Cargando…

Lumbar fusion for lytic spondylolisthesis: Is an interbody cage necessary?

STUDY DESIGN: This study was a retrospective observational study. PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to determine the radiological and clinical outcome of using locally sourced autologous bone graft in the surgical management of single-level lumbar lytic spondylolisthesis. BACKGROUND: Many spinal...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Boktor, Joseph, Ninan, Tishi, Pockett, Rhys, Collins, Iona, Sultan, Ahmed, Koptan, Wael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6024747/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30008528
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jcvjs.JCVJS_20_18
_version_ 1783336123731279872
author Boktor, Joseph
Ninan, Tishi
Pockett, Rhys
Collins, Iona
Sultan, Ahmed
Koptan, Wael
author_facet Boktor, Joseph
Ninan, Tishi
Pockett, Rhys
Collins, Iona
Sultan, Ahmed
Koptan, Wael
author_sort Boktor, Joseph
collection PubMed
description STUDY DESIGN: This study was a retrospective observational study. PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to determine the radiological and clinical outcome of using locally sourced autologous bone graft in the surgical management of single-level lumbar lytic spondylolisthesis. BACKGROUND: Many spinal surgeons supplement pedicle screw fixation of lumbar spondylolisthesis with cages. In developing countries, the high cost of interbody cages has precluded their use, with surgeons resorting to filling the interbody space with different types of bone graft instead. This study reports on the clinical and radiological outcome of posterior lumbar interbody fusions for low-grade lytic spondylolisthesis using locally sourced autologous bone graft. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Posterior interbody fusion was performed in 22 consecutive patients over 18-month period, using (BRAND) pedicle screw system and locally sourced bone graft, i.e., bone removed during neural decompression. There were no postoperative restrictions, and all patients underwent clinical outcome measurements using Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analogue pain score (VAS) at a minimum follow-up of 12 months, and computed tomography (CT) assessment of fusion with intraobserver validation by radiology consultant blinded, at 6 and12 months. Nearly 50% of the population were smokers. RESULTS: There was significant clinical improvement in ODI, VAS back pain, and VAS leg pain (P < 0.001). By contrast, the radiologic fusion rate measured by CT at 12 months was less satisfactory at 64%. There was no difference in clinical outcome between the fused group and nonfused population. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that the use of locally sourced bone graft in single-level lumbar lytic low-grade spondylolisthesis. Interbody fusion provides good clinical outcomes. The use of an interbody cage may not be clinically necessary. Our radiologic outcome, however, shows inferior fusion rates compared with published data. Future research will focus on long-term outcomes
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6024747
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60247472018-07-13 Lumbar fusion for lytic spondylolisthesis: Is an interbody cage necessary? Boktor, Joseph Ninan, Tishi Pockett, Rhys Collins, Iona Sultan, Ahmed Koptan, Wael J Craniovertebr Junction Spine Original Article STUDY DESIGN: This study was a retrospective observational study. PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to determine the radiological and clinical outcome of using locally sourced autologous bone graft in the surgical management of single-level lumbar lytic spondylolisthesis. BACKGROUND: Many spinal surgeons supplement pedicle screw fixation of lumbar spondylolisthesis with cages. In developing countries, the high cost of interbody cages has precluded their use, with surgeons resorting to filling the interbody space with different types of bone graft instead. This study reports on the clinical and radiological outcome of posterior lumbar interbody fusions for low-grade lytic spondylolisthesis using locally sourced autologous bone graft. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Posterior interbody fusion was performed in 22 consecutive patients over 18-month period, using (BRAND) pedicle screw system and locally sourced bone graft, i.e., bone removed during neural decompression. There were no postoperative restrictions, and all patients underwent clinical outcome measurements using Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analogue pain score (VAS) at a minimum follow-up of 12 months, and computed tomography (CT) assessment of fusion with intraobserver validation by radiology consultant blinded, at 6 and12 months. Nearly 50% of the population were smokers. RESULTS: There was significant clinical improvement in ODI, VAS back pain, and VAS leg pain (P < 0.001). By contrast, the radiologic fusion rate measured by CT at 12 months was less satisfactory at 64%. There was no difference in clinical outcome between the fused group and nonfused population. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that the use of locally sourced bone graft in single-level lumbar lytic low-grade spondylolisthesis. Interbody fusion provides good clinical outcomes. The use of an interbody cage may not be clinically necessary. Our radiologic outcome, however, shows inferior fusion rates compared with published data. Future research will focus on long-term outcomes Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6024747/ /pubmed/30008528 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jcvjs.JCVJS_20_18 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Journal of Craniovertebral Junction and Spine http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Boktor, Joseph
Ninan, Tishi
Pockett, Rhys
Collins, Iona
Sultan, Ahmed
Koptan, Wael
Lumbar fusion for lytic spondylolisthesis: Is an interbody cage necessary?
title Lumbar fusion for lytic spondylolisthesis: Is an interbody cage necessary?
title_full Lumbar fusion for lytic spondylolisthesis: Is an interbody cage necessary?
title_fullStr Lumbar fusion for lytic spondylolisthesis: Is an interbody cage necessary?
title_full_unstemmed Lumbar fusion for lytic spondylolisthesis: Is an interbody cage necessary?
title_short Lumbar fusion for lytic spondylolisthesis: Is an interbody cage necessary?
title_sort lumbar fusion for lytic spondylolisthesis: is an interbody cage necessary?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6024747/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30008528
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jcvjs.JCVJS_20_18
work_keys_str_mv AT boktorjoseph lumbarfusionforlyticspondylolisthesisisaninterbodycagenecessary
AT ninantishi lumbarfusionforlyticspondylolisthesisisaninterbodycagenecessary
AT pockettrhys lumbarfusionforlyticspondylolisthesisisaninterbodycagenecessary
AT collinsiona lumbarfusionforlyticspondylolisthesisisaninterbodycagenecessary
AT sultanahmed lumbarfusionforlyticspondylolisthesisisaninterbodycagenecessary
AT koptanwael lumbarfusionforlyticspondylolisthesisisaninterbodycagenecessary