medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8036 (Electronic)
ISSN 2306-4102 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Colegio Mexicano de Ortopedia y Traumatología

2019, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Acta Ortop Mex 2019; 33 (1)

Dynamic transpedicular instrumentation with S14 system (B-FUS) in lumbar spine. Experience in 32 cases

Magdaleno-Estrella E, Granados-Agonizante I, Godínez-García A, Dimas-Uribe YN

Language: Spanish
References: 33
Page: 13-17
PDF size: 180.57 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To evaluate functional and radiographic results in patients with diagnosis of degenerative disease of the lumbar column subject to treatment with transpedicular fixing plus the application of system S14 (B-FUS), and to evaluate the disease development of adjacent disk associated with the method of selected treatment. Material and methods: A transversal descriptive retrospective study in which a total of 32 patients with diagnosis of the degenerative pathology of the column lumbar was included, including 12 patients with lumbar degenerative discopathy (37.50%), 11 patients intervertebral lumbar instability (34.38%), seven with narrow lumbar channel (21.88%) and two patients with adjacent discreet disorder disease (6.25%). Of the sample of 32 patients, 17 belong to the male gender and 15 to the female gender; the middle age of the group was 52 years old with a range of age (26-80 years). Patients operated in the period of January 2015 to December 2016 were included. The procedures were assigned and carry out randomly by two specialist surgeons in column with standardization of surgical technique. clinical and radiographic monitoring was performed by the external consultation of column surgery in the two weeks and after a monthly period during a period of at least nine months, presenting a monitoring range between nine and 33 months, with clinical and radiographic valuation. Results: 17 belonged to male gender and 15 to female gender; the average age was 52 years with a range of 26-80 years. To the 32 patients was performed an assessment of pain prior to surgery (eva) with an average of 7.6 Points and a post-surgical assessment of 1.2 Points on average, having a significant decrease, the qualitative radiographic evaluation by surgeons without development of adjacent disk disease in none of the cases even in those that were valued above 20 months after surgery. Complications: 1 rupture of transpedicular screw post-traumatic (3.1%), 1 Surgical reoperation by discopathy of l3-l4 (3.1%) and 3 cases of wound infection that remitted with antibiotic use (10%), the total complications corresponded to (15.6%) and none is associated with the disease of the adjacent disk. Conclusions: The s14 system (b-fus) in our series of cases as a treatment for degenerative lumbar spine disease has proven to be an effective therapeutic option by reducing the risk of disease development of the adjacent disk.


REFERENCES

  1. White AA 3rd, Padjabi MM. The basic kinematics of the human spine. a review of past and current knowledge. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1978; 3(1): 12-20.

  2. Lee CK. Accelerated degeneration of the segment adjacent to a lumbar fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1988; 13(3): 375-377.

  3. Kumar MN, Jacquot F, Hall H. Long-term follow-up of functional outcomes and radiographic changes at adjacent levels following lumbar spine fusion for degenerative disc disease. Eur Spine J. 2001; 10(4): 309-313.

  4. Gunzburg R, Szpalski M. The conservative surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly. Eur Spine J. 2003; 12(Suppl 2):S176-S180.

  5. Carreon LY, Puno RM, Dimar JR 2nd, Glassman SD, Johnson JR. Perioperative complications of posterior lumbar decompression and arthrodesis in older adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003; 85-A(11): 2089-2092.

  6. Kalanithi PS, Patil CG, Boakye M. National complication rates and disposition after posterior lumbar fusion for acquired spondylolisthesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009; 34(18): 1963-1969.

  7. 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(5): 444-500.

  8. Gillet P. The fate of the adjacent motion segments after lumbar fusion. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2003; 16(4): 338-345.

  9. Mimura M, Panjabi MM, Oxland TR, Crisco JJ, Yamamoto I, Vasavada A. Disc degeneration affects the multidirectional flexibility of the lumbar spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1994; 19(12): 1371-1380.

  10. Voor MJ, Mehta S, Wang M, Zhang YM, Mahan J, Johnson JR. Biomechanical evaluation of posterior and anterior lumbar interbody fusion techniques. J Spinal Disord. 1998; 11(4): 328-334.

  11. Modic MT, Ross JS. Lumbar degenerative disk disease. Radiology. 2007; 245(1): 43-61.

  12. Pfirrmann CWA, Metzdorf A, Zanetti M, Hodler J, Boos N. Magnetic resonance classification of lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001; 26(17): 1873-1878.

  13. Bordes-Monmeneu M, Bordes-Garcia V, Rodrigo-Baeza F, Saez D. System of dynamic neutralization in the lumbar spine: experience on 94 cases. Neurocirugia (Astur). 2005; 16(6): 499-506.

  14. Schnake KJ, Putzier M, Haas Np, Kandziora F. Mechanical concepts for disc regeneration. Eur Spine J. 2006; 15(3): S354-S360.

  15. Kroeber M, Unglaub F, Guehring T, Nerlich A, Hadi T, Lotz J, et al. Effects of controlled dynamic disc distraction on degenerated intervertebral discs: an in vivo study on the rabbit lumbar spine model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(2): 181-187.

  16. Nockels RP. Dynamic stabilization in the surgical management of painful lumbar spinal disorders. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(16 Suppl): S68-S72.

  17. Schnake KJ, Schaeren S, Jeanneret B. Dynamic stabilization in addition to decompression for lumbar stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006; 31(4): 442-449.

  18. Grob D, Benini A, Junge A, Mannion AF. Clinical experience with the Dynesys semirigid fixation system for the lumbar spine: surgical and patient-oriented outcome in 50 cases after an average of 2 years. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(3): 324-331.

  19. Turner JA, Ersek M, Herron L, Haselkorn J, Kent D, Ciol MA, et al. Patients outcomes after lumbar spinal fusions. JAMA. 1992; 268(7): 907-911.

  20. Putzier M, Schneider S, Funk JF, Tohtz SW, Perka C. The surgical treatment of the lumbar disc prolapse: nucleotomy with additional transpedicular dynamic stabilization versus nucleotomy alone. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(5): E109-E114.

  21. Mandigo CE, Sampath P, Kaiser MG. Posterior dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine: pedicle based stabilization with the AccuFlex rod system. Neurosurg Focus. 2007; 22(1): E9.

  22. Meyers K, Tauber M, Sudin Y, Fleischer S, Arnin U, Firardi F, et al. Use of instruments pedicle screws to evaluate load sharing in posterior dynamic stabilization systems. Spine J. 2008; 8(6): 926-932.

  23. 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(8): 1049-1056.

  24. Schulte TL, Hurschler C, Haversath M, Liljenqvist U, Bullman V, Filler TJ, et al. The effect of dynamic, semi-rigid implants on the range of motion of lumbar motion segments after decompression. Eur Spine J. 2008; 17(8): 1057-1065.

  25. Sengupta DK, Mullholland RC. Fulcrum assisted soft stabilization system: a new concept in the surgical treatment of degenerative low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(9): 1019-1029.

  26. Stoll TM, Dubois G, Schwarzenbach O. The dynamic neutralization system for the spine: a multi-center study of a novel non-fusion system. Eur Spine J. 2002; 11(Suppl 2): S170-S178.

  27. Welch WC, Cheng BC, Awad TE, Davis R, Maxwell JH, Delamarter R, et al. Clinical outcomes of the Dynesys dynamic neutralization system: 1-year preliminary results. Neurosurg Focus. 2007; 22: E8.

  28. Würgler-Hauri CC, Kalbarczyk A, Wiesli M, Landolt H, Fandino J. Dynamic neutralization of the lumbar spine after microsurgical decompression in acquired lumbar spinal stenosis and segmental instability. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008; 33(3): E66-E72.

  29. Reyes-Sánchez A, Zárate-Kalfópulos B, Ramírez-Mora I, Rosales-Olivarez LM, Alpizar-Aguirre A, Sánchez-Bringas G. Posterior dynamic stabilization of the lumbar spine with the Accuflex rod system as a stand-alone device: experience in 20 patients with 2-year follow-up. Eur Spine J. 2010; 19(12): 2164-2170.

  30. Guehring T, Omlor Gw, Lorenz H, Engelleiter K, Richter W, Carstens C, et al. Disc distraction shows evidence of regenerative potential in degenerated intervertebral discs as evaluated by protein expression, magnetic resonance imaging, and messenger ribonucleic acid expression analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006; 31(15): 1658-1665.

  31. Cho By, Murovic J, Park KW, Park J. Lumbar disc rehydration postimplantation of a posterior dynamic stabilization system. case report. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010; 13(5): 576-580.

  32. Schaeren S, Broger I, Jeanneret B. Minimum four-year follow-up of spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis treated with decompression and dynamic stabilization. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008; 33(18): E636-E642.

  33. Morishita Y, Ohta H, Naito M, Matsumoto Y, Huang G, Tatsumi M, et al. Kinematic evaluation of the adjacent segments after lumbar instrumented surgery: a comparison between rigid fusion and dynamic non-fusion stabilization. Euro Spine J. 2011; 20(9): 1480-1485.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com