Center for Spine Surgery and Research, Lillebaelt Hospital, Middelfart, Denmark.
Institute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2023 Sep 6;105(17):1309-1317. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.22.00941. Epub 2023 Jun 22.
In Scandinavia, spinal fusion is frequently performed without instrumentation, as use of instrumentation in the elderly can be complicated by poor bone quality and the risk of screw pull-out. However, uninstrumented fusion carries the risk of nonunion. We performed a randomized controlled trial in an attempt to determine if use of instrumentation leads to better outcomes and fusion rates when spinal fusion is performed for degenerative spondylolisthesis in the elderly.
This was a randomized, single-center, open-label trial of patients with symptomatic single-level degenerative spondylolisthesis who were assigned 1:1 to decompression and fusion with or without instrumentation after at least 12 weeks of nonoperative treatment had failed. The primary outcome was the change in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and secondary outcomes included fusion rates within 1 year, reoperation rates within 2 years, and changes in the EuroQol-5 Dimension-3 Level (EQ-5D) score.
Fifty-four subjects were randomized to each of the 2 groups, which had similar preoperative demographic and surgical characteristics. We found similar improvements in the ODI (p = 0.791), back pain, leg pain, and quality of life between groups at 1 and 2 years of follow-up. Solid fusion on computed tomography (CT) scans was noted in 94% of the patients in the instrumented group and 31% in the uninstrumented group (p < 0.001). One patient (2%) in the instrumented group and 7 (13%) in the uninstrumented group (p = 0.031) had a reoperation within 2 years after the index surgery.
We found no difference in patient-reported outcomes when we compared instrumented with uninstrumented fusion in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis. The uninstrumented group had a significantly higher rate of nonunion and reoperations at 2 years.
Therapeutic Level I . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
在斯堪的纳维亚,脊柱融合术常不使用器械进行,因为在老年人中使用器械可能会因骨质量差和螺钉拔出风险而变得复杂。然而,未使用器械的融合会增加不愈合的风险。我们进行了一项随机对照试验,试图确定在老年退行性腰椎滑脱症患者进行脊柱融合术时,使用器械是否会带来更好的结果和融合率。
这是一项针对有症状的单节段退行性腰椎滑脱症患者的随机、单中心、开放性试验,这些患者在经过至少 12 周的非手术治疗后失败,随机分为减压融合组和减压融合加器械固定组,两组比例为 1:1。主要结局是 Oswestry 功能障碍指数(ODI)的变化,次要结局包括 1 年内的融合率、2 年内的再次手术率以及 EuroQol-5 维度-3 水平(EQ-5D)评分的变化。
54 名患者随机分为两组,两组的术前人口统计学和手术特征相似。我们发现两组在 1 年和 2 年的随访中,ODI(p = 0.791)、腰背疼痛、腿部疼痛和生活质量均有类似的改善。在 CT 扫描上,器械组 94%的患者融合牢固,而未使用器械组仅 31%(p < 0.001)。器械组有 1 名患者(2%)和未使用器械组有 7 名患者(13%)(p = 0.031)在索引手术后 2 年内再次手术。
我们发现,在退行性腰椎滑脱症患者中,与未使用器械的融合相比,使用器械与未使用器械的融合在患者报告的结果方面没有差异。未使用器械组在 2 年内的不愈合和再次手术率明显更高。
治疗性 1 级。详见《作者说明》以获取完整的证据水平描述。