Lumbar Spinal Rahisynthesis with Plif: a Retrospective Study of 58 Patients Demonstrating Imaging and Clinical Outcomes with One Year Follow-up.

Konstantinos Zygogiannis, Ioannis Chatzikomninos, Savvas Moschos, Ioannis Palavos, G C Thivaios, Anastasios Kalampokis
{"title":"Lumbar Spinal Rahisynthesis with Plif: a Retrospective Study of 58 Patients Demonstrating Imaging and Clinical Outcomes with One Year Follow-up.","authors":"Konstantinos Zygogiannis, Ioannis Chatzikomninos, Savvas Moschos, Ioannis Palavos, G C Thivaios, Anastasios Kalampokis","doi":"10.26574/maedica.2024.19.3.502","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background/objectives: </strong>Nowadays, posterior lumbar cages remain a popular choice among the available options for interbody fusion even when compared with anterior approaches. As the posterior lumbar anatomy permits a relatively easy exposure to the spinal anatomy of interest, expandable cages prove to be a reliable tool for 360-degree fusion. Our study aspires to investigate the postoperative effects of Flarehawk 9 after open posterior lumbar fixation.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed 58 patients (36 males and 22 females) with a mean age of 59.8 years (age range of 33 to 79 years) who underwent open posterior lumbar fixation and decompression using Flarehawk 9 as an interbody cage between September 2021 and February 2023, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. Patients fit for surgery and with adequate surgical indications suffered from spinal canal stenosis, failed back surgery syndrome, or in need of revision surgery, recurrent disc herniation, spondylolisthesis with mechanical back pain and adjacent segment disease.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Based on the Odeswery index, most of the patients who underwent posterior fixation presented a significant clinical improvement postoperatively. The rate of bony fusion can be affected by the number of fused levels and whether the patient underwent revision surgery. Our study suggested that the number of lordosis that the patients gained on average is 2±0.4 degrees.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The posterior lumbar approach is the golden standard of degenerative spinal surgery even compared to modern anterior approaches. Interbody cages can offer an improvement in fusion rate, lordosis and disc height. Large follow-ups are mandatory for the evaluation of each type of cage.</p>","PeriodicalId":74094,"journal":{"name":"Maedica","volume":"19 3","pages":"502-510"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11565143/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Maedica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26574/maedica.2024.19.3.502","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/objectives: Nowadays, posterior lumbar cages remain a popular choice among the available options for interbody fusion even when compared with anterior approaches. As the posterior lumbar anatomy permits a relatively easy exposure to the spinal anatomy of interest, expandable cages prove to be a reliable tool for 360-degree fusion. Our study aspires to investigate the postoperative effects of Flarehawk 9 after open posterior lumbar fixation.

Materials and methods: We retrospectively analyzed 58 patients (36 males and 22 females) with a mean age of 59.8 years (age range of 33 to 79 years) who underwent open posterior lumbar fixation and decompression using Flarehawk 9 as an interbody cage between September 2021 and February 2023, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. Patients fit for surgery and with adequate surgical indications suffered from spinal canal stenosis, failed back surgery syndrome, or in need of revision surgery, recurrent disc herniation, spondylolisthesis with mechanical back pain and adjacent segment disease.

Results: Based on the Odeswery index, most of the patients who underwent posterior fixation presented a significant clinical improvement postoperatively. The rate of bony fusion can be affected by the number of fused levels and whether the patient underwent revision surgery. Our study suggested that the number of lordosis that the patients gained on average is 2±0.4 degrees.

Conclusions: The posterior lumbar approach is the golden standard of degenerative spinal surgery even compared to modern anterior approaches. Interbody cages can offer an improvement in fusion rate, lordosis and disc height. Large follow-ups are mandatory for the evaluation of each type of cage.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用 Plif 的腰椎雷希合成术:一项对 58 例患者进行的回顾性研究,显示了一年随访的成像和临床效果。
背景/目的:如今,即使与前路方法相比,后路腰椎椎体间融合器仍是椎体间融合术的首选。由于腰椎后路的解剖结构允许相对容易地接触到相关的脊柱解剖结构,可扩张的椎体间融合器被证明是 360 度融合的可靠工具。我们的研究旨在探讨 Flarehawk 9 在开放式腰椎后路固定术后的效果:我们回顾性分析了 2021 年 9 月至 2023 年 2 月期间使用 Flarehawk 9 作为椎间笼接受开放式腰椎后路固定和减压术的 58 名患者(36 名男性和 22 名女性),他们的平均年龄为 59.8 岁(年龄范围在 33 岁至 79 岁之间),随访时间至少为 12 个月。适合手术且有充分手术指征的患者患有椎管狭窄、腰部手术失败综合征或需要翻修手术、复发性椎间盘突出症、伴有机械性腰痛的脊柱滑脱症和邻近节段疾病:根据奥德斯韦尔指数,大多数接受后路固定术的患者术后临床症状明显改善。骨性融合率会受到融合水平数和患者是否接受翻修手术的影响。我们的研究表明,患者平均获得的前凸度为 2±0.4 度:结论:即使与现代的前路相比,腰椎后路也是退行性脊柱手术的黄金标准。椎间融合器可以改善融合率、前凸和椎间盘高度。对每种椎体间架的评估都需要大量的随访。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Laryngopharyngeal Reflux: Effect of Antireflux PPI Therapy on Nasal Congestion and Olfaction. Lumbar Spinal Rahisynthesis with Plif: a Retrospective Study of 58 Patients Demonstrating Imaging and Clinical Outcomes with One Year Follow-up. Mixed Germ Cell Tumor (GCT) of Ovary with Atypical Presentation. Natural Compounds and Cancer: Current Evidences. NF-kB p65 and NF-kB p50 of the Rel Family. A Comparison between Irritable Bowel Syndrome and Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1