Aims

People with severe, persistent low back pain (LBP) may be offered lumbar spine fusion surgery if they have had insufficient benefit from recommended non-surgical treatments. However, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 2016 guidelines recommended not offering spinal fusion surgery for adults with LBP, except as part of a randomized clinical trial. This survey aims to describe UK clinicians’ views about the suitability of patients for such a future trial, along with their views regarding equipoise for randomizing patients in a future clinical trial comparing lumbar spine fusion surgery to best conservative care (BCC; the FORENSIC-UK trial).

Aims

We compared decompression alone to decompression with fusion surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis, with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). The aim was to evaluate if five-year outcomes differed between the groups. The two-year results from the same trial revealed no differences.

Aims

The aims of this study were first, to determine if adding fusion to a decompression of the lumbar spine for spinal stenosis decreases the rate of radiological restenosis and/or proximal adjacent level stenosis two years after surgery, and second, to evaluate the change in vertebral slip two years after surgery with and without fusion.

Introduction and Objective. Almost 60% of the population can expect to experience low back pain (LBP) during their life. Several radiological tools are used to investigate LBP. However, adequate evidence is unavailable to support the use of single photon emission computer tomography (SPECT) in patients with LBP. The objective of this study is to assess the role and efficiency of SPECT in evaluation and management of patients with LBP. Method. Ninety-two patients with LBP were examined and assessed. All the patients received a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan and were referred for a SPECT. We interpreted the modic and degenerative changes found on the MRI and compared it with SPECT tracer uptake. SPECT was used to identify the pain generator and then a surgical plan was made. Data was analyzed for pain improvement in those who underwent surgical treatment to establish the accuracy of CT SPECT in identification of primary pain generator. Results. A total of 184 patients were included in the study who underwent diagnostic CT-SPECT between January 2013 and December 2019. One hundred of them were females and Eighty four males; the mean age was 47.6 years. 111 patients underwent surgery in the form of interbody fusion or posterolateral fusion. 16 patients positive tracer uptake was at asymptomatic level or unrelated. In 3 patients SPECT identified screw sites as pain generator and in all 3 patients screws were removed with good pain relief. Overall axial pain as measured with Numeric rating scale was preoperatively 9.13 ± 0.7 and improved to 4.54 ± 2.3 at 6 months postoperative follow up. MRI changes have been analyzed and correlation studied with relation to SPECT findings. Conclusion. Due to its high precision and sensitivity compared to other radiological modalities, SPECT demonstrated the ability to aid in clinical diagnosis. CT SPECT reveals information that becomes vital in deciding further management. In this study, we exemplified that SPECT scan can give indication for pain generator in axial spine pain and aid in surgical intervention

Aims

High-grade dysplastic spondylolisthesis is a disabling disorder for which many different operative techniques have been described. The aim of this study is to evaluate Scoliosis Research Society 22-item (SRS-22r) scores, global balance, and regional spino-pelvic alignment from two to 25 years after surgery for high-grade dysplastic spondylolisthesis using an all-posterior partial reduction, transfixation technique.

Instrumented fusion for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS) has been challenged recently with high impact trials demonstrating similar changes in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and less morbidity/cost with laminectomy alone. Randomized trials often fail, however, to evaluate a heterogeneous population of patients. A standardized clinical assessment and management plan (SCAMP) was created as a decision aid for surgeons based on the radiographic stability and clinical presentation of patients. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of those patients who followed the decision aid with respect to fusion/no fusion to those who did not. Patients were prospectively enrolled from eleven different Canadian institutions and followed from 2015–2019. A degenerative spondylolisthesis instability classification system (DSIC) was created using best available evidence stratifying patients into three different subtypes (1. stable degenerative spondylolisthesis, 2. potentially unstable spondylolisthesis and 3. unstable spondylolisthesis). The decision aid recommends laminectomy alone for group 1 patients, posterolateral fusion with pedicle screws in type 2 patients and pedicle screw and interbody fusion for type 3 patients. One year changes in HRQOL, length of hospital stay (LOS), medication use and surgical time were compared between each group and in context of whether the treatment fell within the decision aid recommendation. Statistics were performed with STATA software. There were 394 patients initially enrolled and 334 (84.8%) with full one year data available for comparison. There were 95 type 1 (stable), 224 type 2 (potentially unstable) and 75 type 3 (unstable) patients initially classified. Baseline Ostwestry disability index (ODI), EQ-5D, and SF-12 MCS scores were significantly worse for type 3 patients versus type 1 patients. One hundred and eight patients were treated within the recommendations of the DSIC system (108/334, 32.3%). Surgeons performed interbody fusions in 141 patients (42%) rather than follow DSIC recommending a less invasive approach. There were no significant differences EQ-5D, SF-12 PCS/MCS, PHQ-9 or ODI at one year between patient groups. There was a trend towards shorter operating times for those patients following the DSIC system (195 minutes non-followers versus 180 followers, p=0.078) and reduced hospital stay (4.46 days non-followers versus 3.98 followers, p=0.065). There were no significant clinical differences in outcome at 1 year whether patients underwent decompression alone, decompression/posterolateral fusion or interbody fusion regardless of the stability classification. Surgeons were more likely to perform potentially unnecessary interbody fusions even in those patients with stable or potentially unstable spondylolisthesis. Although not statistically significant, there is some suggestion that following the DSIC system based on best evidence recommendations leads to more judicious/responsible use of hospital resources. Further study is required to determine why surgeons are more likely to choose more invasive, higher rigidity constructs in patients with LDS

Due to well-known disadvantages of the autologous bone graft, many alternatives have been studied for a reliable spinal fusion. Herein, we aimed to investigate the effects of human recombinant epidermal growth factor (EGF) on posterolateral lumbar fusion in a rat model. 36 male SD rats underwent posterolateral fusion at L4-5 level. They were randomly assigned to 3 groups: Sham control group, Hydoxyapatite β-tricalcium phosphate (HA/β-TCP) group and HA/β-TCP + EGF group. Rats were euthanized at 8 weeks post-surgery. 6 rats from each group were selected for manual palpation examination, micro-computed tomography analysis and histologic analysis; and the rest was used for biomechanical analysis. Based on manual palpation, there was no fusion in the sham control group. Fusion rate was 33.3% in the HA/β-TCP group and 66.7% in the HA/β-TCP + EGF group (p=0.085). Micro-CT results revealed that new bone formation was higher in the HA/β-TCP + EGF group (BV/TV: 40% vs. 65%) (p=0.004). Histologically newly formed bone tissue was more pronounced in the EGF group and compacted and bridging bone spicules were observed. The median maximum bending moment values were 0.51 Nmm (0.42– 0.59), 0.73 Nmm (0.49– 0.88) and 0.91 Nmm (0.66– 1.03) in the sham control, HA/β-TCP and HA/β-TCP + EGF groups, respectively (p=0.013). The median stiffness values were 1.69 N/mm (1.12–2.18), 1.68 N/mm (1.13–2.74) and 3.10 N/mm (1.66–4.40) as in the previous order (p=0.087). This study demonstrates that EGF enhances posterolateral lumbar fusion in the rat model. EGF in combination with ceramic grafts increased the fusion rates

Aims. To determine the effectiveness of prone traction radiographs in predicting postoperative slip distance, slip angle, changes in disc height, and lordosis after surgery for degenerative spondylolisthesis of the lumbar spine. Methods. A total of 63 consecutive patients with a degenerative spondylolisthesis and preoperative prone traction radiographs obtained since 2010 were studied. Slip distance, slip angle, disc height, segmental lordosis, and global lordosis (L1 to S1) were measured on preoperative lateral standing radiographs, flexion-extension lateral radiographs, prone traction lateral radiographs, and postoperative lateral standing radiographs. Patients were divided into two groups: posterolateral fusion or posterolateral fusion with interbody fusion. Results. The mean changes in segmental lordosis and global lordosis were 7.1° (SD 6.7°) and 2.9° (SD 9.9°) respectively for the interbody fusion group, and 0.8° (SD 5.1°) and -0.4° (SD 10.1°) respectively for the posterolateral fusion-only group. Segmental lordosis (ρ = 0.794, p < 0.001) corrected by interbody fusion correlated best with prone traction radiographs. Global lumbar lordosis (ρ = 0.788, p < 0.001) correlated best with the interbody fusion group and preoperative lateral standing radiographs. The least difference in slip distance (-0.3 mm (SD 1.7 mm), p < 0.001), slip angle (0.9° (SD 5.2°), p < 0.001), and disc height (0.02 mm (SD 2.4 mm), p < 0.001) was seen between prone traction and postoperative radiographs. Regression analyses suggested that prone traction parameters best predicted correction of slip distance (Corrected Akaike’s Information Criterion (AICc) = 37.336) and disc height (AICc = 58.096), while correction of slip angle (AICc = 26.453) was best predicted by extension radiographs. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) cut-off showed, with 68.3% sensitivity and 64.5% specificity, that to achieve a 3.0° increase in segmental lordotic angle, patients with a prone traction disc height of 8.5 mm needed an interbody fusion. Conclusion. Prone traction radiographs best predict the slip distance and disc height correction achieved by interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. To achieve this maximum correction, interbody fusion should be undertaken if a disc height of more than 8.5 mm is attained on preoperative prone traction radiographs. Level of Evidence: Level II Prognostic Study. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(8):1062–1071

Aims. Chronic low back pain due to degenerative disc disease is sometimes treated with fusion. We compared the outcome of three different fusion techniques in the Swedish Spine Register: noninstrumented posterolateral fusion (PLF), instrumented posterolateral fusion (IPLF), and interbody fusion (IBF). Patients and Methods. A total of 2874 patients who were operated on at one or two lumbar levels were followed for a mean of 9.2 years (3.6 to 19.1) for any additional lumbar spine surgery. Patient-reported outcome data were available preoperatively (n = 2874) and at one year (n = 2274), two years (n = 1958), and a mean of 6.9 years (n = 1518) postoperatively and consisted of global assessment and visual analogue scales of leg and back pain, Oswestry Disability Index, EuroQol five-dimensional index, 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, and satisfaction with treatment. Statistical analyses were performed with competing-risks proportional hazards regression or analysis of covariance, adjusted for baseline variables. Results. The number of patients with additional surgery were 32/183 (17%) in the PLF group, 229/1256 (18%) in the IPLF group, and 439/1435 (31%) in the IBF group. With the PLF group as a reference, the hazard ratio for additional lumbar surgery was 1.16 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.72) for the IPLF group and 2.13 (95% CI 1.45 to 3.12) for the IBF group. All patient-reported outcomes improved after surgery (p < 0.001) but were without statistically significant differences between the groups at the one-, two- and 6.9-year follow-ups (all p ≥ 0.12). Conclusion. The addition of interbody fusion to posterolateral fusion was associated with a higher risk for additional surgery and showed no advantages in patient-reported outcome. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1526–1533

Aims

The aim of this study was to explore risk factors for complications associated with dural tear (DT), including the types of DT, and the intra- and postoperative management of DT.

Background context

Fusion is a fundamental procedure in spine surgery. Although autogenous grafts have ideal bone graft characteristics, their use may remain limited due to various morbidities. Even though ceramic based synthetic bone grafts are used commonly at present, in order to enhance their efficacy, their combined use with other materials has been investigated. The use of carbon nanotubes (CNTs) together with synthetic bone grafts such as hydroxyapatite (HA) has contributed to positive developments in bone tissue engineering.

Aims

We compared the clinical and radiological outcomes of using a polyetheretherketone cage with (TiPEEK) and without a titanium coating (PEEK) for instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has issued guidelines that state fusion for non-specific low back pain should only be performed as part of a randomised controlled trial, and that lumbar disc replacement should not be performed. Thus, spinal fusion and disc replacement will no longer be routine forms of treatment for patients with low back pain. This annotation considers the evidence upon which these guidelines are based.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1003–1005.

Objectives. The aim of this systematic literature review was to assess the clinical level of evidence of commercially available demineralised bone matrix (DBM) products for their use in trauma and orthopaedic related surgery. Methods. A total of 17 DBM products were used as search terms in two available databases: Embase and PubMed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses statement. All articles that reported the clinical use of a DBM-product in trauma and orthopaedic related surgery were included. Results. The literature search resulted in 823 manuscripts of which 64 manuscripts met the final inclusion criteria. The included manuscripts consisted of four randomised controlled trials (level I), eight cohort studies (level III) and 49 case-series (level IV). No clinical studies were found for ten DBM products, and most DBM products were only used in combination with other grafting materials. DBM products were most extensively investigated in spinal surgery, showing limited level I evidence that supports the use Grafton DBM (Osteotech, Eatontown, New Jersey) as a bone graft extender in posterolateral lumbar fusion surgery. DBM products are not thoroughly investigated in trauma surgery, showing mainly level IV evidence that supports the use of Allomatrix (Wright Medical, London, United Kingdom), DBX (DePuy Synthes, Zuchwil, Switzerland), Grafton DBM, or OrthoBlast (Citagenix Laval, Canada) as bone graft extenders. Conclusions. The clinical level of evidence that supports the use of DBM in trauma and orthopaedic surgery is limited and consists mainly of poor quality and retrospective case-series. More prospective, randomised controlled trials are needed to understand the clinical effect and impact of DBM in trauma and orthopaedic surgery. Cite this article: J. van der Stok, K. A. Hartholt, D. A. L. Schoenmakers, J. J. C. Arts. The available evidence on demineralised bone matrix in trauma and orthopaedic surgery: A systemati c review. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:423–432. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.67.BJR-2017-0027.R1