Risk factors for degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Devine JG
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3516463 | biostudies-other | 2012 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundConsidering the high reoperation rate in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) patients undergoing lumbar surgeries and controversial results on the risk factors for the reoperation, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to explore the reoperation rate and risk factors for the reoperation in DLS patients undergoing lumbar surgeries.MethodsLiterature search was conducted from inception to October 28, 2022 in Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Odds ratio (OR) was used as the effect index for the categorical data, and effect size was expressed as 95% confidence interval (CI). Heterogeneity test was performed for each outcome effect size, and subgroup analysis was performed based on study design, patients, surgery types, follow-up time, and quality of studies to explore the source of heterogeneity. Results of all outcomes were examined by sensitivity analysis. Publication bias was assessed using Begg test, and adjusted using trim-and-fill analysis.ResultsA total of 39 cohort studies (27 retrospective cohort studies and 12 prospective cohort studies) were finally included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The overall results showed a 10% (95%CI: 8%-12%) of reoperation rate in DLS patients undergoing lumbar surgeries. In surgery types subgroup, the reoperation rate was 11% (95%CI: 9%-13%) for decompression, 10% (95%CI: 7%-12%) for fusion, and 9% (95%CI: 5%-13%) for decompression and fusion. An increased risk of reoperation was found in patients with obesity (OR = 1.91, 95%CI: 1.04-3.51), diabetes (OR = 2.01, 95%CI: 1.43-2.82), and smoking (OR = 1.51, 95%CI: 1.23-1.84).ConclusionsWe found a 10% of reoperation rate in DLS patients after lumbar surgeries. Obesity, diabetes, and smoking were risk factors for the reoperation.
| S-EPMC10324215 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The relationship between various factors predisposing to the formation of spondylolisthesis, including degenerative spondylolisthesis, has been analyzed by many authors. However, not all observations are consistent. In this review, we identified factors whose impact on the prevalence of spondylolisthesis was most often mentioned in the literature. These included gender, age, bone mineral density, ethnic origin, and oophorectomy. The results were inclusive in terms of physical activity, pregnancy status, and use of hormone replacement therapy. Associations between diabetes and smoking were very poorly marked. The literature so far has identified a number of factors significantly affecting the incidence of degenerative spondylolisthesis. These include age, gender, body weight, ethnic origin, bone mineral density, and hormonal balance. Radiological parameters, which include iliac crest, pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, sacral slope, and lumbar lordosis, may also be of great importance for assessing changes in the occurrence and progression. However, the authors do not agree on the real significance of individual factors. The aim of this review was to identify the factors predisposing to the formation of degenerative spondylolisthesis, the importance of which has been suggested in the current literature. The systematization of knowledge in this field can allow a more accurate adjustment of the treatment plan for each patient affected by this condition.
| S-EPMC10456558 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study designSystematic review and meta-analysis.ObjectiveCurrent surgical management of degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) involves decompression of the spinal canal followed by fusion with or without interbody. The additional functional and operative benefits derived from interbody inclusion has yet to be thoroughly established with a number of recent studies producing conflicting results. Thus, we aim to compare the functional and operative outcomes after fusion against interbody fusion in the treatment of DS.MethodsThis systematic review of the literature comparing posterolateral fusion (PLF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) outcomes in the treatment of DS was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Electronic searches of 6 databases yielded 386 articles from database inception to July 2016, which were screening against established criteria for inclusion into this study.ResultsA total of 6 studies, satisfied criteria and reported outcomes for 721 patients. Fusion alone was performed in 458 (63.5%) patients and interbody fusion was performed in 263 (36.5%) patients. Functional outcomes Oswestry Disability Index (P = .29) and visual analog scale (P = .13) were not statistically different between the 2 approaches. Furthermore, there was no significant inferiority between fusion alone and with interbody in terms of the operative outcomes of blood loss (P = .38), reoperation rate (P = .66), hospital stay (P = .96), complication rate (P = .78), or fusion rate (P = .15).ConclusionsThere was no statistically significant difference in functional and operative outcomes following fusion alone versus with interbody. Additional subgroup analysis of intrinsic DS features in future large, prospective, randomized controlled trials will improve the validity of these findings.
| S-EPMC5544162 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10570642 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC6889058 | biostudies-literature
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].).
| S-EPMC2553804 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study designSystematic review.ObjectivesSurgical procedures for lumbar degenerative diseases (LDD), which have emerged in the 21-century, are commonly practiced worldwide. Regarding financial burdens and health costs, readmissions within 30days following surgery are inconvenient. We performed a systematic review to integrate real-world evidence and report the current risk factors associated with 30-day readmission following surgery for LDD.MethodsThe Cochrane Library, Embase, and Medline electronic databases were searched from inception to April 2022 to identify relevant studies reporting risk factors for 30-day readmission following surgery for LDD.ResultsThirty-six studies were included in the review. Potential risk factors were identified in the included studies that reported multivariate analysis results, including age, race, obesity, higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score, anemia, bleeding disorder, chronic pulmonary disease, heart failure, dependent status, depression, diabetes, frailty, malnutrition, chronic steroid use, surgeries with anterior approach, multilevel spinal surgeries, perioperative transfusion, presence of postoperative complications, prolonged operative time, and prolonged length of stay.ConclusionsThere are several potential perioperative risk factors associated with unplanned readmission following surgery for LDD. Preoperatively identifying patients that are at increased risk of readmission is critical for achieving the best possible outcomes.
| S-EPMC9972270 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The efficacies and safety of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) remains controversial, and long-term clinical efficacies in particular need to be explored. This study is designed accordingly, therefore, we searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, OVID, and SinoMed for literature, regardless of publication date or language. Taking 12 months after operation as the shortest limit, the outcome measures were extracted, including visual analog scale (VAS), Oswetry dysfunction index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, intervertebral disk height (IDH), foraminal height (FH), lumbar lordosis (LL), segment lordosis (SL), slip ratio, and incidence of surgical complications. Meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.4 and Stata 16.0, and results were expressed with MD and 95% CI, and two-sided p-values with p < 0.05 being statistically significant. In total, 17 clinical studies (n = 689 patients) were screened, with an average patient age of 63.4 years. Our study revealed that VAS decreased by 4.55 (low back pain) and 5.46 (leg pain) points, respectively. And ODI score decreased by an average of 33.82% while JOA score increased by an average of 11.56 points. In terms of imaging indicators, mean IDH and FH increased by 4.18 and 4.91 mm, mean LL and SL improved by 9.22° and 2.46°, respectively. Besides, mean slip ratio decreased by 10.45%. The incidence of complications was statistically analyzed in 18 studies, with a rate of 4%-54% and an overall incidence of 19%. To sum up, our study was the first to focus on the long-term efficacies of OLIF treatment for DLS, and to provide further clinical evidence. However, long-term follow-up multicenter randomized controlled trials are still needed for further evaluation.
| S-EPMC9891977 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the efficacy of adding instrumented spinal fusion to decompression to treat degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS).DesignSystematic review with meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from inception to May 2022.Eligibility criteria for study selectionRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing decompression with instrumented fusion to decompression alone in patients with DS. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. We provide the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation assessment of the certainty of evidence (COE).ResultsWe identified 4514 records and included four trials with 523 participants. At a 2-year follow-up, adding fusion to decompression likely results in trivial difference in the Oswestry Disability Index (range 0-100, with higher values indicating greater impairment) with mean difference (MD) 0.86 (95% CI -4.53 to 6.26; moderate COE). Similar results were observed for back and leg pain measured on a scale of 0 to 100, with higher values indicating more severe pain. There was a slightly increased improvement in back pain (2-year follow-up) in the group without fusion shown by MD -5·92 points (95% CI -11.00 to -0.84; moderate COE). There was a trivial difference in leg pain between the groups, slightly favouring the one without fusion, with MD -1.25 points (95% CI -6.71 to 4.21; moderate COE). Our findings at 2-year follow-up suggest that omitting fusion may increase the reoperation rate slightly (OR 1.23; 0.70 to 2.17; low COE).ConclusionsEvidence suggests no benefits of adding instrumented fusion to decompression for treating DS. Isolated decompression seems sufficient for most patients. Further RCTs assessing spondylolisthesis stability are needed to determine which patients would benefit from fusion.Prospero registration numberCRD42022308267.
| S-EPMC10359551 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere have been lingering controversies reported decompression and plus fusion. And the relative safety of fusion in addition to standard decompression remains unclear. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of decompression alone or combined with fusion in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS).MethodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched the databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for relevant literature from their inception to 28th December 2021. We identified the eligible studies based on the PICOS principles, populations (LSS with DS), interventions (decompression alone), controls (decompression combined with fusion), outcomes [overall reoperation rate, complications, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), operative time, the amount of blood lost, length of stay (LOS), and visual analog scales (VAS)], study design (cohort studies). Quality assessment for individual study was performed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS).ResultsIn all, 12 articles involving a total of 14,693 patients were finally included in the study, the majority of patients underwent decompression alone (DA group: n=11,598) and the rest underwent decompression associated with fusion (FU group: n=3,095). The quality of most of the included studies was regarded as high quality. The results indicated that the FU group had a higher rate of complication [relative risk (RR): 1.770, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.485 to 2.110], longer operative time [weighted mean difference (WMD): 51.037, 95% CI: 13.743 to 88.330], and increased blood loss (WMD: 258.354, 95% CI: 150.468 to 366.239) than the DA group (all P<0.05), with no significant differences for overall reoperation rate (RR: 0.879, 95% CI: 0.432 to 1.786), ODI (WMD: -2.569, 95% CI: -6.548 to 1.409), LOS (WMD: 3.838, 95% CI: -2.172 to 9.848), and VAS found between the two groups (P>0.05).ConclusionsIn patients with LSS + DS, the effectiveness and safety of decompression alone may be superior to decompression plus fusion in terms of complication rate, operative time, and the amount of bleeding. However, more high-quality literature is needed in the future to confirm the best treatment choice for patients with LSS + DS.
| S-EPMC9279815 | biostudies-literature