Degenerative spondylolisthesis is four times more common in women than in men. Although this gender difference has long been recognised there has been no explanation for it. We have examined the radiographs and CT scans of 118 patients over the age of 55 years and of a control group under the age of 46 years. Our findings confirmed the presence of more sagittally-orientated facet joints in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis but did not show that the gender difference can be explained by the morphology of the facet joint. Furthermore, we conclude that the increased angle of the facet joint is the result of arthritic remodelling and not the primary cause of degenerative spondylolisthesis. It is more likely to be due to loss of soft-tissue resilience with subsequent failure of the facet joints which are acting as the last restraints to subluxation

We performed a case-control study on the influence of oophorectomy on the development of degenerative spondylolisthesis, including a clinical review and determination of serum oestradiol levels. We also compared the radiological appearance of the lumbar spine at L4/5 in patients with and without spondylolisthesis and with and without oophorectomy. Oophorectomy was a risk factor for degenerative spondylolisthesis with an odds ratio of 7.5 (95% confidence interval, 1.6 to 46). The incidence of degenerative spondylolisthesis in 69 oophorectomised patients was about three times higher than in 69 non-oophorectomised matched control subjects. There was also a difference in spinal variation between oophorectomised and non-oophorectomised patients with spondylolisthesis. A high incidence of sagittal-plane orientation of the L4/5 facet and an increase in pedicle-facet angle were seen in both groups and are typical radiological features of this disease. An increase in lumbosacral angle and in disc-space narrowing was seen only in the non-oophorectomised patients with this condition. Our results suggest that the abrupt decrease in oestradiol level caused by oophorectomy may be a predisposing factor in degenerative spondylolisthesis at L4/5

A clinical study has been made of forty-three patients with symptoms arising from degenerative spondylolisthesis of the lumbar spine. Attention is drawn to the lower average level of the iliac crests in these patients, and to the high incidence of osteoarthritis of the hips. Many patients in this series had been referred specifically for operation and fourteen were so treated. The techniques of decompression and of spinal fusion are discussed. It is concluded that patients with back pain predominant are well treated by corsetry, only a minority needing fusion, and that patients with nerve root involvement or with symptoms of spinal stenosis need decompression. The place of spinal fusion is the main problem, but it seems reasonable, firstly, in younger patients with clear evidence of instability and degenerative change at a single level, and secondly, when radical decompression is judged to increase the risk of instability

Unstable degenerative spondylolisthesis of the cervical spine is very rare. Slip usually occurs at the C3 on C4 or C4 on C5 levels, immediately above a stiff lower cervical spine. There are two clinical patterns: that with neurological involvement causing cervicobrachial pain or myelopathy and that with neck pain alone. The diagnosis can be made by flexion/extension radiography. All of our eight patients had localised fusion, three anterior and five posterior, and all had satisfactory results one to seven years after operation

We have analysed a number of radiological measurements in an attempt to clarify the predisposing factors for degenerative spondylolisthesis of the lumbosacral junction. We identified 57 patients with a slip and a control group of 293 patients without any radiological abnormality apart from age-related changes. The relative thickness of the L5 transverse process, the sacral table angle and the height of the iliac crest were measured and evaluated. The difference in these measurements between men and women was analysed in the control group. We found that the transverse process of L5 was extremely slender, the sacral table more inclined, and the L5 vertebra was less deeply placed in the pelvis in patients with a slip compared with the control group. The differences in these three parameters were statistically significant. We believe that the L5 vertebra is predisposed to slip when these factors act together on a rigidly-stabilised sacrum. This occurs more commonly in women, probably as a result of constitutional differences in the development of the male and female spine

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. Methods. The Swedish Spinal Stenosis Study (SSSS) was conducted between 2006 and 2012 at five public and two private hospitals. Six centres participated in this two-year MRI follow-up. We randomized 222 patients with central lumbar spinal stenosis at one or two adjacent levels into two groups, decompression alone and decompression with fusion. The presence or absence of a preoperative spondylolisthesis was noted. A new stenosis on two-year MRI was used as the primary outcome, defined as a dural sac cross-sectional area ≤ 75 mm. 2. at the operated level (restenosis) and/or at the level above (proximal adjacent level stenosis). Results. A total of 211 patients underwent surgery at a mean age of 66 years (69% female): 103 were treated by decompression with fusion and 108 by decompression alone. A two-year MRI was available for 176 (90%) of the eligible patients. A new stenosis at the operated and/or adjacent level occurred more frequently after decompression and fusion than after decompression alone (47% vs 29%; p = 0.020). The difference remained in the subgroup with a preoperative spondylolisthesis, (48% vs 24%; p = 0.020), but did not reach significance for those without (45% vs 35%; p = 0.488). Proximal adjacent level stenosis was more common after fusion than after decompression alone (44% vs 17%; p < 0.001). Restenosis at the operated level was less frequent after fusion than decompression alone (4% vs 14%; p = 0.036). Vertebral slip increased by 1.1 mm after decompression alone, regardless of whether a preoperative spondylolisthesis was present or not. Conclusion. Adding fusion to a decompression increased the rate of new stenosis on two-year MRI, even when a spondylolisthesis was present preoperatively. This supports decompression alone as the preferred method of surgery for spinal stenosis, whether or not a degenerative spondylolisthesis is present preoperatively. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(12):1343–1351

Aims. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of microendoscopic laminotomy in patients with lumbar stenosis and concurrent degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS), and to determine the effect of this procedure on spinal stability. Patients and Methods. A total of 304 consecutive patients with single-level lumbar DS with concomitant stenosis underwent microendoscopic laminotomy without fusion between January 2004 and December 2010. Patients were divided into two groups, those with and without advanced DS based on the degree of spondylolisthesis and dynamic instability. A total of 242 patients met the inclusion criteria. There were 101 men and 141 women. Their mean age was 68.1 years (46 to 85). Outcome was assessed using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association and Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire scores, a visual analogue score for pain and the Short Form Health-36 score. The radiographic outcome was assessed by measuring the slip and the disc height. The clinical and radiographic parameters were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 4.6 years (3 to 7.5). Results. There were no significant differences in the preoperative measurements between the group and no significant differences between the clinical parameters at the final follow-up. The mean percentage slip was 17.1% preoperatively and 17.7% at the final follow-up (p = 0.35). Progressive instability was noted in 13 patients (8.2%) with DS and 6 patients (7.0%) with advanced DS, respectively (p = 0.81). There was radiological evidence of restabilization of the spine in 30 patients (35%) with preoperative instability. The success rate of microendoscopic laminotomy was good/excellent in 166 (69%), fair in 49 (20%) and poor in 27 patients (11%) in both groups. Conclusion. Microendoscopic laminotomy is an effective form of surgical treatment for patients with DS and stenosis. Preservation of the stabilizing structures using this technique prevents postoperative instability. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:499–506

Whether to combine spinal decompression with fusion in patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis remains controversial. We performed a cohort study to determine the effect of the addition of fusion in terms of patient satisfaction after decompressive spinal surgery in patients with and without a degenerative spondylolisthesis. The National Swedish Register for Spine Surgery (Swespine) was used for the study. Data were obtained for all patients in the register who underwent surgery for stenosis on one or two adjacent lumbar levels. A total of 5390 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and completed a two-year follow-up. Using multivariable models the results of 4259 patients who underwent decompression alone were compared with those of 1131 who underwent decompression and fusion. The consequence of having an associated spondylolisthesis in the operated segments pre-operatively was also considered. At two years there was no significant difference in patient satisfaction between the two treatment groups for any of the outcome measures, regardless of the presence of a pre-operative spondylolisthesis. Moreover, the proportion of patients who required subsequent further lumbar surgery was also similar in the two groups. In this large cohort the addition of fusion to decompression was not associated with an improved outcome. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:960–5

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. To compare the efficacy of decompression alone (DA) with i) decompression and fusion (DF) and ii) interspinous process device (IPD) in the treatment of lumbar stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis. Outcomes of interest were both patient-reported measures of postoperative pain and function, as well as the perioperative measures of blood loss, operation duration, hospital stay, and reoperation. Methods. Data were obtained from electronic searches of five online databases. Included studies were limited to randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) which compared DA with DF or IPD using patient-reported outcomes such as the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ), or perioperative data. Patient-reported data were reported as part of the systematic review, while meta-analyses were conducted for perioperative outcomes in MATLAB using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model. Forest plots were generated for visual interpretation, while heterogeneity was assessed using the I. 2. -statistic. Results. A total of 13 articles met the eligibility criteria. Of these, eight compared DA with DF and six studies compared DA with IPD. Patient-rated outcomes reported included the ODI and ZCQ, with mixed results for both types of comparisons. Overall, there were few statistically significant and no clinically significant differences in patient-rated outcomes. Study quality varied greatly across the included articles. Meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes revealed DF to result in greater blood loss than DA (MD = 406.74 ml); longer operation duration (MD = 108.91 min); and longer postoperative stay in hospital (MD = 2.84 days). Use of IPD in comparison to DA led to slightly reduced operation times (MD = –25.18 min), but a greater risk of reoperation compared to DA (RR = 2.70). Conclusion. Currently there is no evidence for the use of DF or IPD over DA in both patient-rated and perioperative outcomes. Indeed, both procedures can potentially lead to greater cost and risk of complications, and therefore, a stronger evidence base for their use should be established before they are promoted as routine options in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis

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. Methods. The Swedish Spinal Stenosis Study was a multicentre randomized controlled trial with recruitment from September 2006 to February 2012. A total of 247 patients with one- or two-level central lumbar spinal stenosis, stratified by the presence of DS, were randomized to decompression alone or decompression with fusion. The five-year Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were the EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), visual analogue scales for back and leg pain, and patient-reported satisfaction, decreased pain, and increased walking distance. The reoperation rate was recorded. Results. Five-year follow-up was completed by 213 (95%) of the eligible patients (mean age 67 years; 155 female (67%)). After five years, ODI was similar irrespective of treatment, with a mean of 25 (SD 18) for decompression alone and 28 (SD 22) for decompression with fusion (p = 0.226). Mean EQ-5D was higher for decompression alone than for fusion (0.69 (SD 0.28) vs 0.59 (SD 0.34); p = 0.027). In the no-DS subset, fewer patients reported decreased leg pain after fusion (58%) than with decompression alone (80%) (relative risk (RR) 0.71 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.97). The frequency of subsequent spinal surgery was 24% for decompression with fusion and 22% for decompression alone (RR 1.1 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.8)). Conclusion. Adding fusion to decompression in spinal stenosis surgery, with or without spondylolisthesis, does not improve the five-year ODI, which is consistent with our two-year report. Three secondary outcomes that did not differ at two years favoured decompression alone at five years. Our results support decompression alone as the preferred method for operating on spinal stenosis. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(7):705–712

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

Aims. Lumbar disc prolapse is a frequent indication for surgery. The few available long-term follow-up studies focus mainly on repeated surgery for recurrent disease. The aim of this study was to analyze all reasons for additional surgery for patients operated on for a primary lumbar disc prolapse. Methods. We retrieved data from the Swedish spine register about 3,291 patients who underwent primary surgery for a lumbar disc prolapse between January 2007 and December 2008. These patients were followed until December 2020 to record all additional lumbar spine operations and the reason for them. Results. In total, 681 of the 3,291 patients (21%) needed one or more additional operations. More than three additional operations was uncommon (2%; 15/906). Overall, 906 additional operations were identified during the time period, with a mean time to the first of these of 3.7 years (SD 3.6). The most common reason for an additional operation was recurrent disc prolapse (47%; 426/906), followed by spinal stenosis or degenerative spondylolisthesis (19%; 176/906), and segmental pain (16%; 145/906). The most common surgical procedures were revision discectomy (43%; 385/906) and instrumented fusion (22%; 200/906). Degenerative spinal conditions other than disc prolapse became a more common reason for additional surgery with increasing length of follow-up. Most patients achieved the minimally important change (MIC) for the patient-reported outcomes after the index surgery. After the third additional spinal operation, only 20% (5/25) achieved the MIC in terms of leg pain, and 29% (7/24) in terms of the EuroQol five-dimension index questionnaire visual analogue scale. Conclusion. More than one in five patients operated on for a lumbar disc prolapse underwent further surgery during the 13-year follow-up period. Recurrent disc prolapse was the most common reason for additional surgery, followed by spinal stenosis and segmental pain. This study shows that additional operations after primary disc surgery are needed more frequently than previously reported, and that the outcome profoundly deteriorates after the second additional operation. The findings from this study can be used in the shared decision-making process. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(5):627–632

Aims. Although lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (LSTV) are well-documented, few large-scale studies have investigated thoracolumbar transitional vertebrae (TLTV) and spinal numerical variants. This study sought to establish the prevalence of numerical variants and to evaluate their relationship with clinical problems. Methods. A total of 1,179 patients who had undergone thoracic, abdominal, and pelvic CT scanning were divided into groups according to the number of thoracic and lumbar vertebrae, and the presence or absence of TLTV or LSTV. The prevalence of spinal anomalies was noted. The relationship of spinal anomalies to clinical symptoms (low back pain, Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire) and degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) was also investigated. Results. Normal vertebral morphology (12 thoracic and five lumbar vertebrae without TLTV and LSTV) was present in 531 male (76.7%) and 369 female patients (75.8%). Thoracolumbar transitional vertebrae were present in 15.8% of males and 16.0% of females. LSTV were present in 7.1% of males and 9.0% of females. The prevalence of the anomaly of 16 presacral mobile vertebrae (total number of thoracolumbar vertebrae and TLTV) without LSTV was 1.0% in males and 4.1% in females, and that of the anomaly of 18 vertebrae without LSTV was 5.3% in males and 1.2% in females. The prevalence of DS was significantly higher in females with a total of 16 vertebrae than in those with normal morphology. There was no significant correlation between a spinal anomaly and clinical symptoms. Conclusion. Overall, 24% of subjects had anomalies in the thoracolumbar region: the type of anomaly differed between males and females, which could have significant implications for spinal surgery. A decreased number of vertebrae was associated with DS: numerical variants may potentially be a clinical problem. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7):1301–1308

The October 2023 Spine Roundup. 360. looks at: Cutting through surgical smoke: the science of cleaner air in spinal operations; Unlocking success: key factors in thoracic spine decompression and fusion for ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament; Deep learning algorithm for identifying cervical cord compression due to degenerative canal stenosis on radiography; Surgeon experience influences robotics learning curve for minimally invasive lumbar fusion; Decision-making algorithm for the surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis of L4/L5; Response to preoperative steroid injections predicts surgical outcomes in patients undergoing fusion for isthmic spondylolisthesis

Aims. The aim of this study is to test the hypothesis that three grades of sagittal compensation for standing posture (normal, compensated, and decompensated) correlate with health-related quality of life measurements (HRQOL). Methods. A total of 50 healthy volunteers (normal), 100 patients with single-level lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS), and 70 patients with adult to elderly spinal deformity (deformity) were enrolled. Following collection of demographic data and HRQOL measured by the Scoliosis Research Society-22r (SRS-22r), radiological measurement by the biplanar slot-scanning full body stereoradiography (EOS) system was performed simultaneously with force-plate measurements to obtain whole body sagittal alignment parameters. These parameters included the offset between the centre of the acoustic meatus and the gravity line (CAM-GL), saggital vertical axis (SVA), T1 pelvic angle (TPA), McGregor slope, C2-7 lordosis, thoracic kyphosis (TK), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), PI-LL, sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT), and knee flexion. Whole spine MRI examination was also performed. Cluster analysis of the SRS-22r scores in the pooled data was performed to classify the subjects into three groups according to the HRQOL, and alignment parameters were then compared among the three cluster groups. Results. On the basis of cluster analysis of the SRS-22r subscores, the pooled subjects were divided into three HRQOL groups as follows: almost normal (mean 4.24 (SD 0.32)), mildly disabled (mean 3.32 (SD 0.24)), and severely disabled (mean 2.31 (SD 0.35)). Except for CAM-GL, all the alignment parameters differed significantly among the cluster groups. The threshold values of key alignment parameters for severe disability were TPA > 30°, C2-7 lordosis > 13°, PI-LL > 30°, PT > 28°, and knee flexion > 8°. Lumbar spinal stenosis was found to be associated with the symptom severity. Conclusion. This study provides evidence that the three grades of sagittal compensation in whole body alignment correlate with HRQOL scores. The compensation grades depend on the clinical diagnosis, whole body sagittal alignment, and lumbar spinal stenosis. The threshold values of key alignment parameters may be an indication for treatment. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(10):1359–1367

The April 2024 Spine Roundup. 360. looks at: Lengthening behaviour of magnetically controlled growing rods in early-onset scoliosis: a multicentre study; LDL, cholesterol, and statins usage cause pseudarthrosis following lumbar interbody fusion; Decision-making in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis of L4/L5; Does the interfacing angle between pedicle screws and support rods affect clinical outcomes after posterior thoracolumbar fusion?; Returning to the grind: how workload influences recovery post-lumbar spine surgery; Securing the spine: a leap forward with s2 alar-iliac screws in adult spinal deformity surgery

Introduction: Forward slip of the above vertebra may compromise the exit foramen and produce nerve root signs. Conservative management should be attempted first. However in 10–15% surgical procedures are required to control symptoms of backpain and radiculopathy. In this cohort study, we compare the functional outcome of Dynesys in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis categorised in three subgroups. Material & Methods: Seventy eight patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis were treated with Dynesys. Patients were sub-grouped into Dynesys alone (group 1 n=31), Adjunct fusion (group 2 n=34) and Adjunct decompression (group 3 n=13). Three main outcome parameters were reviewed; ODI, VAS and the need for further surgeries. Patients follow up was arranged at 2 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months then annually. Results: Average follow up was 53 months, 47 months & 55 months in groups 1, 2 & 3 respectively. Patients with Dynesys alone had initial good improvement in ODI & VAS but this was not maintained. Secondary surgery was needed in 32% at 28.2 months. Dynesys with adjunct PLIF showed clinically & statistically maintained ODI & VAS outcome. Secondary surgery rate was 11.7% at 26 months. Dynesys with adjunct decompression group was favoured by clinically & statistically improved functional outcome. Second surgery was necessary in 7.6%. Discussion: Dynesys stands as an innovative device for the treatment of backpain. However, its clinical indications were not refined. Patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis require decompression with instrumented stabilisation. Conclusion: Dynesys alone is not recommended for degenerative spondylolisthesis. Conflicts of Interest: None. Source of Funding: Zimmer Spine sponsored research fellowship at the Conquest hospital between 2005–2007. The funds were paid direct to the hospital for follow up and maintenance of Dynesys database. No researcher received direct fund by the company