DOCSLIB.ORG

Lumbar Instability 37

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lumbar Instability 37 Lumbar instability 37 CHAPTER CONTENTS Definitions Definitions . 523 Anatomy . 524 At the most simple level, instability is a lack of stability, a condition in which application of a small load causes an inor- Inert structures . 524 dinately large, perhaps catastrophic displacement.1 This is also Contractile structures . 524 the description given by the American Academy of Orthopae- Neuromuscular control . 524 dic Surgeons, who state: ‘Segmental instability is an abnormal Classification .of .lumbar .instability . 524 response to applied loads, characterized by motion in motion segments beyond normal constraints.’2 Instability .and .the .clinical .concept .of .mechanical . lesions .of .the .lumbar .spine . 525 A biomechanically more accurate definition of segmental instability, using a ‘neutral zone’ concept, has been proposed Segmental instability and discodural by Panjabi. The neutral zone concept is based on the observa- interactions . 526 tion that the total range of motion (ROM) of a spinal Segmental instability and ligamentous lesions . 526 motion segment may be divided into two zones: a neutral Segmental instability and the stenotic concept . 526 zone and an elastic zone (Fig. 37.1).3 The neutral zone is Diagnosis .of .lumbar .instability . 526 the initial portion of the ROM during which spinal motion is produced against minimal internal resistance. The elastic Clinical observations . 527 portion of the ROM is the portion nearer to the end-range Radiological observations . 527 of movement that is produced against substantial internal Bracing . 527 resistance. Segmental instability is thus defined as a decrease Treatment .of .lumbar .instability . 528 in the capacity of the stabilizing system of the spine to maintain Sclerosant treatment . 529 the spinal neutral zones within physiological limits in order to prevent neurological deficit, major deformity and/or Surgery . 529 incapacitating pain.4 This definition describes joints that, early in range and under minor loads, may exhibit excessive Although lumbar instability is considered to be responsible for displacement. the majority of chronic or recurrent backaches, the word ‘insta- The clinical definition of instability is: ‘a condition in which bility’ is still poorly defined. A number of different definitions the clinical status of a patient with low back problems evolves, exist, but as yet there are no clear and validated clinical fea- with the least provocation, from the mildly symptomatic to tures by which instability might be diagnosed. It is also not the severe episode’.5 Others consider instability to exist only clear how instability as such might set up pain and disability. when sudden aberrant motions such as a visible slip or catch It is generally accepted that instability does not cause are observed during active movements of the lumbar spine or trouble in itself, but predisposes to other conditions such when a change in the relative position of adjacent vertebrae is as (recurrent) disc displacements, strain of the posterior detected by palpation performed with the patient in a standing ligaments and the zygapophyseal joints, and nerve root position versus palpation performed with the patient in a prone entrapment. position.6 © Copyright 2013 Elsevier, Ltd. All rights reserved. The Lumbar Spine Box 37.1 Lumbar segmental instabilities: classification Stress 1. Fractures and fracture dislocations 2. Infections involving anterior columns 3. Primary and metastatic neoplasms 4. Spondylolisthesis in children 5. Degenerative instabilities NZ ∆NZ ROM 6. (Progressive scoliosis in children) Fig 37.1 • In segmental instability, the stabilizing system is unable to maintain the spinal neutral zone (NZ) within physiological limits. ROM, range of motion. compressive loads on the spine, which in turn achieves a sta- bilizing effect. In other words, by compressing joints in a neutral position, muscles may make it less easy for joints and Anatomy discs to move. During recent decades, a variety of studies have docu- In order to be clinically useful, the structures that are respon- mented the stabilizing effect of muscles on the lumbar 15–18 sible for instability must be specified. The stabilizing system of spine. The lumbar erector spinae muscle group provides 19 the spine can be conceptualized as consisting of passive (inert) most of the extensor force required for many lifting tasks. and active (contractile) parts and a neural control system. Rotation is produced primarily by the oblique abdominal muscles. The multifidus muscle seems to be able to exert some segmental control and is therefore proposed to function as a Inert structures stabilizer during lifting and rotational movements of the lumbar spine.20 The role of the oblique abdominal and transversus The passive subsystem consists primarily of the vertebral abdominis muscles in spinal stability has been the subject of bodies, discs, zygapophyseal joints and joint capsules, and much debate. The abdominals have been thought to play a spinal ligaments. The passive subsystem plays its most impor- stabilizing role, either by increasing intra-abdominal pressure tant stabilizing role in the elastic zone of spinal ROM (i.e. near or by creating tension in the lumbodorsal fascia.21 end-range),7 and numerous studies have been conducted that demonstrate the relative contributions of passive structures to segmental stability. Neuromuscular control The posterior ligaments of the spine (interspinous and supraspinous ligaments), along with the zygapophyseal joints The neural control system may also play an important part in and joint capsules and the intervertebral discs, are the most stabilization of the spine. Panjabi describes the stability system important stabilizing structures when the spine moves into as being composed of an inert spinal column, the spinal muscles 22 flexion.8–11 End-range extension is stabilized primarily by the and a control unit. In this model, changes in spinal balance anterior longitudinal ligament, the anterior aspect of the resulting from position and load are monitored by transducers annulus fibrosus and the zygapophyseal joints.12,13 Rotational embedded in the ligaments that relay information to the movements of the lumbar spine are stabilized mostly by the control unit. When conditions that challenge spine stability are intervertebral discs, the zygapophyseal joints and, for the detected, the control unit activates the appropriate muscles to L4–L5 and L5–S1 segments, the iliolumbar ligaments too.14 protect or restore stability, or to avoid instability. Evidence for Injury to the inert stabilizing system may have important this hypothesis is found in studies showing that patients with implications for spinal stability. Intervertebral disc degenera- low back pain (LBP) often have persistent deficits in neuro- 23,24 tion, weakening of the posterior longitudinal ligaments and muscular control. This hypothesis was further supported early degeneration of the facet joints may increase the size of by a recent electromyographic study demonstrating that a the neutral zone, increasing demands on the contractile sub- primary reflex arc exists from mechanoreceptors in the system to avoid the development of segmental instability.3 supraspinous ligament to the multifidus muscles. Such a reflex arc could be triggered by application of loads to the isolated supraspinous ligament, which in turn initiates activity of the Contractile structures multifidus muscles at the level of ligament deformation, as well as one level above or below.25 The active subsystem of the spinal stabilizing system includes the spinal muscles and tendons and the thoracolumbar fascia; these contribute to stability in two ways. The first and Classification of lumbar instability lesser mechanism is to pull directly against the threatened displacement (which is, of course, not possible if the latter The major categories of segmental instability are shown in Box is a fragment of disc). The second, more important contribu- 37.1.26 Tumours, infections and trauma are beyond contro- tion is indirect: whenever the muscles contract, they exert versy. They produce mechanical weakening of the anterior 524 Lumbar instability C H A P T E R 3 7 columns and can be diagnosed by medical imaging and by A further classification system for degenerative lumbar biopsy. Spondylolisthesis is a more controversial category. The instability (Box 37.2), based on a combination of history and condition is rarely progressive in teenagers or adults and can radiographic findings, has been proposed.32 27 therefore be considered as stable in these age groups. • A primary instability is one where there has been no prior However, it has been suggested that concurrent severe disc intervention or treatment which might account for the degeneration at the level of listhesis may lead to progression development of the process. of slip and convert an asymptomatic and stable lesion into a 28 • A secondary instability involves surgical destruction of one symptomatic one. or more of the restraining elements of the spine. More difficulties arise with respect to so-called ‘degen- Secondary instabilities may develop after discectomies,33 erative instability’. The ageing of the lumbar spine has decompressive laminectomies, spinal fusions and been discussed thoroughly (see Ch. 32). Grossly, it occurs chemonucleolysis.34 in three sequential phases: dysfunction, instability and 29 Rotational instability is still a hypothetical entity and so far restabilization. 35 During the early phase of degeneration
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Spinal Deformity Study Group
    Spinal Deformity Study Group Editors in Chief Radiographic Michael F. O’Brien, MD Timothy R. Kuklo, MD Kathy M. Blanke, RN Measurement Lawrence G. Lenke, MD Manual B T2 T5 T2–T12 CSVL T5–T12 +X° -X +X° C7PL T12 L2 A S1 ©2008 Medtronic Sofamor Danek USA, Inc. – 0 + Radiographic Measurement Manual Editors in Chief Michael F. O’Brien, MD Timothy R. Kuklo, MD Kathy M. Blanke, RN Lawrence G. Lenke, MD Section Editors Keith H. Bridwell, MD Kathy M. Blanke, RN Christopher L. Hamill, MD William C. Horton, MD Timothy R. Kuklo, MD Hubert B. Labelle, MD Lawrence G. Lenke, MD Michael F. O’Brien, MD David W. Polly Jr, MD B. Stephens Richards III, MD Pierre Roussouly, MD James O. Sanders, MD ©2008 Medtronic Sofamor Danek USA, Inc. Acknowledgements Radiographic Measurement Manual The radiographic measurement manual has been developed to present standardized techniques for radiographic measurement. In addition, this manual will serve as a complimentary guide for the Spinal Deformity Study Group’s radiographic measurement software. Special thanks to the following members of the Spinal Deformity Study Group in the development of this manual. Sigurd Berven, MD Hubert B. Labelle, MD Randal Betz, MD Lawrence G. Lenke, MD Fabien D. Bitan, MD Thomas G. Lowe, MD John T. Braun, MD John P. Lubicky, MD Keith H. Bridwell, MD Steven M. Mardjetko, MD Courtney W. Brown, MD Richard E. McCarthy, MD Daniel H. Chopin, MD Andrew A. Merola, MD Edgar G. Dawson, MD Michael Neuwirth, MD Christopher DeWald, MD Peter O. Newton, MD Mohammad Diab, MD Michael F.
    [Show full text]
  • CERVICAL SPONDYLOSIS Pathogenesis the Canal Diameter Is
    CERVICAL SPONDYLOSIS Pathogenesis The canal diameter is reduced by 1. Osteophytes, thickened ligamentum flavum, protruded disc 2. Hyperextension of the spine reduces the canal diameter by shingling effect of lamina and buckling of Ligamentum flavum 3. Retrolisthesis with extension 4. Hypermobility in the level above degenerated disc can cause myelopathy 5. Vascular compromise in spondylosis may cause myelopathy Disc is innervated by sinu‐vertebral nerve formed from ventral nerve root and sympathetic plexus. This nerve turns back at intervertebral foramen and supplies: annulus fibrosus, posterior longitudinal ligament, and periosteum of the vertebra Clinical A B C 1. Axial Pain patterns proved during discography at each level A Level between C2‐3 B “ C3‐4 C “ C4‐5 D “ C5‐6 E “ C6‐7 D E Look for trigger points. Pain is more on extending the neck. 2. Red flags: Night pain Persistent pain > 3months Any associated primary tumour Weight loss and sweat 3. Referred or radicular pain C6 to the thumb, C7 to the middle finger C8 to the little finger C6 nerve root exist between C5‐C6 vertebra. At cervical spine, both disc herneation and stenosis affect the exit root [In the lumbar region, transit root is involved in disc herniation] If more than one nerve root involvement: rule out myelopathy Sometimes, the pain can be referred to heart lungs and TMJ joint from Cervical spondylosis 4. Spurling’s manoeuvre: Extension and lateral rotation to the side of pain [refer clinical examination] Differential diagnosis for radiculopathy Peripheral entrapment syndrome Rotator cuff syndrome Brachial plexitis and herpes Spinal tumours Cardiac ischemia Investigations X rays AP, Lateral, Flexion‐extension lateral MRI is gold standard Myelopathy Types 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Acquired Degenerative Changes of the Intervertebral Segments at And
    European Journal of Radiology 50 (2004) 134–158 Acquired degenerative changes of the intervertebral segments at and suprajacent to the lumbosacral junction A radioanatomic analysis of the nondiscal structures of the spinal column and perispinal soft tissues J. Randy Jinkins a,b,∗ a Department of Radiologic Sciences, Downstate Medical Center, State University of New York, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA b Fonar Corporation, 110 Marcus Drive, Melville, NY 11747, USA Received 3 October 2003; received in revised form 9 October 2003; accepted 13 October 2003 Abstract A review of the imaging features of normal and degenerative anatomy of the spine on medical imaging studies shows features that have been largely overlooked or poorly understood by the imaging community in recent years. The imaging methods reviewed included computed tomography (CT) with multiplanar reconstructions and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). A routine part of the MRI examination included fat-suppressed T2 weighted fast-spin- or turbo-spin-echo acquisitions. As compared to the normal features in asymptomatic volunteers, alterations in the observed CT/MRI morphology and MR signal characteristics were sought in symptomatic individuals. Findings in symptomatic subjects which departed from the normal anatomic features of the posterior spinal elements in asymptomatic volunteers included: rupture of the interspinous ligament(s), neoarthrosis of the interspinous space with perispinous cyst formation, posterior spinal facet (zygapophyseal joint) arthrosis, related central spinal canal, lateral recess (subarticular zone) and neural foramen stenosis, posterior element alterations associated with various forms of spondylolisthesis, and perispinal muscle rupture/degeneration. These findings indicate that the posterior elements are major locations of degenerative spinal and perispinal disease that may accompany or even precede degenerative disc disease.
    [Show full text]
  • Pattern of Degenerative Lumbar Retrolisthesis in Basrah Thamer a Hamdan, Mubder a M
    Pattern of Degenerative lumbar Retrolisthesis in Basrah Thamer A Hamdan, Mubder A M. Saeed & Yas k. Hadood Basrah Journal Original Article Of Surgery Bas J Surg, June, 21, 2015 PATTERN OF DEGENERATIVE LUMBAR RETROLISTHESIS IN BASRAH Thamer A Hamdan*, Mubder A Mohammed Saeed# & Yas khudair Hadood@ *FRCS, FRCP, FICS, FACS, American Board (Orth.), Professor of Orthopedic Surgery. #FICMS, (Orth.) Assistant Prof. of Orthopedic Surgery. College of Medicine, University of Basrah, Basrah, Iraq. @MB,ChB, Postgraduate Arab Board Medical Specialization (Orth.) Abstract Although retrolisthesis is not a well-known condition by many medical specialists dealing with back problems and it has been regarded as a radiological incidental finding with no clinical significance, a growing prove is now evolving stating that retrolisthesis could be a cause of many backache complaints and a sequelae of an altered spine biomechanics. Objectives: to study and analyze the various biomechanical characteristics of retrolisthesis and its relationship with various radiological parameters of the lumbar spine and other patient’s factors. Patients and Method: Forty patients, twenty six males, and fourteen females with an age range from 40–66 years with radiological evidence of significant lumbar spine retrolisthesis (slip > 3 millimeters) were evaluated clinically and radiologically by plain radiography and MRI in Basra General Hospital and Ibn AL-Bittar Private Hospital, during the period from the 1st of August 2014 to the 1st of March 2015. After a thorough history and physical examination, various radiological parameters were obtained including the lumbar lordosis, sacral slop, pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, all those measurements were done digitally. A statistical analysis was made via IBM SPSS ver.17 and the results were compared with that of similar studies.
    [Show full text]
  • A Technical Nuance to Avoid Lumbar Five Radiculopathy with Anterior Lumbar Fusion and Posterior Instrumentation
    Hindawi Case Reports in Orthopedics Volume 2021, Article ID 5514720, 4 pages https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5514720 Case Report A Technical Nuance to Avoid Lumbar Five Radiculopathy with Anterior Lumbar Fusion and Posterior Instrumentation Matthew T. Neal, Maziyar A. Kalani , and Mark K. Lyons Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, 5777 East Mayo Boulevard, Phoenix, AZ 85054, USA Correspondence should be addressed to Mark K. Lyons; [email protected] Received 5 January 2021; Revised 17 March 2021; Accepted 19 March 2021; Published 25 March 2021 Academic Editor: Taketoshi Yasuda Copyright © 2021 Matthew T. Neal et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is a well-established procedure used to treat a multitude of spinal pathologies. When performed at the L5-S1 level, the ALIF is often supplemented with posterior pedicle screw and rod fixation. Because the interbody device can restore disk and foraminal height, one benefit of the ALIF procedure is indirect neural decompression in the spinal canal and neural foramina. If the contour of the posterior rod is not matched to the exact position of the tulip heads on the pedicle screws, spondylolisthesis can be introduced, leading to foraminal stenosis and nerve compression. This concern is particularly germane when the posterior instrumentation is placed percutaneously without any direct foraminal decompression. In this report, we describe a patient who had an L4-S1 ALIF, resulting in new L5-S1 retrolisthesis and worsening L5 radiculopathy.
    [Show full text]
  • Espa Ingles A.Pdf
    Documento descargado de http://www.elsevier.es el 02/11/2012. Copia para uso personal, se prohíbe la transmisión de este documento por cualquier medio o formato. Radiología. 2011;53(2):116-133 ISSN: 0033-8338 RADIOLOGÍA Publicación Oficial de la Sociedad Española de Radiología Médica RADIOLOGÍA Incluida en Index Medicus/MEDLINE www.elsevier.es/rx Actividad acreditada en base a la encomienda de gestión concedida por los Ministerios de Educación, Cultura y Deporte y de Sanidad y Consumo al Con sejo General de Colegios Oficiales de Médicos con 1 crédito, equivalente a 4 horas lectivas. www.seram.es www.elsevier.es/rx UPDATE Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging for painful spinal column: contributions and controversies F. Ruiz Santiago,* M.M. Castellano García, L. Guzmán Álvarez, M. Tello Moreno Sección de Radiología Musculoesquelética, Servicio de Radiodiagnóstico, Hospital de Traumatología, Ciudad Sanitaria Virgen de las Nieves, Granada, Spain Received 7 May 2010; accepted 22 October 2010 KEYWORDS Abstract The use of tomographic imaging techniques, computed tomography (CT) and Spine; magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), to complement or replace plain-fi lm radiography in the Magnetic resonance study of spine pain is becoming more and more common. imaging; The aim of this paper is to provide a general review of the CT and MRI manifestations of the Column; wide spectrum of lesions that can cause pain in the spinal column. This spectrum includes Computed degenerative disease, malalignment, tumors, inflammatory processes, and infectious tomography; processes. Back pain; Precise knowledge and accurate reporting of the fi ndings at CT and MRI are fundamental for Spinal column clinical decision making in patients with spine pain.
    [Show full text]
  • Cervical Spondylotic Radiculo-Myelopathy in Patients with Athetoid-Dystonic Cerebral Palsy: Clinical Evaluation and Surgical Treatment
    J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry: first published as 10.1136/jnnp.47.8.775 on 1 August 1984. Downloaded from Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry 1984;47:775-780 Cervical spondylotic radiculo-myelopathy in patients with athetoid-dystonic cerebral palsy: clinical evaluation and surgical treatment GENJIRO HIROSE, SATORU KADOYA From the Departments ofNeurology and Neurosurgery, Kanazawa Medical University, Ishikawa, Japan SUMMARY The acute onset of symptoms of severe cervical radiculo-myelopathy in four patients with athetoid-dystonic cerebral palsy is reported. Neurological and radiological examination showed that the spondylotic changes of the cervical spine were responsible for new neurological deficits leading to the patients being bedridden. Dystonic-athetoid neck movements may cause excessive axial neck rotation as well as flexion and extension movements of the spine. These repetitive exaggerated movements may result in early degenerative changes of the vertebrae which may enhance the radiculo-myelopathy. The four patients were treated with an anterior discectomy with interbody fusion. They were bedridden pre-operatively but all have since been able to walk with or without a cane. It is concluded that early anterior decompression with interbody fusion is a treatment of choice for cervical spondylotic radiculo-myelopathy in associa- Protected by copyright. tion with athetoid cerebral palsy. Trauma as a cause of cervical spondylosis, with or Neurological examination revealed generalised without neurological deficits, has often been pro- athetoid-dystonic movements. No muscle atrophy was posed. Reports allude to a causal relationship be- noted but she was barely able to extend her arms or to raise tween movement disorders of the neck and the her legs from the bed.
    [Show full text]
  • 18-0378 ) Issued: June 18, 2019 U.S
    United States Department of Labor Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board __________________________________________ ) K.C., Appellant ) ) and ) Docket No. 18-0378 ) Issued: June 18, 2019 U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, ) Painesville, OH, Employer ) __________________________________________ ) Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record Alan J. Shapiro, Esq., for the appellant1 Office of Solicitor, for the Director DECISION AND ORDER Before: PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge JURISDICTION On December 18, 2017 appellant, through counsel, filed a timely appeal from an August 31, 2017 merit decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP).2 Pursuant to the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act3 (FECA) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3, the Board has jurisdiction over the merits of this case.4 1 In all cases in which a representative has been authorized in a matter before the Board, no claim for a fee for legal or other service performed on appeal before the Board is valid unless approved by the Board. 20 C.F.R. § 501.9(e). No contract for a stipulated fee or on a contingent fee basis will be approved by the Board. Id. An attorney or representative’s collection of a fee without the Board’s approval may constitute a misdemeanor, subject to fine or imprisonment for up to one year or both. Id.; see also 18 U.S.C. § 292. Demands for payment of fees to a representative, prior to approval by the Board, may be reported to appropriate authorities for investigation. 2 The Board notes that appellant’s surname has changed since the filing of the appeal.
    [Show full text]
  • Commented Glossary for Rheumatic Spinal Diseases, Based on Pathologyf
    Annals ofthe Rheumatic Diseases 1995; 54: 615-625 615 NOW AND THEN Ann Rheum Dis: first published as 10.1136/ard.54.8.615 on 1 August 1995. Downloaded from Commented glossary for rheumatic spinal diseases, based on pathologyf Robert J Franqois, Frits Eulderink, Eric G L Bywaters Abstract or the posterior facet joints' and in another3 as Objectives-To redefine and comment on 'dissolution of a vertebra' or as 'a condition terms on a pathological basis, in order to marked by platyspondylia, aplasia of the avoid the confusion due to the use ofterms posterior arch, and separation of the pars with different meanings, to standardise interarticularis'. Thus the simplest and most usage among clinicians, radiologists and common meaning, 'separation of the pars pathologists, and to facilitate literature interarticularis', is not given by either of these searches. two authoritative dictionaries. Methods-Within the Committee of The idea of standardising nomenclature in Pathology ofthe European League against this field arose in 1967, at the VIth European Rheumatism, a study group was set up to Congress of Rheumatology in Lisbon.4 It was analyse the medical literature and taken up again by the Committee on Pathology common practice concerning the nomen- of the European League against Rheumatism clature of rheumatic spinal diseases. The (EULAR): a subgroup was appointed to define group tried to amalgamate the main concepts, list synonyms, and recommend trends in the field, to reconcile etymology, preferred terms. After agreement was reached historical background, morphology, and on a number of items pertaining to the normal common practice. anatomy of the spine,5 a list of terms Results-The group warns against use of concerning pathological changes and diseases the terms 'acquired hyperostosis syn- is now proposed.
    [Show full text]
  • Preoperative Retrolisthesis As a Risk Factor of Postdecompression Lumbar Disc Herniation
    CLINICAL ARTICLE J Neurosurg Spine 24:592–601, 2016 Preoperative retrolisthesis as a risk factor of postdecompression lumbar disc herniation Shota Takenaka, MD, Kosuke Tateishi, MD, PhD, Noboru Hosono, MD, PhD, Yoshihiro Mukai, MD, PhD, and Takeshi Fuji, MD, PhD Orthopaedic Surgery, Japan Community Healthcare Organization Osaka Hospital, Osaka, Japan OBJECT In this study, the authors aimed to identify specific risk factors for postdecompression lumbar disc herniation (PDLDH) in patients who have not undergone discectomy and/or fusion. METHODs Between 2007 and 2012, 493 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis underwent bilateral partial laminectomy without discectomy and/or fusion in a single hospital. Eighteen patients (herniation group [H group]: 15 men, 3 women; mean age 65.1 years) developed acute sciatica as a result of PDLDH within 2 years after surgery. Ninety patients who did not develop postoperative acute sciatica were selected as a control group (C group: 75 men, 15 women; mean age 65.4 years). Patients in the C group were age and sex matched with those in the H group. The patients in the groups were also matched for decompression level, number of decompression levels, and surgery date. The radiographic variables measured included percentage of slippage, intervertebral angle, range of motion, lumbar lordosis, disc height, facet angle, extent of facet removal, facet degeneration, disc degeneration, and vertebral endplate degeneration. The threshold for PDLDH risk factors was evaluated using a continuous numerical variable and receiver operating charac- teristic curve analysis. The area under the curve was used to determine the diagnostic performance, and values greater than 0.75 were considered to represent good performance.
    [Show full text]
  • Correction of Sagittal Balance with Resection of Kissing Spines
    Open Access Case Report DOI: 10.7759/cureus.16874 Correction of Sagittal Balance With Resection of Kissing Spines Eris Spirollari 1 , Eric Feldstein 1 , Christina Ng 1 , Sima Vazquez 1 , Merritt D. Kinon 1 , Chirag Gandhi 1 , Rachana Tyagi 1 1. Neurosurgery, Westchester Medical Center, Valhalla, USA Corresponding author: Rachana Tyagi, [email protected] Abstract Kissing spines syndrome, also known as Baastrup’s disease, is a common yet underdiagnosed disorder involving close approximation of adjacent spinous processes. These painful pseudoarticulations may be secondary to the compensatory mechanisms that result from sagittal imbalance. Conventional operative correction of sagittal balance includes a wide range of procedures from facetectomies to vertebral column resection. Resection of kissing spines for the operative management of sagittal imbalance is a treatment modality not extensively discussed in the literature but may offer improved patient outcomes with shorter operative times, lower risk, and reduced length of stay. A 67-year old male with a history of degenerative disk disease and scoliosis presented with neurogenic claudication and severe back pain that worsened with walking and improved with sitting. X-ray imaging of the lumbar spine revealed straightening of the normal lumbar lordotic curvature with mild rotoscoliosis. There was also evidence of retrolisthesis of L2 on L3 that worsened with flexion. The patient had Baastrup’s disease at the L3-4 and L4, 5 levels that contributed to his reduced range of motion on extension imaging. Operative treatments including long-segment fusion with interbody cages to correct sagittal balance were considered with a discussion of possible debilitating and high-risk post-surgical outcomes.
    [Show full text]
  • Spondylolisthesis.Pdf
    Y Diagnosis and Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis | NASS Clinical Guidelines 1 G Evidence-Based Clinical Guidelines for Multidisciplinary ETHODOLO Spine Care M NE I DEL I U /G ON Diagnosis and Treatment of I NTRODUCT Degenerative Lumbar I Spondylolisthesis 2nd Edition NASS Evidence-Based Clinical Guidelines Committee Paul Matz, MD R.J. Meagher, MD Tim Lamer, MD William Tontz Jr, MD Committee Co-Chair Diagnosis/Imaging Medical/Interventional Surgical Treatment and and Surgical Treatment Section Chair Section Chair Value Section Chair Section Chair Thiru M. Annaswamy, MD John E. Easa, MD Terrence D. Julien, MD Jonathan N. Sembrano, MD R. Carter Cassidy, MD Dennis E. Enix, DC, MBA Matthew B. Maserati, MD Alan T. Villavicencio, MD Charles H. Cho, MD, MBA Bryan A. Gunnoe, MD Robert C. Nucci, MD Jens-Peter Witt, MD Paul Dougherty, DC Jack Jallo, MD, PhD, FACS John E. O’Toole, MD, MS North American Spine Society Clinical Guidelines for Multidisciplinary Spine Care Diagnosis and Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Copyright © 2014 North American Spine Society 7075 Veterans Boulevard Burr Ridge, IL 60527 USA 630.230.3600 www.spine.org ISBNThis clinical 1-929988-36-2 guideline should not be construed as including all proper methods of care or excluding or other acceptable methods of care reason- ably directed to obtaining the same results. The ultimate judgment regarding any specific procedure or treatment is to be made by the physi- cian and patient in light of all circumstances presented by the patient and the needs and resources particular to the locality or institution. I NTRODUCT 2 Diagnosis and Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis | NASS Clinical Guidelines Financial Statement This clinical guideline was developed and funded in its entirety by the North American Spine Society (NASS).
    [Show full text]