Alleviation of Chronic Low Back Pain due to Bilateral Traumatic L4 Pars Interarticularis Fractures Relieved With Steroid Injections

Main and contralateral side stages of lesion affected bone union in the conservative treatment of adolescent lumbar spondylolysis: a multivariable analysis of 217 patients and 298 lesions in a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Factors affecting bone union in the conservative treatment of adolescent lumbar spondylolysis remain controversial. We aimed to examine these factors along with advances in diagnostic imaging using multivariable analysis of a sufficient number of patients and lesions.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, high-school-aged patients or younger (n = 514) who were diagnosed with lumbar spondylolysis from 2014 to 2021 were investigated. We included patients with acute fractures who showed signal changes around the pedicle on magnetic resonance imaging and who completed conservative treatment. The following factors were investigated at the initial visit: age, sex, level of lesion, main side stage, presence and stage of contralateral side lesion, and presence of spina bifida occulta. The association of each factor with bone union was evaluated through a multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

Altogether, 298 lesions in 217 patients (174 boys and 43 girls; mean age: 14.3 years) were included in this study. Multivariable logistic regression analysis of all factors showed that the main side progressive stage was more likely associated with nonunion as compared to the pre-lysis (OR: 5.86; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.00-18.8; p = 0.0011) and early stages (OR: 3.77; 95% CI: 1.72-8.46; p = 0.0009). Regarding the contralateral side stage, the terminal stage was more likely to be associated with nonunion.

CONCLUSION

In the conservative treatment of lumbar spondylolysis, the factors affecting bone union were the main and contralateral side stages. Sex, age, level of lesion, or spina bifida occulta had no significant effects on bone union. The main, progressive, and contralateral side terminal stages were negative predictors of bone union. Trial registration This study was retrospectively registered.

Back pain in adolescent athletes: a narrative review

BACKGROUND

Back pain in young athletes is common. Adolescents are at an increased risk for back pain related to several factors including rapid growth. Traditionally, the conversation around back pain in the adolescent age group has been centered around diagnosis and treatment; however, there are emerging studies regarding prevention.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present investigation is to summarize sport-specific risk factors, to describe the growing emphasis on prevention/screening, and report results on minimally invasive and surgical options.

METHODS

The literature search was performed in Mendeley. Search fields were varied until redundant. All articles were screened by title and abstract and a preliminary decision to include an article was made. The full-text screening was performed on the selected articles. Any question regarding the inclusion of an article was discussed by at least 3 authors until an agreement was reached.

RESULTS

Adolescent athletes have a higher risk of developing spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis than their non-athletic counterparts. Participation in athletic activity alone, increased body mass index, varsity status, and nationally/internationally competitive status are identified are demographic risk factors. Weightlifters, gymnasts, football players, and combat athletes may be at higher risks. Increased lumbar lordosis, abdominal muscle weakness, hip flexor tightness, hamstring tightness, thoracolumbar fascia tightness, femoral anteversion, genu recurvatum, and thoracic kyphosis also predispose. Recent cadaveric and kinematic studies have furthered our understanding of pathoanatomic. There is some evidence to suggest that isokinetic testing and electromyographic data may be able to identify at-risk individuals. Perturbation-based exercise interventions can reduce the incidence of adolescent athletic back pain. There is a large body of evidence to support the efficacy of physical therapy. There is some data to support minimally invasive treatments including external bone growth simulators, steroid injections, and chemonucleolysis for specific pathologies. Endoscopic surgery results for a limited subset of patients with certain disease processes are good.

CONCLUSIONS

Back pain in adolescent athletes is common and may not lead to appropriate alterations in athletes' level of participation. Athletes with a higher body mass index should be counseled regarding the benefits of losing weight. Isokinetic testing and electromyographic data have the potential as diagnostic and screening tools. Strength deficits and postural control could be used to identify patients requiring early intervention and thus reduce the incidence. External bone growth simulators, steroid injections, and chemonucleolysis could potentially become conservative options in the future. When surgery is indicated, the endoscopic intervention has the potential to decrease operative time, decrease cost, and promote healing.