Clinical Outcomes and Complications After Pedicle-anchored Dynamic or Hybrid Lumbar Spine Stabilization A Systematic Literature Review

被引:31
作者
Prud'homme, Marion [1 ]
Barrios, Carlos [2 ]
Rouch, Philippe [1 ]
Charles, Yann Philippe [3 ]
Steib, Jean-Paul [3 ]
Skalli, Wafa [1 ]
机构
[1] Arts & Metiers ParisTech, Lab Biomecan, LBM, F-75013 Paris, France
[2] Valencia Catholic Univ, Inst Res Musculoskeletal Disorders, Valencia, Spain
[3] Univ Hosp Strasbourg, Dept Spine Surg, Strasbourg, France
来源
JOURNAL OF SPINAL DISORDERS & TECHNIQUES | 2015年 / 28卷 / 08期
关键词
dynamic stabilization; clinical outcomes; screw loosening; adjacent segment degeneration; device failure; FOLLOW-UP; POSTERIOR STABILIZATION; NEUTRALIZATION SYSTEM; FUSION; SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; EXPERIENCE; FIXATION; STENOSIS; DISEASE; DECOMPRESSION;
D O I
10.1097/BSD.0000000000000092
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design:A systematic medline review.Objective:An overview of pedicle-based dynamic stabilization devices clinical outcomes.Summary of Background Data:Fusion is the standard instrumentation for many pathologies of the lumbar spine. Worrying rates of failure, including adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), have consistently been reported. The interest for dynamic stabilization came from the need of minimizing the long-term complications related to the restriction of the lumbar motion. However, pedicle-based dynamic stabilization advantages and drawbacks remain controversial.Materials and Methods:Articles about the clinical outcomes were identified by a comprehensive Medline search. The inclusion criteria were a minimum follow-up of 12 months, indications for lumbar dynamic stabilization, and assessment of clinical outcomes and adverse events. The studied parameters included self-reported outcomes (pain, disability, and satisfaction) and complications.Results:A total of 46 articles fulfilling the inclusion criteria were reviewed providing results for 2026 patients with a mean follow-up of 33 months. The postoperative improvements in terms of pain and disability were significant. Subjective assessment showed an overall patient satisfaction of 83.4%. Radiographic ASD occurred in 0%-34% of patients. Device breakage occurred in 0%-30%, and device loosening in 0%-72% of patients. The global amount of revision surgeries reached 9.4% mainly for breakage, ASD, or persistent pain, not always associated with screw loosening.Conclusions:Dynamic stabilization seems as safe and effective but benefits might partly come from decompressive gestures. Reported clinical outcomes seems to be comparable with outcomes published for fusion and no clear evidence of protection of the adjacent segments emerge from this mid-term review. Technical failures are design related but also linked with patient specificities. Relationships between sagittal balance and surgery outcomes are still rarely reported. Dynamic stabilization might display advantages in selected indications, such as moderate degeneration and beginning instability associated with clinical symptoms, but further clinical studies are needed.
引用
收藏
页码:E439 / E448
页数:10
相关论文
共 67 条
[1]  
Barrey Cedric Y, 2008, SAS J, V2, P159, DOI 10.1016/SASJ-2008-0010-LR
[2]   Retrospective patient outcome evaluation after semi-rigid stabilization without fusion for degenerative lumbar instability [J].
Benezech, Jacques ;
Mitulescu, Anca .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND TRAUMATOLOGY, 2007, 17 (03) :227-234
[3]   The impact of bone mineral density and disc degeneration on shear strength and stiffness of the lumbar spine following laminectomy [J].
Bisschop, Arno ;
Mullender, Margriet G. ;
Kingma, Idsart ;
Jiya, Timothy U. ;
van der Veen, Albert J. ;
Roos, Jan C. ;
van Dieen, Jaap H. ;
van Royen, Barend J. .
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2012, 21 (03) :530-536
[4]  
Bordes-Monmeneu M, 2005, NEUROCIRUGIA, V16, P499
[5]   Dynesys fixation for lumbar spine degeneration [J].
Bothmann, Matthias ;
Kast, Erich ;
Boldt, Gerald Jens ;
Oberle, Joachim .
NEUROSURGICAL REVIEW, 2008, 31 (02) :189-196
[6]   Dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine [J].
Cakir, Balkan ;
Richter, Marcus ;
Huch, Klaus ;
Puhl, Wolfhart ;
Schmidt, Rene .
ORTHOPEDICS, 2006, 29 (08) :716-722
[7]   Dysfunctional Segmental Motion Treated with Dynamic Stabilization in the Lumbar Spine [J].
Cansever, Tufan ;
Civelek, Erdinc ;
Kabatas, Serdar ;
Yilmaz, Cem ;
Caner, Hakan ;
Altinors, M. Nur .
WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2011, 75 (5-6) :743-749
[8]   Fusion and nonsurgical treatment for symptomatic lumbar degenerative disease: a systematic review of Oswestry Disability Index and MOS Short Form-36 outcomes [J].
Carreon, Leah Y. ;
Glassman, Steven D. ;
Howard, Jennifer .
SPINE JOURNAL, 2008, 8 (05) :747-755
[9]   Influence of 2 Different Dynamic Stabilization Systems on Sagittal Spinopelvic Alignment [J].
Chen, Hong ;
Charles, Yann Philippe ;
Bogorin, Ioan ;
Steib, Jean-Paul .
JOURNAL OF SPINAL DISORDERS & TECHNIQUES, 2011, 24 (01) :37-43
[10]   NFlex Dynamic Stabilization System: Two-Year Clinical Outcomes of Multi-Center Study [J].
Coe, Jeffrey D. ;
Kitchel, Scott H. ;
Meisel, Hans Joerg ;
Wingo, Charles H. ;
Lee, Soo Eon ;
Jahng, Tae-Ahn .
JOURNAL OF KOREAN NEUROSURGICAL SOCIETY, 2012, 51 (06) :343-349