Dataset Information

Pain Control Affects the Radiographic Diagnosis of Segmental Instability in Patients with Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Diagnosing intervertebral instability is crucial for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). Disabling back pain will reduce spinal mobility which leads to an underestimate of the incidence of intervertebral instability. We hypothesized that adequate analgesia could alter the flexion/extension exam performance, and thus increase the diagnostic accuracy of segmental instability.

Materials and methods

One hundred patients with low-grade DLS were prospectively enrolled in the before-after cohort study. Standing lateral flexion/extension radiographs of lumbar spines were examined and analyzed before and after intramuscular injections of 30 mg ketorolac.

Results

Pain score decreased significantly after analgesic injections (p < 0.001). Dynamic slip (DS), dynamic segmental angle (DA), dynamic lumbar lordosis, and slip percentage (SP) were significantly increased after pain reduction (all p < 0.001). According to the diagnostic criteria for segmental instability (DS > 4.5 mm, DA > 15°, or SP > 15%), there were 4%, 4%, and 0.7% of total motion segments fulfilling the criteria which markedly increased to 42%, 32%, and 16.7% after analgesia was administered. The incidence of instability also increased from 6% to 38% after analgesia.

Conclusions

The diagnosis rate of intervertebral instability is commonly underestimated in the presence of low back pain. This short-term pain relief facilitates reliable functional imaging adding to the diagnosis of intervertebral instability.

SUBMITTER: Chou SH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8432229 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:STUDY DESIGN:Surgeon survey. OBJECTIVE:To examine factors influencing surgeons' definition of instability in grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) and assess treatment preferences for both stable and unstable DS. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:DS treatment options are broadly classified as decompression with or without fusion. In surgical decision-making, "instability" is frequently considered as a key factor. However, no consensus on the definition of instability exists. METHODS:A survey was conducted to ascertain the minimum amounts of static translation, dynamic translation, and angulation change that surgeons considered significant for determining instability. The importance of other clinical and radiographic features were also assessed, and respondents' standard treatment for stable and unstable DS. RESULTS:Out of 226 respondents, 99% deemed dynamic translation moderately to extremely influential for determining instability, whereas only 55% found static translation as important. The most prevalent cut-off values for dynamic (57%) and static translation (32%) were at least 2-4?mm and for angulation change at least 10-15 degrees (43%). Facet angulation was considered moderately to extremely important to determine instability by 69% of the surgeons, disk height by 67%, patient age by 64%, severity of stenosis by 55%, severity of back pain by 50%, patient-reported function by 49%, pelvic incidence by 47%, and severity of neurogenic claudication by 42%.Decompression with fusion was the preferred treatment method for unstable DS in 99% of the respondents. For stable DS, 40% would still perform fusion, whereas 60% preferred treatment with decompression-alone. Those who preferred fusion for stable DS reported significantly lower thresholds for static (P<0.001) and dynamic translation (P=0.004) for their determination of instability. CONCLUSIONS:Clear consensus regarding the definition of instability does not exist. Dynamic translation is the most agreed-upon parameter of influence. Treatment preferences vary for stable DS, but for unstable cases there is broad consensus to perform fusion. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Level II.

Project description:BackgroundManagement of degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis is controversial. Surgery is widely used, but its effectiveness in comparison with that of nonsurgical treatment has not been demonstrated in controlled trials.MethodsSurgical candidates from 13 centers in 11 U.S. states who had at least 12 weeks of symptoms and image-confirmed degenerative spondylolisthesis were offered enrollment in a randomized cohort or an observational cohort. Treatment was standard decompressive laminectomy (with or without fusion) or usual nonsurgical care. The primary outcome measures were the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form General Health Survey (SF-36) bodily pain and physical function scores (100-point scales, with higher scores indicating less severe symptoms) and the modified Oswestry Disability Index (100-point scale, with lower scores indicating less severe symptoms) at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years.ResultsWe enrolled 304 patients in the randomized cohort and 303 in the observational cohort. The baseline characteristics of the two cohorts were similar. The one-year crossover rates were high in the randomized cohort (approximately 40% in each direction) but moderate in the observational cohort (17% crossover to surgery and 3% crossover to nonsurgical care). The intention-to-treat analysis for the randomized cohort showed no statistically significant effects for the primary outcomes. The as-treated analysis for both cohorts combined showed a significant advantage for surgery at 3 months that increased at 1 year and diminished only slightly at 2 years. The treatment effects at 2 years were 18.1 for bodily pain (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.5 to 21.7), 18.3 for physical function (95% CI, 14.6 to 21.9), and -16.7 for the Oswestry Disability Index (95% CI, -19.5 to -13.9). There was little evidence of harm from either treatment.ConclusionsIn nonrandomized as-treated comparisons with careful control for potentially confounding baseline factors, patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis treated surgically showed substantially greater improvement in pain and function during a period of 2 years than patients treated nonsurgically. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000409 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Project description:BackgroundClinically, there are substantive practice variations in surgical management of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. We aimed at evaluating whether decompression alone outcomes for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis are comparable to those of decompression with fusion.MethodsIn this meta-analysis, the Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to February 16th, 2022. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing decompression alone with decompression and fusion for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis were included in this study. There were no language limitations. Odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to report results in the random-effects model. Main outcomes included Oswestry disability index (ODI), pain, clinical satisfaction, complication and reoperation rates. The study protocol was published in PROSPERO (CRD42022310645).FindingsThirty-three studies (6 RCTs and 27 cohort studies) involving 94 953 participants were included. Differences in post-operative ODI between decompression alone and decompression with fusion were not significant. A small difference for back (MD, 0.13; [95% CI, 0.08 to 0.18]; I 2:0.00%) and leg pain (MD, 0.30; [95% CI, 0.09 to 0.51]; I 2:48.35%) was observed on the 3rd post-operative month. The results did not reveal significant differences in leg pain and back pain between decompression alone and fusion groups on the 6th, 12th, and 24th post-operative months. Difference in clinical satisfaction between decompression alone and decompression with fusion were not significant from RCTs (OR, 0.26; [95% CI, 0.03 to 1.92]; I 2:83.27%). Complications (OR, 1.54; [95% CI, 1.16 to 2.05]; I 2:48.88%), operation time (MD, 83.39; [95% CI, 55.93 to 110.85]; I 2:98.75%), intra-operative blood loss (MD, 264.58; [95% CI, 174.99 to 354.16]; I 2:95.61%) and length of hospital stay (MD, 2.85; [95% CI, 1.60 to 4.10]; I 2:99.49%) were higher with fusion.InterpretationClinical effectiveness of decompression alone was comparable to that of decompression with fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Decompression alone is recommended for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.FundingThis work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81871818), Tangdu Hospital Seed Talent Program (Fei-Long Wei), Natural Science Basic Research Plan in Shaanxi Province of China (No.2019JM-265) and Social Talent Fund of Tangdu Hospital (No.2021SHRC034).

Project description:BackgroundInferior clinical outcomes have been reported in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) accompanied by lumbar degenerative scoliosis, but little attention has been paid to its radiologic assessment or preoperative planning. The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion on patients with DLS and lumbar degenerative scoliosis and explore the surgical aspects benefiting the restoration of lumbar degenerative scoliosis.MethodsAll patients with DLS and lumbar degenerative scoliosis undergoing single-level unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery between July 1, 2015, and April 30, 2021, were screened in this retrospective cohort study. Clinical outcomes including visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and radiographic parameters of sagittal and coronal alignment, cage spatial locations, and angle of pedicle screw (parallel, cranial, and caudad angle) were assessed. Coronal asymmetry was demonstrated by the intervertebral height difference between the medial and lateral margins of indexed intersegmental space. The correlations between Δintervertebral height difference (postoperative intervertebral height difference-preoperative intervertebral height difference) and radiographic parameters and clinical outcomes were analyzed by univariable, multivariable, mediation, and correlation analyses. Significance was set at a bilateral P<0.05.ResultsA total of 57 included patients were followed up for a minimum of 1 year. Reduction of VAS, ODI, and improvement of radiographic parameters were found after surgery. The cranial angle of the lower pedicle screw positively correlated with Δintervertebral height difference restoration (b=0.54; standard error=0.11; P<0.001).ConclusionsTransforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery appears to be an effective approach to improving the radiographic and clinical outcomes of patients with DLS and lumbar degenerative scoliosis. The cranial direction of the lower pedicle screws in single-level unilateral transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery may be associated with a better postoperative restoration of lumbar degenerative scoliosis.

Project description:BackgroundPedicle screw invasion of the proximal articular process will cause local articular process degeneration and acceleration, which is an important factor affecting adjacent segment degeneration. Although lumbar spondylolisthesis is a risk factor for screw invasion of the proximal joint, there is no clear conclusion regarding the two different types of spondylolisthesis. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to explore the influence of pedicle screw placement on proximal facet invasion in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis and isthmic spondylolisthesis.MethodsIn total, 468 cases of lumbar spondylolisthesis treated by decompression and fusion in our hospital from January 2017 to January 2020 were included in this retrospective study. Among them, 238 cases were degenerative spondylolisthesis (group A), and 230 cases were isthmic spondylolisthesis (group B). Sex, age, body mass index, bone mineral density, preoperative visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, postoperative VAS and ODI scores at 1 month and 3 months, and angle of the proximal facet joint at the last follow-up were recorded and compared between the two groups. The degree of pedicle screw invasion of the proximal facet joint was graded and compared by the SEO grading method.ResultsThere were no significant differences in sex, age, body mass index, bone mineral density, preoperative VAS and ODI scores, or proximal facet joint angle between the two groups (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in VAS and ODI scores between the two groups at 1 month and 3 months after the operation (P > 0.05). The VAS score of group A at the last follow-up was 1 (1,2). The VAS score of group B at the last follow-up was 3 (1,3). The ODI score of group A at the last follow-up was 6(4,26). The ODI score of group B at the last follow-up was 15(8,36). The VAS and ODI scores of the two groups at the last follow-up were significantly different (P < 0.05). According to the SEO grading method, the invasion of the proximal articular process by pedicle screw placement in group A involved 320 cases in grade 0, 128 cases in grade I and 28 cases in grade II. In group B, there were 116 cases in grade 0, 248 cases in grade I and 96 cases in grade II, with a significant difference (P < 0.01).ConclusionIn summary, a certain number of cases involving screws invading the proximal facet joint occurred in the two different types of lumbar spondylolisthesis, but the number in the isthmic spondylolisthesis group was significantly higher than that in the degenerative spondylolisthesis group, which caused more trauma to the proximal facet joint and significantly affected the patient prognosis.