Short-term effects of a dynamic neutralization system (Dynesys) for multi-segmental lumbar disc herniation

Long-term efficacy of Waveflex semi-rigid-dynamic-internal-fixation system in delaying intervertebral disc degeneration at adjacent segments and improving spinal sagittal imbalance

The Waveflex semi-rigid-dynamic-internal-fixation system shows good short-term effects in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases, but there are few long-term follow-up studies, especially for recovery of sagittal balance. Fifty patients with lumbar degenerative diseases treated from January 2016 to October 2017 were retrospectively analysed: 25 patients treated with Waveflex semi-rigid-dynamic-internal-fixation system (Waveflex group) and 25 patients treated with double-segment PLIF (PLIF group). Clinical efficacy was evaluated by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Imaging data before surgery and at 3 months, 1 year, and 5 years postoperatively was used for imaging indicator assessment. Local disc degeneration of the cephalic adjacent segment (including disc height index (DHI), intervertebral foramen height (IFH), and range of motion (ROM)) and overall spinal motor function (including lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), sacral slope (SS), pelvic tilt (PT), and |PI-LL|) were analysed. Regarding clinical efficacy, comparison of VAS and ODI scores between the Waveflex and PLIF groups showed no significant preoperative or postoperative differences. The comparison of the objective imaging indicators showed no significant differences in the DHI, IFH, LL, |PI-LL|, and SS values between the Waveflex and PLIF groups preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively (P > 0.05). These values were significantly different at 1 and 5 years postoperatively (P < 0.05), and the Waveflex group showed better ROM values than those of the PLIF group (P < 0.05). PI values were not significantly different between the groups, but PT showed a significant improvement in the Waveflex group 5 years postoperatively (P < 0.05). The Waveflex semi-rigid dynamic fixation system can effectively reduce the probability of intervertebral disc degeneration in upper adjacent segments. Simultaneously, patients in the Waveflex group showed postoperative improvements in LL, spinal sagittal imbalance, and quality of life.

Long-term Outcome of Isobar TTL System for the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disc Diseases

OBJECTIVE

The Isobar TTL dynamic fixation system has demonstrated favorable outcomes in the short-term treatment of lumbar degenerative disc diseases (LDDs). However, there is a paucity of extensive research on the long-term effects of this system on LDDs. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term clinical and radiological outcomes of patients with LDDs who underwent treatment utilizing the Isobar TTL dynamic fixation system.

METHODS

The study analyzed the outcomes of 40 patients with LDDs who underwent posterior lumbar decompression and received single-segment Isobar TTL dynamic internal fixation at our hospital between June 2010 and December 2016. The evaluation of clinical therapeutic effect involved assessing postoperative pain levels using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI), both before surgery, 3 months after, and the final follow-up. To determine the preservation of functional motion in dynamically stable segments, we measured the range of motion (ROM) and disc height of stabilized and adjacent segments preoperatively and during the final follow-up. Additionally, we investigated the occurrence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD).

RESULTS

Forty patients were evaluated, with an average age of 44.65 years and an average follow-up period of 79.37 months. Fourteen patients belonged to the spondylolisthesis group, while the remaining 26 were categorized under the stenosis or herniated disc group. The preoperative ROM of the stabilized segment exhibited a significant reduction from 8.15° ± 2.77° to 5.00° ± 1.82° at the final follow-up (p < 0.001). In contrast, there was a slight elevation in the ROM of the adjacent segment during the final follow-up, increasing from 7.68° ± 2.25° before surgery to 9.36° ± 1.98° (p < 0.001). The intervertebral space height (IH) in the stabilized segment exhibited a significant increase from 10.56 ± 1.99 mm before surgery to 11.39 ± 1.90 mm at the one-week postoperative follow-up (p < 0.001). Conversely, there was a notable decrease in the IH of the adjacent segment from 11.09 ± 1.82 mm preoperatively to 10.86 ± 1.79 mm at the one-week follow-up after surgery (p < 0.001). The incidence of ASD was 15% (6/40) after an average follow-up period of 79.37 months, with a rate of 15.38% (4/26) in the stenosis or herniated disc group and 14.29% (2/14) in the spondylolisthesis group; however, no statistically significant difference was observed in the occurrence of ASD among these groups (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The Isobar TTL dynamic fixation system is an effective treatment for LDDs, improving pain relief, quality of life (QoL) and maintaining stabilized segmental motion. It has demonstrated excellent long-term clinical and radiographic results.

Medium and long-term radiographic and clinical outcomes of Dynesys dynamic stabilization versus instrumented fusion for degenerative lumbar spine diseases

BACKGROUND

Dynesys stabilization (DS) is utilized to preserve mobility at the instrumental segments and prevent adjacent segment pathology in clinical practice. However, the advantages of DS method in medium and long-term follow-up remain controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes between DS and instrumented fusion in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine disease with or without grade I spondylolisthesis with a minimum follow-up period of 2 years.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases, Chinese National Knowledge Databases, and Wanfang Database for potentially eligible articles. Clinical outcomes were assessed in terms of VAS and ODI scores, screw loosening and breakage, and surgical revision. Radiographic outcomes were assessed in terms of postoperative range of movement (ROM) and disc heigh. Moreover, adjacent segment degeneration (ASDeg) and adjacent segment disease (ASDis) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies with 1296 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The DS group was associated with significantly lower postoperative VAS scores for low-back and leg pain, and lower rate of surgical revision than the fusion group. Moreover, the Dynesys group showed significantly less ASDeg than the fusion group but showed no significant advantage over the fusion group in terms of preventing ASDis. Additionally, the ROM at the stabilized segments of the fusion group decreased significantly and that at the adjacent segments increased significantly compared with those of the DS group.

CONCLUSION

DS showed comparable clinical outcomes and provided benefits in preserving the motion at the stabilized segments, thus limiting the hypermobility at the adjacent segments and preventing ASDeg compared with the fusion method in degenerative disease with or without grade I spondylolisthesis.

A Study to Compare the Efficacy of a Biodegradable Dynamic Fixation System With Titanium Devices in Posterior Spinal Fusion Between Articular Processes in a Canine Model

The objective of this study was to apply a biodegradable dynamic fixation system (BDFS) for lumbar fusion between articular processes and compare the fusion results and biomechanical changes with those of conventional rigid fixation. Twenty-four mongrel dogs were randomly assigned to 2 groups and subjected to either posterior lumbar fusion surgery with a BDFS or titanium rods (TRs) at the L5-L6 segments. Six animals in each group were sacrificed at 8 or 16 weeks. Fusion conditions were evaluated by computed tomography (CT), manual palpation, biomechanical tests, and histological analysis. Biomechanical tests were performed at the L4-7 (for range of motion (ROM)) and L5-6 (for fusion stiffness) segments. Histological examination was performed on organs, surrounding tissues, and the fused area. The magnesium alloy components maintained their initial shape 8 weeks after the operation, but the meshing teeth were almost completely degraded at 16 weeks. The biomechanical analysis revealed an increased lateral bending ROM at 8 weeks and axial torsion ROM at 16 weeks. The L4-5 extension-flexion ROMs in the BDFS group were 2.29 ± 0.86 deg and 3.17 ± 1.08 deg at 16 weeks, respectively, compared with 3.22 ± 0.56 deg and 5.55 ± 1.84 deg in TR group. However, both groups showed similar fusion results. The BDFS design is suitable, and its degradation in vivo is safe. The BDFS can be applied for posterior lumbar fusion between articular processes to complete the fusion well. Additionally, the BDFS can reduce the decline in lateral motion and hypermotion of the cranial adjacent segment in flexion-extension motion.

Dynesys system vs posterior decompression and fusion for the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases

BACKGROUND

The Dynesys dynamic stabilization system is an alternative to rigid instrumentation and fusion for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical efficacy between Dynesys and posterior decompression and fusion for lumbar degenerative diseases.

METHODS

The computer was used to retrieve the Cochrane library, Medline, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang database and Chinese biomedical literature database; and the references and main Chinese and English Department of orthopedics journals were manually searched. All the prospective or retrospective comparative studies on the clinical efficacy and safety of Dynesys and posterior decompression and fusion were collected, so as to evaluate the methodological quality of the study and to extract the data. The RevMan 5.2 software was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 17 studies were included in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in Oswestry disability index and visual analogue score for leg pain, visual analogue score for back pain, L2-S1 ROM between Dynesys and fusion group. Operation time, blood loss, length of stay and complications in the Dynesys group were significantly less than that in the fusion group. Adjacent-segment degeneration in the fusion group was significantly higher than that in the Dynesys group. In addition, postoperative operated segment ROM was significantly less in the fusion group as compared to the Dynesys group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis suggests that Dynesys system acquires comparable clinical outcomes compared to fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative diseases. Moreover, compared with fusion, Dynesys could remain ROM of surgical segments with less operation time, blood loss, length of stay, adjacent-segment degeneration, and lower complication. Further studies with large samples, long term follow up and well-designed are needed to assess the two procedures in the future.

A novel dynamic fixation system with biodegradable components on lumbar fusion between articular processes in a canine model

The objective of this study was to design a novel dynamic fixation system with biodegradable components, apply it for lumbar fusion between articular processes and compare the fusion results and biomechanical changes to those of conventional rigid fixation. The novel dynamic fixation system was designed using a finite element model, stress distributions were compared and 24 mongrel dogs were randomly assigned to two groups and subjected to either posterior lumbar fusion surgery with a novel dynamic fixation system or titanium rods at the L5-L6 segments. Lumbar spines were assessed in both groups to detect radiographic, manual palpation and biomechanical changes. Histological examination was performed on organs and surrounding tissues. In the novel dynamic fixation system, stress was mainly distributed on the meshing teeth of the magnesium alloy spacer. The magnesium alloy components maintained their initial shape 8 weeks after the operation, but the meshing teeth were almost completely degraded at 16 weeks. The novel dynamic fixation system revealed an increased lateral bending range of motion at 8 weeks; however, both groups showed similar radiographic grades, fusion stiffness, manual palpation and histological results. The novel dynamic fixation system design is suitable, and its degradation in vivo is safe. The novel dynamic fixation system can be applied for posterior lumbar fusion between articular processes and complete the fusion like titanium rods.

Multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis treated with Dynesys stabilization versus lumbar fusion in elderly patients: a retrospective study with a minimum of 5 years' follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Middle- and long-term outcomes of multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis treated with Dynesys stabilization (DS) have rarely been reported. Older age and multi-segmental degeneration may be positive factors in achieving satisfactory outcomes following DS. The present study aimed to compare the middle- and long-term outcomes of DS with lumbar fusion for treatment of multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis (ms-LSS) in elderly patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed patients with ms-LSS treated by DS or lumbar fusion from January 2011 to April 2013. Twenty-two patients were included in the Dynesys group, and 44 patients treated by lumbar fusion and rigid fixation were included in the fusion group. Clinical outcomes were assessed by VAS and ODI. Radiological outcomes were measured by range of motion (ROM) of stabilized segments and the proximal adjacent segment, intervertebral disc height (DH) and L1-S1 lumbar lordosis angle (LL). Modified Pfirrmann grade score was used to access disc degeneration.

OUTCOMES

The mean follow-up time of the Dynesys group and fusion group was 68.50 ± 6.40 and 70.14 ± 7.26 months, respectively. Baseline data were similar between the two groups. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of improvement of clinical outcomes (VAS and ODI). DS preserved a certain degree of ROM (3.74 ± 2.00) of surgical segments. ROM of proximal adjacent segment underwent an increase in both groups at the final follow-up. The DH of the surgical segments and proximal adjacent segment in both groups was significantly lower than that before surgery (P = 0.000). LL of both groups improved (P = 0.000), and there was no significant difference between the two groups. The modified Pfirrmann score of proximal adjacent segment of both groups increased at the final follow-up. The fusion group underwent a more significant increase (P = 0.000), whereas the inter-group difference showed no significance (P = 0.090).

CONCLUSION

DS is a safe and effective surgical treatment of multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly population. DS preserves a certain degree of mobility of surgical segments.

Intrasubject repeatability of in vivo intervertebral motion parameters using quantitative fluoroscopy

PURPOSE

In vivo quantification of intervertebral motion through imaging has progressed to a point where biomarkers for low back pain are emerging. This makes possible deeper study of the condition's biometrics. However, the measurement of change over time involves error. The purpose of this prospective investigation is to determine the intrasubject repeatability of six in vivo intervertebral motion parameters using quantitative fluoroscopy.

METHODS

Intrasubject reliability (ICC) and minimal detectable change (MDC) of baseline to 6-week follow-up measurements were calculated for six lumbar spine intervertebral motion parameters in 109 healthy volunteers. A standardised quantitative fluoroscopy (QF) protocol was used to provide measurements in the coronal and sagittal planes using both passive recumbent and active weight-bearing motion. Parameters were: intervertebral range of motion (IV-RoM), laxity, motion sharing inequality (MSI), motion sharing variability (MSV), flexion translation and anterior disc height change during flexion.

RESULTS

The best overall intrasubject reliability (ICC) and agreement (MDC) were for disc height (ICC 0.89, MDC 43%) and IV-RoM (ICC 0.96, MDC 60%), and the worst for MSV (ICC 0.04, MDC 408%). Laxity, MSI and translation had acceptable reliability (most ICCs > 0.60), but not agreement (MDC > 85%).

CONCLUSION

Disc height and IV-RoM measurement using QF could be considered for randomised trials, while laxity, MSI and translation could be considered for moderators, correlates or mediators of patient-reported outcomes. MSV had both poor reliability and agreement over 6 weeks. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Medium-term effects of Dynesys dynamic stabilization versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of multisegmental lumbar degenerative disease

Objective

To compare the medium-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of Dynesys dynamic stabilization and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) for treatment of multisegmental lumbar degenerative disease.

Methods

Fifty-seven patients with multisegmental lumbar degenerative disease underwent Dynesys stabilization (n = 26) or PLIF (n = 31) from December 2008 to February 2010. The mean follow-up period was 50.3 (range, 46–65) months. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Oswestry disability index (ODI). Radiographic evaluations included disc height and range of motion (ROM) of the operative segments and proximal adjacent segment on lumbar flexion-extension X-rays. The intervertebral disc signal change was defined by magnetic resonance imaging, and disc degeneration was classified by the Pfirrmann grade.

Results

The clinical outcomes including the VAS score and ODI were significantly improved in both groups at 3 months and the final follow-up, but the difference between the two was not significant. At the final follow-up, the disc height of stabilized segments in both groups was significantly increased; the increase was more notable in the Dynesys than PLIF group. The ROM of stabilized segments at the final follow-up decreased from 6.20° to 2.76° and 6.56° to 0.00° in the Dynesys and PLIF groups, respectively. There was no distinct change in the height of the proximal adjacent segment in the two groups. The ROM of the proximal adjacent segment in both groups increased significantly at the final follow-up; the change was significantly greater in the PLIF than Dynesys group. Only one case of adjacent segment degeneration occurred in the PLIF group, and this patient underwent a second operation.

Conclusions

Both Dynesys stabilization and PLIF can improve the clinical and radiographic outcomes of multisegmental lumbar degenerative disease. Compared with PLIF, Dynesys stabilization can maintain the mobility of the stabilized segments with less influence on the proximal adjacent segment and may help to prevent the occurrence of adjacent segment degeneration. Dynesys is reliable for the treatment of multisegmental lumbar degenerative disease at the medium-term follow-up.

The influence of L4-S1 Dynesys® dynamic stabilization versus fusion on lumbar motion and its relationship with lumbar degeneration: a retrospective study

Background

The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of Dynesys® posterior dynamic stabilization (PDS) in the treatment of L4–S1 degenerative diseases and to assess the influence of postoperative motion on lumbar degeneration.

Methods

Included in this retrospective study were patients with L4–S1 degenerative disease who underwent fusion or PDS from September 2010 to September 2014. Clinical outcomes were assessed by preoperative and postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Preoperative and postoperative X-rays assessed range of motion (ROM) of the non-surgical and surgical levels and whole lumbar. MRI assessed degeneration of non-surgical levels.

Results

A total of 56 consecutive patients were divided into two groups: group A, PDS, and group B, fusion. Patient demographics and baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups. In both groups, there was a significant difference between preoperative and postoperative VAS and ODI scores (P < 0.05). However, there was a significant difference in a 6-month follow-up ODI between the two groups (P < 0.05). X-rays showed PDS patients partially maintained surgical level ROM and non-surgical level ROM increased less than in the fusion group. MRI showed adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) in both groups, and patients whose preoperative L3–4 Pfirrmann classification was higher than grade 2 had more ASD than lower than grade 2.

Conclusion

PDS can maintain surgical level ROM and had less influence on whole and non-surgical level ROM. Following PDS, patients recovered faster and had a better lumbar function. It may be a better choice for multi-level lumbar degenerative diseases.

Evaluation of a Hybrid Dynamic Stabilization and Fusion System in the Lumbar Spine: A 10 Year Experience

INTRODUCTION

The development of adjacent-segment disease is a recognized consequence of lumbar fusion surgery. Posterior dynamic stabilization, or motion preservation, techniques have been developed which theoretically decrease stress on adjacent segments following fusion. This study presents the experience of using a hybrid dynamic stabilization and fusion construct for degenerative lumbar spine pathology in place of rigid arthrodesis.

METHODS

A clinical cohort investigation was conducted of 66 consecutive patients (31 female, 35 male; mean age: 53 years, range: 25 - 76 years) who underwent posterior lumbar instrumentation with the Dynesys Transition Optima (DTO) implant (Zimmer-Biomet Spine, Warsaw, IN) hybrid dynamic stabilization and fusion system over a 10-year period. The median length of follow-up was five years. DTO consists of pedicle screw fixation coupled to a rigid rod as well as a flexible longitudinal connecting system. All patients had symptoms of back pain and neurogenic claudication refractory to non-surgical treatment. Patients underwent lumbar arthrodesis surgery in which the hybrid system was used for stabilization instead of arthrodesis of the stenotic adjacent level.

RESULTS

Indications for DTO instrumentation were primary degenerative disc disease (n = 52) and failed back surgery syndrome (n = 14). The most common dynamically stabilized and fused segments were L3-L4 (n = 37) and L5-S1 (n = 33), respectively. Thirty-eight patients (56%) underwent decompression at the dynamically stabilized level, and 57 patients (86%) had an interbody device placed at the level of arthrodesis. Complications during the follow-up period included a single case of screw breakage and a single case of pseudoarthrosis. Ten patients (15%) subsequently underwent conversion of the dynamic stabilization portion of their DTO instrumentation to rigid spinal arthrodesis.

CONCLUSION

The DTO system represents a novel hybrid dynamic stabilization and fusion construct. This 10-year experience found the device to be highly effective as well as safe. The technique may serve as an alternative to multilevel arthrodesis. Implantation of a motion-preserving dynamic stabilization device immediately adjacent to a fused level instead of extending a rigid construct may reduce the subsequent development of adjacent-segment disease in this patient population.