Iliocava junction to L4-L5 disc anatomical relationship in L5-S1 isthmic spondylolisthesis

Surgical management of isthmic spondylolisthesis: A comparative study of postoperative outcomes between ALIF and TLIF

INTRODUCTION

Circumferential fusion by the anterior (ALIF) or transforaminal (TLIF) approach combined with posterior instrumentation is currently used for the surgical treatment of low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. But few studies have compared the clinical and radiological outcomes of various interbody fusion techniques. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological results at 2 years postoperative of two fusion techniques-TLIF versus ALIF plus posterior instrumentation-for low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was an observational multicenter study done at nine French healthcare facilities specialized in spine surgery. The inclusion criteria were minimum age of 18 years, grade 1-3 isthmic spondylolisthesis, ALIF+posterior fixation (ALIF+PS) or TLIF, minimum follow-up of 2 years. Clinical and radiological evaluations were done preoperatively and at 2 years of follow-up. A lumbar CT scan was done at 1 year postoperative to evaluate fusion.

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 89 patients (50 women, 39 men) with a mean age of 47.7±12.3 (18-79) years. The patients in the ALIF groups (n=71) had a significantly longer hospital stay than those in the TLIF group (n=18): 5.7 days versus 4.6 days (p=.04). However, their medical leave from work was significantly shorter: 31.0 weeks versus 40.7 (p=.003). Lumbar pain VAS diminished faster in the ALIF groups, with a significantly larger drop than the TLIF group in the first 3 months postoperative. Only the increase in lumbar disc lordosis was larger in the ALIF group: 11.7°±12.0° versus 6.0°±11.7° (p=.036). There was a significant correlation between the increase in global lordosis and reduction in lumbar VAS at 2 years postoperative (ρ=-0.3295; p=.021).

CONCLUSION

ALIF+PS provides a faster relief of postoperative low back pain than TLIF but there are no significant clinical differences between techniques at 2 years of follow-up. Despite better restoration of disc lordosis in the ALIF+PS group, there was no difference in the restoration of global lordosis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III; multicenter comparative study.

Fusion and clinical outcomes of lumbar interbody fusion for low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis

INTRODUCTION

Low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis (ISPL) is generally treated by circumferential fusion with interbody graft, although there is no consensus on technique.

HYPOTHESIS

The various interbody fusion strategies provide satisfactory fusion rates and clinical results.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective study analyzed lumbar interbody fusion for low-grade ISPL performed between March 2016 and March 2019. Techniques comprised: circumferential fusion on a posterior or a transforaminal approach (PLIF, TLIF: n=57), combined anterior (ALIF)+posterolateral fusion (ALIF+PLF: n=60), and ALIF+percutaneous posterior fixation (ALIF+PPF: n=55). Function was assessed on a lumbar and a radicular visual analog scale (AVS-L, VAS-R), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Short Form 12 (SF12).

RESULTS

Among the 129 patients, 85.3% showed fusion (Lenke 1 or 2), with no significant differences between the ALIF-PLF or ALIF-PPF groups and the PLIF or TLIF groups (p=0.3). Likewise, there was no difference in fusion rates between the ALIF-PPF and ALIF-PLF subgroups (p=0.28). VAS-L (p<0.001) and VAS-R (p<0.0001), ODI (p<0.001) and SF12 physical (PCS) (p<0.01) and mental component sores (MCS) (p<0.001) all showed significant improvement at 12months. Combined approaches provided greater clinical efficacy than TLIF or PLIF for lumbar (p<0.0001) and radicular pain (p<0.05), ODI (p<0.0001) and SF12 PCS (p<0.01). At 12months, there was no clinical difference between the ALIF-PPF and ALIF-PLF subgroups. However, patents with interbody non-union (Lenke 3 or 4) had lower SF12 PCS scores (p<0.004) and VAS-L ratings (p<0.001) than Lenke 1-2 patients.

CONCLUSION

Low-grade ISPL treated by circumferential arthrodesis and interbody graft showed 85.3% consolidation at 2years, with equivalent outcomes between anterior and posterior techniques. Successful fusion was associated with better clinical results.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

High-grade L5-S1 spondylolisthesis with lumbosacral kyphosis: Long-term results of non-instrumented circumferential arthrodesis in children, adolescents

INTRODUCTION

The choice of surgical technique for high-grade spondylolisthesis (HGS) associated with lumbosacral kyphosis remains controversial. Are non-instrumented techniques still relevant, what with the multiplicity and modernity of patient-specific instrumentation?

HYPOTHESIS

Our hypothesis was that a non-instrumented circumferential arthrodesis performed after a period of gradual reduction of HGS, associated with lumbosacral kyphosis, provided satisfactory long-term functional and radiographic results in children and adolescents while minimizing the risk of complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-one L5-S1 HGS associated with a lumbosacral kyphosis operated by non-instrumented circumferential arthrodesis after a period of traction and suspension were included in our study. The first stage of this technique consisted of a gradual reduction using traction followed by immobilization in the corrected position. The second stage involved a posterior, followed by an anterior, surgical procedure and a spica cast immobilization for 4 months. The mean age at surgery was 13.9±2.3 years (6-18) and the mean follow-up was 10.3±4.5 years (2.1-17.8).

RESULTS

The overall complication rate was 26% (n=8/31): 13% neurologic complications, 10% bone fusion defects and 3% skin complications. The reoperation rate was 13% (n=4/31). The mean ODI (/50) was 3±4.6 (0-22) and the SRS-30 126.7±15 (72-143). The Taillard index decreased by 25% (p<.001) and remained stable throughout the follow-up period (p=.65). The lumbosacral angle was corrected by 13.5% (p=.03) and the correction was maintained throughout the follow-up period (p=.71). At the last follow-up, the lumbosacral angle was significantly correlated with a low ODI score and a high SRS-30 score (p<.05).

CONCLUSION

Even though this technique achieved a smaller reduction of the lumbosacral angle, it reduced by at least a factor of three the incidence of neurologic complications and resulted in satisfactory functional outcomes when compared to instrumented and intraoperative correction series.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.