Good 5-year postoperative outcomes after facet fusion using a percutaneous pedicle screw system for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis


doi: 10.1007/s10143-022-01747-x.


Online ahead of print.

Affiliations

Item in Clipboard

Tomohiro Miyashita et al.


Neurosurg Rev.


.

Abstract

Many authors have reported no significant differences in clinical outcomes between posterolateral fusion (PLF) and interbody fusion, as well as satisfactory long-term outcomes after PLF. Facet fusion (FF), a minimally invasive evolution of PLF, has also resulted in good clinical outcomes. This study aimed to assess the clinical outcomes 5 years after FF for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) and determine whether good clinical outcomes were maintained after FF. Records of 115 patients who underwent FF for single-level DLS with at least 5 years of follow-up were retrospectively studied. The therapeutic effectiveness of FF was assessed as a clinical outcome using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ), the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and the visual analogue scale (VAS) preoperatively and at 1 and 5 years postoperatively. Computed tomography was performed for fusion confirmation. The revision surgery rate was also evaluated. The JOABPEQ category scores demonstrated therapeutic effectiveness in 81.7% of patients at 1 year postoperatively and 81.4% of patients at 5 years postoperatively for low back pain; the corresponding proportions for walking ability were 93.8% and 86.6%, respectively. There were no significant differences in therapeutic effectiveness at 1 and 5 years postoperatively for any category, including the RMDQ and VAS scores. The fusion rate was 90.4% at the final follow-up. Four patients required revision surgery for adjacent segment disease 1-5 years after the first surgery (revision surgery rate, 3.5%). Good clinical outcomes were maintained 5 years after FF, and FF had an extremely low revision surgery rate.


Keywords:

Adjacent segment disease; Facet joint fusion; Fusion rate; In situ fusion; Nonunion; Posterolateral fusion.

References

    1. Colman MW, Baronne LM 2nd, Brodke DS, Woodbury AM, Annis P, Lawrence BD (2019) Perioperative effects associated with the surgical treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis: interbody versus no interbody. Clin Spine Surg 32(2):E71–E77. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000000729



      DOI



      PubMed

    1. Kim KT, Lee SH, Lee YH, Bae SC, Suk KS (2006) Clinical outcomes of 3 fusion methods through the posterior approach in the lumbar spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31(12):1351–7 discussion 1358.

    1. Kuraishi S, Takahashi J, Mukaiyama K, Shimizu M, Ikegami S, Futatsugi T, Hirabayashi H, Ogihara N, Hashidate H, Tateiwa Y, Kinoshita H, Kato H (2016) Comparison of clinical and radiological results of posterolateral fusion and posterior lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of L4 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Asian Spine J 10(1):143–152



      DOI

    1. McAnany SJ, Baird EO, Qureshi SA, Hecht AC, Heller JG, Anderson PA (2016) Posterolateral fusion versus interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 41(23):E1408-E1414.

    1. Andersen T, Videbæk TS, Hansen ES, Bünger C, Christensen FB (2008) The positive effect of posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion is preserved at long-term follow-up: a RCT with 11–13 year follow-up. Eur Spine J 17(2):272–280 (Epub 2007 Sep 12)



      DOI

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on vk
VK
Share on pinterest
Pinterest
Close Menu
Close Menu
undefined