Tag: degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

Posted on

Five-year follow-up after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus decompression alone for grade 1 spondylolisthesis: are there any differences in outcomes?

J Neurosurg Spine 43:547–556, 2025

This multicenter, prospective registry study compares 60-month outcomes after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) versus minimally invasive tubular decompression for Meyerding grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis. Patient-reported outcomes (ODI, NRS for back/leg pain, EQ-5D, NASS satisfaction) improved significantly in both cohorts, with MIS TLIF showing greater back-pain reduction and higher satisfaction rates.

Durability differs: MIS TLIF had a markedly lower 5-year reoperation rate than MIS decompression (2.8% vs 15.5%), and multivariable analysis found fusion reduced reoperation odds despite similar long-term PROs. Authors conclude both MIS approaches benefit selected patients, but fusion offers superior reoperation durability.

Posted on

Correlation between the spinopelvic type and morphological characteristics of lumbar facet joints in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

J Neurosurg Spine 38:425–435, 2023

The correlation between the spinopelvic type and morphological characteristics of lumbar facet joints in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) was investigated.

METHODS One hundred forty-two patients with L4 DLS were enrolled (DLS group), and 100 patients with lumbar disc herniation without DLS were selected as the control group (i.e., non–lumbar spondylolisthesis [NL] group). Morphological parameters of L4–5 facet joints and L4–5 disc height and angle were measured on 3D reconstructed CT images; namely, the facet joint angle (FJA), pedicle–facet joint angle (PFA), facet joint tropism, and facet joint osteoarthritis (OA). The L4 slip percentage, sacral slope, and lumbar lordosis were measured on radiographs. Patients in the DLS and NL groups were divided into 4 subgroups according to Roussouly classification (types I, II, III, and IV).

RESULTS In the DLS and NL groups, as the spinopelvic type changed from type II to type IV, the facet joint morphology showed a gradual sagittal orientation in the FJA, a gradual horizontal orientation in the PFA, a gradual severity in OA, and a gradual increase in the slip percentage, but changes were completely opposite from type I to type II. Additionally, compared with the NL group, the facet joint morphology in the DLS group had more horizontal orientation in PFA, more sagittal orientation in the FJA, and the facet joint tropism and OA were more severe.

CONCLUSIONS Facet joint morphology was correlated with spinopelvic type in the slip segment of DLS. Facet joint morphology was part of the joint configuration in different spinopelvic types, not just the result of joint remodeling after DLS. Moreover, morphological changes of the facet joints and DLS interacted with each other. Additionally, morphological remodeling of the facet joints in DLS played an important role in spinal balance and should be taken into consideration when designing a surgical approach.

Posted on

Surgical outcomes of PLIF with CBT screw fixation

surgical-outcomes-of-plif-with-cbt-screw-fixation

J Neurosurg Spine 25:591–595, 2016

Several biomechanical studies have demonstrated the favorable mechanical properties of the cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw. However, no reports have examined surgical outcomes of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with CBT screw fixation for degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) compared with those after PLIF using traditional pedicle screw (PS) fixation. The purposes of this study were thus to elucidate surgical outcomes after PLIF with CBT screw fixation for DS and to compare these results with those after PLIF using traditional PS fixation.

Methods Ninety-five consecutive patients underwent PLIF with CBT screw fixation for DS (CBT group; mean followup 35 months). A historical control group consisted of 82 consecutive patients who underwent PLIF with traditional PS fixation (PS group; mean follow-up 40 months). Clinical status was assessed using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scale score. Fusion status was assessed by dynamic plain radiographs and CT. The need for additional surgery and surgery-related complications was also evaluated.

Results The mean JOA score improved significantly from 13.7 points before surgery to 23.3 points at the latest follow-up in the CBT group (mean recovery rate 64.4%), compared with 14.4 points preoperatively to 22.7 points at final follow-up in the PS group (mean recovery rate 55.8%; p < 0.05). Solid spinal fusion was achieved in 84 patients from the CBT group (88.4%) and in 79 patients from the PS group (96.3%, p > 0.05). Symptomatic adjacent-segment disease developed in 3 patients from the CBT group (3.2%) compared with 9 patients from the PS group (11.0%, p < 0.05).

Conclusions PLIF with CBT screw fixation for DS provided comparable improvement of clinical symptoms with PLIF using traditional PS fixation. However, the successful fusion rate tended to be lower in the CBT group than in the PS group, although the difference was not statistically significant between the 2 groups.

Proudly powered by WordPress