Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF) augmented with Pedicle Screw Fixation Versus PLIF augmented with Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in Low Grade Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Background Data: The optimal treatment for patients with Spondylolisthesis has been the subject of many recent studies which provide some of the best evidence for lumbar spinal fusion. Purpose: Compare the clinical and radiological outcome of treating low grade lumbar spondylolisthesis patients with...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	Esam Elkhatib
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Egyptian Spine Association 2013
Materias:	Percutaneous Pedicle Screws fixation posterior lumbar interbody fusion Spondylolisthesis Back Pain Neurology. Diseases of the nervous system RC346-429
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/c094b94f0f23405d9037545466cfe981
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:c094b94f0f23405d9037545466cfe981
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:c094b94f0f23405d9037545466cfe9812021-12-02T06:49:18ZPosterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF) augmented with Pedicle Screw Fixation Versus PLIF augmented with Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in Low Grade Lumbar SpondylolisthesisDOI:10.21608/ESJ.2013.38142314-89502314-8969https://doaj.org/article/c094b94f0f23405d9037545466cfe9812013-04-01T00:00:00Zhttp://esj.journals.ekb.eg/article_3814.htmlhttps://doaj.org/toc/2314-8950https://doaj.org/toc/2314-8969Background Data: The optimal treatment for patients with Spondylolisthesis has been the subject of many recent studies which provide some of the best evidence for lumbar spinal fusion. Purpose: Compare the clinical and radiological outcome of treating low grade lumbar spondylolisthesis patients with PLIF augmented with PSF versus those treated with PLIF augmented with Percutaneous PSF. Study Design: This is a prospective comparative clinical case study. Patients and Methods: Seventeen patients with low grade spondylolisthesis who underwent instrumented fixation were retrospectively analyzed from the period of 2011 to 2012. A PLIF and PSF (Group A) was performed in 9 patients, and PLIF and percutaneous PSF (Group B) was performed in 8 patients. Data were collected preoperatively and at 6 months after surgery. A comparative analysis was made between the 2 groups using visual analog pain scale (VAS) before and after surgery, and functional disability was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), by which low back pain, disability were assisted using a questionnaire and radiological (dynamic plain radiographs and CT scans) measures. Results: Follow-up duration was 6 months. The mean preoperative scores on the VAS for low-back pain in Groups A and B were 55 and 54, respectively, decreasing to 43 and 39, respectively, at 6 months after surgery (P=0.003). The mean preoperative scores on the VAS for leg pain in Groups A and B were 65 and 61, respectively, decreasing at 6 months after surgery to 43 and 40, respectively (P=0.031), The fusion rates in Groups A and B were obtained in all 17 cases with variable rates of fusion in groups A 88.9% and in group B 75% at 6 months after surgery (P=0.008), There was no significant difference in terms of the complication rate between Group A (4.5%) and B (3.9%) (P=0.781). Conclusion: Patients with PLIF and PSF results were much better than those with PLIF and percutaneous PSF. The postoperative back pain was much less in the percutaneous group and relatively longer time for fusion. These results seem to favor PLIF with SF rather than PLIF with percutaneous PSF in the treatment of low grade spondylolisthesis. (2013ESJ042) Esam ElkhatibEgyptian Spine AssociationarticlePercutaneousPedicle Screws fixationposterior lumbar interbody fusionSpondylolisthesisBack PainNeurology. Diseases of the nervous systemRC346-429ENEgyptian Spine Journal, Vol 6, Iss 1, Pp 11-17 (2013)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Percutaneous Pedicle Screws fixation posterior lumbar interbody fusion Spondylolisthesis Back Pain Neurology. Diseases of the nervous system RC346-429
spellingShingle	Percutaneous Pedicle Screws fixation posterior lumbar interbody fusion Spondylolisthesis Back Pain Neurology. Diseases of the nervous system RC346-429 Esam Elkhatib Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF) augmented with Pedicle Screw Fixation Versus PLIF augmented with Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in Low Grade Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
description	Background Data: The optimal treatment for patients with Spondylolisthesis has been the subject of many recent studies which provide some of the best evidence for lumbar spinal fusion. Purpose: Compare the clinical and radiological outcome of treating low grade lumbar spondylolisthesis patients with PLIF augmented with PSF versus those treated with PLIF augmented with Percutaneous PSF. Study Design: This is a prospective comparative clinical case study. Patients and Methods: Seventeen patients with low grade spondylolisthesis who underwent instrumented fixation were retrospectively analyzed from the period of 2011 to 2012. A PLIF and PSF (Group A) was performed in 9 patients, and PLIF and percutaneous PSF (Group B) was performed in 8 patients. Data were collected preoperatively and at 6 months after surgery. A comparative analysis was made between the 2 groups using visual analog pain scale (VAS) before and after surgery, and functional disability was assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), by which low back pain, disability were assisted using a questionnaire and radiological (dynamic plain radiographs and CT scans) measures. Results: Follow-up duration was 6 months. The mean preoperative scores on the VAS for low-back pain in Groups A and B were 55 and 54, respectively, decreasing to 43 and 39, respectively, at 6 months after surgery (P=0.003). The mean preoperative scores on the VAS for leg pain in Groups A and B were 65 and 61, respectively, decreasing at 6 months after surgery to 43 and 40, respectively (P=0.031), The fusion rates in Groups A and B were obtained in all 17 cases with variable rates of fusion in groups A 88.9% and in group B 75% at 6 months after surgery (P=0.008), There was no significant difference in terms of the complication rate between Group A (4.5%) and B (3.9%) (P=0.781). Conclusion: Patients with PLIF and PSF results were much better than those with PLIF and percutaneous PSF. The postoperative back pain was much less in the percutaneous group and relatively longer time for fusion. These results seem to favor PLIF with SF rather than PLIF with percutaneous PSF in the treatment of low grade spondylolisthesis. (2013ESJ042)
format	article
author	Esam Elkhatib
author_facet	Esam Elkhatib
author_sort	Esam Elkhatib
title	Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF) augmented with Pedicle Screw Fixation Versus PLIF augmented with Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in Low Grade Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
title_short	Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF) augmented with Pedicle Screw Fixation Versus PLIF augmented with Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in Low Grade Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
title_full	Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF) augmented with Pedicle Screw Fixation Versus PLIF augmented with Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in Low Grade Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
title_fullStr	Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF) augmented with Pedicle Screw Fixation Versus PLIF augmented with Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in Low Grade Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
title_full_unstemmed	Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF) augmented with Pedicle Screw Fixation Versus PLIF augmented with Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in Low Grade Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
title_sort	posterior lumbar interbody fusion (plif) augmented with pedicle screw fixation versus plif augmented with percutaneous pedicle screw fixation in low grade lumbar spondylolisthesis
publisher	Egyptian Spine Association
publishDate	2013
url	https://doaj.org/article/c094b94f0f23405d9037545466cfe981
work_keys_str_mv	AT esamelkhatib posteriorlumbarinterbodyfusionplifaugmentedwithpediclescrewfixationversusplifaugmentedwithpercutaneouspediclescrewfixationinlowgradelumbarspondylolisthesis
_version_	1718399718037389312

Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF) augmented with Pedicle Screw Fixation Versus PLIF augmented with Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in Low Grade Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

Ejemplares similares