Cargando…

Comparison of pedicle screw fixation with or without cement augmentation for treating single-segment isthmic spondylolisthesis in the osteoporotic spine

The present study examined the necessity of cement-augmented pedicle screw fixation in osteoporotic patients with single-segment isthmic spondylolisthesis.Fifty-nine cases were reviewed retrospectively. Thirty-three cases were in the polymethylmethacrylate-augmented pedicle screw (PMMA-PS) group, an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Peng, Jian-cheng, Guo, Hui-zhi, Zhan, Chen-guang, Huang, Hua-sheng, Ma, Yan-huai, Zhang, Shun-cong, Xu, Yue-rong, Mo, Guo-ye, Tang, Yong-chao
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9842729/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36646752
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-27539-x
Descripción
Sumario:The present study examined the necessity of cement-augmented pedicle screw fixation in osteoporotic patients with single-segment isthmic spondylolisthesis.Fifty-nine cases were reviewed retrospectively. Thirty-three cases were in the polymethylmethacrylate-augmented pedicle screw (PMMA-PS) group, and the other 26 cases were in the conventional pedicle screw (CPS) group. Evaluation data included operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospitalization cost, hospitalization days, rates of fusion, screw loosening, bone cement leakage, visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry disability index (ODI), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic tilt (PT) and sacral slope (SS).The operation time and blood loss in the CPS group decreased significantly compared to those in the PMMA-PS group. The average hospitalization cost of the PMMA-PS group was significantly higher than that of the CPS group. There was no significant difference in the average hospital stay between the 2 groups. The initial and last follow-up postoperative VAS and ODI scores improved significantly in the two groups. There were no significant differences in VAS and ODI between the 2 groups at each time point. The last postoperative spine-pelvic parameters were significantly improved compared with those preoperatively. In the PMMA-PS group, the fusion rate was 100%. The fusion rate was 96.15% in the CPS group. No significant difference was found between the two groups for the fusion rate. Nine patients in the PMMA-PS group had bone cement leakage. There was no screw loosening in the PMMA-PS group. There were 2 cases of screw loosening in the CPS group. There were no significant differences in screw loosening, postoperative adjacent segment fractures, postoperative infection or postoperative revision between the 2 groups. The use of PMMA-PS on a regular basis is not recommended in posterior lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of single-segment isthmic spondylolisthesis with osteoporosis.