Bone resorption during the first year after implantation of a single-segment dynamic interspinous stabilization device and its risk factors

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Haiying Liu¹  Yi Zhu¹  Bo Wang¹  Zhenqi Zhu¹  Kaifeng Wang¹ 

[1] Department of Spinal Surgery, Peking University People’s Hospital, 11 Xizhimen South Street, West District, Beijing, China

关键词: Wallis;    Interspinous dynamic stabilization device;    Risk factor;    Bone resorption;   

Others  :  1227779
DOI  :  10.1186/s12891-015-0561-y

 received in 2014-08-25, accepted in 2015-04-24,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Dynamic interspinous stabilization devices generally provide satisfactory results, but can result in recurrent lumbar disc herniation, spinous process fracture, or bone resorption of the spinous process. The purpose of this study was to investigate if the Wallis dynamic stabilization device is associated with bone resorption.

Methods

Patients who underwent single-segment posterior lumbar decompression and implantation of a Wallis dynamic interspinous stabilization device at the L4/5 level between January 1, 2009 and October 1, 2011 were included. Bone resorption rate, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, and visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score were measured. Patient baseline and 1-year follow-up data were collected and analyzed. The bone resorption rate of the L4 and L5 spinous processes was calculated.

Results

Twenty four males and 20 females with a mean age of 42.7 ± 14.7 years were included. Twenty nine patients had significant bone resorption (bone resorption rate > 20%) and 15 had no bone resorption (bone resorption rate ≤ 20%) at 1 year after surgery. Lumbar lordosis ≥ 50° was associated with a lower bone resorption than lumbar lordosis < 50° and increasing BMI was associated with increased bone resorption. There were no significant differences between the bone resorption and no bone resorption groups in the improvement rate of VAS pain score, ODI, and JOA score at 1 year after surgery.

Conclusions

Significant bone resorption occurs within 1 year after implantation of the Wallis device in more than 50% of patients. However, it does not affect short-term functional results.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Wang et al.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Whitecloud TS, Davis JM, Olive PM. Operative treatment of the degenerated segment adjacent to a lumbar fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1994; 19:531-6.
• [2]Fujiwara A, Tamai K, An HS, Kurihashi T, Lim TH, Yoshida H et al.. The relationship between disc degeneration, facet joint osteoarthritis, and stability of the degenerative lumbar spine. J Spinal Disord. 2000; 13:444-50.
• [3]Biering-Sørensen F, Hansen FR, Schroll M, Runeborg O. The relation of spinal x-ray to low-back pain and physical activity among 60-year-old men and women. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1985; 10:445-51.
• [4]Yang KH, King AI. Mechanism of facet load transmission as a hypothesis for low-back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1984; 9:557-65.
• [5]Senegas J, Etchevers JP, Vital JM, Baulny D, Grenier F. Recalibration of the lumbar canal, an alternative to laminectomy in the treatment of lumbar canal stenosis]. Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1988; 74:15-22.
• [6]Sénégas J. Mechanical supplementation by non-rigid fixation in degenerative intervertebral lumbar segments: the Wallis system. Eur Spine J. 2002; 11 Suppl 2:S164-9.
• [7]Sénégas J, Vital JM, Pointillart V, Mangione P. Clinical evaluation of a lumbar interspinous dynamic stabilization device (the Wallis system) with a 13-year mean follow-up. Neurosurg Rev. 2009; 32:335-41.
• [8]Sénégas J, Vital JM, Pointillart V, Mangione P. Long-term actuarial survivorship analysis of an interspinous stabilization system. Eur Spine J. 2007; 16:1279-87.
• [9]Korovessis P, Repantis T, Zacharatos S, Zafiropoulos A. Does Wallis implant reduce adjacent segment degeneration above lumbosacral instrumented fusion? Eur Spine J. 2009; 18:830-40.
• [10]Liu HY, Zhou J, Wang B, Wang HM, Jin ZH, Zhu ZQ et al.. Comparison of Topping-off and posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery in lumbar degenerative disease: a retrospective study. Chin Med J (Engl). 2012; 125:3942-6.
• [11]Floman Y, Millgram MA, Smorgick Y, Rand N, Ashkenazi E. Failure of the Wallis interspinous implant to lower the incidence of recurrent lumbar disc herniations in patients undergoing primary disc excision. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007; 20:337-41.
• [12]Wilke HJ, Drumm J, Häussler K, Mack C, Steudel WI, Kettler A. Biomechanical effect of different lumbar interspinous implants on flexibility and intradiscal pressure. Eur Spine J. 2008; 17:1049-56.
• [13]Kim DH, Shanti N, Tantorski ME, Shaw JD, Li L, Martha JF et al.. Association between degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinous process fracture after interspinous process spacer surgery. Spine J. 2012; 12:466-72.
• [14]Miller JD, Miller MC, Lucas MG. Erosion of the spinous process: a potential cause of interspinous process spacer failure. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010; 12:210-3.
• [15]Chung KJ, Hwang YS, Koh SH. Stress fracture of bilateral posterior facet after insertion of interspinous implant. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009; 34:E380-3.
• [16]Ghiselli G, Wang JC, Hsu WK, Dawson EG. L5-S1 segment survivorship and clinical outcome analysis after L4-L5 isolated fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003; 28:275-80.
• [17]McPhee B. Spondylolishthesis and spondylolysis. In: Neurological surgery: a comprehensive reference guide to the diagnosis and management of neurosurgical problems. 1990.49-84.
• [18]Yang Z, Griffith JF, Leung PC, Lee R. Effect of osteoporosis on morphology and mobility of the lumbar spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009; 34:E115-1.
• [19]Ihm EH, Han IB, Shin DA, Kim TG, Huh R, Chung SS. Spinous process morphometry for interspinous device implantation in Korean patients. World Neurosurg. 2013; 79:172-6.
• [20]Ma XY, Yin QS, Wu ZH, Xia H, Riew KD, Liu JF. C2 anatomy and dimensions relative to translaminar screw placement in an Asian population. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010; 35(6):704-8.
• [21]Griffith JF, Wang YX, Antonio GE, Choi KC, Yu A, Ahuja AT. Modified Pfirrmann grading system for lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007; 32:E708-12.
• [22]Ilharreborde B, Shaw MN, Berglund LJ, Zhao KD, Gay RE, An KN. Biomechanical evaluation of posterior lumbar dynamic stabilization: an in vitro comparison between universal clamp and wallis systems. Eur Spine J. 2011; 20:289-96.
• [23]Sandu N, Schaller B, Arasho B, Orabi M. Wallis interspinous implantation to treat degenerative spinal disease: description of the method and case series. Expert Rev Neurother. 2011; 11:799-807.
• [24]Sobottke R, Schlüter-Brust K, Kaulhausen T, Röllinghoff M, Joswig B, Stützer H et al.. Interspinous implants (X Stop, Wallis, Diam) for the treatment of LSS: is there a correlation between radiological parameters and clinical outcome? Eur Spine J. 2009; 18:1494-503.
• [25]Chou D, Lau D, Skelly A, Ecker E. Dynamic stabilization versus fusion for treatment of degenerative spine conditions. Evid Based Spine Care J. 2011; 2:33-42.
• [26]Kabir SM, Gupta SR, Casey AT. Lumbar interspinous spacers: a systematic review of clinical and biomechanical evidence. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010; 35:E1499--506.
• [27]Lafage V, Gangnet N, Sénégas J, Lavaste F, Skalli W. New interspinous implant evaluation using an in vitro biomechanical study combined with a finite-element analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007; 32:706-13.
• [28]Justus R, Luft JH. A mechanochemical hypothesis for bone remodeling induced by mechanical stress. Calcif Tissue Res. 1970; 5:222-35.
• [29]Chiba M. Study of bone remodeling mechanism induced by mechanical stress. Differentiation of osteoclasts induced by compressive force in newborn rat cultured long bone. Nihon Kyosei Shika Gakkai Zasshi 1989;48:585-600. [Article in Japanese].
• [30]Tanne K, Nagataki T, Matsubara S, Kato J, Terada Y, Sibaguchi T et al.. Association between mechanical stress and bone remodeling. J Osaka Univ Dent Sch. 1990; 30:64-71.
• [31]Takuma M, Tsutsumi S, Tsukamoto H, Kimura Y, Fukunaga S, Takamori Y et al.. The influence of materials difference on stress distribution and bone remodeling around alumina and titanium dental implants. J Osaka Univ Dent Sch. 1990; 30:86-96.
• [32]Enis F. The three column spine and its significance in the classification of acute thoracolumbar spinal injuries. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1983; 8:817-31.
• [33]Sowers MR, Zheng H, Greendale GA, Neer RM, Cauley JA, Ellis J et al.. Changes in bone resorption across the menopause transition: effects of reproductive hormones, body size, and ethnicity. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013; 98(7):2854-63.
• [34]Schulte LM, O’Brien JR, Matteini LE, Yu WD. Change in sagittal balance with placement of an interspinous spacer. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011; 36(20):E1302-5.
• [35]Gurban CV, Mederle O. The OPG/RANKL system and zinc ions are promoters of bone remodeling by osteoblast proliferation in postmenopausal osteoporosis. Rom J Morphol Embryol. 2011; 52(3 Suppl):1113-9.
• [36]Dalle Carbonare L, Arlot ME, Chavassieux PM, Roux JP, Portero NR, Meunier PJ. Comparison of trabecular bone microarchitecture and remodeling in glucocorticoid-induced and postmenopausal osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res. 2001; 16:97-103.
• [37]Zupan J, Komadina R, Marc J. The relationship between osteoclastogenic and anti-osteoclastogenic pro-inflammatory cytokines differs in human osteoporotic and osteoarthritic bone tissues. J Biomed Sci. 2012; 19:28.