Health-related quality of life following decompression compared to decompression and fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a Canadian multicentre study

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of fusion surgery in addition to decompression surgery in patients who have lumbar spinal stenosis, with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis, has not been substantiated in controlled trials.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 247 patients between 50 and 80 years of age who had lumbar spinal stenosis at one or two adjacent vertebral levels to undergo either decompression surgery plus fusion surgery (fusion group) or decompression surgery alone (decompression-alone group). Randomization was stratified according to the presence of preoperative degenerative spondylolisthesis (in 135 patients) or its absence. Outcomes were assessed with the use of patient-reported outcome measures, a 6-minute walk test, and a health economic evaluation. The primary outcome was the score on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI; which ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more severe disability) 2 years after surgery. The primary analysis, which was a per-protocol analysis, did not include the 14 patients who did not receive the assigned treatment and the 5 who were lost to follow-up.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the groups in the mean score on the ODI at 2 years (27 in the fusion group and 24 in the decompression-alone group, P=0.24) or in the results of the 6-minute walk test (397 m in the fusion group and 405 m in the decompression-alone group, P=0.72). Results were similar between patients with and those without spondylolisthesis. Among the patients who had 5 years of follow-up and were eligible for inclusion in the 5-year analysis, there were no significant differences between the groups in clinical outcomes at 5 years. The mean length of hospitalization was 7.4 days in the fusion group and 4.1 days in the decompression-alone group (P<0.001). Operating time was longer, the amount of bleeding was greater, and surgical costs were higher in the fusion group than in the decompression-alone group. During a mean follow-up of 6.5 years, additional lumbar spine surgery was performed in 22% of the patients in the fusion group and in 21% of those in the decompression-alone group.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis, decompression surgery plus fusion surgery did not result in better clinical outcomes at 2 years and 5 years than did decompression surgery alone. (Funded by an Uppsala institutional Avtal om Läkarutbildning och Forskning [Agreement concerning Cooperation on Medical Education and Research] and others; Swedish Spinal Stenosis Study ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01994512.).

Laminectomy plus Fusion versus Laminectomy Alone for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

BACKGROUND

The comparative effectiveness of performing instrumented (rigid pedicle screws affixed to titanium alloy rods) lumbar spinal fusion in addition to decompressive laminectomy in patients with symptomatic lumbar grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis is unknown.

METHODS

In this randomized, controlled trial, we assigned patients, 50 to 80 years of age, who had stable degenerative spondylolisthesis (degree of spondylolisthesis, 3 to 14 mm) and symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis to undergo either decompressive laminectomy alone (decompression-alone group) or laminectomy with posterolateral instrumented fusion (fusion group). The primary outcome measure was the change in the physical-component summary score of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36; range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life) 2 years after surgery. The secondary outcome measure was the score on the Oswestry Disability Index (range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more disability related to back pain). Patients were followed for 4 years.

RESULTS

A total of 66 patients (mean age, 67 years; 80% women) underwent randomization. The rate of follow-up was 89% at 1 year, 86% at 2 years, and 68% at 4 years. The fusion group had a greater increase in SF-36 physical-component summary scores at 2 years after surgery than did the decompression-alone group (15.2 vs. 9.5, for a difference of 5.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.1 to 11.3; P=0.046). The increases in the SF-36 physical-component summary scores in the fusion group remained greater than those in the decompression-alone group at 3 years and at 4 years (P=0.02 for both years). With respect to reductions in disability related to back pain, the changes in the Oswestry Disability Index scores at 2 years after surgery did not differ significantly between the study groups (-17.9 in the decompression-alone group and -26.3 in the fusion group, P=0.06). More blood loss and longer hospital stays occurred in the fusion group than in the decompression-alone group (P<0.001 for both comparisons). The cumulative rate of reoperation was 14% in the fusion group and 34% in the decompression-alone group (P=0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with degenerative grade I spondylolisthesis, the addition of lumbar spinal fusion to laminectomy was associated with slightly greater but clinically meaningful improvement in overall physical health-related quality of life than laminectomy alone. (Funded by the Jean and David Wallace Foundation and others; SLIP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00109213.).

Improvement in Health State Utility after Sacroiliac Joint Fusion: Comparison to Normal Populations

Study Design Prospective cohort study. Objective The sacroiliac joint (SIJ) is an important cause of lower back pain. The degree to which minimally invasive surgical fusion of the SIJ improves health state utility has not been previously documented. Methods Health state utility values were calculated using the EuroQOL-5D (EQ-5D) and Short Form-36 (SF-36) at baseline and 6 and 12 months after SIJ fusion surgery in subjects participating in a prospective, multicenter clinical trial (n = 172). Values were compared with individuals who participated in a nationally representative cross-sectional survey (National Health Measurement Study [NHMS], n = 3,844). Health utility values in the SIJ cohort were compared with those of the NMHS participants using both weighted linear regression and calculation of "health quantile" (i.e., percentile of health normalized to the NHMS cohort adjusted for age and gender). Results Baseline health state utility was significantly depressed in SIJ patients compared with normal subjects (SF-6D 0.509 versus 0.789, SF-36 physical component summary 31.7 versus 49.2, SF-36 mental component summary 8.5 versus 53.8, EQ-5D 0.433 versus 0.868; all p < 0.0001 after adjustment for age and gender). In the SIJ cohort, all the measures improved by 6 months postoperatively, and improvements were sustained at 12 months. Baseline health quantile was low (fifth percentile) in the SIJ cohort and improved significantly at follow-up. Conclusions Quality of life is markedly impaired in patients with SIJ pain compared with age- and gender-matched cohorts. SIJ fusion in this cohort resulted in a substantial improvement in health state utility, bringing the population back toward the expected levels of overall health. The quantile approach helps to explain the degree to which health is improved compared with age- and gender-matched cohorts.

Lumbar Interspinous Process Fixation and Fusion with Stand-Alone Interlaminar Lumbar Instrumented Fusion Implant in Patients with Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Undergoing Decompression for Spinal Stenosis

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

PURPOSE

To assess the ability of a stand-alone lumbar interspinous implant (interspinous/interlaminar lumbar instrumented fusion, ILIF) associated with bone grafting to promote posterior spine fusion in degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) with vertebral instability.

OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE

A few studies, using bilateral laminotomy (BL) or bilateral decompression by unilateral laminotomy (BDUL), found satisfactory results in stenotic patients with decompression alone, but others reported increased olisthesis, or subsequent need for fusion in DS with or without dynamic instability.

METHODS

Twenty-five patients with Grade I DS, leg pain and chronic low back pain underwent BL or BDUL and ILIF implant. Olisthesis was 13% to 21%. Follow-up evaluations were performed at 4 to 12 months up to 25 to 44 months (mean, 34.4). Outcome measures were numerical rating scale (NRS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI) and short-form 36 health survey (SF-36) of body pain and function.

RESULTS

Fusion occurred in 21 patients (84%). None had increased olisthesis or instability postoperatively. Four types of fusion were identified. In Type I, the posterior part of the spinous processes were fused. In Type II, fusion extended to the base of the processes. In Type III, bone was present also around the polyetheretherketone plate of ILIF. In Type IV, even the facet joints were fused. The mean NRS score for back and leg pain decreased by 64% and 80%, respectively. The mean ODI score was decreased by 52%. SF-36 bodily pain and physical function mean scores increased by 53% and 58%, respectively. Computed tomography revealed failed fusion in four patients, all of whom still had vertebral instability postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Stand-alone ILIF with interspinous bone grafting promotes vertebral fusion in most patients with lumbar stenosis and unstable Grade I DS undergoing BL or BDUL.

Defining the inherent stability of degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review

OBJECT A range of surgical options exists for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). The chosen technique inherently depends on the stability of the DLS. Despite a substantial body of literature dedicated to the outcome analysis of numerous DLS procedures, no consensus has been reached on defining or classifying the disorder with respect to stability or the role that instability should play in a treatment algorithm. The purpose of this study was to define grades of stability and to develop a guide for deciding on the optimal approach in surgically managing patients with DLS. METHODS The authors conducted a qualitative systematic review of clinical or biomechanical analyses evaluating the stability of and surgical outcomes for DLS for the period from 1990 to 2013. Research focused on nondegenerative forms of spondylolisthesis or spinal stenosis without associated DLS was excluded. The primary extracted results were clinical and radiographic parameters indicative of DLS instability. RESULTS The following preoperative parameters are predictors of stability in DLS: restabilization signs (disc height loss, osteophyte formation, vertebral endplate sclerosis, and ligament ossification), no disc angle change or less than 3 mm of translation on dynamic radiographs, and the absence of low-back pain. The validity and magnitude of each parameter's contribution can only be determined through appropriately powered prospective evaluation in the future. Identifying these parameters has allowed for the creation of a preliminary DLS instability classification (DSIC) scheme based on the preoperative assessment of DLS stability. CONCLUSIONS Spinal stability is an important factor to consider in the evaluation and treatment of patients with DLS. Qualitative assessment of the best available evidence revealed clinical and radiographic parameters for the creation of the DSIC, a decision aid to help surgeons develop a method of preoperative evaluation to better stratify DLS treatment options.

The effect of disc degeneration on anterior shear translation in the lumbar spine

Many pathologies involving disc degeneration are treated with surgery and spinal implants. It is important to understand how the spine behaves mechanically as a function of disc degeneration. Shear loading is especially relevant in the natural and surgically stabilized lumbar spine. The objective of our study was to determine the effect of disc degeneration on anterior translation of the lumbar spine under shear loading. We tested 30 human cadaveric functional spinal units (L3-4 and L4-5) in anterior shear loading. First, the specimens were imaged in a 1.5 T magnetic resonance scanner. The discs were graded according to the Pfirrmann classification. The specimens were then loaded up to 250 N in anterior shear with an axial compression force of 300 N. Motion of the vertebrae was captured with an optoelectronic camera system. Inter- and intra-observer reliability for disc grading was determined (Cohen's and Fleiss' Kappa), and a non-parametric test was performed on the translation data to characterize the effect of disc degeneration on this parameter. We found fair to moderate agreement between and within observers for the disc grading. We found no significant effect of disc degeneration on anterior shear translation (Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA). Our results indicate that disc degeneration, as classified with the Pfirrmann scale, does not predict lumbar spinal motion in shear.

Lumbar facet joint motion in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the in vivo biomechanical effect of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) on the motion of the facet joint during various functional weight-bearing activities.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Although the morphologic changes of the facet joints in patients with DLS have been reported in a few studies, no data have been reported on the kinematics of these facet joints.

METHODS

Ten patients with DLS at L4-L5 were studied. Each patient underwent a magnetic resonance imaging scan to obtain 3-dimensional models of the lumbar vertebrae from L2-L5 and a dual fluoroscopic imaging scan in different postures: flexion-extension, left-right bending, and left-right torsion. The positions of the vertebrae were reproduced by matching the magnetic resonance imaging-based vertebral models to the fluoroscopic images. The kinematics of the facet joint and the ranges of motion were compared with those of healthy subjects and those of patients with degenerative disk diseases (DDD) previously published.

RESULTS

In DLS patients, the range of rotation of the facet joints was significantly less at the DLS level (L4-L5) than that at the adjacent levels (L2-L3 and L3-L4), whereas the range of translation was similar at all levels. The range of rotation at the facet joints of the DLS level decreased compared with those of both the DDD patients and healthy subjects at the corresponding vertebral level (L4-L5), whereas no significant difference was found in the range of translation. The range of motion of facet joints in DLS and in DDD patients was similar at the adjacent levels (L2-L3 and L3-L4).

CONCLUSIONS

The range of rotation decreased at the facet joints at the DLS level (L4-L5) in patients compared with those in healthy subjects and DDD patients. This decrease in range of rotation implies that the DLS disease may cause restabilization of the joint. The data may help the selection of conservative treatment or different surgical techniques for the DLS patients.