Pedicle-Based Non-fusion Stabilization Devices: A Critical Review and Appraisal of Current Evidence

Lumbar dynamic pedicle-based stabilization versus fusion in degenerative disease: a multicenter, double-blind, prospective, randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Fusion is the standard of treatment for degenerative lumbar symptomatic instabilities. Dynamic stabilization is a potential alternative, with the aim of reducing pathological motion. Potential advantages are a reduction of surgical complexity and morbidity. The aim of this study was to assess whether dynamic stabilization is associated with a higher degree of functional improvement while reducing surgical complexity and thereby surgical duration and perioperative complications in comparison with lumbar fusion.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, double-blind, prospective, randomized, 2-arm superiority trial. Patients with symptomatic mono- or bisegmental lumbar degenerative disease with or without stenosis and instability were randomized 1:1 to instrumented fusion or pedicle-based dynamic stabilization. Patients underwent either rigid internal fixation and interbody fusion or pedicle-based dynamic stabilization. The primary endpoint was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, and secondary endpoints were pain, health-related quality of life, and patient satisfaction at 24 months.

RESULTS

Of 293 patients randomized to fusion or dynamic stabilization, 269 were available for analysis. The duration of surgery was significantly shorter for dynamic stabilization versus fusion, and the blood loss was significantly less for dynamic stabilization (380 ml vs 506 ml). Assessment of primary and secondary outcome parameters revealed no significant differences between groups. There were no differences in the incidence of adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Dynamic pedicle-based stabilization can achieve similar clinical outcome as fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative instabilities. Secondary failures are not different between groups. However, dynamic stabilization is less complex than fusion and is a feasible alternative.

Thoracic and lumbar spine pedicle morphology in Japanese patients

PURPOSE

Pedicle morphology is important for intraoperative surgical anatomy and to define pedicle screw design and parameters. However, differences of pedicle size according to ethnicity and gender are not well studied. The purpose of this study is to investigate morphological characteristics of the pedicle in Japanese patients for determining adequate screw size and optimal surgical planning.

METHODS

We investigated thoracic and lumbar pedicle morphology in Japanese patients using computed tomography (CT) measurements and analyzed the standard size of pedicles on upper thoracic to lumbar spine CT images in 227 Japanese patients.

RESULTS

Gender had a larger impact on the shape and size of pedicles than racial differences. In the distribution of pedicle width, we calculated the ratio of values less than 4.5 mm, that in females resulted to be over 30% for the Th3-Th9 segment, and particularly high, above 60% at Th4 and Th5.

CONCLUSION

Our measurement analysis showed that pedicle morphological parameters in Japanese patients showed tendency to be smaller to those found in other studies, and particularly in female patients, they were statistically significantly smaller. Adequate transpedicular instrumentation for Japanese patients will require smaller size pedicle-related devices that will match our anatomical findings to achieve safe device placement. In addition, serving ethnically non-homogenous patient population can require further to spinal morphometric for precise device selection.

Decompression and paraspinous tension band: a novel treatment method for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Prior studies have demonstrated the superiority of decompression and fusion over decompression alone for the treatment of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. More recent studies have investigated whether nonfusion stabilization could provide durable clinical improvement after decompression and fusion.

PURPOSE

To examine the clinical safety and effectiveness of decompression and implantation of a novel flexion restricting paraspinous tension band (PTB) for patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective clinical study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Forty-one patients (7 men and 34 women) aged 45 to 83 years (68.2 ± 9.0) were recruited with symptomatic spinal stenosis and Meyerding Grade 1 or 2 degenerative spondylolisthesis at L3-L4 (8) or L4-L5 (33).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Self-reported measures included visual analog scale (VAS) for leg, back, and hip pain and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Physiologic measures included quantitative and qualitative radiographic analysis performed by an independent core laboratory.

METHODS

Patients with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis and stenosis were prospectively enrolled at four European spine centers with independent monitoring of data. Clinical and radiographic outcome data collected preoperatively were compared with data collected at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. This study was sponsored by the PTB manufacturer (Simpirica Spine, Inc., San Carlos, CA, USA), including institutional research support grants to the participating centers totaling approximately US $172,000.

RESULTS

Statistically significant improvements and clinically important effect sizes were seen for all pain and disability measurements. At 24 months follow-up, ODI scores were reduced by an average of 25.4 points (59%) and maximum leg pain on VAS by 48.1 mm (65%). Back pain VAS scores improved from 54.1 by an average of 28.5 points (53%). There was one postoperative wound infection (2.4%) and an overall reoperation rate of 12%. Eighty-two percent patients available for 24 months follow-up with a PTB in situ had a reduction in ODI of greater than 15 points and 74% had a reduction in maximum leg pain VAS of greater than 20 mm. According to Odom criteria, most of these patients (82%) had an excellent or good outcome with all except one patient satisfied with surgery. As measured by the independent core laboratory, there was no significant increase in spondylolisthesis, segmental flexion-extension range of motion, or translation and no loss of lordosis in the patients with PTB at the 2 years follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis treated with decompression and PTB demonstrated no progressive instability at 2 years follow-up. Excellent/good outcomes and significant improvements in patient-reported pain and disability scores were still observed at 2 years, with no evidence of implant failure or migration. Further study of this treatment method is warranted to validate these findings.