레이블이 anterior lumbar interbody fusion인 게시물을 표시합니다. 모든 게시물 표시
레이블이 anterior lumbar interbody fusion인 게시물을 표시합니다. 모든 게시물 표시

2014년 7월 16일 수요일

Stand-Alone Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Disc Disease of the Lumbar Spine: Results With a Two Year Follow Up

Brief review

SPINE지의 최신호에 나온 논문 입니다.
퇴행성 디스크 질환이 있는 환자들에게 stand alone 전방경유요추체간 유합술을 시행한 후 2년이 지난 후의 임상적, 방사선학적 결과를 관찰한 연구 입니다.
허리,다리의 통증지수(VAS) 및 일상생활장애지수(ODI) 가 수술전에 비해 유의하게 감소하였고, 인접분절의 disc height도 감소되지 않는 좋은 결과가 나왔네요.
아래의 링크로 들어가서 한번 읽어보세요^^ 시간 없으시면 아래의 key points만 읽어봐도 도움이 될 듯 합니다.

*Title: Stand-Alone Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Degenerative Disc Disease of the Lumbar Spine: Results With a Two Year Follow Up.
*Authors: Lammli J, Whitaker C, Moskowitz A, Duong J, Dong F, Felts L, Konye G, Ablah E, Wooley P.
*Bibliography: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014 May 12. [Epub ahead of print]

Study Design
Retrospective chart review

Objective
To report outcomes of a consecutive series of patients diagnosed with degenerative disc disease (DDD) between L4 and S1, treated with stand alone Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (ALIF, either one or two-level) and use of rhBMP-2 for bony fusion with instrumented fixation.

Summary of Background Data
Degeneration of the lumbar spine is described as lumbar spondylosis, or DDD. To treat DDD, surgical interventions include: ALIF, circumferential fusion (360° fusion), posterior spinal fusion (PSF), and total disc replacement (TDR). Currently, there has been paucity in the literature on the evaluation of ALIFs.

Methods
Researchers reviewed a consecutive series of patients with DDD that had undergone a 1-level or 2-level ALIF between 2005 and 2010, with the use of rhBMP-2. Patients' clinical and functional outcomes were documented. Radiographs were analyzed for disc height, mean optical density, and integrated optical density. Operative time, length of hospital stay, and estimated blood loss were also reported.



























Results
Patients' two year Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores significantly improved from pre-surgery (p ≤ 0.0001). Patients' two year post-operative disc height was significantly greater than the pre-operative disc height at the fused level (p ≤ 0.0001); there was no significant difference at the level adjacent to fusion. Majority of patients (107 of 115, 93.0%) satisfied fusion criteria based on mean optical density. Intra-operative time, estimated blood loss, and hospital stay was significantly fewer with 1-level and 2-level ALIFs than 360 fusions and TDR.




















Conclusion

Stand alone ALIF used to treat DDD can produce comparative clinical and functional outcomes. ALIFs showed significant decreases in blood loss, operative time, and hospital stay. Furthermore, at two years' time, mean optical density suggests high rate of bony fusion, and no significant loss of disc height was noted at the adjacent level.


2014년 5월 28일 수요일

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion in comparison with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: implications for the restoration of foraminal height, local disc angle, lumbar lordosis, and sagittal balance

Brief review

전방경유 요추 유합술과 추간공경유 요추 유합술을 비교하여 술 후의 추간공의 높이와 디스크의 각도, 요추전만각 및 시상면 정렬 등의 항목을 측정하여 연구한 논문 입니다.

전방경유 요추 유합술이 추간공경유 요추 유합술에 비해 위에서 언급한 추간공의 높이와 디스크의 각도, 요추전만각 및 시상면 정렬 등의 항목에서 우수한 결과를 보였습니다.

이 논문은 방사선학적 측정값이 주를 이루므로 설명보다는 표로 보는게 쉬워서 아래와 같이 첨부했습니다.



*Title: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion in comparison with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: implications for the restoration of foraminal height, local disc angle, lumbar lordosis, and sagittal balance

*Authors: PATRICK C. HSIEH, TYLER R. KOSKI, BRIAN A. O’SHAUGHNESSY, PATRICK SUGRUE, SEAN SALEHI, STEPHEN ONDRA, JOHN C. LIU




Backgroud of data
-A primary consideration of all spinal fusion procedures is restoration of normal anatomy, including disc height, lumbar lordosis, foraminal decompression, and sagittal balance.

-There has been no direct comparison of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) concerning their capacity to alter those parameters.


OBJECT
The authors conducted a retrospective radiographic analysis directly comparing ALIF with TLIF in their capacity to alter foraminal height, local disc angle, and lumbar lordosis.


METHODS
▶Study design : retrospective study(medical records and radiographs review)
▶Subjects: 32 patients (ALIF)+ 25 patients (TLIF) (2000~2004)
▶Data measurement
-Clinical data: VAS score (pre&post:6,12,24mon)
-radiographic data: foraminal height, local disc angle, and lumbar lordosis (pre&post)

▶Statistical analyses: included mean values, 95% confidence intervals, and intraobserver/interobserver reliability for the measurements that were performed.


RESULTS
-ALIF is superior to TLIF in its capacity to restore foraminal height, local disc angle, and lumbar lordosis.
▶increasing rate or degree in radiographic data
-foraminal height: 18.5%(ALIF) vs 0.4%(TLIF)
-local disc angle: 8.3 degrees(ALIF) vs 0.1 degree(TLIF)
-lumbar lordosis: 6.2 degrees(ALIF)  vs 2.1 degrees(TLIF)












































































CONCLUSIONS
-The ALIF procedure is superior to TLIF in its capacity to restore foraminal height, local disc angle, and lumbar lordosis.

-The improved radiographic outcomes may be an indication of improved sagittal balance correction, which may lead to better long-term outcomes as shown by other studies. Our data, however, demonstrated no difference in clinical outcome between the two groups at the 2-year follow-up.




2014년 2월 24일 월요일

Clinical analysis of percutaneous facet screw fixation after anterior lumbar interbody fusion

Brief review

이 논문은 전방경유요추체유합술 후의 경피적 나사못 고정술 시행의 임상적 결과를 연구한 내용 입니다.
percutaneous facet screw fixation 시행 그룹을 실험군으로, pedicle screw fixation 시행 그룹을 대조군으로 설정하여 수술 전, 후의 ODI(장애지수) 및 MacNab(만족도)를 조사하여 비교했습니다.
수술 시행 후 최소 2년의 기간 동안 추적조사 한 결과, 두 그룹 간에는 임상적으로 유의한 차이가 없었습니다.
percutaneous facet screw fixation은 요추체 유합술과 함께 시행할 때에 안전하고 최소침습적인 치료법이라는 결론 입니다.


*Title: Clinical analysis of percutaneous facet screw fixation after anterior lumbar interbody fusion.
전방경유 요추체 유합술 후 경피적 나사못 고정술 시행의 임상적인 분석

*Authors: JEE-SOO Jang, SANG-HO Lee.
*Bibliography: J Neurosurg Spine. 2005 Jul;3(1):40-6.


STUDY DESIGN
Retrospective study


OBJECT
To evaluate the results of percutaneous facet screw fixation (PFSF) after anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) in comparison with the post-ALIF pedicle screw fixation (PSF).


METHODS
▶Subject number: 84 patients (treated for degenerative spondylolisthesis or degenerative disc disease)

▶Grouping
-group1: 44 underwent percutaneous facet screw fixation
-group2: 40 underwent pedicle screw fixation (control group)

▶Evaluating method
-Functional outcome: using Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Macnab criteria.
-Radiologic outcome: dynamic lateral (flexion-extension) radiography and CT scanning (to evaluate the osseous union status)

▶Follow up period: min 2 yrs


RESULTS
▶Functional outcome: ODI and Macnab outcome- no significant difference between 2 groups (p > 0.05).
-Excellent or good outcome: 40 (90.9%) of the 44 patients (Group 1) and 37 (92.5%) of the 40 patients (Group 2) (p > 0.05).

-No patient required a blood transfusion in either group.

▶Fusion rates: 95.8% (Group 1) and 97.5% (Group 2) -at 24 months after surgery


CONCLUSIONS
-There are no significant difference in clinical outcome between percutaneous facet screw fixation and pedicle screw fixation after ALIF.


-Percutaneous facet screw fixation represents a safe and minimally invasive modality with which to achieve solid fusion in the lumbar spine.



2013년 9월 13일 금요일

Which procedure is better for lumbar interbody fusion: anterior lumbar interbody fusion or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion?

1st journal review

*Title: Which procedure is better for lumbar interbody fusion: anterior lumbar interbody fusion or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion?

*Author: Sheng-Dan Jiang, Jiang-Wei Chen, Lei-Sheng Jiang

*Bibliography: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg (2012) 132:1259-1266

Abstract
Introduction: This systematic review investigated whether surgical complications, non fusion rate, radiographic outcome and clinical outcome of ALIF were significantly different from those of TLIF.


Method: using MEDLINE data base.
>Eligibility criteria
selecting those articles: 1) target population, individuals: with lumbar spondylosis
2) intervention: ALIF compared with TLIF
3) English written article
and only the most recent papers were used..

>Identification of study
-Publications comparing ALIF and TLIF in the management of lumbar spondylosis were identified from a MEDLINE search. (1966.1~2011.6)
-using OVID search engine
-keyword: ALIF, TLIF, lumbar spondylosis

>Review method : Two authors reviewed the article using below method
1) review the title --> the article might meet eligibility criteria? -->2) then abstract review
-->3) review the complete article.
(only review the method section and blinded with author, institution, journal, results.)

>Statistical analysis
-using SPSS, unpaired Student's t test, Mann-Whitney U test/ Chi-squared test. ( p < 0.05 )


Result
-9 studies(comparing ALIF and TLIF) included in this systematic review.

1) Operative Time (7 studies)
ALIF >>>>>> TLIF

 2) Blood loss (7 studies)
ALIF >>>>>> TLIF

3) Complications (5 studies)
ALIF: 60 complications /244 patients
TLIF: 90 complications /371 patients

4) Radiographic outcomes: disc height, segmental lordosis, whole lumbar lordosis (3 studies)
ALIF >> TLIF

5) Clinical outcomes: using VAS(visual analog scale), ODI (oswestry disability index) (3 studies)
no significant difference

6) Nonfusion
ALIF: 23 /169 patients (13.6%)
TLIF: 23 /222 patients (10.4%)
no significant difference

7) Economic analysis
costs of ALIF were greater than those of TLIF.


Conclusion
OP Time and Blood loss, Radiographic outcomes, costs : ALIF > TLIF
Clinical outcomes and Nonfusion rate: ALIF ≒ TLIF

홈