Treatment Of Adjacent Segment Disease Research Articles

Posterior lumbar dynamic stabilization instead of arthrodesis for symptomatic adjacent-segment degenerative stenosis: description of a novel technique.

OBJECTIVE The development of symptomatic adjacent-segment disease (ASD) is a well-recognized consequence of lumbar fusion surgery. Extension of a fusion to a diseased segment may only lead to subsequent adjacent-segment degeneration. The authors report the use of a novel technique that uses dynamic stabilization instead of arthrodesis for the surgical treatment of symptomatic ASD following a prior lumbar instrumented fusion. METHODS A cohort of 28 consecutive patients was evaluated who developed symptomatic stenosis immediately adjacent to a previous lumbar instrumented fusion. All patients had symptoms of neurogenic claudication refractory to nonsurgical treatment and were surgically treated with decompression and dynamic stabilization instead of extending the fusion construct using a posterior lumbar dynamic stabilization system. Preoperative symptoms, visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, and perioperative complications were recorded. Clinical outcome was gauged by comparing VAS scores prior to surgery and at the time of last follow-up. RESULTS The mean follow-up duration was 52 months (range 17-94 months). The mean interval from the time of primary fusion surgery to the dynamic stabilization surgery was 40 months (range 10-96 months). The mean patient age was 51 years (range 29-76 years). There were 19 (68%) men and 9 (32%) women. Twenty-three patients (82%) presented with low-back pain at time of surgery, whereas 24 patients (86%) presented with lower-extremity symptoms only. Twenty-four patients (86%) underwent operations that were performed using single-level dynamic stabilization, 3 patients (11%) were treated at 2 levels, and 1 patient underwent 3-level decompression and dynamic stabilization. The most commonly affected and treated level (46%) was L3-4. The mean preoperative VAS pain score was 8, whereas the mean postoperative score was 3. No patient required surgery for symptomatic degeneration rostral to the level of dynamic stabilization during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS The use of posterior lumbar dynamic stabilization may offer a valid and safe option for the management of patients who develop ASD rostral to a previously instrumented arthrodesis. The technique may serve as an alternative to multilevel arthrodesis in this patient population. By implanting a dynamic stabilization device instead of an extension of a rigid construct, this might translate into a reduction in the development of yet another level of ASD.

Single-Level Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Adjacent Segment Disease: A Retrospective Two-Center Study

While there is a plethora of literature on adjacent segment disease (ASD) following traditional arthrodesis techniques, the data on ASD following lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is limited. Vice versa, the surgical outcome after LLIF for the treatment of ASD remains to be elucidated.

Adjacent segment disease.

EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES As a result of reading this article, physicians should be able to: 1. Understand the forces that predispose adjacent cervical segments to degeneration. 2. Understand the challenges of radiographic evaluation in the diagnosis of cervical and lumbar adjacent segment disease. 3. Describe the changes in biomechanical forces applied to adjacent segments of lumbar vertebrae with fusion. 4. Know the risk factors for adjacent segment disease in spinal fusion. Adjacent segment disease (ASD) is a broad term encompassing many complications of spinal fusion, including listhesis, instability, herniated nucleus pulposus, stenosis, hypertrophic facet arthritis, scoliosis, and vertebral compression fracture. The area of the cervical spine where most fusions occur (C3-C7) is adjacent to a highly mobile upper cervical region, and this contributes to the biomechanical stress put on the adjacent cervical segments postfusion. Studies have shown that after fusion surgery, there is increased load on adjacent segments. Definitive treatment of ASD is a topic of continuing research, but in general, treatment choices are dictated by patient age and degree of debilitation. Investigators have also studied the risk factors associated with spinal fusion that may predispose certain patients to ASD postfusion, and these data are invaluable for properly counseling patients considering spinal fusion surgery. Biomechanical studies have confirmed the added stress on adjacent segments in the cervical and lumbar spine. The diagnosis of cervical ASD is complicated given the imprecise correlation of radiographic and clinical findings. Although radiological and clinical diagnoses do not always correlate, radiographs and clinical examination dictate how a patient with prolonged pain is treated. Options for both cervical and lumbar spine ASD include fusion and/or decompression. Current studies are encouraging regarding the adoption of arthroplasty in spinal surgery, but more long-term data are required for full adoption of arthroplasty as the standard of care for prevention of ASD.

The Interspinous Spacer: A New Posterior Dynamic Stabilization Concept for Prevention of Adjacent Segment Disease

Introduction. Posterior Dynamic stabilization using the interspinous spacer device is a known to be used as an alternative to rigid fusion in neurogenic claudication patients in the absence of macro instability. Actually, it plays an important in the management of adjacent segment disease in previously fused lumbar spine. Materials and Method. We report our experience with posterior dynamic stabilization using an interspinous spacer. 134 cases performed in our institution between September 2008 and August 2012 with different lumbar spine pathologies. The ages of our patients were between 40 and 72 years, with a mean age of 57 years. After almost 4 years of follow up in our patient and comparing their outcome to our previous serious we found that in some case the interspinous distracter has an important role not only in the treatment of adjacent segment disease but also in its prevention. Results and Discussion. Clinical improvement was noted in ISD-treated patients, with high satisfaction rate. At first, radicular pain improves with more than 3/10 reduction of the mean score on visual analog scale (VAS). In addition, disability score as well as disc height and lordotic angle showed major improvement at 3 to 6 months post operatively. And, no adjacent segment disease was reported in the patient operated with interspinous spacer. Conclusion. The interspinous spacer is safe and efficient modality to be used not only as a treatment of adjacent segment disease but also as a preventive measure in patients necessitating rigid fusion.

Revision lumbar surgery in elderly patients with symptomatic pseudarthrosis, adjacent-segment disease, or same-level recurrent stenosis. Part 1. Two-year outcomes and clinical efficacy

Same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis, pseudarthrosis, and adjacent-segment disease (ASD) are potential complications that can occur after index lumbar spine surgery, leading to significant discomfort and radicular pain. While numerous studies have demonstrated excellent results following index lumbar spine surgery in elderly patients (age > 65 years), the effectiveness of revision lumbar surgery in this cohort remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term effectiveness of revision lumbar decompression and fusion in the treatment of symptomatic pseudarthrosis, ASD, and same-level recurrent stenosis, using validated patient-reported outcomes. After a review of the institutional database, 69 patients who had undergone revision neural decompression and instrumented fusion for ASD (28 patients), pseudarthrosis (17 patients), or same-level recurrent stenosis (24 patients) were included in this study. Baseline and 2-year scores on the visual analog scale for leg pain (VAS-LP), VAS for back pain (VAS-BP), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS) as well as the time to narcotic independence, time to return to baseline activity level, health state utility (EQ-5D, the EuroQol-5D health survey), and physical and mental component summary scores of the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12 PCS and MCS) were assessed. Compared with the preoperative status, VAS-BP was significantly improved 2 years after surgery for ASD (mean ± standard deviation 9 ± 2 vs 4.01 ± 2.56, p = 0.001), pseudarthrosis (7.41 ± 1 vs 5.52 ± 3.08, p = 0.02), and same-level recurrent stenosis (7 ± 2.00 vs 5.00 ± 2.34, p = 0.003). The 2-year ODI was also significantly improved after surgery for ASD (29 ± 9 vs 23.10 ± 10.18, p = 0.001), pseudarthrosis (28.47 ± 5.85 vs 24.41 ± 7.75, p = 0.001), and same-level recurrent stenosis (30.83 ± 5.28 vs 26.29 ± 4.10, p = 0.003). The Zung SDS score and SF-12 MCS did not change appreciably after surgery in any of the cohorts, with an overall mean 2-year change of 1.01 ± 5.32 (p = 0.46) and 2.02 ± 9.25 (p = 0.22), respectively. Data in this study suggest that revision lumbar decompression and extension of fusion for symptomatic pseudarthrosis, ASD, and same-level recurrent stenosis provides improvement in low-back pain, disability, and quality of life and should be considered a viable treatment option for elderly patients with persistent or recurrent back and radicular pain. Mental health symptoms may be more refractory to revision surgery.

Cost per quality-adjusted life year gained of laminectomy and extension of instrumented fusion for adjacent-segment disease: defining the value of surgical intervention

Over the past decade, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of spinal fusions performed in the US and a corresponding increase in the incidence of adjacent-segment disease (ASD). Surgical management of symptomatic ASD consists of decompression of neural elements and extension of fusion. It has been shown to have favorable long-term outcomes, but the cost-effectiveness remains unclear. In this study, the authors set out to assess the cost-effectiveness of revision surgery in the treatment of ASD over a 2-year period. Fifty patients undergoing neural decompression and extension of fusion construct for ASD-associated back and leg pain were included in the study. Two-year total back-related medical resource utilization, missed work, and health state values (quality-adjusted life years [QALYs], calculated from the EQ-5D with US valuation) were assessed. Two-year resource use was multiplied by unit costs based on Medicare national allowable payment amounts (direct cost), and patient and caregiver workday losses were multiplied by the self-reported gross-of-tax wage rate (indirect cost). Mean total 2-year cost per QALY gained after revision surgery was assessed. The mean (± SD) interval between prior fusion and revision surgery for ASD was 3.07 ± 2.02 years. A mean cumulative 2-year gain of 0.76 QALYs was observed after revision surgery. The mean total 2-year cost of extension of fusion constructs was $47,846 ± $32,712 (surgery cost: $24,063 ± $300; outpatient resource utilization cost: $4175 ± $3368; indirect cost: $19,607 ± $32,187). Revision decompression and extension of fusion was associated with a mean 2-year cost per QALY gained of $62,955. In the authors' practice, revision decompression and extension of fusion provided a significant gain in health state utility for patients with symptomatic ASD, with a 2-year cost per QALY gained of $62,995. When indicated, revision surgery for ASD is a valuable treatment option for patients experiencing back and leg pain secondary to ASD. The findings provide a value measure of surgery that can be compared with future cost-per-QALY-gained studies of medical management or alternative surgical approaches.

The prevalence of indications and contraindications to cervical total disc replacement

Background context Although the prevalence of indications and contraindications to lumbar total disc replacement (TDR) has been evaluated, no study to date has quantified the potential candidacy for cervical disc replacement in practice. Purpose To report the potential candidacy rate for cervical TDR from both an academic and private practice spine surgery setting. Study design/setting Retrospective case series. Patient sample Patient record review of 167 consecutive patients who underwent cervical spine surgery by 1 of 2 orthopedic spine surgeons between January 1, 2003 and January 1, 2005. Outcome measures Evaluation of potential candidacy for cervical TDR, with emphasis on both contraindications and indications. Methods In this study, we used the published contraindications and indications listed in trials of four different cervical disc arthroplasty devices: ProDisc-C (Synthes Spine, West Chester, PA), PRESTIGE LP (Medtronik Sofamor Danek, Memphis, TN), Bryan Cervical Disc prosthesis (Medtronik Sofamor Danek, Memphis, TN), and Porous Coated Motion (PCM; Cervitech, Rockaway, NJ). The proportion of patients who met both inclusion and exclusion criteria was calculated. We also examined the proportion of patients who would be candidates for cervical TDR if the indications were expanded to include the treatment for adjacent segment disease (ASD). Results Of the 167 patients (mean age 50.8 years, range 20–89 years) reviewed, 91.6% (153/167) had fusion surgery and 8.4% (14/167) had nonfusion surgery. Fifty-seven percent (95/167) had absolute contraindications to cervical TDR, and within this group the average number of contraindications was 2.1 (SD=1.2, range 0–5). Forty-three percent (72/167) met the strict inclusion criteria, and had no exclusion criteria. If the indications were expanded to include treatment for ASD, an additional 4.2% (7/167) of the patients would have qualified as candidates for cervical TDR. Conclusions Compared with lumbar TDR, total disc replacement may have a larger potential role in the treatment of cervical degenerative conditions, as 43% of patients would have met the strict criteria for TDR candidacy, or 47% if the indications were expanded to include treatment for ASD.

The success of anterior cervical arthrodesis adjacent to a previous fusion.

A retrospective review of all patients surgically treated for adjacent segment disease of the cervical spine over a 20-year period. To determine the clinical and radiographic success of discectomy with interbody grafting and corpectomy with strut grafting in the treatment of adjacent segment disease of the cervical spine. Up to 25% of all patients undergoing anterior cervical fusion have new disease due to degeneration of an adjacent segment within 10 years. The success of surgical treatment in these patients with adjacent segment disease has not been reported. Thirty-eight patients were surgically treated for adjacent segment disease by discectomy with interbody grafting or corpectomy with strut grafting. Arthrodesis was evaluated by flexion-extension lateral radiographs and clinical outcomes were assessed using Robinson's criteria at least 2 years after surgery. Fusion rates were compared by Fisher's exact test, and outcomes were compared by rank-sum analysis. The rate of arthrodesis was significantly lower in the 24 patients treated by discectomy with interbody grafting at one or more levels (63%) than in the 14 patients treated by corpectomy with strut grafting (100%; P = 0.01). Clinical outcomes were similar for the corpectomy and discectomy groups (P = 0.55). There was a trend toward better outcomes in patients who achieved a solid arthrodesis (P = 0.13). Achieving fusion is more difficult when anterior cervical arthrodesis is performed adjacent to a prior fusion. Strut grafting resulted in a significantly higher rate of arthrodesis than interbody grafting.