Fusion and nonsurgical treatment for symptomatic lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review of Oswestry Disability Index and MOS Short Form-36 outcomes

Risk Factors Associated With Failure to Reach Minimal Clinically Important Difference in Patient-reported Outcomes Following Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Spondylolisthesis

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

OBJECTIVE

To determine risk factors associated with failure to reach the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for patients undergoing minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) for spondylolisthesis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The MCID of PROs are often utilized to determine the benefit of spinal procedures. However, negative predictive factors for reaching MCID in patients surgically treated for lumbar spondylolisthesis have been difficult to elucidate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospectively maintained surgical database of patients who were diagnosed with lumbar spondylolisthesis and surgically treated with a single level MIS TLIF from 2010 to 2016 was reviewed. Patients with incomplete PRO survey data or <6-month follow-up were excluded from the analysis. MCID for visual analogue scale (VAS) back, VAS leg, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was obtained from established values in the literature. All risk factors were then assessed for association with failure to reach MCID using bivariate and multivariate regression adjusting for preoperative characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 165, 76, and 73 patients treated with MIS TLIF for spondylolisthesis had complete PRO data for VAS back, VAS leg, and ODI, respectively, and were thus included in the analysis for the respective PRO. Overall, 75.76%, 71.05%, and 61.64% of patients treated with a single level MIS TLIF for spondylolisthesis reached MCID for VAS back, VAS leg, and ODI, respectively. On multivariate analysis, patients were less likely to achieve MCID for VAS back following surgical treatment if they received workers' compensation (P<0.001). No other measured factors were noted to independently correlate with MCID achievement.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that a majority of patients with spondylolisthesis achieve MCID for commonly measured PROs following MIS TLIF for spondylolisthesis. However, worker's compensation insurance status may serve as a negative predictive factor for reaching MCID.

Sensory nerve ingrowth, cytokines, and instability of discogenic low back pain: A review

Introduction

Many patients suffer from discogenic low back pain. However, the mechanisms, diagnosistic strategy, and treatment of discogenic low back pain all remain controversial. The purpose of this paper was to review the pathological mechanisms of discogenic low back pain.

Methods

Many authors have investigated the pathological mechanisms of discogenic low back pain using animal models and examining human patients. Central to most investigations is understanding the innervation and instabilities of diseased intervertebral discs and the role of inflammatory mediators. We discuss three pathological mechanisms of discogenic low back pain: innervation, inflammation, and mechanical hypermobility of the intervertebral disc.

Results

Sensory nerve fibers include C-fibers and A delta-fibers, which relay pain signals from the innervated outer layers of the intervertebral disc under normal conditions. However, ingrowth of these sensory nerve fibers into the inner layers of intervertebral disc occurs under disease conditions. Levels of neurotrophic factors and some cytokines are significantly higher in diseased discs than in normal discs. Stablization of the segmental hypermobility, which can be induced by intervertebral disc degeneration, suppresses inflammation and prevents sensitization of sensory nerve fibers innervating the disc.

Conclusions

Pathological mechanisms of discogenic low back pain include sensory nerve ingrowth into inner layers of the intervertebral disc, upregulation of neurotrophic factors and cytokines, and instability. Inhibition of these mechanisms is important in the treatment of discogenic low back pain.

Postoperative Evaluation of Health-Related Quality-of-Life (HRQoL) of Patients With Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis After Instrumented Posterolateral Fusion (PLF): A prospective Study With a 2-Year Follow-Up

Background

Several studies have compared instrumented PLF with other surgical approaches in terms of clinical outcomes, however little is known about the postoperative HRQoL of patients, especially as regards to degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Methods

A group of 62 patients, 30 women (48,4%) and 32 men (51,6%) with mean age 56,73 (SD +/- 9,58) years old, were selected to participate in a 2-year follow-up. Their pain was assessed via the visual analogue scale (VAS) for low back pain (VASBP) and leg pain (VASLP) separately. Their HRQoL was evaluated by the Short Form (36) Health Survey (SF-36). Both scales, VAS and SF36, were measured and re-assessed at 10 days, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months and 2 years.

Results

VASBP, VASLP and each parameter of SF36 presented statistically significant improvement (p<0.01). VASBP, VASLP and SF36 scores did not differ significantly between men and women (p≥0.05). The most notable amelioration of VASBP, VASLP was observed within the first 10 days and the maximum improvement within the first 3 months. From that point, a stabilization of the parameters was observed. The majority of SF36 parameters, and especially PF (physical functioning) and BP (bodily pain), presented statistically significant improvement within the follow up depicting a very similar improvement pattern to that of VAS.

Conclusion

We conclude that instrumented PLF ameliorates impressively the HRQoL of patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis after 2 years of follow-up, with pain recession being the most crucial factor responsible for this improvement.

Minimally invasive techniques for lumbar decompressions and fusions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this study is to summarize the recent literature investigating the use of minimally invasive (MIS) techniques in the treatment of lumbar degenerative stenosis, spondylolisthesis, and scoliosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

MIS lumbar decompression and fusion techniques for degenerative pathology are associated with reduced operative morbidity, shortened length of hospital stay, and reduced postoperative pain and narcotics utilization. Recent studies with long-term clinical follow-up have demonstrated equivalence in clinical outcomes between open and MIS surgical procedures. Radiographically, MIS procedures provide adequate postoperative correction of coronal alignment. Correction of sagittal alignment, however, is more variable based on current reports. MIS techniques are both safe and effective in the treatment of lumbar degenerative pathologies. While some studies have reported on long-term outcomes and costs associated with MIS procedures, more investigation into these topics is still necessary. Additionally, further work is required to analyze the training requirements and learning curves of MIS procedures to better promote adoption amongst surgeons.

Comparison of clinical efficacy in epidural steroid injections through transforaminal or parasagittal approaches

BACKGROUND

The transforaminal (TF) epidural steroid injection (ESI) is suggested as more effective than the interlaminar (IL) route due to higher delivery of medication at the anterior epidural space. However, serious complications such as spinal cord injury and permanent neural injury have been reported. The purpose of this study is to evaluate and compare the clinical effectiveness, technical ease, and safety of the TF and parasagittal IL (PIL) ESI.

METHODS

A total of 72 patients were randomized to either the PIL group (n = 41) or the TF group (n = 31) under fluoroscopic guidance. Patients were evaluated for effective pain relief by the numerical rating scale (NRS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (%) before and 2 weeks after the ESI. The presence of concordant paresthesia, anterior epidural spread, total procedure time, and exposed radiation dose were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Both the PIL and TF approach produced similar clinically significant improvements in pain and level of disability. Among the 72 patients, 27 PIL (66%) and 20 TF (64%) patients showed concordant paresthesia while 14 (34%) and 11 (36%) patients in the same respective order showed disconcordant or no paresthesia. Radiation dose and total procedure time required were compared; the PIL group showed a significantly lower radiation dose (30.2 ± 12 vs. 80.8 ± 26.8 [Cgy/cm²]) and shorter procedure time (96.2 ± 31 vs. 141.6 ± 30 seconds).

CONCLUSIONS

ESI under fluoroscopic guidance with PIL or TF approach were effective in reducing the NRS and ODI. PIL ESI was a technically easier and simple method compared to TF ESI.

An analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database, Part 1. Disability, quality of life, and pain outcomes following lumbar spine surgery: predicting likely individual patient outcomes for shared decision-making

OBJECTIVE Quality and outcomes registry platforms lie at the center of many emerging evidence-driven reform models. Specifically, clinical registry data are progressively informing health care decision-making. In this analysis, the authors used data from a national prospective outcomes registry (the Quality Outcomes Database) to develop a predictive model for 12-month postoperative pain, disability, and quality of life (QOL) in patients undergoing elective lumbar spine surgery. METHODS Included in this analysis were 7618 patients who had completed 12 months of follow-up. The authors prospectively assessed baseline and 12-month patient-reported outcomes (PROs) via telephone interviews. The PROs assessed were those ascertained using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EQ-5D, and numeric rating scale (NRS) for back pain (BP) and leg pain (LP). Variables analyzed for the predictive model included age, gender, body mass index, race, education level, history of prior surgery, smoking status, comorbid conditions, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, symptom duration, indication for surgery, number of levels surgically treated, history of fusion surgery, surgical approach, receipt of workers' compensation, liability insurance, insurance status, and ambulatory ability. To create a predictive model, each 12-month PRO was treated as an ordinal dependent variable and a separate proportional-odds ordinal logistic regression model was fitted for each PRO. RESULTS There was a significant improvement in all PROs (p < 0.0001) at 12 months following lumbar spine surgery. The most important predictors of overall disability, QOL, and pain outcomes following lumbar spine surgery were employment status, baseline NRS-BP scores, psychological distress, baseline ODI scores, level of education, workers' compensation status, symptom duration, race, baseline NRS-LP scores, ASA score, age, predominant symptom, smoking status, and insurance status. The prediction discrimination of the 4 separate novel predictive models was good, with a c-index of 0.69 for ODI, 0.69 for EQ-5D, 0.67 for NRS-BP, and 0.64 for NRS-LP (i.e., good concordance between predicted outcomes and observed outcomes). CONCLUSIONS This study found that preoperative patient-specific factors derived from a prospective national outcomes registry significantly influence PRO measures of treatment effectiveness at 12 months after lumbar surgery. Novel predictive models constructed with these data hold the potential to improve surgical effectiveness and the overall value of spine surgery by optimizing patient selection and identifying important modifiable factors before a surgery even takes place. Furthermore, these models can advance patient-focused care when used as shared decision-making tools during preoperative patient counseling.

Could the Topping-Off Technique Be the Preventive Strategy against Adjacent Segment Disease after Pedicle Screw-Based Fusion in Lumbar Degenerative Diseases? A Systematic Review

The "topping-off" technique is a new concept applying dynamic or less rigid fixation such as hybrid stabilization device (HSD) or interspinous process device (IPD) for the purpose of avoiding adjacent segment disease (ASD) proximal to the fusion construct. A systematic review of the literature was performed on the effect of topping-off techniques to prevent or decrease the occurrence of ASD after lumbar fusion surgery. We searched through major online databases, PubMed and MEDLINE, using key words related to "topping-off" technique. We reviewed the surgical results of "topping-off" techniques with either HSD or IPD, including the incidence of ASD at two proximal adjacent levels (index and supra-adjacent level) as compared to the fusion alone group. The results showed that the fusion alone group had statistically higher incidence of radiographic (52.6%) and symptomatic (11.6%) ASD at the index level as well as higher incidence (8.1%) of revision surgery. Besides, the HSD (10.5%) and fusion groups (24.7%) had statistically higher incidences of radiographic ASD at supra-adjacent level than the IPD (1%). The findings suggest that the "topping-off" technique may potentially decrease the occurrence of ASD at the proximal motion segments. However, higher quality prospective randomized trials are required prior to wide clinical application.

A Systematic Review of Cross-cultural Adaptation of the Oswestry Disability Index

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review of cross-cultural adaptation of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the translation procedures for and measurement properties of cross-cultural adaptations of the ODI.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The ODI is the most commonly used questionnaire to determine the outcome of low back pain, and has been translated into many other languages, such as Danish, Greek, and Korean, and adapted for use in different countries.

METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Medline, and EMBASE were searched from the time they were established to January 2015. Studies related to cross-cultural adaptation of the ODI in a specific language/culture were included. Guidelines for the Process of Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Self-Report Measures and Quality Criteria for Psychometric Properties of Health Status Questionnaire were used for assessment.

RESULTS

This study included 27 versions of ODI adaptations in 24 different languages/cultures. Only the Danish-Danish adaptation employed all six of the cross-cultural adaptation processes. Expert committee review (three of 27), back translation (eight of 27), and pretesting (nine of 27) were conducted in very few studies. The Polish-Polish (two) adaptation reported all (nine of nine) the measurement properties, whereas the Traditional Chinese-Taiwan and Hungarian-Hungarian adaptations reported six of them. Content validity (16/27), construct validity (17/27), and reliability (22/27) were determined in a relatively high number of studies, whereas agreement (three of 27), responsiveness (12/27), floor and ceiling effects (six of 27), and interpretability (one of 27) were only determined in some studies.

CONCLUSION

We recommend the Traditional Chinese-Taiwan, Simplified Chinese-Mandarin Chinese, Danish-Danish, German-Swiss, Hungarian-Hungarian, Italian-Italian, and Polish-Polish (two) versions for application, but Traditional Chinese-Hong Kong, French-Swiss, Japanese-Japanese (two), Polish-Polish (two), Tamil-Indian, and Thai-Thai versions may need more research. Furthermore, supplementary tests for the adaptations are necessary, especially for assessing agreement, responsiveness, and interpretability.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1.

CORRELATION BETWEEN QUALITY OF LIFE AND OSTEOLYSIS AROUND LUMBAR PEDICLE SCREWS

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate whether the presence of osteolysis around the pedicle screws affects the quality of life of patients who underwent posterolateral arthrodesis of the lumbosacral spine. Methods: A retrospective study of patients undergoing lumbar posterolateral or lumbosacral arthrodesis due to spinal degenerative disease. CT scans of the operated segments were performed at intervals of 45, 90, 180, and 360 postoperatively. In these tests, the presence of a peri-implant radiolucent halo was investigated, which was considered present when greater than 1mm in the coronal section. Concurrently with the completion of CT scans, the participants completed the questionnaire Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) to assess the degree of disability of the patients. Results: A total of 38 patients were evaluated, and 14 (36.84%) of them showed some degree of osteolysis around at least one pedicle screw at the end of follow-up. Of the 242 analyzed screws, 27 (11.15%) had osteolysis in the CT coronal section, with the majority of these occurrences located at the most distal level segment of the arthrodesis. There was no correlation between the presence of the osteolysis to the quality of life of patients. The quality of life has significantly improved when comparing the preoperative results with the postoperative results at different times of application of ODI. This improvement in ODI maintains linearity over time. Conclusion: There is no correlation between the presence of peri-implant osteolysis to the quality of life of patients undergoing lumbar or posterolateral lumbosacral arthrodesis in the follow-up period up to 360 days. The quality of life in postoperative has significantly improvement when compared to the preoperative period.

Workers' Compensation, Return to Work, and Lumbar Fusion for Spondylolisthesis

Lumbar fusion for spondylolisthesis is associated with consistent outcomes in the general population. However, workers' compensation is a risk factor for worse outcomes. Few studies have evaluated prognostic factors within this clinically distinct population. The goal of this study was to identify prognostic factors for return to work among patients with workers' compensation claims after fusion for spondylolisthesis. The authors used International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, and Current Procedural Terminology codes to identify 686 subjects from the Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation who underwent fusion for spondylolisthesis from 1993 to 2013. Positive return to work status was recorded in patients who returned to work within 2 years of fusion and remained working for longer than 6 months. The criteria for return to work were met by 29.9% (n=205) of subjects. The authors used multivariate logistic regression analysis to identify prognostic factors for return to work. Negative preoperative prognostic factors for postoperative return to work included: out of work for longer than 1 year before fusion (P<.001; odds ratio [OR], 0.16); depression (P=.007; OR<0.01); long-term opioid analgesic use (P=.006; OR, 0.41); lumbar stenosis (P=.043; OR, 0.55); and legal representation (P=.042; OR, 0.63). Return to work rates associated with these factors were 9.7%, 0.0%, 10.0%, 29.2%, and 25.0%, respectively. If these subjects were excluded, the return to work rate increased to 60.4%. The 70.1% (n=481) of subjects who did not return to work had markedly worse outcomes, shown by higher medical costs, chronic opioid dependence, and higher rates of failed back syndrome, total disability, and additional surgery. Psychiatric comorbidity increased after fusion but was much higher in those who did not return to work. Future studies are needed to identify how to better facilitate return to work among similar patients with workers' compensation claims.

Serum CX3CL1/fractalkine concentrations are positively associated with disease severity in postmenopausal osteoporotic patients

BACKGROUND

The chemokine (C-X3-C motif) ligand 1 (CX3CL1), also called fractalkine (FKN), has recently been reported to be involved in osteoclastogenic process and pathological bone destruction.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the link between serum CX3CL1/FKN levels with disease progression of postmenopausal osteoporotic patients.

METHODS

A total of 53 women with postmenopausal osteoporosis (PMOP group), 51 postmenopausal non-osteoporotic female patients (PMNOP group) and 50 premenopausal non-osteoporotic healthy women of childbearing age (control group) were enrolled in the study. The bone mineral density (BMD) for all subjects was determined via dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry of the lumbar spine, femoral neck, internal trochanter, total hip, greater trochanter and Ward's triangle. The levels of FKN in the serum were examined using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay method. The serum bone resorption markers TRACP-5b, NTX levels, inflammation markers IL-1β and IL-6 as well as oestrogen-2(E2) were also detected in all participants. The visual analogue scores (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for low back pain were recorded in PMOP females for evaluation of osteoporotic pain and function.

RESULTS

FKN levels were significantly higher in postmenopausal osteoporotic patients compared with postmenopausal non-osteoporotic females (139.8 ± 44.3 pg/mL VS 116.5 ± 23.1 pg/mL, p < 0.05) and healthy controls (139.8 ± 44.3 pg/mL VS 109.7 ± 19.4 pg/mL, p < 0.05). Serum FKN concentrations were negatively associated with BMD at femoral neck (r = -0.394, p = 0.004), total hip(r = -0.374, p = 0.006), internal trochanter(r = -0.340, p = 0.013), greater trochanter(r = -0.376, p = 0.006), Ward's triangle(r = -0.343, p = 0.012), L1-L4 lumbar spine(r = -0.339, p = 0.013) and positively associated with VAS (r = 0.321, p = 0.019) and ODI (r = 0.377, p = 0.005) scores, bone turnover makers (TRACP-5b:r = 0.341, p = 0.012; NTX:r = 0.364, p = 0.007)as well as inflammation markers (IL-1β: r = 0.396, p = 0.003; IL-6:r = 0.355, p = 0.009) in postmenopausal osteoporotic patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Serum FKN may serve as a novel biomarker for assessing disease progression and a new potential therapeutic target for anti-resorptive treatment in osteoporosis patients.

Trends of Posterior Long Segment Fusion with and without Recombinant Human Bone Morphogenetic Protein 2 in Patients with Scoliosis

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

Symptomatic scoliosis can be a source of severe pain and disability. When nonoperative treatments fail, spine fusion is considered as an effective procedure in scoliosis management. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the trends of patients with scoliosis undergoing posterior long segment fusion (PLSF) with and without recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 (rhBMP-2).

METHODS

Patients within the orthopedic subset of Medicare database undergoing PLSF from 2005 to 2011 were identified using the PearlDiver Patient Records Database. Both diagnosis and procedural International Classification of Diseases, ninth edition and Current Procedural Terminology codes were used. The year of procedure, age, sex, region, and rhBMP-2 use were recorded.

RESULTS

In total, 1,265,591 patients with scoliosis were identified with 29,787 PLSF surgeries between 2005 and 2011. The incidence of PLSF procedures increased gradually from 2005 to 2009, decreased in 2010 (p < 0 0.01), and grew again in 2011. Patients over age 84 years had the highest incidence of PLSF. The lowest incidence of the procedures was in the Northeast, 5.96 per 100,000 patients. Sex differences were observed with a male-to-female ratio of 0.40 (p < 0.01). The use of rhBMP-2 for PLSF increased steadily from 2005 to 2009; the numbers dropped dramatically in 2010 and returned by 2011.

CONCLUSIONS

According to our study, patients with scoliosis demonstrated a 0.6575 average incidence increase of PLSF treatments annually. There were significant differences in incidence of PLSF procedure and patient demographics. Additionally, rhBMP-2 consumption significantly changed when we stratified it by sex, age, and region respectively.

PEEK Cages in Lumbar Fusion: Mid-term Clinical Outcome and Radiologic Fusion

STUDY DESIGN

Historical cohort analysis.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluation of mid-term clinical outcome and radiologic fusion in patients treated with a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion can be a good alternative in chronic low back pain when conservative treatment fails. Although titanium alloy cages give good fusion rates, disadvantages are the subsidence of the cage in the adjacent vertebrae and problematic radiologic evaluation of fusion. PEEK cages such as the Synfix-LR cage (Synthes, Switzerland) should overcome this.

METHODS

From December 2004 until August 2007, 95 patients (21 double-level and 74 single-level) with degenerative disk disease from L3-S1 were operated by a single surgeon. The number of reoperations was counted. Radiologic fusion on computed tomography scan was scored with a new scoring system by an independent skeletal radiologist and orthopedic surgeon. Intraobserver agreement and specificity were assessed. Clinical improvement was measured by the Oswestry Disability Index score. The median duration of clinical follow-up was 47.7 months (range 29.9-61.6).

RESULTS

In total, 26 patients were reoperated after a median period of 17.6 months (range 6.7-46.9) of the initial surgery. Of the 26 patients, 23 patients (18 single-level and 5 double-level) were reoperated for symptomatic pseudarthrosis. A moderate agreement (κ=0.36) and a specificity of 70% and 37% for the radiologist and orthopedic surgeon, respectively, were found for scoring bony bridging. The Oswestry Disability Index score improved after initial surgery; however, reoperated patients reported a significantly lower improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

A high number of reoperations after an anterior lumbar interbody fusion procedure with the Synfix-LR cage were found, mainly because of symptomatic pseudarthrosis. The absence of posterior fixation in combination with lower stiffness and the hydrophobic characteristics of PEEK probably lead to insufficient initial stability, creating suboptimal conditions for bony bridging, and thus solid fusion. The proposed ease of the evaluation of radiologic fusion could not be supported. Clinicians should be alert on pseudarthrosis when patients treated with the Synfix-LR cage presented with persisted or aggravated complaints.

Pain and disability following first-time lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative disorders: a systematic review protocol

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal fusion for degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine is frequently used, despite current research presenting inconclusive evidence. This study aims to systematically review and meta-analyse the natural course of pain and disability in patients with degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine such as spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, disc herniation, or discogenic low back pain to improve lumbar spinal fusion management.

METHODS/DESIGN

An electronic database search will be conducted up to 30 September 2015 using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and ZETOC database. In addition, a search for articles in press and published ahead of print, British National Bibliography for Report Literature, and OpenGrey will be conducted. Prospective cohort studies using outcome measures of pain and disability will be eligible for inclusion. Two reviewers will screen titles, abstracts, and full-text independently using predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The risk of bias of included studies will be assessed with the modified version of the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. If meta-analysis of outcome data is deemed appropriate, variance-weighted pooled means will be calculated.

DISCUSSION

The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis may improve understanding of recovery after lumbar spinal fusion and improve lumbar spinal fusion management.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42015026922.

Quality assessment of systematic reviews for surgical treatment of low back pain: an overview

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Low back pain is one of the most frequent reasons for medical appointments. Surgical treatment is widely controversial, and new surgical techniques and treatment modalities have been developed within the last decade. Treatment for low back pain should be evidence-based through systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Thus, the quality of these reviews is sometimes put into question as methodological mistakes are frequently seen.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to gather all systematic reviews for the surgical treatment of low back pain and analyze their outcomes, quality, and conclusion.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This is an overview of systematic reviews.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The outcome measures were the AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) score, PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement, and conclusion supported by descriptive statistics.

METHODS

A literature search for systematic reviews containing low back pain surgical treatment was conducted through different medical databases. Two investigators independently assessed all titles and abstracts for inclusion. Studies should have at least one surgical procedure as an intervention. Diagnoses were categorized as lumbar disc herniation, spondylolisthesis, stenosis, facet joint syndrome, and degenerative disc disease. Quality was assessed through the PRISMA and AMSTAR questionnaires. Study quality related to its PRISMA or AMSTAR score percentage was rated as very poor (<30%), poor (30%-50%), fair (50%-70%), good (70%-90%), and excellent (>90%). Articles were considered conclusive if they had a conclusion for their primary outcome supported by descriptive statistical evidence. This study was funded exclusively by the authors' own resources. None of the authors have any potential conflict of interest to declare.

RESULTS

Overall, there were 40 systematic reviews included. According to AMSTAR and PRISMA scores, 5% to 7.5% of the systematic reviews were rated as excellent and most of them were rated as a fair review. AMSTAR indicated that 22.5% of the reviews have very poor quality, whereas PRISMA stated that 7.5% were of very poor quality. For both tools, performing a meta-analysis made the reviews' quality significantly better. The best-rated diagnosis groups according to PRISMA were spondylosis, lumbar disc herniation, and degenerative disc disease. Considering the studies' conclusions, 25 (62.5%) out of the 40 systematic reviews had a conclusion to their primary outcome, and only 11 (27.5%) were supported by descriptive statistical analysis. This means that 44% of the systematic reviews with a conclusion were evidence-based. There were 15 (37.5%) systematic reviews that did not reach a conclusion to their primary objectives.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, most systematic reviews for low back pain do not reach very good or excellent quality, and only 27.5% of them have evidence-based conclusions. Including a meta-analysis is a significant factor to improve quality and evidence for systematic reviews.

Effects of Lumbar Stiffness After Lumbar Fusion Surgery on Activities of Daily Living

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the effects of lumbar stiffness after lumbar fusion surgery on functional limitations, health-related quality of life, and activities of daily living (ADL).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Postoperative outcomes after fusion surgery are usually assessed using patient-reported instruments to describe disability related to pain and health status. There are few studies on the effects of lumbar stiffness on ADL after lumbar fusion surgery.

METHODS

This study included 93 patients who underwent lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative lumbar disease. Their mean age was 69 years (range 51-79), and the mean follow-up was 34 months (24-46). The patients were categorized into 5 groups according to the number of segments involved: 0 level (decompression), 1 level, 2 levels, 3 levels, and 4 levels. They completed a 21-item questionnaire about their ADL and the Short Form Health Survey 36 (SF-36) to evaluate the effects of lumbar stiffness on ADL after surgery.

RESULTS

There was a linear trend toward a decreased rating in all items in our questionnaire and in the physical component summary in the SF-36 related to postoperative lumbar stiffness. These trends were significantly related to the number of fused segments (P < 0.05 and P < 0.001, respectively). Patient satisfaction did not differ between the groups (P = 0.381). Patients who received a 1- or 2-level fusion reported no serious limitations in most ADL. Patients who received a 3- or 4-level fusion, especially 4-level fusion, reported more limitations because of postoperative lumbar stiffness.

CONCLUSION

This study investigated in detail the effects of lumbar stiffness after fusion surgery on ADL. Spine surgeons should consider the patient's occupation and lifestyle in preoperative planning. These results will help the surgeon explain the possible outcomes to patients planning to undergo fusion surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

Long-term Outcome After Monosegmental L4/5 Stabilization for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis With the Dynesys Device

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected clinical data.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the long-term outcome of patients with monosegmental L4/5 degenerative spondylolisthesis treated with the dynamic Dynesys device.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The Dynesys system has been used as a semirigid, lumbar dorsal pedicular stabilization device since 1994. Good short-term results have been reported, but little is known about the long-term outcome after treatment for degenerative spondylolisthesis at the L4/5 level.

METHODS

A total of 39 consecutive patients with symptomatic degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis at the L4/5 level were treated with bilateral decompression and Dynesys instrumentation. At a mean follow-up of 7.2 years (range, 5.0-11.2 y), they underwent clinical and radiographic evaluation and quality of life assessment.

RESULTS

At final follow-up, back pain improved in 89% and leg pain improved in 86% of patients compared with preoperative status. Eighty-three percent of patients reported global subjective improvement. Ninety-two percent would undergo the surgery again. Eight patients (21%) required further surgery because of symptomatic adjacent segment disease (6 cases), late-onset infection (1 case), and screw breakage (1 case). In 9 cases, radiologic progression of spondylolisthesis at the operated segment was found. Seventy-four percent of operated segments showed limited flexion-extension range of <4 degrees. Adjacent segment pathology, although without clinical correlation, was diagnosed at the L5/S1 (17.9%) and L3/4 (28.2%) segments. In 4 cases, asymptomatic screw loosening was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Monosegmental Dynesys instrumentation of degenerative spondylolisthesis at L4/5 shows good long-term results. The rate of secondary surgeries is comparable to other dorsal instrumentation devices. Residual range of motion in the stabilized segment is reduced, and the rate of radiologic and symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration is low. Patient satisfaction is high. Dynesys stabilization of symptomatic L4/5 degenerative spondylolisthesis is a possible alternative to other stabilization devices.

Surgical Versus Nonsurgical Treatment for High-Grade Spondylolisthesis in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The optimal management of high-grade spondylolisthesis in children and adolescent is controversial. There is a paucity of literature regarding operatively or nonoperative management in this setting. To assessment of the current state of evidence regarding high-grade spondylolisthesis treatment with the goal of obtaining outcome comparisons in these patients managed either operatively or nonoperatively. We performed a systematic literature search up to November 2014, using Medline, Embase, and The Cochrane Library. The analysis and eligibility criteria were documented according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA-guidelines) and Cochrane Back Review Group editorial board. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale (NOS-scale) to assess the quality. Five observational studies were considered eligible for analysis based on the evaluation of 1596 identified papers. The mean overall difference in the Scoliosis Research Society questionnaire 22 between the surgical and nonsurgical groups was not statistically significant (95% CI: -0.17 to 0.21, P = 0.84). The pooled mean difference in progression of slip between the surgical and nonsurgical groups was no significant difference (OR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.12-1.81, P = 0.27, I = 0%). Because of the preponderance of uncontrolled case series, low-quality evidence indicates that the quality of life and progression of slips was no significant difference between surgery and nonoperation group. Nonoperative patients had no radiologic progression of their slip during the follow-up period.

Trends in the surgical treatment of lumbar spine disease in the United States

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

There is a lack of agreement among spine surgeons as to the best surgical treatment modality for many degenerative lumbar diseases. Although there are many studies examining trends in spinal surgery, specific studies reporting the variations in surgical treatment in the United States for these diseases are lacking.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to analyze trends in lumbar spinal fusion methods for common lumbar pathologies in the United States.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

National insurance database review: 2004-2009.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Data is taken from United Healthcare and represents more than 25 million patients.

OUTCOME MEASURES

No outcomes were measured in this study.

METHODS

Using a private insurance database, we identified patients who underwent one of five types of instrumented single-level lumbar spinal fusion for the 10 most common primary diagnoses. Surgery rates were reviewed from 2004 to 2009 and were stratified according to patient age, patient gender, and region in the United States. Poisson regression analysis was performed to determine regional and demographic differences in treatment modality. The authors received no funds in support of this work.

RESULTS

A total of 23,986 patients met our search criteria. Of the five fusion types, posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with posterolateral fusion (PLF) was the most common (45%), followed by PLF (19%), anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF, 16%), PLIF (10%), and ALIF with PLF (9%). There was a significant increase in PLIF with PLF (p<.0001), PLIF (p<.0001), PLF (p=.012), ALIF (p<.0001), and ALIF with PLF (p<.0001) from 2004 to 2009. After controlling for gender, there were significant differences between regions for all fusion types (p<.0001). The likelihood of a posterior fusion increased with age. Anterior fusions were more common in the 30- to 49-year-old age range than in patents older than 50. For patients in age groups older than 30, there was an increased number who underwent a circumferential fusion or an ALIF (p<.022). Fusion types were significantly different between genders (p<.026). Both genders had an overall increase in the number of fusions (p<.001) over the time period studied.

CONCLUSIONS

There are large differences in the United States for surgical treatment methods for lumbar spine pathology. These differences are likely multifactorial, with both patient and surgeon traits playing a role. Illustrating these differences will hopefully lead to outcomes research to determine the indications, efficacy, and appropriateness of these surgical methods, an important step on the path toward standardization of care.

Has a Mono- or Bisegmental Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery an Influence on Self-Assessed Quality of Life, Trunk Range of Motion, and Gait Performance?

STUDY DESIGN

This investigation prospectively compared self-assessed quality of life and biomechanical measures of physical function before and after spinal fusion surgery in 26 adult patients with symptomatic lumbar degenerative disease.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to demonstrate that (1) due to a reduction of low back pain, quality of life as well as gait parameters would improve after a spinal fusion surgery and (2) gait performance is more similar to that observed in healthy controls at the same age, whereas trunk range of motion remains unchanged after surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Current outcome evaluations of spinal fusion surgery are based on radiological changes and self-report questionnaires. However, these traditional measures do not sufficiently assess the functionality.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients with a mean age of 59.3 (SD: 10.1) years and 20 healthy subjects at the same age were evaluated. Before and approximately 6 months after a mono- or bisegmental spinal fusion surgery, patients completed self-report questionnaires and biomechanical assessments of gait analysis and trunk range of motion in the 3 principal planes of the body.

RESULTS

Results indicated an improvement in quality of life as well as an increased pain-free walking distance, walking speed, step length, and maximum hip extension during the stance phase of gait. Anterior pelvis and thorax tilt were significantly reduced after the surgery without significant differences compared with the control group. Regarding the trunk range of motion, we observed a decrease in maximum forward flexion and an increase in the fingertip-floor distance after surgery.

CONCLUSION

The study results show that lumbar spinal fusion is a useful procedure to improve patient's quality of life and gait performance. Although we performed only mono- and 2-level fusions, the sagittal alignment of the pelvis and thorax during walking was normalized. Clinical gait analysis contributes to the advancement of our knowledge regarding the functional changes after a spinal fusion surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

Pathomechanisms of discogenic low back pain in humans and animal models

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Although explored in humans and animal models, the pathomechanisms of discogenic low back pain (LBP) remain unknown.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to review the literature about the pathomechanisms of discogenic LBP.

METHODS

Animal models of discogenic pain and specimens from degenerated human intervertebral discs (IVDs) have provided clues about the pathomechanisms of discogenic LBP. Painful discs are characterized by a confluence of innervation, inflammation, and mechanical hypermobility. These three possible mechanisms are discussed in this review.

RESULTS

Animal models and specimens from humans have revealed sensory innervation of lumbar IVDs and sensory nerve ingrowth into the inner layer of IVDs. Cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor-α and interleukins induce this ingrowth. Nerve growth factor has also been recently identified as an inducer of ingrowth. Finally, disc degeneration induces several collagenases; their action results in hypermobility and pain.

CONCLUSIONS

To treat discogenic LBP, it is important to prevent sensitization of sensory nerve fibers innervating the IVD, to suppress pathogenic increases of cytokines, and to decrease disc hypermobility.

Short-term study on risk-benefit outcomes of two spinal manipulative therapies in the treatment of acute radiculopathy caused by lumbar disc herniation: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

That patients with acute radiculopathy caused by lumbar disc herniation (LDH) will benefit from spinal manipulation (SM) treatment has been taken for granted, despite no solid evidence to support that claim. There is a demand for a win-win SM treatment that is both effective and less risky, and we attempt to use this trial to demonstrate such a treatment. In this study, Feng's Spinal Manipulative Therapy (FSM) is selected as the observational SM. FSM can be performed with either manipulation or mobilization, and also can be easily mimicked as a sham SM.

METHODS/DESIGN

Two hundred and sixteen qualified hospitalized participants will be randomly allocated to one of the three following groups: sham SM, mobilization, or manipulation, according to a ratio of 1:1:1. Participants in each group will receive specific FSM treatments four times, along with basic therapies over a course of 2 weeks. Two days after each SM appointment, risk outcomes will be assessed using a questionnaire developed to identify accompanying unpleasant reactions (AUR). The pain pressure threshold (PPT) will be measured paraspinally on the tender spot beside the involved joint before and immediately after each SM treatment. Relative risk (RR) of AUR, number needed to harm (NNH) and the 95% confidence intervals of each group will be calculated and compared. Benefit outcomes will be assessed by analyzing the following data recordings: the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Global Perceived Effect (GPE) before enrollment and at the 7th, and 15th day after the treatment. Analyses will include comparisons of NRS, ODI and changes at the different visit times among the three groups by Repeated Measures Data ANOVA, an evaluation of reduced scores of NRS and ODI after the therapy to determine if they meet the minimum acceptable outcome (MAO), and the determination of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) by the average improvement in NRS and ODI scores of all participants who have been allocated to the category 'improved' on the GPE assessment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered in Chinese Clinical Trial Register (ChiCTR) on 19 August 2013 ( ChiCTR-TRC-13003496 ).

Feasibility and patient-reported outcomes after outpatient single-level instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion in a surgery center: preliminary results in 16 patients

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

To report surgical and patient-reported outcomes after outpatient lumbar fusions in an ambulatory setting.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There is growing interest in the potential benefits of outpatient spine surgery such as reduced costs, consistent operative team, and decreased postoperative complications during in-hospital recovery. However, there are limited studies on outcomes after outpatient lumbar fusions, to guide patient selection, treatment techniques and postoperative expectations.

METHODS

Medical records of 16 consecutive patients, who underwent outpatient direct open, single-level, posterior lumbar interbody fusions, were examined by a single surgeon. Outcome measures included visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for lower back and Oswestry Disability Indices (ODIs). Mean body mass indices (BMIs), estimated blood loss, surgical times and complications, and fusion rates were evaluated.

RESULTS

Males represented 56% of patients. Mean age was 42.81 ± 3.05 years (mean ± standard error) and mean body mass index was 28.95 ± 1.04. History of smoking and narcotics use were statistically noncontributory. Mean final follow-up was 15 (range, 5.52-34.2 mo) months. Mean postoperative scores were determined by the final follow-up VAS and ODI. L5-S1 was the most common level of the 16 levels operated on (69%). Preoperative and postoperative VAS and ODI scores for lower back were obtained for 15 patients (93.75%). Mean lower back VAS score of 8.4 ± 0.37 preoperatively reduced to 4.96 ± 0.73 postoperatively, (P = 0.001). Mean ODI improved from 52.71 ± 0.04 preoperatively, to 37.43 ± 0.06 postoperatively, (P = 0.04). One patient experienced postoperative worsened back pain with clinical and radiological signs of possible aseptic discitis. Estimated blood loss was 161 ± 32 mL and average operating time was 124.85 ± 7.10 minutes. The overall fusion rate was 87.5%.

CONCLUSION

Direct open posterior lumbar interbody fusions were done safely with statistically significant reduction in average pain and ODI scores. Surgical times were approximately 2 hours with minimal blood loss, allowing patients to be comfortably discharged the same day without a drain.

Functional limitations due to stiffness as a collateral impact of instrumented arthrodesis of the lumbar spine

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To understand whether patients actually perceive increased limitations as compared with their preoperative state due to stiffness after lumbar arthrodesis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Lumbar arthrodesis by intention eliminates spinal motion in an attempt to decrease pain, deformity, and instability. Independent of pain, loss of mobility can impact ability to perform certain activities of daily living. The lumbar stiffness disability index (LSDI) is a validated measure of the effect of lumbar stiffness on functional activities. To date, no prospective evaluations of stiffness impacts on patient function after lumbar arthrodesis have been reported.

METHODS

The LSDI, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, and Oswestry Disability Index were administered preoperatively and at 2-year minimum follow-up to 62 adult patients undergoing lumbar fusion for degenerative disease or spinal deformity. Patients also completed a satisfaction questionnaire at 2 years. Patients were separated according to the number of lumbar arthrodesis levels. Pre- and postoperative LSDI, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey physical composite score, and Oswestry Disability Index scores were compared using paired t tests.

RESULTS

Significant improvements in Oswestry Disability Index were observed across all arthrodesis levels, and significant improvements in physical composite score were observed at level 1 and at 5 or more levels. Patients undergoing 1-level arthrodesis demonstrated statistically significant decreases in LSDI scores, indicating less impact from stiffness than at baseline. Patients with 3 or 4 levels and 5 or more levels of arthrodesis showed increases in LSDI scores, although none reached significance with the numbers available. Forty-six percent of patients reported that low back stiffness created significant limitations in activities of daily living, although 97% indicated that they would undergo the same procedure again and 91% reported that any increase in stiffness was an acceptable trade-off for their functional improvements from lumbar arthrodesis.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing elective lumbar arthrodesis reported relatively limited functional deficit due to stiffness at 2-year follow-up. Paradoxically, patients undergoing 1-level arthrodesis actually reported significantly less limitation due to stiffness postoperatively. Although the effects of stiffness did trend toward greater impacts among patients undergoing longer fusions, 91% of patients were satisfied with trade-offs of function and pain relief in exchange for perceived increases in lumbar stiffness.

Spine surgery in athletes with low back pain-considerations for management and treatment

While degenerative lumbar spine conditions are common in the general population, there are unique considerations when diagnosed in high-level athletes. Genetic factors have been identified as a more significant contributor to the development of degenerative disc disease than occupational risks, however, some have postulated that the incessant training of young, competitive athletes may put them at a greater risk for accelerated disease. The evidence-based literature regarding lumbar disc herniation in elite athletes suggests that it is reasonable to expect excellent clinical outcomes and successful return-to-sport after either operative or non-operative treatment regardless of sport played. However, those athletes who require repetitive torque on their lumbar spines may have poorer long-term outcomes if surgical treatment is required for this condition. Painful spondylolysis in the athlete can often be treated successfully with non-operative treatment, however, if surgery is required, pars repair techniques provides a motion-sparing alternative that may lead to successful return to sport.

Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 9: lumbar fusion for stenosis with spondylolisthesis

Patients presenting with stenosis associated with a spondylolisthesis will often describe signs and symptoms consistent with neurogenic claudication, radiculopathy, and/or low-back pain. The primary objective of surgery, when deemed appropriate, is to decompress the neural elements. As a result of the decompression, the inherent instability associated with the spondylolisthesis may progress and lead to further misalignment that results in pain or recurrence of neurological complaints. Under these circumstances, lumbar fusion is considered appropriate to stabilize the spine and prevent delayed deterioration. Since publication of the original guidelines there have been a significant number of studies published that continue to support the utility of lumbar fusion for patients presenting with stenosis and spondylolisthesis. Several recently published trials, including the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial, are among the largest prospective randomized investigations of this issue. Despite limitations of study design or execution, these trials have consistently demonstrated superior outcomes when patients undergo surgery, with the majority undergoing some type of lumbar fusion procedure. There is insufficient evidence, however, to recommend a standard approach to achieve a solid arthrodesis. When formulating the most appropriate surgical strategy, it is recommended that an individualized approach be adopted, one that takes into consideration the patient's unique anatomical constraints and desires, as well as surgeon's experience.

Trunk Control Ability after Minimally Invasive Lumbar Fusion Surgery during the Early Postoperative Phase

[Purpose] Lumbar fusion has been used for spinal disorders when conservative treatment fails. The minimally invasive approach causes minimal damage to the back muscles and shortens the postoperative recovery time. However, evidence regarding functional recovery in patients after minimally invasive lumbar spinal fusion is limited. The purpose of this study was to investigate how trunk control ability is affected after minimally invasive lumbar fusion surgery during the early postoperative phase. [Subjects and Methods] Sixteen patients and 16 age- and sex-matched healthy participants were recruited. Participants were asked to perform a maximum forward reaching task and were evaluated 1 day before and again 1 month after the lumbar fusion surgery. Center of pressure (COP) displacement, back muscle strength, and scores for the Visual Analog Scale, and Chinese version of the modified Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were recorded. [Results] The healthy control group exhibited more favorable outcomes than the patient group both before and after surgery in back strength, reaching distance, reaching velocity, and COP displacement. The patient group improved significantly after surgery in all clinical outcome measurements. However, reaching distance decreased, and the reaching velocity as well as COP displacement did not differ before and after surgery. [Conclusion] The LBP patients with lumbar fusion surgery showed improvement in pain intensity 1 month after surgery but no improvement in trunk control during forward reaching. The results provide evidence that the back muscle strength was not fully recovered in patients 1 month after surgery and limited their ability to move their trunk forward.

The impact of reduction of pain after lumbar spine surgery: the relationship between changes in pain and physical function and disability

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the relationship between improvement in pain intensity and subsequent improvement in physical function and disability during the first 12 months after lumbar spine surgery.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Little is known about how reduction of pain intensity after surgery may predict improvements in physical function and disability.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled 260 individuals undergoing elective surgery for degenerative lumbar spine conditions from August 2005 through August 2011. Preoperative and postoperative (3, 6, and 12 mo) assessment tools were numeric pain rating scale, Short Form 12 version 2 physical component score (physical function), and Oswestry Disability Index (disability). Changes were defined using minimum clinically important differences. The association between improvement in pain intensity and subsequent improvement in physical function and disability during the first 12 postoperative months was assessed using standard regression methods. Significance was set at a P value less than 0.05.

RESULTS

Preoperatively, mean pain intensity was 5.2 (standard deviation, 2.4), physical function was 27.9 (standard deviation, 9.2), and disability was 40.1% (standard deviation, 16.8%). Pain intensity had improved in 164 (63.1%) patients by 3 and 6 months and in 184 (70.8%) by 12 months. Patients with improvement in pain postoperatively were more likely to have subsequent improvement in physical function (odds ratio, 2.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-3.16) during the course of 12 postoperative months. The association between postoperative pain reduction and reduced disability was similar (odds ratio, 1.61; confidence interval, 1.12-2.33).

CONCLUSION

Most patients experienced clinically important postsurgical reductions in pain intensity by 3 months after surgery. Those patients were more likely to have clinically important improvement in physical function and reduction in disability during the first postoperative year.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1.

Lumbar spinal stenosis: who should be fused? An updated review

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is mostly caused by osteoarthritis (spondylosis). Clinically, the symptoms of patients with LSS can be categorized into two groups; regional (low back pain, stiffness, and so on) or radicular (spinal stenosis mainly presenting as neurogenic claudication). Both of these symptoms usually improve with appropriate conservative treatment, but in refractory cases, surgical intervention is occasionally indicated. In the patients who primarily complain of radiculopathy with an underlying biomechanically stable spine, a decompression surgery alone using a less invasive technique may be sufficient. Preoperatively, with the presence of indicators such as failed back surgery syndrome (revision surgery), degenerative instability, considerable essential deformity, symptomatic spondylolysis, refractory degenerative disc disease, and adjacent segment disease, lumbar fusion is probably recommended. Intraoperatively, in cases with extensive decompression associated with a wide disc space or insufficient bone stock, fusion is preferred. Instrumentation improves the fusion rate, but it is not necessarily associated with improved recovery rate and better functional outcome.

Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 17: Bone growth stimulators as an adjunct for lumbar fusion

The relationship between the formation of a solid arthrodesis and electrical and electromagnetic energy is well established; most of the information on the topic, however, pertains to the healing of long bone fractures. The use of both invasive and noninvasive means to supply this energy and supplement spinal fusions has been investigated. Three forms of electrical stimulation are routinely used: direct current stimulation (DCS), pulsed electromagnetic field stimulation (PEMFS), and capacitive coupled electrical stimulation (CCES). Only DCS requires the placement of electrodes within the fusion substrate and is inserted at the time of surgery. Since publication of the original guidelines, few studies have investigated the use of bone growth stimulators. Based on the current review, no conflict with the previous recommendations was generated. The use of DCS is recommended as an option for patients younger than 60 years of age, since a positive effect on fusion has been observed. The same, however, cannot be stated for patients over 60, because DCS did not appear to have an impact on fusion rates in this population. No study was reviewed that investigated the use of CCES or the routine use of PEMFS. A single low-level study demonstrated a positive impact of PEMFS on patients undergoing revision surgery for pseudarthrosis, but this single study is insufficient to recommend for or against the use of PEMFS in this patient population.

Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 4: Radiographic assessment of fusion status

The ability to identify a successful arthrodesis is an essential element in the management of patients undergoing lumbar fusion procedures. The hypothetical gold standard of intraoperative exploration to identify, under direct observation, a solid arthrodesis is an impractical alternative. Therefore, radiographic assessment remains the most viable instrument to evaluate for a successful arthrodesis. Static radiographs, particularly in the presence of instrumentation, are not recommended. In the absence of spinal instrumentation, lack of motion on flexion-extension radiographs is highly suggestive of a successful fusion; however, motion observed at the treated levels does not necessarily predict pseudarthrosis. The degree of motion on dynamic views that would distinguish between a successful arthrodesis and pseudarthrosis has not been clearly defined. Computed tomography with fine-cut axial images and multiplanar views is recommended and appears to be the most sensitive for assessing fusion following instrumented posterolateral and anterior lumbar interbody fusions. For suspected symptomatic pseudarthrosis, a combination of techniques including static and dynamic radiographs as well as CT images is recommended as an option. Lack of facet fusion is considered to be more suggestive of a pseudarthrosis compared with absence of bridging posterolateral bone. Studies exploring additional noninvasive modalities of fusion assessment have demonstrated either poor potential, such as with 99mTc bone scans, or provide insufficient information to formulate a definitive recommendation.

Comparative effectiveness of open versus minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion

Background

The mainstay of sacroiliac joint disruption/degenerative sacroiliitis therapy has been nonoperative management. This nonoperative management often includes a regimen of physical therapy, chiropractic treatment, therapeutic injections, and possibly radiofrequency ablation at the discretion of the treating physician. When these clinical treatments fail, sacroiliac joint fusion has been recommended as the standard treatment. Open and minimally invasive (MIS) surgical techniques are typical procedures. This study aims to compare the perioperative measures and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) outcomes associated with each of these techniques.

Methods

A comparative retrospective chart review of patients with sacroiliac joint fusion and a minimum of 1 year of follow-up was performed. Perioperative measures and ODI scores were compared using the Fisher’s exact test and two nonparametric tests, ie, the Mann–Whitney U test and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The results are presented as percent or median with range, as appropriate.

Results

Forty-nine patients from two institutions underwent sacroiliac joint fusion between 2006 and 2012. Ten patients were excluded because of incomplete data, leaving 39 evaluable patients, of whom 22 underwent open and 17 underwent MIS sacroiliac joint fusion. The MIS group was significantly older (median age 66 [39–82] years) than the open group (median age 51 [34–74] years). Surgical time and hospital stay were significantly shorter in the MIS group than in the open group. Preoperative ODI was significantly greater in the open group (median 64 [44–78]) than in the MIS group (median 53 [14–84]). Postoperative improvement in ODI was statistically significant within and between groups, with MIS resulting in greater improvement.

Conclusion

The open and MIS sacroiliac joint fusion techniques resulted in statistically and clinically significant improvement for patients with degenerative sacroiliitis refractory to nonoperative management. However, the number of patients reaching the minimal clinically important difference and those showing overall improvement were greater in the MIS group.

Treatment of painful Modic type I changes by vertebral augmentation with bioactive resorbable bone cement

INTRODUCTION

Low back pain is one of the most common causes of seeking medical attention in industrialized western countries. End plate degenerative changes in the acute phase, formally referred to as Modic type I, represent a specific cause. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of vertebral augmentation with calcium sulfate and hydroxyapatite resorbable cement in patients with low back pain resistant to conservative treatment whose origin can be recognized in Modic type I changes.

METHODS

From February 2009 to October 2013, 1,124 patients with low back pain without radicular symptoms underwent physical and imaging evaluation. Stringent inclusion criteria elected 218 to vertebral augmentation with resorbable cement. Follow-up period was 1 year.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-two (79 %) patients improved quickly during the first 4 weeks after treatment. Forty-two (19 %) patients showed a more gradual improvement over the first 6 months, and at 1 year, their pain level did not differ from that of the previous group. In both groups, pain did not resolved completely, but patients showed significant improvement in their daily life activities. Two (1 %) patients did not show any improvement. Two (1 %) patients died for other reasons. There were no complications related to the procedures.

CONCLUSION

Vertebroplasty with bioactive resorbable bone cement seems to be an effective therapeutic option for patients with low back pain resistant to conservative treatment whose origin could be recognized in Modic type I end plate degenerative changes.

Correlation of reduction and clinical outcome in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION

Operative treatment is increasingly implemented for the treatment of degenerative lumbar listhesis, with lumbar fusion the most common intervention. Prediction of clinical outcomes after such procedures is of ongoing relevance, and the correlation of radiologic parameters with clinical outcome remains controversial. In particular, clinical studies have not determined conclusively whether reduction of slipped vertebrae is beneficial.

METHODS

We performed a monocenter prospective analysis of a comprehensive set of quality of life scores (QLS) (Core Outcome Measure Index, Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index, SF-36) of 40 patients, who underwent a standardized PLIF procedure for symptomatic, Spondylolisthesis. Follow-up was 24 months. The correlations between the radiologic parameters (degree of slippage, sagittal rotation) and the clinical scores before surgery as well as 12 and 24 months post-operatively were examined.

RESULTS

All QLS showed a statistically significant improvement after 12 and 24 months post-operatively (p < 0.05). The mean amount of the anterior slippage was 34.2 ± 14.7 % (minimum 12 %, maximum 78 %). After 12 months, there was an average 19.1 % decrease to 15.1 ± 8.3 % (minimum 2 %, maximum 38 %, p < 0.000) and after 24 months it was decreased by 18.0-16.2 ± 9.0 % (minimum 2.9 %, maximum 40 %, p < 0.000). Average sagittal rotation measured 67.3° ± 16.6° initially (minimum 35°, maximum 118) and decreased by 4.3° to an average of 63.0° ± 15.2° at 12 months post-surgery (minimum 15°, maximum 101°, p = 0.065,), and by 5.7° to an average of 61.6° ± 13.0° at 24 months (minimum 15°, maximum 90°, p = 0.044). The data show positive correlations between the amount of reduction of the slipped vertebra as well as the amount of correction of the sagittal rotation and the improvement of the clinical outcomes(r = 0.31-0.54, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The current study indicates a modest advantage for the best possible reposition in respect of the clinical outcome.

Perioperative complications and mortality after spinal fusions: analysis of trends and risk factors

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the trends in complications and mortality after spinal fusions.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Utilization of spinal fusions has been increasing during the past decade. It is essential to evaluate surgical outcomes to better identify patients who benefit most from surgical intervention. Integration of empiric evidence from large administrative databases into clinical decision making is instrumental in providing higher-quality, evidence-based, patient-centered care.

METHODS

This study used Nationwide Inpatient Sample data from 2001 through 2010. Patients who underwent spinal fusions were identified using the CCS (Clinical Classifications Software) and ICD-9 (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision) codes. Data on patient comorbidities, primary diagnosis, and postoperative complications were obtained via ICD-9 diagnosis codes and via CCS categories. National estimates were calculated using weights provided as part of the database. Time trend analysis for average length of stay, total charges, mortality, and comorbidity burden was performed. Univariate and multivariate models were constructed to identify predictors of mortality and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

An estimated 3,552,873 spinal fusions were performed in the United States between 2001 and 2010. The national bill for spinal fusions increased from $10 billion to $46.8 billion. Today, patients are older and have a greater comorbidity burden than 10 years ago. Mortality remained relatively constant at 0.46%, 1.2%, and 0.14% for cervical, thoracic, and lumbar fusions, respectively. Morbidity rates showed an increasing trend at all levels. Multivariate analysis of 19 procedures and patient-related risk factors and 9 perioperative complications identified 85 statistically significant (P< 0.01) interactions.

CONCLUSION

The data on perioperative risks and risk factors for postoperative complications of spinal fusions presented in this study is pivotal to appropriate surgical patient selection and well-informed risk-benefit evaluation of surgical intervention.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A.

Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2-augmented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of chronic low back pain secondary to the homogeneous diagnosis of discogenic pain syndrome: two-year outcomes

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE

To assess clinical outcomes, perioperative complications, revision surgery rates, and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2)-related osteolysis, heterotopic bone, and unexplained postoperative radiculitis (BMPP) in a group of patients treated with BMP-2-augmented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (bTLIF) for the homogeneous diagnosis of discogenic pain syndrome (DPS) and to put forth the algorithm used to make the diagnosis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There is a paucity of literature describing outcomes of TLIF for the homogeneous diagnosis of DPS, an old but controversial member of the lumbar degenerative disease family.

METHODS

The registry from a single surgeon was queried for patients who had undergone bTLIF for the homogeneous diagnosis of DPS, which was made via specific diagnostic algorithm. Clinical outcomes were determined by analyzing point improvement from typical outcome questionnaires and the data from Patient Satisfaction and Return to Work questionnaires. Independent record review was used to assess all outcomes.

RESULTS

Eighty percent of the cohort (36/45) completed preoperative and postoperative outcome questionnaires at an average follow-up of 41.9 ± 11.9 months, which demonstrated significant clinical improvement: Oswestry Disability Index = 16.4 (P < 0.0001), 12-Item Short Form Health Survey physical component summary score = 10.0 (P < 0.0001), and a Numeric Rating Scale for back pain = 2.3 (P < 0.0001). The median patient satisfaction score was 9.0 (10 = complete satisfaction), and 84.4% (27/32) of the cohort were able to return to their preoperative job, with or without modification. There were 3 perioperative complications, 4 revision surgical procedures, and 11 cases of benign BMPP. There were no incidents of the intraoperative dural tears or nerve root injury, and litigation involvement (11/36, P > 0.17), preoperative depression (15/36, P > 0.19) or prior discectomy/decompression (14/36, P < 0.37) was not a predictor of outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Although limited by retrospective design and small cohort, the results of this investigation suggest that bTLIF is a reasonable treatment option for patients who experience DPS and affords high patient satisfaction. A larger study is needed to confirm these findings.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Biologically based therapy for the intervertebral disk: who is the patient?

The intervertebral disk (IVD) is a fascinating and resilient tissue compartment given the myriad of functions that it performs as well as its unique anatomy. The IVD must tolerate immense loads, protect the spinal cord, and contribute considerable flexibility and strength to the spinal column. In addition, as a consequence of its anatomical and physiological configuration, a unique characteristic of the IVD is that it also provides a barrier to metastatic disease. However, when injured and/or the subject of significant degenerative change, the IVD can be the source of substantial pain and disability. Considerable efforts have been made over the past several decades with respect to regenerating or at least modulating degenerative changes affecting the IVD through the use of many biological agents such as growth factors, hydrogels, and the use of plant sterols and even spices common to Ayurvedic medicine. More recently stem/progenitor and autologous chondrocytes have been used mostly in animal models of disk disease but also a few trials involving humans. At the end of the day if biological therapies are to offer benefit to the patient, the outcomes must be improved function and/or less pain and also must be improvements upon measures that are already in clinical practice. Here some of the challenges posed by the degenerative IVD and a summary of some of the regenerative attempts both in vitro and in vivo are discussed within the context of the vital question: "Who is the patient?"

Lateral parasagittal versus midline interlaminar lumbar epidural steroid injection for management of low back pain with lumbosacral radicular pain: a double-blind, randomized study

BACKGROUND

Epidural steroid injections are commonly used for management of low back pain with lumbosacral radicular pain and can be administered by either interlaminar or transforaminal routes. The transforaminal route is reported to be more effective than the interlaminar route due to higher delivery of drug at the ventral epidural space. However, the transforaminal route has been associated with serious complications including spinal cord injury and permanent paralysis. Hence, there is a search for a technically better route with fewer complications for drug delivery into the ventral epidural space. Recently, a parasagittal interlaminar (PIL) approach of epidural contrast injection was reported to have 100% ventral epidural spread. However, the therapeutic efficacy of this route has never been investigated. We compared the therapeutic efficacy of the PIL approach and midline interlaminar (MIL) approach. We hypothesized that the PIL approach may produce a better clinical outcome because of better ventral epidural spread of the drug compared with MIL approach.

METHODS

Thirty-seven patients were randomized to receive injection of 80 mg methylprednisolone either by the PIL (PIL group, n = 19) or MIL (MIL group, n = 18) approach under fluoroscopic guidance. Patients were evaluated for effective pain relief (≥50% from baseline) by visual analog scale and improvement in disability by the modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire at intervals of 15 days, 1, 2, 3, and 6 months. Patients having <50% pain relief from baseline received additional epidural injection of the same drug, dosage, and route, a maximum of 3 injections at least 15 days apart. The primary outcome of our study was the incidence of effective pain relief at 6 months.

RESULTS

The incidence of patients having effective pain relief was higher with the PIL approach (13/19 [68.4%]) vs MIL (3/18 [16.7%]) at the end of 6 months. A significantly higher relative success of effective pain relief was noted in the PIL group (relative risk, 4.10; 95% confidence interval, 1.40-12.05; P = 0.001) at the end of the 6-month follow up with the requirement of fewer total injections (29 vs 41 in MIL, P = 0.043). Visual analog scale and modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire scores were significantly lower in the PIL group compared with the MIL group at all time intervals after the procedure. Ventral epidural spread of contrast was significantly higher in the PIL 89.7% vs 31.7% in the MIL group. The administration of epidural steroid injection was without any complications with an exact 95% Clopper-Pearson confidence interval of 0.0% to 17.6% in the PIL group and 0.0% to 18.5% in the MIL group.

CONCLUSIONS

Epidural steroid injection administered with the PIL approach was significantly more effective for pain relief and improvement in disability than the MIL approach for 6 months in the management of low back pain with lumbosacral radicular pain.

Predictors of Oswestry Disability Index worsening after lumbar fusion

The authors identified patients with an increase in their Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score after lumbar spine fusion to evaluate whether this is a plausible definition of deterioration and to determine whether any common patient characteristics exist.A total of 1054 patients who underwent lumbar spinal fusion and had 2-year follow-up data, including the Short Form 36, the ODI, and numeric rating scales for back and leg pain, were identified. Patients with worsening ODI were compared with the remaining cohort. Twenty-eight patients had an absolute increase (worse) in ODI at 1 year postoperatively. Participants with worsening ODI scores included 13 men and 15 women with an average age of 43.3 years; 15 (54%) were smokers. Common medical comorbidities included obesity and hypertension. Complications occurred in 5 (18%) patients and included wound infection, dural tear, and nerve root injury. Pseudarthrosis was common (n=8; 28%). Twenty-one patients required an additional intervention, including epidural injections, fusion revision, and cervical spine surgery.It is important to have a clear definition of deterioration to better provide informed consent or choice of treatment. Only 28 (2.6%) patients were identified as having an increase in ODI score at 2-year follow-up.

Lumbar spine fusion for chronic low back pain due to degenerative disc disease: a systematic review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic literature review.

OBJECTIVE

To categorize published evidence systematically for lumbar fusion for chronic low back pain (LBP) in order to provide an updated and comprehensive analysis of the clinical outcomes.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Despite a large number of publications of outcomes of spinal fusion surgery for chronic LBP, there is little consensus on efficacy.

METHODS

A MEDLINE and Cochrane database search was performed to identify published articles reporting on validated patient-reported clinical outcomes measures (2 or more of visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index, Short Form [36] Health Survey [SF-36] PCS, and patient satisfaction) with minimum 12 months of follow-up after lumbar fusion surgery in adult patients with LBP due to degenerative disc disease. Twenty-six total articles were identified and stratified by level of evidence: 18 level 1 (6 studies of surgery vs. nonoperative treatment, 12 studies of alternative surgical procedures), 2 level 2, 2 level 3, and 4 level 4 (2 prospective, 2 retrospective). Weighted averages of each outcomes measure were computed and compared with established minimal clinically important difference values.

RESULTS

Fusion cohorts included a total of 3060 patients. The weighted average improvement in visual analogue scale back pain was 36.8/100 (standard deviation [SD], 14.8); in Oswestry Disability Index 22.2 (SD, 14.1); in SF-36 Physical Component Scale 12.5 (SD, 4.3). Patient satisfaction averaged 71.1% (SD, 5.2%) across studies. Radiographical fusion rates averaged 89.1% (SD, 13.5%), and reoperation rates 12.5% (SD, 12.4%) overall, 9.2% (SD, 7.5%) at the index level. The results of the collective studies did not differ statistically in any of the outcome measures based on level of evidence (analysis of variance, P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The body of literature supports fusion surgery as a viable treatment option for reducing pain and improving function in patients with chronic LBP refractory to nonsurgical care when a diagnosis of disc degeneration can be made.

Differentiating minimum clinically important difference for primary and revision lumbar fusion surgeries

OBJECT

Previous studies have reported on the minimum clinically important difference (MCID), a threshold of improvement that is clinically relevant for lumbar degenerative disorders. Recent studies have shown that pre- and postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures vary among patients with different diagnostic etiologies. There is also concern that a patient's previous care experience may affect his or her perception of clinical improvement. This study determined if MCID values for the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), and back and leg pain are different between patients undergoing primary or revision lumbar fusion.

METHODS

Prospectively collected preoperative and 1-year postoperative patient-reported HRQOLs, including the ODI, SF-36 physical component summary (PCS), and numeric rating scales (0-10) for back and leg pain, in patients undergoing lumbar spine fusion were analyzed. Patients were grouped into either the primary surgery or revision group. As the most widely accepted MCID values were calculated from the minimum detectable change, this method was used to determine the MCID.

RESULTS

A total of 722 patients underwent primary procedures and 333 patients underwent revisions. There was no statistically significant difference in demographics between the groups. Each group had a statistically significant improvement at 1 year postoperatively compared with baseline. The minimum detectable change-derived MCID values for the primary group were 1.16 for back pain, 1.36 for leg pain, 12.40 for ODI, and 5.21 for SF-36 PCS. The MCID values for the revision group were 1.21 for back pain, 1.28 for leg pain, 11.79 for ODI, and 4.90 for SF-36 PCS. These values are very similar to those previously reported in the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

The MCID values were similar for the revision and primary lumbar fusion groups, even when subgroup analysis was done for different diagnostic etiologies, simplifying interpretation of clinical improvement. The results of this study further validate the use of patient-reported HRQOLs to measure clinical effectiveness, as a patient's previous experience with care does not seem to substantially alter an individual's perception of clinical improvement.