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

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. 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

Some patients presenting with hip pain and instability and underlying acetabular dysplasia (AD) do not experience resolution of symptoms after surgical management. Hip-spine syndrome is a possible underlying cause. We hypothesized that there is a higher frequency of radiological spine anomalies in patients with AD. We also assessed the relationship between radiological severity of AD and frequency of spine anomalies.

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

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

Aims

The aim of this study was to use diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) to investigate changes in diffusion metrics in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) up to five years after decompressive surgery. We correlated these changes with clinical outcomes as scored by the Modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) method, Neck Disability Index (NDI), and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS).

Aims

The aetiologies of common degenerative spine, hip, and knee pathologies are still not completely understood. Mechanical theories have suggested that those diseases are related to sagittal pelvic morphology and spinopelvic-femoral dynamics. The link between the most widely used parameter for sagittal pelvic morphology, pelvic incidence (PI), and the onset of degenerative lumbar, hip, and knee pathologies has not been studied in a large-scale setting.

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

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.

Aims. Patients may present with concurrent symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip and degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine, with surgical treatment being indicated for both. Whether arthroplasty of the hip or spinal surgery should be performed first remains uncertain. Materials and Methods. Clinical scenarios were devised for a survey asking the preferred order of surgery and the rationale for this decision for five fictional patients with both OA of the hip and degenerative lumbar disorders. These were symptomatic OA of the hip and: 1) lumbar spinal stenosis with neurological claudication; 2) lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis with leg pain; 3) lumbar disc herniation with leg weakness; 4) lumbar scoliosis with back pain; and 5) thoracolumbar disc herniation with myelopathy. This survey was sent to 110 members of The Hip Society and 101 members of the Scoliosis Research Society. The choices of the surgeons were compared among scenarios and between surgical specialties using the chi-squared test. The free-text comments were analyzed using text-mining. Results. Responses were received from 51 hip surgeons (46%) and 37 spine surgeons (37%). The percentages of hip surgeons recommending ‘hip first’ differed significantly among scenarios: 59% for scenario 1; 73% for scenario 2; 47% for scenario 3; 47% for scenario 4; and 10% for scenario 5 (p < 0.001). The percentages of spine surgeons recommending ‘hip first’ were 49% for scenario 1; 70% for scenario 2; 19% for scenario 3; 78% for scenario 4; and 0% for scenario 5. There were significant differences between the groups for scenarios 3 (more hip surgeons recommended ‘hip first’; p = 0.012) and 4 (more hip surgeons recommended ‘spine first’; p = 0.006). Conclusion. In patients with coexistent OA of the hip and degenerative disorders of the spine, the question of ‘hip or spinal surgery first’ elicits relatively consistent answers in some clinical scenarios, but remains controversial in others, even for experienced surgeons. The nature of neurological symptoms can influence surgeons’ decision-making. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B(6 Supple B):37–44

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

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).

Little information is available about the incidence and outcome of incidental dural tears associated with microendoscopic lumbar decompressive surgery. We prospectively examined the incidence of dural tears and their influence on the outcome six months post-operatively in 555 consecutive patients (mean age 47.4 years (13 to 89)) who underwent this form of surgery. The incidence of dural tears was 5.05% (28/555). The risk factors were the age of the patient and the procedure of bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach. The rate of recovery of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score in patients with dural tears was significantly lower than that in those without a tear (77.7% vs 87.6%; p < 0.02), although there were no significant differences in the improvement of the Oswestry Disability Index between the two groups. Most dural tears were small, managed by taking adequate care of symptoms of low cerebrospinal fluid pressure, and did not require direct dural repair. Routine MRI scans were undertaken six months post-operatively; four patients with a dural tear had recurrent or residual disc herniation and two had further stenosis, possibly because the dural tear prevented adequate decompression and removal of the fragments of disc during surgery; as yet, none of these patients have undergone further surgery.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:641–5.

We investigated the spinopelvic morphology and global sagittal balance of patients with a degenerative retrolisthesis or anterolisthesis. A total of 269 consecutive patients with a degenerative spondylolisthesis were included in this study. There were 95 men and 174 women with a mean age of 64.3 years (sd 10.5; 40 to 88). A total of 106 patients had a pure retrolisthesis (R group), 130 had a pure anterolisthesis (A group), and 33 had both (R+A group).

A backward slip was found in the upper lumbar levels (mostly L2 or L3) with an almost equal gender distribution in both the R and R+A groups. The pelvic incidence and sacral slope of the R group were significantly lower than those of the A (both p < 0.001) and R+A groups (both p < 0.001). The lumbar lordosis of the R+A group was significantly greater than that of the R (p = 0.025) and A groups (p = 0.014). The C7 plumb line of the R group was located more posteriorly than that of the A group (p = 0.023), but was no different from than that of the R+A group (p = 0.422). The location of C7 plumb line did not differ between the three groups (p = 0.068). The spinosacral angle of the R group was significantly smaller than that of the A group (p < 0.001) and R+A group (p < 0.001).

Our findings imply that there are two types of degenerative retrolisthesis: one occurs primarily as a result of degeneration in patients with low pelvic incidence, and the other occurs secondarily as a compensatory mechanism in patients with an anterolisthesis and high pelvic incidence.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1244–9.

This study evaluates the long-term survival of spinal implants after surgical site infection (SSI) and the risk factors associated with treatment failure.

A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was carried out on 43 patients who had undergone a posterior spinal fusion with instrumentation between January 2006 and December 2008, and who consecutively developed an acute deep surgical site infection. All were appropriately treated by surgical debridement with a tailored antibiotic program based on culture results for a minimum of eight weeks.

A ‘terminal event’ or failure of treatment was defined as implant removal or death related to the SSI. The mean follow-up was 26 months (1.03 to 50.9). A total of ten patients (23.3%) had a terminal event. The rate of survival after the first debridement was 90.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 82.95 to 98.24) at six months, 85.4% (95% CI 74.64 to 96.18) at one year, and 73.2% (95% CI 58.70 to 87.78) at two, three and four years. Four of nine patients required re-instrumentation after implant removal, and two of the four had a recurrent infection at the surgical site. There was one recurrence after implant removal without re-instrumentation.

Multivariate analysis revealed a significant risk of treatment failure in patients who developed sepsis (hazard ratio (HR) 12.5 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.6 to 59.9); p < 0.001) or who had > three fused segments (HR 4.5 (95% CI 1.25 to 24.05); p = 0.03). Implant survival is seriously compromised even after properly treated surgical site infection, but progressively decreases over the first 24 months.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1121–6.

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

The purpose of this study was to determine whether it would be feasible to use oblique lumbar interbody fixation for patients with degenerative lumbar disease who required a fusion but did not have a spondylolisthesis.

A series of CT digital images from 60 patients with abdominal disease were reconstructed in three dimensions (3D) using Mimics v10.01: a digital cylinder was superimposed on the reconstructed image to simulate the position of an interbody screw. The optimal entry point of the screw and measurements of its trajectory were recorded. Next, 26 cadaveric specimens were subjected to oblique lumbar interbody fixation on the basis of the measurements derived from the imaging studies. These were then compared with measurements derived directly from the cadaveric vertebrae.

Our study suggested that it is easy to insert the screws for L1/2, L2/3 and L3/4 fixation: there was no significant difference in measurements between those of the 3-D digital images and the cadaveric specimens. For L4/5 fixation, part of L5 inferior articular process had to be removed to achieve the optimal trajectory of the screw. For L5/S1 fixation, the screw heads were blocked by iliac bone: consequently, the interior oblique angle of the cadaveric specimens was less than that seen in the 3D digital images.

We suggest that CT scans should be carried out pre-operatively if this procedure is to be adopted in clinical practice. This will assist in determining the feasibility of the procedure and will provide accurate information to assist introduction of the screws.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:977–82.

Wrong-level surgery is a unique pitfall in spinal surgery and is part of the wider field of wrong-site surgery. Wrong-site surgery affects both patients and surgeons and has received much media attention. We performed this systematic review to determine the incidence and prevalence of wrong-level procedures in spinal surgery and to identify effective prevention strategies. We retrieved 12 studies reporting the incidence or prevalence of wrong-site surgery and that provided information about prevention strategies. Of these, ten studies were performed on patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery and two on patients undergoing lumbar, thoracic or cervical spine procedures. A higher frequency of wrong-level surgery in lumbar procedures than in cervical procedures was found. Only one study assessed preventative strategies for wrong-site surgery, demonstrating that current site-verification protocols did not prevent about one-third of the cases. The current literature does not provide a definitive estimate of the occurrence of wrong-site spinal surgery, and there is no published evidence to support the effectiveness of site-verification protocols. Further prevention strategies need to be developed to reduce the risk of wrong-site surgery.