scholarly journals Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with bioabsorbable spacers and local autograft in a series of 27 patients

2004 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel E. Couture ◽  
Charles L. Branch
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Surgical Complication ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Radiographic Evidence ◽  
Pedicle Fixation ◽  
Term Evaluation ◽  
Lost To Follow Up

Object The goal of this prospective study was to review a series of 27 patients who underwent bilateral posterior lumbar interbody fusion with instrumented pedicle fixation and two HYDROSORB (known generically as 70:30 poly[L-lactide-co-D,L-lactide]) rectangular cages packed with locally harvested autograft at a total of 48 levels, and to assess the safety and efficacy of this novel technique. This analysis, conducted at a mean of 26 months of follow up, is the first report of a long-term evaluation of this technique. Fusion rates and clinical outcomes are presented. Methods A prospective clinical and radiographic review of findings in 27 consecutive patients was performed. Fusion rates and clinical outcome were assessed at 6-month intervals up to the 32-month follow-up end point. Two patients with four corresponding fusion levels were lost to follow up. Radiographic evidence of satisfactory fusion was achieved in 42 (95.5%) of 44 levels fused. Satisfactory fusion at all levels was achieved in 23 (92%) of 25 patients. Two patients required repeated operations for treatment of symptomatic pseudarthrosis during the study period. The likelihood of all levels attaining fusion in a given patient decreased as the number of levels treated increased, which is consistent with previously published studies. Nonetheless, fusion rates per treated level were similar for patients in whom one to three levels were treated. No significant surgical complication occurred. Conclusions Posterior lumbar interbody fusion in which the HYDROSORB bioabsorbable implant packed with locally harvested autograft and segmental internal fixation are used appears to be an interbody fusion alternative whose efficacy is comparable with previously reported procedures.

Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using an En-Bloc Resected Lamina as an Interbody Spacer in Combination with Spinal Instruments

1998 ◽  
Vol 02 (04) ◽  
pp. 325-332
Author(s):  
Shigeru Hirabayashi ◽  
Kiyoshi Kumano ◽  
Takeshi Uchida
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Spinous Process ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Spinal Instrumentation ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Bony Union ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
En Bloc ◽  
Time Of Operation

We developed a new method of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) using an en-bloc resected lamina with or without a hydroxyapatite block as an interbody spacer instead of auto-iliac bone, in combination with rigid-type spinal instrumentation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of our method. There were 23 patients (13 males, 10 females, age at the time of operation: 21–71 years, mean 50.5 years; follow-up: 1–4 years, mean 2 years and 3 months). In 10 patients with spondylolitic spondylolisthesis and 3 patients with spondylolysis, the floating lamina was resected enbloc by mid-line splitting. In 7 patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis and 3 patients with unstable spine, a cleavage was made at the isthmus and then the complex of lamina and inferior spinous process was resected en-bloc. Seventeen patients with olisthesis underwent reduction. PLIF was performed at the L4/L5 level in 10 patients and the L5/S1 level in 13 patients. Sixteen patients with preoperative low back pain recovered, except for one patient with instability at the adjacent vertebra. All of the seven patients with preoperative gait disturbance recovered. The ratio of olisthesis changed from preoperative 30% to postoperative 18% on average. Good bony union was obtained in both the patients with and those without a hydroxyapatite spacer. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using an en-bloc resected lamina as an interbody spacer in combination with rigid-type spinal instrumentation was useful.

Outcomes of 2-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion for 2-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

2013 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 90-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hironobu Sakaura ◽  
Tomoya Yamashita ◽  
Toshitada Miwa ◽  
Kenji Ohzono ◽  
Tetsuo Ohwada
Keyword(s):  
Lumbar Spine ◽  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Sagittal Alignment ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Adjacent Segment ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Single Level ◽  
The Mean

Object A systematic review concerning surgical management of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) showed that a satisfactory clinical outcome was significantly more likely with adjunctive spinal fusion than with decompression alone. However, the role of adjunctive fusion and the optimal type of fusion remain controversial. Therefore, operative management for multilevel DS raises more complicated issues. The purpose of this retrospective study was to elucidate clinical and radiological outcomes after 2-level PLIF for 2-level DS with the least bias in determination of operative procedure. Methods Since 2005, all patients surgically treated for lumbar DS at the authors' hospital have been treated using posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with pedicle screws, irrespective of severity of slippage, patient age, or bone quality. The authors conducted a retrospective review of 20 consecutive cases involving patients who underwent 2-level PLIF for 2-level DS and had been followed up for 2 years or longer (2-level PLIF group). They also analyzed data from 92 consecutive cases involving patients who underwent single-level PLIF for single-level DS during the same time period and had been followed for at least 2 years (1-level PLIF group). This second group served as a control. Clinical status was assessed using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score. Fusion status and sagittal alignment of the lumbar spine were assessed by comparing serial plain radiographs. Surgery-related complications and the need for additional surgery were evaluated. Results The mean JOA score improved significantly from 12.8 points before surgery to 20.4 points at the latest follow-up in the 2-level PLIF group (mean recovery rate 51.8%), and from 14.2 points preoperatively to 22.5 points at the latest follow-up in the single-level PLIF group (mean recovery rate 55.3%). At the final follow-up, 95.0% of patients in the 2-level PLIF group and 96.7% of those in the 1-level PLIF group had achieved solid spinal fusion, and the mean sagittal alignment of the lumbar spine was more lordotic than before surgery in both groups. Early surgery-related complications, including transient neurological complications, occurred in 6 patients in the 2-level PLIF group (30.0%) and 11 patients in the 1-level PLIF group (12.0%). Symptomatic adjacent-segment disease was found in 4 patients in the 2-level PLIF group (20.0%) and 10 patients in the 1-level PLIF group (10.9%). Conclusions The clinical outcome of 2-level PLIF for 2-level lumbar DS was satisfactory, although surgery-related complications including symptomatic adjacent-segment disease were not negligible.

scholarly journals Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cortical bone trajectory screw fixation versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion using traditional pedicle screw fixation for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a comparative study

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 591-595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hironobu Sakaura ◽  
Toshitada Miwa ◽  
Tomoya Yamashita ◽  
Yusuke Kuroda ◽  
Tetsuo Ohwada
Keyword(s):  
Cortical Bone ◽  
Pedicle Screw ◽  
Surgical Outcomes ◽  
Recovery Rate ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Screw Fixation ◽  
Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Cortical Bone Trajectory

OBJECTIVE Several biomechanical studies have demonstrated the favorable mechanical properties of the cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw. However, no reports have examined surgical outcomes of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with CBT screw fixation for degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) compared with those after PLIF using traditional pedicle screw (PS) fixation. The purposes of this study were thus to elucidate surgical outcomes after PLIF with CBT screw fixation for DS and to compare these results with those after PLIF using traditional PS fixation. METHODS Ninety-five consecutive patients underwent PLIF with CBT screw fixation for DS (CBT group; mean followup 35 months). A historical control group consisted of 82 consecutive patients who underwent PLIF with traditional PS fixation (PS group; mean follow-up 40 months). Clinical status was assessed using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scale score. Fusion status was assessed by dynamic plain radiographs and CT. The need for additional surgery and surgery-related complications was also evaluated. RESULTS The mean JOA score improved significantly from 13.7 points before surgery to 23.3 points at the latest follow-up in the CBT group (mean recovery rate 64.4%), compared with 14.4 points preoperatively to 22.7 points at final follow-up in the PS group (mean recovery rate 55.8%; p < 0.05). Solid spinal fusion was achieved in 84 patients from the CBT group (88.4%) and in 79 patients from the PS group (96.3%, p > 0.05). Symptomatic adjacent-segment disease developed in 3 patients from the CBT group (3.2%) compared with 9 patients from the PS group (11.0%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS PLIF with CBT screw fixation for DS provided comparable improvement of clinical symptoms with PLIF using traditional PS fixation. However, the successful fusion rate tended to be lower in the CBT group than in the PS group, although the difference was not statistically significant between the 2 groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document