de la Torre GDM, Pérez MA

Language: Spanish
References: 15
Page: 68-71
PDF size: 76.51 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective. The objective of this study is to value the result in treatment of the spondylolisthesis vertebral lumbar variety degenerative of a single level L4-L5 or L5-S1 with reduction of the luxation vertebral interbody, liberation of the channel raquial for via later, and instrumentation rigid transpedicular Setting. This study was carry out in the “Hospital Juárez de México”, in 10 patients of January to December of 1999. Material and methods. All patients were practiced radiological study of the column lumbosacrum in position front and lateral, oblique and dynamic x-rays flexo-extension in lateral position and image of magnetic resonance. Results. The lumbar pain and neurologic compromise, to carry out posterior liberation of spinal column, disappear immediately and stay asymptomatic due metallic stabilization. They deambulate at 48 hours. The spondylolisthesis reduction was obtain in 80 to 90% in accordance with Taillard measure, and implant integration achieve in average of 3 to 5 months. One case present slackening of implant and pseudoarthrosis. Discussion. The treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis grade I-II of L4-L5 or L5-S1 level with laminectomy, foraminectomy and discectomy provoke most vertebral instability. With the utilization of transpedicular fixation, listhesis reduction, more rapid bone graft integration, vertebral stability as soon as relief of clinical symptoms are achieved.

REFERENCES

1. Rotman S. Espondilolisis y espondilolistesis en el niño. La columna vertebral. 2a. Ed. 1985. p. 290-311.

2. Sánchez-García J. El equilibrio del raquis en el plano sagital. Rev Mex Ortop Traum 1998; 12(6): 540-8.

3. Wiltse LL. Spondylolisthesis: Classification and etiology. Symposium on the Spine. American Academy of Orthopaedics Surgeon. St. Louis, C.U. Mosby Co; 1969. p. 143-68.

4. Osterman K. Schlenz D, Poussa M. Istmic spondylolisthesis in symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects epidemiology and natural history with special reference to disk abnormality mode of treatment. Clin Orthop 1993; 297: 65-70.

5. Wiltse L, Winter R. Terminology and measurement of spondylolisthesis. J Bone Joint Surg 1983; 65: 768-71.

6. Hanley EN, Mattari E, Frymoyer JW. Accurate roentgenographic determination of lumbar flexion-extension. Clin Orthop 1976; 115:145-8.

7. Putto, Tallroth K. Extension-flexion radiograph for motion studies of the lumbar spine. A comparison of two methods. Spine 1940; 15: 107-10.

8. Reyes-Sánchez A. Medición radiológica de los rangos de movilidad translacional y angulatoria en sujetos sanos de nuestro medio. Rev Mex Ortop Traum 1998; 12(6): 526-39.

9. Boden SD, Wiesel SW. Lumbosacral segmental motion in normal individuals, have been measuring instability properly. Spine 1990; 15: 571-6.

10. Mochida J, Suzuki K. How to stabilize a single level lesion of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Clin Orthop Rel Res 1999; 368: 126-34.

11. Harrington PR. Reduction of several spondylolisthesis in children. South Med 1963; 62: 1-2.

12. Bradford DS. Treatment of severe spondylolisthesis. A cambried approach of reduction and stabilization. Spine 1979; 4: 423-9.

13. Scaglietti O, Frontino G, Bartolozzi P. Technique of anatomical reduction of lumbar spondylolisthesis and surgical stabilization. Clin Orthop 1976; 117: 164-71.

14. De la Torre GD, Lima F, Camacho JJ. Sistema de instrumentación transpedicular modificado para el tratamiento de la inestabilidad vertebral toracolumbar. Cir Ciruj 1999; 67: 102-7.

15. Satoni K, Hirobayoshi K. A clinical study of degenerative spondylolisthesis. Spine 1992; 17 (11): 1329-35.