Decompression Versus Fusion for Grade I Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Meta-Analysis

Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: review of current classifications and proposal of a novel classification system

PURPOSE

To review existing classification systems for degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS), propose a novel classification designed to better address clinically relevant radiographic and clinical features of disease, and determine the inter- and intraobserver reliability of this new system for classifying DS.

METHODS

The proposed classification system includes four components: 1) segmental dynamic instability, 2) location of spinal stenosis, 3) sagittal alignment, and 4) primary clinical presentation. To establish the reliability of this system, 12 observers graded 10 premarked test cases twice each. Kappa values were calculated to assess the inter- and intraobserver reliability for each of the four components separately.

RESULTS

Interobserver reliability for dynamic instability, location of stenosis, sagittal alignment, and clinical presentation was 0.94, 0.80, 0.87, and 1.00, respectively. Intraobserver reliability for dynamic instability, location of stenosis, sagittal alignment, and clinical presentation were 0.91, 0.88, 0.87, and 0.97, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The UCSF DS classification system provides a novel framework for assessing DS based on radiographic and clinical parameters with established implications for surgical treatment. The almost perfect interobserver and intraobserver reliability observed for all components of this system demonstrates that it is simple and easy to use. In clinical practice, this classification may allow subclassification of similar patients into groups that may benefit from distinct treatment strategies, leading to the development of algorithms to help guide selection of an optimal surgical approach. Future work will focus on the clinical validation of this system, with the goal of providing for more evidence-based, standardized approaches to treatment and improved outcomes for patients with DS.

Decompression alone versus decompression with instrumented fusion in the treatment of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy of adding instrumented spinal fusion to decompression to treat degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS).

DESIGN

Systematic review with meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from inception to May 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing decompression with instrumented fusion to decompression alone in patients with DS. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data. We provide the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation assessment of the certainty of evidence (COE).

RESULTS

We identified 4514 records and included four trials with 523 participants. At a 2-year follow-up, adding fusion to decompression likely results in trivial difference in the Oswestry Disability Index (range 0-100, with higher values indicating greater impairment) with mean difference (MD) 0.86 (95% CI -4.53 to 6.26; moderate COE). Similar results were observed for back and leg pain measured on a scale of 0 to 100, with higher values indicating more severe pain. There was a slightly increased improvement in back pain (2-year follow-up) in the group without fusion shown by MD -5·92 points (95% CI -11.00 to -0.84; moderate COE). There was a trivial difference in leg pain between the groups, slightly favouring the one without fusion, with MD -1.25 points (95% CI -6.71 to 4.21; moderate COE). Our findings at 2-year follow-up suggest that omitting fusion may increase the reoperation rate slightly (OR 1.23; 0.70 to 2.17; low COE).

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence suggests no benefits of adding instrumented fusion to decompression for treating DS. Isolated decompression seems sufficient for most patients. Further RCTs assessing spondylolisthesis stability are needed to determine which patients would benefit from fusion.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022308267.

Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Treatment of Low-Grade Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort comparison study.

OBJECTIVE

To compare perioperative outcomes, radiographic parameters, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between minimally invasive unilateral laminotomy with bilateral decompression (MIS-ULBD) versus MIS transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) for treatment of low-grade lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

While lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis is a common condition, optimal surgical treatment remains controversial. Newer MIS techniques, which preserve bone, paraspinal musculature, and posterior midline stabilizers, are thought to reduce the risk of iatrogenic instability and may obviate the need for fusion. However, few comparative studies of MIS techniques for low-grade lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis currently exist.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients with low-grade (Meyerding grade I or II) lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis treated with single-level MIS-ULBD or MIS-TLIF were identified retrospectively from a prospectively collected spine surgery registry from April 2017 to November 2021. Perioperative outcomes, radiographic data, and PROMs were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 188 patients underwent either MIS-ULBD or MIS-TLIF (79 MIS-ULBD and 109 MIS-TLIF). Patients who underwent MIS-ULBD tended to be older, had higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, lower mean percentage back pain, higher percentage of L4/L5 pathology, shorter operative time, lower estimated blood loss, and lower postoperative pain ( P <0.05). In both groups, there were statistically significant improvements at one year for five of the six PROMs studied: Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS)-back pain, VAS-leg pain, Short Form 12 Physical Component Score (SF12-PCS), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) ( P <0.05). On multivariate analysis controlling for confounders, there were no associations between procedure type and achieving minimal clinically important difference at one year in any of the PROMs studied.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study suggests that both MIS-ULBD and MIS-TLIF result in significant improvements in pain and physical function for patients with low-grade lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCES

3.

Posterior stabilization with polyetheretherketone (PEEK) rods and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with titanium rods for single-level lumbar spine degenerative disease in patients above 70 years of age

BACKGROUND

Given the lack of guidelines regarding the operative management of elderly patients needing lumbar spine fusion for degenerative disease, it is often difficult to balance between invasiveness respecting the fragile spine and geriatric comorbidities.

AIM

To compare reoperation rates and clinical outcome in patients above 70 years of age undergoing Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) with titanium rods or posterior stabilization with Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) rods for the treatment of one-level lumbar spine degenerative disease.

METHODS

Retrospective review of baseline characteristics, reoperation rates as well as the clinical and radiological outcomes of patients, older than 70 years, undergoing posterolateral fusion with PEEK rods (n = 76, PEEK group) or TLIF with titanium rods (n = 67, TLIF group) for a single-level lumbar degenerative disease from 2014 to 2020. Additional subanalysis on the patients above 80 years of age was performed.

RESULTS

Our results showed similar reoperation rates and outcomes in the TLIF and PEEK groups. However, intraoperative blood loss, administration of tranexamic acid, and operation time were significantly higher in the TLIF group. In patients older than 80 years, reoperation rates at first follow-up were significantly higher in the TLIF group, too.

CONCLUSION

According to our results, posterior stabilization with PEEK rods is less invasive and was associated with significantly lower blood loss, administration of blood products and shorter operation time. Moreover, in patients above 80 years of age reoperations rates were lower with PEEK rods, as well. Nevertheless, the benefits of PEEK rods for foraminal stenosis still have to be investigated.

Stable Low-Grade Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Does Not Compromise Clinical Outcome of Minimally Invasive Tubular Decompression in Patients with Spinal Stenosis

Background and Objectives: In recent literature, the routine addition of arthrodesis to decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with concomitant stable low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis remains controversial. The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical outcome, complication and re-operation rates following minimally invasive (MIS) tubular decompression without arthrodesis in patients suffering from LSS with or without concomitant stable low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis. Materials and Methods: This study is a retrospective review of prospectively collected data. Ninety-six consecutive patients who underwent elective MIS lumbar decompression with a mean follow-up of 27.5 months were included in the study. The spondylolisthesis (S) group comprised 53 patients who suffered from LSS with stable degenerative spondylolisthesis, and the control (N) group included 43 patients suffering from LSS without spondylolisthesis. Outcome measures included complications and revision surgery rates. Pre- and post-operative visual analog scale (VAS) for both back and leg pain was analyzed, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was used to evaluate functional outcome. Results: The two groups were comparable in most demographic and preoperative variables. VAS for back and leg pain improved significantly following surgery in both groups. Both groups showed significant improvement in their ODI scores, at one and two years postoperatively. The average length of hospital stay was significantly higher in patients with spondylolisthesis (p-value< 0.01). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of post-operative complications rates or re-operation rates. Conclusions: Our results indicate that MIS tubular decompression may be an effective and safe procedure for patients suffering from LSS, with or without degenerative stable spondylolisthesis.

Is There Additional Value to Flexion-Extension Radiographs for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis?

STUDY DESIGN

Multicenter retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

Flexion-extension radiographs are frequently used to assess motion in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis. However, they expose patients to additional radiation and increase cost. The aim of this study is to determine if flexion-extension radiographs provide additional information not seen on upright neutral radiographs and supine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) that may guide surgical decision making.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Supine MRI and upright neutral radiographs are routinely performed in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis. It is unclear whether additional flexion-extension views play a significant role in surgical planning for this patient population.

METHODS

From the Quality Outcomes Database, patients who had surgery for grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis were identified. Magnitude of slip on pre-op supine MRI, upright neutral, flexion, and extension radiographs were measured. Additional motion was defined as 3 mm or more slip difference between radiographs. For the purpose of this analysis, patients with a slip of 7 mm or more on upright neutral radiographs were assumed to require a fusion.

RESULTS

A total of 191 patients were identified. Mean age was 61.6 years (114 females, 60%). Only 31 patients (16%) had additional motion on flexion-extension views not seen on upright neutral x-rays versus supine MRI. Of these 31 patients, 19 had slips less than 7 mm on upright x-ray, generating equipoise for fusion.

CONCLUSION

Flexion-extension radiographs may play a limited role in management of degenerative spondylolisthesis. The subset of patients for which flexion-extension views were most likely to provide value were patients with smaller slips (<7 mm) with no evidence of motion on standing radiographs versus MRI. In 90% of spondylolisthesis cases, information used for surgical planning may be ascertained by comparing motion between supine MRI and upright lateral radiographs.Level of Evidence: 3.

Association between the appropriateness of surgery, according to appropriate use criteria, and patient-rated outcomes after surgery for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis

INTRODUCTION

Treatment failures in spine surgery are often attributable to poor patient selection and the application of inappropriate treatment. We used published appropriate use criteria (AUC) to evaluate the appropriateness of surgery in a large group of patients operated for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS) and to evaluate its association with outcome.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected outcome data from patients operated in our Spine Centre, 2005-2012. Appropriateness of surgery was judged based on the AUC. Patients had completed the multidimensional Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) before surgery and at 3 months' and 1, 2 and 5 years' follow-up (FU).

RESULTS

In total, 448 patients (69.8 ± 9.6 years; 323 (72%) women) were eligible for inclusion and the AUC could be applied in 393 (88%) of these. Surgery was considered appropriate (A) in 234 (59%) of the patients, uncertain/equivocal (U) in 90 (23%) and inappropriate (I) in 69 (18%). A/U patients had significantly (p < 0.05) greater improvements in COMI than I patients at each FU time point. The minimal clinically important change (MCIC) score for COMI was reached by 82% A, 76% U and 54% I patients at 1-year FU (p < 0.001, I vs A and U); the odds of achieving MCIC were 3-4 times greater in A/U patients than in I patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest a relationship between appropriateness of surgery for LDS and the improvements in COMI score after surgery. The findings require confirmation in prospective studies that also include a control group of non-operated patients.

Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Narrative Review

Degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) is a condition leading to the slippage of one vertebral body over the one below due to degenerative changes resulting in spinal stenosis and producing neurogenic claudication, with or without low back pain. DS prevalence is age and gender specific. Other risk factors mainly include a history of occupational driving, intense manual activity and sedentary work. Diagnosis for patients with DS include detailed history, physical examination and imaging through standing lateral radiographs and MRI. Most patients with symptomatic DS and absence of neurologic deficits should perform better with conservative treatment, whereas, patients with neurological symptoms, are more prone to undergo progressive functional deterioration without surgery. There is a lack of agreement on the best surgical management in patients with DS and symptomatic stenosis. There is a contradictory data that does not permit for a recommendation for or against the addition of fusion to decompression. There is also controversy on which fusion technique is best. Spinal minimally invasive surgery is a promising approach for DS promoting early recovery and enhanced quality of life by reducing skin incision, muscular damage and perioperative pain with significant improvements in clinical results and high satisfaction rates.