45
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Analytical comparison study of the clinical and radiological outcome of spine fixation using posterolateral, posterior lumber interbody and transforaminal lumber interbody spinal fixation techniques to treat lumber spine degenerative disc disease

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Degenerative disc disease is a common cause of chronic and disabling back pain that requires surgical intervention, posterolateral and posterior instrumental fixation (PLF), posterior lumber interbody fusion (PLIF) and transforaminal lumber interbody fusion (TLIF) are the techniques used to deal with such a problem.

          Objective

          To compare the clinical and radiological outcome of the variable surgical techniques used to deal with Lumber degenerative disc disease and to recommend the technique of choice.

          Methods

          120 patients were treated between 2003 and 2010 at king Abdullah university hospital for lumber disc disease. The patients were divided into three groups: Group I (PLF n = 30 [59 levels]); Group II (PLIF n = 40 [70 levels]); and Group III (TLIF n = 50 [96 levels]). All patients had the same pre- and postoperative clinical and radiological evaluations (using Stanford score and local criteria and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI],). All cases had three months and then yearly for five years follow ups.

          Results

          There was no observed difference in the rates of intra-operative complications (Group I: 10 %; Group II: 8 %; Group III: 14 %; p = 0.566) and postoperative complications (Group I: 13.3 %, Group II:17.5 %, Group III: 18 % with p = 0.332). Among the groups. There was a vital decrease in the ODI scores over time (p < 0.005) but no major difference among the groups at different follow-up times. Radiographic fusion rates for Groups I, II and III were 90 %, 92.5 % and 94 %, respectively.

          Conclusions

          The surgical outcome of PLF, PLIF and TLIF used to treat degenerative disc disease is almost similar, there is no significant differences observed in complications and clinical outcomes. However, TILF may have better radiological outcome.

          Related collections

          Most cited references28

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          [A one-stager procedure in operative treatment of spondylolistheses: dorsal traction-reposition and anterior fusion (author's transl)].

          On account of 41 cases of spondylolisthesis a one-stage operation for repositioning and stabilisation using Harrington's instrumentation with anterior intercorporal spine fusion is recommended. The advantage of this procedure is a secure fusion and a short hospitalisation. After 6 months the patient usually is rehabilitated.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            2001 Volvo Award Winner in Clinical Studies: Lumbar fusion versus nonsurgical treatment for chronic low back pain: a multicenter randomized controlled trial from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group.

            A randomized controlled multicenter study with a 2-year follow-up by an independent observer. To determine whether fusion of the lower lumbar spine could reduce pain and diminish disability more effectively when compared with nonsurgical treatment in patients with severe chronic low back pain (CLBP). The reported results after fusion surgery on patients with CLBP vary considerably, and the evidence of treatment efficacy is weak in the absence of randomized controlled studies. A total of 294 patients referred to 19 spinal centers from 1992 through 1998 were randomized blindly into four treatment groups. Patients aged 25-65 years with CLBP for at least 2 years and with radiologic evidence of disc degeneration at L4-L5, L5-S1, or both were eligible to participate in the study. The surgical group (n=222) included three different fusion techniques, not analyzed separately in this study. Patients in the nonsurgical group (n=72) were treated with different kinds of physical therapy. The surgical group comprised 49.5% men, and the mean age was 43 years. The corresponding figures for the nonsurgical group were 48.6% and 44 years. The patients had suffered from low back pain for a mean of 7.8 and 8.5 years and been on sick leave due to back pain for a mean of 3.2 and 2.9 years, respectively. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was used to measure pain. The Oswestry Low Back Pain Questionnaire, the Million Score and the General Function Score (GFS) were used to measure disability. The Zung Depression Scale was used to measure depressive symptoms. The overall result was assessed by the patient and by an independent observer. Records from the Swedish Social Insurance were used to evaluate work disability. Patients who changed groups were included in the analyses of significance according to the intention-to-treat principle. At the 2-year follow-up 289 of 294 (98%) patients, including 25 who had changed groups, were examined. Back pain was reduced in the surgical group by 33% (64 to 43), compared with 7% (63 to 58) in the nonsurgical group (P=0.0002). Pain improved most during the first 6 months and then gradually deteriorated. Disability according to Oswestry was reduced by 25% (47 to 36) compared with 6% (48 to 46) among nonsurgical patients (P=0.015), according to Million by 28% (64 to 46) compared with 8% (66 to 60) (P=0.004), and accordingtoGFS by 31% (49 to 34) compared with 4% (48 to 46) (P=0.005). The depressive symptoms, according to Zung, were reduced by 20% (39 to 31) in the surgical group compared with 7% (39 to 36) in the nonsurgical group (P=0.123). In the surgical group 63% (122/195) rated themselves as "much better" or "better" compared with 29% (18/62) in the nonsurgical group (P<0.0001). The "net back to work rate" was significantly in favor of surgical treatment, or 36% vs. 13% (P=0.002). The early complication rate in the surgical group was 17%. Lumbar fusion in a well-informed and selected group of patients with severe CLBP can diminish pain and decrease disability more efficiently than commonly used nonsurgical treatment.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              The treatment of ruptured lumbar intervertebral discs by vertebral body fusion. I. Indications, operative technique, after care.

              R Cloward (1953)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                dr_barbarawi@yahoo.com
                ziadaudat@yahoo.com
                mallouh@yahoo.com
                Journal
                Scoliosis
                Scoliosis
                Scoliosis
                BioMed Central (London )
                1748-7161
                27 May 2015
                27 May 2015
                2015
                : 10
                : 17
                Affiliations
                [ ]Department of Neuroscience/ Division of Neurosurgery, Level 7A. King Abdullah University Hospital, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid-Amman Street, P.O.box 3030, Irbid, Jordan
                [ ]Department of orthopeadic, Level 8A. King Abdullah University Hospital, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid-Amman Street, P.O.box 3030, Irbid, Jordan
                [ ]Department of Anatomy, Faculty of medicine, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid-Amman Street, P.O.box 3030, Irbid, Jordan
                Article
                40
                10.1186/s13013-015-0040-0
                4487990
                26136814
                741aac75-a153-4f2a-a975-6d96b8a59fc4
                © Al Barbarawi et al. 2015

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 27 March 2015
                : 18 May 2015
                Categories
                Methodology
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2015

                Orthopedics
                degenerative disc disease (ddd),spinal fixation,transforaminal lumber interbody fusion (tilf),posterolateral fusion (plf),posterior lumber interbody fusion (plif)

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content298

                Cited by5

                Most referenced authors264