ML) methods offer novel opportunities to address these challenges by leveraging data-driven approaches. This chapter provides a comprehensive overview of the potential applications of ML in the field of lumbar spondylolisthesis. ML is a branch of artificial intelligence that employs statistical algorithms to mimic human learning behavior. In the domain of diagnosis, ML methods have been applied to detect spondylolisthesis using medical imaging. In particular, deep learning models have shown high accuracy in detecting spondylolisthesis from X-rays and MRIs, suggesting ML's potential as a diagnostic tool. Additionally, ML can aid in distinguishing spondylolisthesis grades and subtypes. Although automatic grading remains challenging, recent advances suggest that emerging ML techniques may be effective in classifying spondylolisthesis subtypes and guiding subsequent decision-making. Already, ML has been used to predict spondylolisthesis treatment outcomes, such as functional recovery and hospital length of stay. While promising, most of these prediction studies used "shallow" ML techniques, suggesting that further gains may be realized by applying deep learning methods to larger, complex datasets. In conclusion, ML advances hold promise in spondylolisthesis diagnosis, classification, and outcome prediction. In the future, these methods may help support more personalized and effective management of lumbar spondylolisthesis.

A New Technique for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Reduction Using T-Shaped Tools.

Retrospective study. To introduce a simple technique to facilitate lumbar spondylolisthesis reduction during posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Spondylolisthesis reduction has been conducted in various ways, but most of them require special complicated tools. T-shaped levering tool was newly designed. This study included 23 patients who underwent PLIF for lumbar spondylolisthesis treatment using newly designed T-shaped tools and followed up for >2 years. Demographic, clinical, and surgical data, which had been routinely collected in a database, were analyzed. The degree of listhesis was measured on lateral radiographs by the Taillard method. The authors could achieve lumbar spondylolisthesis reduction without difficulty using newly designed T-shaped tools. Immediate postoperative lateral radiographs revealed a reduced preoperative slip of 36.9%±9.6% to 1.2%±1.9%, showing a correction rate of 96.7%. The final follow-up radiographs revealed the mean final slip of 2.6%±2.7%, showing a correction rate of 93.0%. This technique allowed lumbar spondylolisthesis reduction without difficulty.

Progression to fusion after lumbar laminectomy for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: Rate and risk-factors. A national database study

ObjectiveLumbar laminectomy is often utilized in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Risk factors that contribute to reoperation rates, in particular to progression to fusion, are poorly understood. We aimed to identify rate and risk factors of lumbar fusion surgery following lumbar laminectomy for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal spondylolisthesis. MethodsOur sample was obtained from the national MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database. We reviewed patients undergoing lumbar laminectomy for stable degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (Grade-1) at one or two levels between January 2007 and December 2016. ResultsA total of 33,681 patients were included. By 2 years after the index operation, 2.48 % of patients had required lumbar fusion surgery. Female sex was associated with lower odds (OR 0.8, 95 %CI 0.7–0.9) of reoperation for fusion. Diabetes (OR 1.2, 95 %CI 1.1–1.4), rheumatoid arthritis (OR 1.5, 95 %CI 1.2–1.7) and clinical presentation with LBP (OR 2.1, 95 %CI 1.6–2.9), lower extremity weakness (OR 1.4, 95 %CI 1.1–1.5), as well as occurrence of a postoperative neurological complications (OR 2.0, 95 %CI 1.1–3.4) increased the odds ratio for requiring fusion surgery within two years after lumbar laminectomy. ConclusionIn this large cross-sectional sample of a national claims database consisting of lumbar laminectomy patients for the treatment of spondylolisthesis, approximately 2.5 % required subsequent lumbar fusion. Several modifiable risk factors for fusion progression were identified, which may guide clinicians in shared decision-making and to help identify patients with elevated post-operative risk providing potential leverage point for prevention.

The novel Kambin Torpedo full-endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion technique: a case series.

Full-endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (FELIF) is a new-generation treatment for spondylolisthesis. However, owing to their unique characteristics, the two main endoscopic fusion trajectories, the trans-Kambin and posterolateral approaches, have important limitations. Herein, we aimed to introduce a new technique called Kambin Torpedo FELIF (KT-FELIF). The KT-FELIF technique is based on the trans-Kambin approach. It additionally completes ipsilateral total facetectomy and contralateral direct decompression. Thus, this novel technique combines the advantages of the trans-Kambin and posterolateral approaches. We reported on the indications and technical steps of KT-FELIF and provided intraoperative and animated videos to clarify the procedure. Short-term follow-up based on 3-month postoperative computed tomography and plain films images taken at least 3months after surgery showed adequate bony decompression, a large bone graft contact area, and good intervertebral trabecular bone growth without radiolucent lines between the graft, cage, and end plate. The clinical results, such as ipsilateral and contralateral visual analog scale and Oswestry disability index values, gradually improved at 1 and 3months postoperatively. No complications were observed. KT-FELIF is a promising FELIF technique for achieving bilateral direct decompression through a unilateral approach while accomplishing thorough discectomy and endplate preparation.

Functional outcomes correlate with sagittal spinal balance in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXTDegenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) is a debilitating condition associated with poor preoperative functional status. Surgical intervention has been shown to improve functional outcomes in this population though the optimal surgical procedure remains controversial. The importance of maintaining and/or improving sagittal and pelvic spinal balance parameters has received increasing interest in the recent DLS literature. However, little is known about the radiographic parameters most associated with improved functional outcomes among patients undergoing surgery for DLS. PURPOSETo identify the effect of postoperative sagittal spinal alignment on functional outcome after DLS surgery. STUDY DESIGNRetrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLETwo-hundred forty-three patients in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) prospective DLS study database. OUTCOME MEASURESBaseline and 1-year postoperative leg and back pain on the 10-point Numeric Rating Scale and baseline and 1-year postoperative disability on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). METHODSAll enrolled study patients had a DLS diagnosis and underwent decompression in isolation or with posterolateral or interbody fusion. Global and regional radiographic alignment parameters were measured at baseline and 1-year postoperatively including sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis (LL). Both univariate and multiple linear regression was used to assess for the association between radiographic parameters and patient-reported functional outcomes with adjustment for possible confounding baseline patient factors. RESULTSTwo-hundred forty-three patients were available for analysis. Among participants, the mean age was 66 with 63% (153/243) female with the primary surgical indication of neurogenic claudication in 197/243 (81%) of patients. Worse pelvic incidence-LL mismatch was correlated with more severe disability [ODI, 0.134, p<.05), worse leg pain (0.143, p<.05) and worse back pain (0.189, p<.001) 1-year postoperatively. These associations were maintained after adjusting for age, BMI, gender, and preoperative presence of depression (ODI, R2 0.179, β, 0.25, 95% CI 0.08, 0.42, p=.004; back pain R2 0.152 (β, 0.05, 95% CI 0.022, 0.07, p<.001; leg pain score R2 0.059, β, 0.04, 95% CI 0.008, 0.07, p=.014). Likewise, reduction of LL was associated with worse disability (ODI, R2 0.168, β, 0.04, 95% CI -0.39, -0.02, p=.027) and worse back pain (R2 0.135, β, -0.04, 95% CI -0.06, -0.01, p=.007). Worsened SVA correlated with worse patient reported functional outcomes (ODI, R2 0.236, β, 0.12, 95% CI 0.05, 0.20, p=.001). Similarly, an increase (worsening) in SVA resulted in a worse NRS back pain (R2 0.136, β, 0.01, 95% CI .001, 0.02, p=.029) and worse NRS leg pain (R2 0.065, β, 0.02, 95% CI 0.002, 0.02, p=.018) scores regardless of surgery type. CONCLUSIONSPreoperative emphasis on regional and global spinal alignment parameters should be considered in order to optimize functional outcome in lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis treatment.

A cross-sectional study of MIS TLIF in treatment of spondylolisthesis: initial good results from 92 Vietnamese patients.

In this study, the authors enroled 92 patients diagnosed with single-level, grade I or grade II lumbar spondylolisthesis from January 2019 to October 2022. The median age in our study was 47.79±12.61 (range 15-75), the male/female ratio was 1/2.3. The mean disease duration was 28.57 months. Conventional X-ray images showed that there were 74 patients (80.43%) with spondylolisthesis grade I, 18 patients (19.57%) with grade II. Spondylolisthesis occured mainly in L4-L5 with 53 patients (57.61%). The isthmic sign was recorded in 16 patients (31.4%). The mean blood loss was 149.46ml. Patients walked on average of 3.22 days after surgery. VAS score reduced significantly in both back and leg. Spinal function improved significantly with a preoperative Owestry Disability Index of 48.18% decrease to 15.18% 12 months after surgery. The surgical results were good and excellent at 95.00% after 12 months of surgery according to Macnab scale. The fusion rate reached 97.50%. The results of this Macnab's classification study show that minimally invasive spinal transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion is an effective treatment for spondylolisthesis with less pain, less blood loss after surgery, and high fusion rate.

Anterolateral versus posterior minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion surgery for spondylolisthesis: comparison of outcomes from a global, multicenter study at 12-months follow-up

BACKGROUND CONTEXTSeveral minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion techniques may be used as a treatment for spondylolisthesis to alleviate back and leg pain, improve function and provide stability to the spine. Surgeons may choose an anterolateral or posterior approach for the surgery however, there remains a lack of real-world evidence from comparative, prospective studies on effectiveness and safety with relatively large, geographically diverse samples and involving multiple surgical approaches. PURPOSETo test the hypothesis that anterolateral and posterior minimally invasive approaches are equally effective in treating patients with spondylolisthesis affecting one or two segments at 3-months follow-up and to report and compare patient reported outcomes and safety profiles between patients at 12-months post-surgery. DESIGNProspective, multicenter, international, observational cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLEPatients with degenerative or isthmic spondylolisthesis who underwent 1- or 2-level minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion. OUTCOME MEASURESPatient reported outcomes assessing disability (ODI), back pain (VAS), leg pain (VAS) and quality of life (EuroQol 5D-3L) at 4-weeks, 3-months and 12-months follow-up; adverse events up to 12-months; and fusion status at 12-months post-surgery using X-ray and/or CT-scan. The primary study outcome is improvement in ODI score at 3-months. METHODSEligible patients from 26 sites across Europe, Latin America and Asia were consecutively enrolled. Surgeons with experience in minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion procedures used, according to clinical judgement, either an anterolateral (ie, ALIF, DLIF, OLIF) or posterior (MIDLF, PLIF, TLIF) approach. Mean improvement in disability (ODI) was compared between groups using ANCOVA with baseline ODI score used as a covariate. Paired t-tests were used to examine change from baseline in PRO for both surgical approaches at each timepoint after surgery. A secondary ANCOVA using a propensity score as a covariate was used to test the robustness of conclusions drawn from the between group comparison. RESULTSParticipants receiving an anterolateral approach (n=114) compared to those receiving a posterior approach (n=112) were younger (56.9 vs 62.0 years, p <.001), more likely to be employed (49.1% vs 25.0%, p<.001), have isthmic spondylolisthesis (38.6% vs 16.1%, p<.001) and less likely to only have central or lateral recess stenosis (44.9% vs 68.4%, p=.004). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups for gender, BMI, tobacco use, duration of conservative care, grade of spondylolisthesis, or the presence of stenosis. At 3-months follow-up there was no difference in the amount of improvement in ODI between the anterolateral and posterior groups (23.2 ± 21.3 vs 25.8 ± 19.5, p=.521). There were no clinically meaningful differences between the groups on mean improvement for back- and leg-pain, disability, or quality of life until the 12-months follow-up. Fusion rates of those assessed (n=158; 70% of the sample), were equivalent between groups (anterolateral, 72/88 [81.8%] fused vs posterior, 61/70 [87.1%] fused; p=.390). CONCLUSIONSPatients with degenerative lumbar disease and spondylolisthesis who underwent minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion presented statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements from baseline up to 12-months follow-up. There were no clinically relevant differences between patients operated on using an anterolateral or posterior approach.