Long-term result of posterolateral fusion of the lumbar spine using the Tadpole system

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research

Yuichi Kasai¹  Toshihiko Sakakibara¹  Zhuo Wang¹  Kriangkrai Wittayapairoj² 

[1] Department of Spinal Surgery and Medical Engineering, Mie University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-174 Edobashi, Tsu city, Mie 514-8507, Japan;Department of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand

关键词: Spinal instrumentation;    Spinal fusion;    Lumbar spine;    Lumbar degenerative disease;    Adjacent segment disease;   

Others  :  813417
DOI  :  10.1186/1749-799X-9-33

 received in 2013-11-19, accepted in 2014-05-01,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Failure of pedicle screw fixation is often seen in patients with severe osteoporosis. We developed new lumbar spinal instrumentation (Tadpole system) for elderly patients who have osteoporotic bone and poor general health status. The objective of this study was to document the long-term clinical outcomes after Tadpole system fixation, the rate of spinal fusion, the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration, the rate of instrumentation failure, and the overall complications.

Methods

Sixty patients who underwent posterolateral spinal fusion using the Tadpole system, in whom a radiograph of the lumbar spine was taken at more than 5 years after operation, were involved in this study. The improvement rate of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, rate of spinal fusion, presence or absence of adjacent segment degeneration, rate of instrumentation failure, and postoperative complications of each patient were assessed at 5 years postoperatively.

Results

The mean JOA score improvement was 72.5%, and the posterolateral spinal fusion rate was 93.3% (56 of 60 patients) at the last follow-up. Adjacent segment degeneration occurred in only two patients who showed decreased intervertebral disc height, and instrumentation failure (hook deviation) was observed in one patient. No other complications were observed in any patients.

Conclusion

Tadpole system fixation shows favorable long-term clinical outcomes.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Wittayapairoj et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Fischgrund JS, Mackay M, Herkowitz HN, Brower R, Montgomery DM, Kurz LT: Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis: a prospective, randomized study compareing decompressive laminectomy and arthrodesis with and without spinal instrumentation. Spine 1997, 22:2807-2812.
• [2]Zdeblick TA: A prospective, randomized study of lumbar fusion. Preliminary results. Spine 1993, 18:983-991.
• [3]Kotani Y, Abumi K, Ito M, Sudo H, Abe Y, Minami A: Mid-term clinical results of minimally invasive decompression and posterolateral fusion with percutaneous pedicle screws versus conventional approach for degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. Eur Spine J 2012, 21(6):1171-1177.
• [4]Lee JH, Lee JH, Park JW, Shin YH: The insertional torque of a pedicle screw has a positive correlation with bone mineral density in posterior lumbar pedicle screw fixation. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 2012, 94(1):93-97.
• [5]Wu ZX, Gong FT, Liu L, Ma ZS, Zhang Y, Zhao X, Yang M, Lei W, Sang HX: A comparative study on screw loosening in osteoporotic lumbar spine fusion between expandable and conventional pedicle screws. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2012, 132(4):471-476.
• [6]Kasai Y, Inaba T, Akeda K, Uchida A: Tadpole system as new lumbar spinal instrumentation. J Orthop Surg Res 2008, 12(3):41.
• [7]Pope MH, Hanley EN, Matteri RE, Wilder DG, Frymoyer JW: Measurement of intervertebral disc space height. Spine 1977, 2:282-286.
• [8]Kasai Y, Takegami K, Uchida A: Mixture ratios of local bone to artificial bone in lumbar posterolateral fusion. J Spinal Disord 2003, 16:31-37.
• [9]Christensen FB, Laursen M, Gelineck J, Eiskjaer SP, Thomsen K, Bünger CE: Interobserver and intraobserver agreement of radiograph interpretation with and without pedicle screw implants: the need for a detailed classification system in posterolateral spinal fusion. Spine 2001, 26(5):538-543.
• [10]Bostman O, Myllynen P, Riska EB: Posterior spinal fusion using internal fixation with the Daab plate. Acta Orthop Scand 1984, 55:310-314.
• [11]Wilson PD, Straub LR: Lumbosacral fusion with metallic plate fixation. Instr Course Lect 1952, 9:52-57.
• [12]Wang JC, Haid RW Jr, Miller JS, Robinson JC: Comparison of CD HORIZON SPIRE spinous process plate stabilization and pedicle screw fixation after anterior lumbar interbody fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 2006, 4:132-136.
• [13]Wang JC, Spencer D, Robinson JC: SPIRE spinous process plate: biomechanical evaluation of a novel technology. J Neurosurg Spine 2006, 4:160-164.
• [14]Shepherd DE, Leahy JC, Mathias KJ, Wilkinson SJ, Hukins DW: Spinous process strength. Spine 2000, 25:319-323.
• [15]Yan DL, Pei FX, Li J, Soo CL: Comparative study of PILF and TLIF treatment in adult degenerative spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J 2008, 17:1311-1316.
• [16]Kuroki H, Tajima N, Kubo S: Clinical results of posterolateral fusion for degenerative lumbar spinal diseases: a follow-up study of more than 10 years. J Orthop Sci 2002, 7:317-324.
• [17]Tsutsumimoto T, Shimogata M, Yoshimura Y, Misawa H: Union versus nonunion after posterolateral lumbar fusion: a comparison of long-term surgical outcomes in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J 2008, 17:1107-1112.
• [18]Endres S, Aigner R, Wilke A: Instrumented intervertebral or posterolateral fusion in elderly patients: clinical results of a single center. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2011, 12:189. BioMed Central Full Text
• [19]Audat Z, Moutasem O, Yousef K, Mohammad B: Comparison of clinical and radiological results of posterolateral fusion, posterior lumbar interbody fusion and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion techniques in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine. Singapore Med J 2012, 53(3):183-187.
• [20]Thomsen K, Christensen FB, Eiskjaer SP, Hansen ES, Fruensgaard S, Bünger CE: The effect of pedicle screw instrumentation on functional outcome and fusion rates in posterolateral fusion: a prospective randomized clinical study. Spine 1997, 22:2813-2822.
• [21]Lorenz M, Zindrick M, Schwaegler P, Vrbos L, Collatz MA, Behal R, Cram R: A comparison of single level fusions with and without hardware. Spine 1991, 16:s455-s458.
• [22]Esses SI, Sachs BL, Dreyzin V: Complication associated with the technique of pedicle screw fixation. A selected survey of ABS members. Spine 1993, 18:2231-2238.
• [23]Jutte PC, Castelein RM: Complications of pedicle screws in lumbar and lumbosacral fusion in 105 consecutive primary operations. Eur Spine J 2002, 11:594-598.
• [24]Ghiselli G, Wang JC, Bhatia NN, Hsu WK, Dawson EG: Adjacent segment degeneration in the lumbar spine. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004, 86:1497-1503.
• [25]Lund T, Oxland TR: Adjacent level disk disease-is it really a fusion disease? Orthop Clin N Am 2011, 42:529-541.
• [26]Park P, Garton HJ, Gala VC, Hoff JT, McGillicuddy JE: Adjacent segment disease after lumbar or lumbosacral fusion: review of the literature. Spine 2004, 29(17):1938-1944.