ObjectiveTo investigate the effectiveness of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF) assisted with microscope in treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis. MethodsBetween January 2011 and June 2012, 52 patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis underwent MI-TLIF assisted with microscope. There were 29 males and 23 females with an average age of 46 years (range, 32-67 years). The median disease duration was 3.2 years (range, 3 months to 6 years). There were 38 cases of lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis and 14 cases of degenerative spondylolisthesis; 12 cases had stenosis secondary to lumbar spondylolisthesis. The affected segments were L4, 5 (29 cases) and L5, S1 (23 cases). According to the Meyerding evaluating system, 24 cases were classified as degree I and 28 cases as degree Ⅱ. The visual analogue scale (VAS) score and Oswestry disability index (ODI)were used for clinical assessment, and the clinical effects were also analyzed by Macnab criterion at last follow-up. The radiographic data were used to evaluate reduction of spondylolisthesis, including slipping degree, slipping angle, and intervertebral space height. The fusion rate was assessed by Suk criterion. ResultsThe operations were performed successfully in all patients. No dural tear or cerebrospinal fluid leakage occurred during operation. The average operation time was 105 minutes; the average intraoperative blood loss was 225 mL; the average postoperative drainage volume was 75 mL; and the average hospitalization days were 5.5 days. Superficial infection of incision occurred in 1 case and was cured after change dressing, and primary healing of incision was obtained in the others. All patients were followed up 12-26 months (mean, 18 months). No loosening, breakage, and displacement of pedicle screw and no Cage dislocation occurred by X-ray films after operation. The lumbar spondylolisthesis all got good correction. The three-dimensional CT showed continuous bone trabecula between centrums. The VAS score, ODI, and the slipping degree, slipping angle, and intervertebral space height were significantly improved at last follow-up when compared with preoperative ones (P<0.05). According to Macnab criterion at last follow-up, the results were excellent in 20 cases, good in 29 cases, and fair in 3 cases; the excellent and good rate was 94.2%. According to Suk criterion for fusion, 49 cases obtained complete fusion and 3 cases got possible fusion. ConclusionAs long as indications are seized, MI-TLIF assisted with microscope is safe and reliable for treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis (Meyerding dergee I or Ⅱ), and it has the advantage of less injury, less blood loss, less complications, and definite short-term effectiveness.
Objective To review the research progress in the treatment of high-grade spondylolisthesis (HS), in order to provide a reference for clinical treatment decision-making. Methods The literature related to the treatment of HS at home and abroad in recent years was widely reviewed. The methods of conservative treatment, in situ fusion, and spondylolisthesis reduction were analyzed and summarized. Results Surgical treatment is the main treatment of HS, but which method is the best is still controversial. The advantages, disadvantages, and applicability of various operations are also different, so individualized analysis is needed in clinic. Conclusion The treatment plan of HS needs to be considered comprehensively according to the individual condition of the patient. It will be an important research direction to further compare the existing treatment methods and develop more safe and effective new technology.
ObjectiveTo explore the effectiveness of posterior lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of double-segmental bilateral isthmic lumbar spondylolisthesis. MethodsBetween February 2008 and December 2013, 17 patients with double-segmental bilateral isthmic lumbar spondylolisthesis were treated with posterior lumbar interbody fusion. There were 12 males and 5 females, with an age ranged 48-69 years (mean, 55.4 years). The disease duration ranged from 11 months to 17 years (median, 22 months). According to the Meyerding classification, 30 vertebrea were rated as degree I, 3 as degree Ⅱ, and 1 as degree Ⅲ. L4, 5 was involved in 14 cases and L3, 4 in 3 cases. The preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score was 8.6±3.2. ResultsCerebrospinal fluid leakage occurred in 2 cases because of intraoperative dural tear; primary healing of incision was obtained, with no operation related complication in the other patients. The patients were followed up 1-6 years (mean, 3.4 years). At last follow-up, VAS score was decreased significantly to 1.1±0.4, showing significant difference when compared with preoperative score (t=7.652, P=0.008). X-ray films showed that slippage vertebral body obtained different degree of reduction, with a complete reduction rate of 85% (29/34) at 1 week after operation. All patients achieved bony union at 6-12 months (mean, 7.4 months). According to the Lenke classification, 13 cases were rated as grade A and 4 cases as grade B. No internal fixation loosening and fracture were observed during the follow-up. Intervertebral disc height was maintained, no loss of spondylolisthesis reduction was found. ConclusionIt can obtain satisfactory clinical result to use spinal canal decompression by posterior approach, and screw fixation for posterior fusion in treatment of double-segmental bilateral isthmic lumbar spondylolisthesis. The key points to successful operation include accurate insertion of screw, effective decompression, distraction before reduction, rational use of pulling screws, and interbody fusion.
Objective To evluate the clinical outcome of autograftsof ilium and interbody fusion cage or bone morphogenetic protein(BMP)／artificial bone material／ cage in treating lumbar spondylolisthesis. Methods From January 1997 to January 2004，114 patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis were treated with posterior lumbar interbody fusion and pedicle screw fixation． There were 45 males and 69 females with an average age of 43 years ranging from 32 to 61 years. Of 114patients, 85 cases were classified as degree Ⅰ, 24 cases as degree Ⅱ and 5 cases as degree Ⅲ. The patients were divided into three groups accordingto the material used for interbody fusion: autografts of ilium (group A, n=42), interbody fusion cages(group B, n=36), and BMP／artificial bone material／ cage (group C, n=36)．The clinical and radiographic results of the patients were compared among three groups． Results All patients were followed from 13 to 30 months with an average of 15 months． There were no statistically significant differences in surgical time, blood loss, and disc space height of preoperation(P＞0.05) among three groups. No severe complication occurred in the three groups(P＞0.05). The excellent and good rates in groups A，B and C were 81.0％, 80.6％, and 83.3％ respectively, showing no statisticallysignificant difference(P＞0.05)．The fusion rate of group C(97.0%) was significantly higher than those of group A(81.0%) and group B(83.3%) (P＜0.05) after 1 year of operation．And the average loss of disc space height in groups B and C was significantly lower than that in group A(P＜0.05). Conclusion Higher fusion rate and lower loss of disc space height can beobtained in treating lumbar spondylolisthesis with BMP／artificial bone materiel.It is an effective method in the treatment of spondylolisthesis.
ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression and unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) in the treatment of degreeⅠdegenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). MethodsA clinical data of 58 patients with degreeⅠDLS who met the selection criteria between October 2021 and October 2022 was retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 28 cases were treated with unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression (decompression group) and 30 cases with ULIF (ULIF group). There was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05) in the gender, age, lesion segment, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), disk height (DH), segmental lordosis (SL), and other baseline data. The operation time, postoperative drainage volume, postoperative ambulation time, VAS score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, ODI, laboratory examination indexes (CRP, ESR), and imaging parameters (DH, SL) were compared between the two groups. ResultsCompared with the ULIF group, the decompression group had shorter operation time, less postoperative drainage, and earlier ambulation (P<0.05). All incisions healed by first intention, and no complication such as nerve root injury, epidural hematoma, or infection occurred. All patients were followed up 12 months. Laboratory tests showed that ESR and CRP at 3 days after operation in decompression group were not significantly different from those before operation (P>0.05), while the above indexes in ULIF group significantly increased at 3 days after operation compared to preoperative values (P<0.05). There were significant differences in the changes of ESR and CRP before and after operation between the two groups (P<0.05). Except that the VAS score of low back pain at 3 days after operation was not significantly different from that before operation in decompression group (P>0.05), there were significant differences in VAS score of low back pain and VAS score of leg pain between the two groups at other time points (P<0.05). The VAS score of low back pain in ULIF group was significantly higher than that in decompression group at 3 days after operation (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in VAS score of low back pain and VAS score of leg pain between the two groups at other time points (P>0.05). The ODI of the two groups significantly improved after operation (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between 3 days and 6 months after operation (P>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups at the two time points after operation (P<0.05). Imaging examination showed that there was no significant difference in DH and SL between pre-operation and 12 months after operation in decompression group (P>0.05). However, the above two indexes in ULIF group were significantly higher than those before operation (P<0.05). There were significant differences in the changes of DH and SL before and after operation between the two groups (P<0.05). ConclusionUnilateral biportal endoscopic decompression can achieve good effectiveness in the treatment of degree Ⅰ DLS. Compared with ULIF, it can shorten operation time, reduce postoperative drainage volume, promote early ambulation, reduce inflammatory reaction, and accelerate postoperative recovery. ULIF has more advantages in restoring intervertebral DH and SL.
Objective To review the research progress of the risk factors for slip progression and the pathogenesis of lumbosacral spondylolisthesis, and to discuss the value of Spinal Deformity Study Group (SDSG) classification system for lumbosacral spondylolisthesis. Methods Recent articles about the risk factors for slip progression and the pathogenesis of lumbosacral spondylolisthesis were reviewed and comprehensively analyzed with SDSG classification system of lumbosacral spondylolisthesis. Results Pelvic incidence (PI) is the key pathogenic factor of lumbosacral spondylolisthesis. The Meyerding grade of slip, PI, sacro-pelvic balance, and spino-pelvic balance not only are the fundamental risk factors of slip progression, but also are the key factors to determine how to treat and influence the prognosis. Therefore, compared with Wiltse, Marchetti-Bartolozzi, and Mac-Thiong-Labelle classification systems of lumbosacral spondylolisthesis, SDSG classification based on these factors mentioned above, has better homogeneity between the subjects of subgroup, and better reliability, moreover, could better guide operative plan and judge the prognosis. Conclusion It is suggested that the SDSG classification system should be the standard classification for lumbosacral spondylolisthesis for the clinical and research work.
Objective To compare the effectiveness of posterolateral approach lumbar interbody fusion assisted by one-hole split endoscope (OSE) and traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in the treatment of L4, 5 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). Methods The clinical data of 58 patients with DLS who met the selection criteria admitted between February 2020 and March 2022 were retrospectively analyzed, of which 26 were treated with OSE-assisted posterolateral approach lumbar interbody fusion (OSE group) and 32 were treated with PLIF (PLIF group). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of gender, age, body mass index, Meyerding grade, lower limb symptom side, decompression side, stenosis type, and preoperative low back pain visual analogue scale (VAS) score, leg pain VAS score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and the height of the anterior and posterior margins of the intervertebral space (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and complications were compared between the two groups. The low back pain and leg pain VAS scores and ODI before operation, at 1 month, 6 months after operation, and last follow-up, the height of anterior and posterior margins of the intervertebral space before operation, at 6 months after operation, and last follow-up, the modified MacNab criteria at last follow-up after operation were used to evaluate the effectiveness; and the Bridwell method at last follow-up was used to evaluate the interbody fusion. Results Both groups successfully completed the operation. Compared with the PLIF group, the OSE group showed a decrease in intraoperative blood loss and postoperative hospital stay, but an increase in operation time, with significant differences (P<0.05). In the OSE group, no complication such as nerve root injury and thecal sac tear occurred; in the PLIF group, there were 1 case of thecal sac tear and 1 case of epidural hematoma, which were cured after conservative management. Both groups of patients were followed up 13-20 months with an average of 15.5 months. There was no complication such as loosening, sinking, or displacement of the fusion cage. The low back pain and leg pain VAS scores, ODI, and the height of anterior and posterior margins of the intervertebral space at each time point after operation in both groups were significantly improved when compared with those before operation (P<0.05). Except for the VAS score of lower back pain in the OSE group being significantly better than that in the PLIF group at 1 month after operation (P<0.05), there was no significant difference in all indicators between the two groups at all other time points (P>0.05). At last follow-up, both groups achieved bone fusion, and there was no significant difference in Bridwell interbody fusion and modified MacNab standard evaluation between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion OSE-assisted posterolateral approach lumbar interbody fusion for L4, 5 DLS, although the operation time is relatively long, but the postoperative hospitalization stay is short, the complications are few, the operation is safe and effective, and the early effectiveness is satisfactory.
ObjectiveTo explore a better segment of fixation and fusion for high-grade spondylolisthesis. MethodsA total of 21 patients with high-grade spondylolisthesis who had undergone reduction and posterior instrumented fusion between July 2007 and March 2012, were retrospectively reviewed. All cases underwent posterior spinal canal decompression, Schanz screws fixation and reduction, and intervertebral and posterolateral fusion. The concept of "unstable zone" and the feature of spinal deformity helped us to identify the most appropriate segment to fuse. The pre/post-operative differences on slip percentage, pelvic incidence (PI) and lumbosacral angle were compared and analyzed. The nerve function was evaluated by physical examination and neurological Frankel grade. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index were used to assess clinical and functional outcomes of lower limbs. Bone fusion was assessed using CT reconstruction. ResultsAll patients were followed up between 12 and 48 months. The clinical and radiological outcomes such as VAS scores and PI angle were all improved compared with that of preoperative, and the differences were all statistically significant (P<0.05). ConclusionFor children with severe spondylolisthesis, if not combined with structural scoliosis, the fixation and fusion level should be up to the upper vertebra which PI angle>60°, and try to protect the posterior longitudinal ligament complex in case adjacent segments become instability or even slip. For adults with severe spondylolisthesis, if not combined with other spinal disorders such as severe osteoporosis, only mono-segmental fusion is recommended after reduction. If the slipped vertebrae could not be reduced to Meyerding gradeⅠ, two or more segments would need to be fixed and fused.
ObjectiveTo investigate the early effctiveness of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) combined with pedicle screw fixation via small incision Wiltse approach for the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis.MethodsBetween January 2016 and December 2016, 21 patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis were treated with OLIF and pedicle screw fixation via small incision Wiltse approach. There were 9 males and 12 females, aged 57-73 years, with an average age of 64.5 years. The disease duration was 24-60 months, with an average of 34.6 months. All cases were spondylolisthesis at L4 (15 cases of degreeⅠ, 6 cases of degreeⅡ); 1 case had vertebral arch isthmus, and 20 cases had spinal stenosis. Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scoring system was used to evaluate the effectiveness before operation and at last follow-up. Before operation and at 2 days after operation, anteroposterior and lateral X-ray films and CT were taken to measure the sagittal diameter and cross-sectional area of the spinal canal, and calculate the intervertebral height and degree of spondylolisthesis. At 6 months after operation, the intervertebral fusion was evaluated by CT.ResultsThe operation time was 120-180 minutes, with an average of 155 minutes; the intraoperative blood loss was 100-340 mL, with an average of 225.5 mL. One patient had slight injury of lower endplate, 1 patient had numbness of thigh and weakness of hip flexion after operation, 1 patient had sympathetic nerve trunk injury. All the cases were followed up 12-18 months, with an average of 14.3 months. The symptoms of low back pain, leg pain, and numbness of lower limbs significantly relieved after operation, and there was no complication such as protrusion of fusion cage, screw breakage, and endplate collapse. At 2 days after operation, the intervertebral height, degree of spondylolisthesis, sagittal diameter of spinal canal, and cross-sectional area of spinal canal significantly improved compared with preoperative ones (P<0.05). At 6 months after operation, CT showed that 1 patient had poor interbody fusion (grade Ⅲ), the other 20 patients had good interbody fusion (grade Ⅰ and Ⅱ), and the interbody fusion rate was 95.2%. At last follow-up, JOA score of lumbar spine significantly increased compared with that before operation (t=24.980, P=0.000).ConclusionOLIF combined with pedicle screw fixation via small incision Wiltse approach for the lumbar spondylolisthesis has minimally invasive features, such as less trauma, fewer complications, and higher intervertebral fusion rate. It is a safe and effective method.
ObjectiveTo review the researches of in vivo kinematics in lumbar degenerative spondylol isthesis (DS). MethodsRelated literature concerning the in vivo kinematics in patients with lumbar DS was extensively reviewed and comprehensively analyzed in 4 terms of the instabil ity of lumbar DS, vertebral motion pattern, the morphological changes of spinal canal, and intraoperative biomechanical measurement. ResultsWhether there is lumbar segmental instabil ity in lumbar DS patients is still controversial, which should be based on degenerative stage of lumbar spine and grade of slip. The hypomobility of the lumbar spinous processes and the facet joint is seen in DS. The diameter, cross-sectional area, and volume of spinal canal in lumbar DS patients are significantly smaller than those of the normal control. Because of its invasive procedure and medical ethics, the use of the intraoperative measurement device is limited. These reported researches of in vivo kinematics in DS are almost on the sagittal plane. However, few data have been reported on the 6-degree-of-freedom (6DOF) kinematics of the diseased levels under physiological loading conditions. ConclusionThe 6DOF kinematics data can accurately reflect the segmental motion characteristics in lumbar DS patients, recent studies have been reported, further studies are still needed.