Cargando…

Spondylolysis repair using a pedicle screw hook or claw-hook system. ―a comparison of bone fusion rates―

INTRODUCTION: To assess the bone fusion rates and clinical results of two surgical methods (pedicle screw claw-hook fixation and pedicle screw hook fixation) of lumbar spondylolysis repair. METHODS: A multicenter database of surgical patients with lumbar spondylolysis was reviewed. All patients <...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ishida, Ko, Aota, Yoichi, Mitsugi, Naoto, Kuniya, Takashi, Morii, Takaaki, Kawai, Takuya, Yamada, Katsutaka, Saito, Tomoyuki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6698499/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31440659
http://dx.doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2017-0011
_version_ 1783444552751775744
author Ishida, Ko
Aota, Yoichi
Mitsugi, Naoto
Kuniya, Takashi
Morii, Takaaki
Kawai, Takuya
Yamada, Katsutaka
Saito, Tomoyuki
author_facet Ishida, Ko
Aota, Yoichi
Mitsugi, Naoto
Kuniya, Takashi
Morii, Takaaki
Kawai, Takuya
Yamada, Katsutaka
Saito, Tomoyuki
author_sort Ishida, Ko
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: To assess the bone fusion rates and clinical results of two surgical methods (pedicle screw claw-hook fixation and pedicle screw hook fixation) of lumbar spondylolysis repair. METHODS: A multicenter database of surgical patients with lumbar spondylolysis was reviewed. All patients < 20 years old with a minimum of 6 months of follow-up and computed tomography images were included. Operation time and blood loss amount were investigated. Visual analogue scale (VAS; 0-10) scores for lower back pain were evaluated to assess clinical results. RESULTS: A total of 17 patients met the inclusion criteria. Pedicle screw hook fixation was performed in five patients (the hook group), and pedicle screw claw-hook fixation was performed in 13 patients (the claw-hook group). One patient was included in both groups because each method was performed at different lumbar levels (L4 and L5). The bone fusion rates at 3, 6, and 9 months after surgery were significantly higher in the claw-hook group than those in the hook group. Operation time and blood loss amount were not significantly different between the groups. VAS scores improved in the claw-hook group but not in the hook group because of a small number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Pedicle screw claw-hook fixation was more effective than pedicle screw hook fixation in terms of bone fusion rates.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6698499
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66984992019-08-22 Spondylolysis repair using a pedicle screw hook or claw-hook system. ―a comparison of bone fusion rates― Ishida, Ko Aota, Yoichi Mitsugi, Naoto Kuniya, Takashi Morii, Takaaki Kawai, Takuya Yamada, Katsutaka Saito, Tomoyuki Spine Surg Relat Res Original Article INTRODUCTION: To assess the bone fusion rates and clinical results of two surgical methods (pedicle screw claw-hook fixation and pedicle screw hook fixation) of lumbar spondylolysis repair. METHODS: A multicenter database of surgical patients with lumbar spondylolysis was reviewed. All patients < 20 years old with a minimum of 6 months of follow-up and computed tomography images were included. Operation time and blood loss amount were investigated. Visual analogue scale (VAS; 0-10) scores for lower back pain were evaluated to assess clinical results. RESULTS: A total of 17 patients met the inclusion criteria. Pedicle screw hook fixation was performed in five patients (the hook group), and pedicle screw claw-hook fixation was performed in 13 patients (the claw-hook group). One patient was included in both groups because each method was performed at different lumbar levels (L4 and L5). The bone fusion rates at 3, 6, and 9 months after surgery were significantly higher in the claw-hook group than those in the hook group. Operation time and blood loss amount were not significantly different between the groups. VAS scores improved in the claw-hook group but not in the hook group because of a small number of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Pedicle screw claw-hook fixation was more effective than pedicle screw hook fixation in terms of bone fusion rates. The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research 2018-02-28 /pmc/articles/PMC6698499/ /pubmed/31440659 http://dx.doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2017-0011 Text en Copyright © 2018 by The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Spine Surgery and Related Research is an Open Access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. To view the details of this license, please visit (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Ishida, Ko
Aota, Yoichi
Mitsugi, Naoto
Kuniya, Takashi
Morii, Takaaki
Kawai, Takuya
Yamada, Katsutaka
Saito, Tomoyuki
Spondylolysis repair using a pedicle screw hook or claw-hook system. ―a comparison of bone fusion rates―
title Spondylolysis repair using a pedicle screw hook or claw-hook system. ―a comparison of bone fusion rates―
title_full Spondylolysis repair using a pedicle screw hook or claw-hook system. ―a comparison of bone fusion rates―
title_fullStr Spondylolysis repair using a pedicle screw hook or claw-hook system. ―a comparison of bone fusion rates―
title_full_unstemmed Spondylolysis repair using a pedicle screw hook or claw-hook system. ―a comparison of bone fusion rates―
title_short Spondylolysis repair using a pedicle screw hook or claw-hook system. ―a comparison of bone fusion rates―
title_sort spondylolysis repair using a pedicle screw hook or claw-hook system. ―a comparison of bone fusion rates―
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6698499/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31440659
http://dx.doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2017-0011
work_keys_str_mv AT ishidako spondylolysisrepairusingapediclescrewhookorclawhooksystemacomparisonofbonefusionrates
AT aotayoichi spondylolysisrepairusingapediclescrewhookorclawhooksystemacomparisonofbonefusionrates
AT mitsuginaoto spondylolysisrepairusingapediclescrewhookorclawhooksystemacomparisonofbonefusionrates
AT kuniyatakashi spondylolysisrepairusingapediclescrewhookorclawhooksystemacomparisonofbonefusionrates
AT moriitakaaki spondylolysisrepairusingapediclescrewhookorclawhooksystemacomparisonofbonefusionrates
AT kawaitakuya spondylolysisrepairusingapediclescrewhookorclawhooksystemacomparisonofbonefusionrates
AT yamadakatsutaka spondylolysisrepairusingapediclescrewhookorclawhooksystemacomparisonofbonefusionrates
AT saitotomoyuki spondylolysisrepairusingapediclescrewhookorclawhooksystemacomparisonofbonefusionrates