Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 10 | Pages 886 - 893
15 Oct 2024
Zhang C Li Y Wang G Sun J

Aims. A variety of surgical methods and strategies have been demonstrated for Andersson lesion (AL) therapy. In 2011, we proposed and identified the feasibility of stabilizing the spine without curettaging the vertebral or discovertebral lesion to cure non-kyphotic AL. Additionally, due to the excellent reunion ability of ankylosing spondylitis, we further came up with minimally invasive spinal surgery (MIS) to avoid the need for both bone graft and lesion curettage in AL surgery. However, there is a paucity of research into the comparison between open spinal fusion (OSF) and early MIS in the treatment of AL. The purpose of this study was to investigate and compare the clinical outcomes and radiological evaluation of our early MIS approach and OSF for AL. Methods. A total of 39 patients diagnosed with AL who underwent surgery from January 2004 to December 2022 were retrospectively screened for eligibility. Patients with AL were divided into an MIS group and an OSF group. The primary outcomes were union of the lesion on radiograph and CT, as well as the visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores immediately after surgery, and at the follow-up (mean 29 months (standard error (SE) 9)). The secondary outcomes were total blood loss during surgery, operating time, and improvement in the radiological parameters: global and local kyphosis, sagittal vertical axis, sagittal alignment, and chin-brow vertical angle immediately after surgery and at the follow-up. Results. Data for 30 patients with AL were evaluated: 14 in the MIS group and 16 in the OSF group. All patients were followed up after surgery; no nonunion complications or instrumentation failures were observed in either group. No significant differences in the VAS and ODI scores were identified between the two groups. Mean ODI improved from 51 (SE 5) to 17 (SE 5) in the MIS group and from 52 (SE 6) to 19 (SE 5) in the OSF group at the follow-up. There were significant improvements in total blood loss (p = 0.025) and operating time (p < 0.001) between the groups. There was also no significant difference in local kyphosis six months postoperatively (p = 0.119). Conclusion. Early MIS is an effective treatment for AL. MIS provides comparable clinical outcomes to those treated with OSF, with less total blood loss and shorter operating time. Our results support and identify the feasibility of solid immobilization achieved by posterior instrumentation without bone graft via MIS for the treatment of AL. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(10):886–893


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 4, Issue 8 | Pages 573 - 579
8 Aug 2023
Beresford-Cleary NJA Silman A Thakar C Gardner A Harding I Cooper C Cook J Rothenfluh DA

Aims

Symptomatic spinal stenosis is a very common problem, and decompression surgery has been shown to be superior to nonoperative treatment in selected patient groups. However, performing an instrumented fusion in addition to decompression may avoid revision and improve outcomes. The aim of the SpInOuT feasibility study was to establish whether a definitive randomized controlled trial (RCT) that accounted for the spectrum of pathology contributing to spinal stenosis, including pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch and mobile spondylolisthesis, could be conducted.

Methods

As part of the SpInOuT-F study, a pilot randomized trial was carried out across five NHS hospitals. Patients were randomized to either spinal decompression alone or spinal decompression plus instrumented fusion. Patient-reported outcome measures were collected at baseline and three months. The intended sample size was 60 patients.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 7 | Pages 540 - 544
19 Jul 2021
Jensen MM Milosevic S Andersen GØ Carreon L Simony A Rasmussen MM Andersen MØ

Aims. The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with poor outcome following coccygectomy on patients with chronic coccydynia and instability of the coccyx. Methods. From the Danish National Spine Registry, DaneSpine, 134 consecutive patients were identified from a single centre who had coccygectomy from 2011 to 2019. Patient demographic data and patient-reported outcomes, including pain measured on a visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire, and 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-36) were obtained at baseline and at one-year follow-up. Patient satisfaction was obtained at follow-up. Regression analysis, including age, sex, smoking status, BMI, duration of symptoms, work status, welfare payment, preoperative VAS, ODI, and SF-36 was performed to identify factors associated with dissatisfaction with results at one-year follow-up. Results. A minimum of one year follow-up was available in 112 patients (84%). Mean age was 41.9 years (15 to 78) and 97 of the patients were female (87%). Regression showed no statistically significant association between the investigated prognostic factors and a poor outcome following coccygectomy. The satisfied group showed a statistically significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes at one-year follow-up from baseline, whereas the dissatisfied group did not show a significant improvement. Conclusion. We did not identify factors associated with poor outcome following coccygectomy. This suggests that neither of the included parameters should be considered contraindications for coccygectomy in patients with chronic coccydynia and instability of the coccyx. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(7):540–544