Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society

  • 제46권1호
  • /
  • Pages.5-10
  • /
  • 2009
  • /
  • 2005-3711(pISSN)
  • /
  • 1598-7876(eISSN)
대한신경외과학회 (The Korean Neurosurgical Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Unilateral Augmented Pedicle Screw Fixation for Foraminal Stenosis

  • Kim, Jeong-Gyun (Department of Neurosurgery, Seoul National University Hospital) ;
  • Jin, Yong-Jun (Department of Neurosurgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Chung, Sang-Ki (Department of Neurosurgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Ki-Jeong (Department of Neurosurgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Hyun-Jib (Department of Neurosurgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital)
  • 발행 : 2009.07.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of unilateral decompression and pedicle screw fixation for the unilateral symptomatic foraminal stenosis. Methods: The study group comprises consecutive 16 patients who underwent unilateral decompression and bone cement augmented pedicle screw fixation from May 2003 to January 2006. The patients were evaluated by visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and the scoring system of the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) for low back pain. The result of surgery was also evaluated with McNab's classification. Excellent or good outcome was considered as successful. The patients were followed at postoperative 1 month, 3 month, 6 month, and 1 year with standing AP and lateral films. Results: The average VAS and JOA score of the 16 patients were 7.8(range, 6-9) and 5.8(range, 3 - 10) before surgery and 2.2(range, 0 - 5)and 12.3(range, 9 - 15) at the time of last follow up. Both VAS and JOA score improved significantly after the surgery (p<0.05, t-test). All patients improved after the operation and no revision surgery was required. No metal failure or pseudoarthrosis was observed during the follow-up. The success rate was 87.5%. Conclusion: Our data suggest that unilateral decompression and pedicle screw fixation for the unilateral symptomatic foraminal stenosis is an effect method for obtaining satisfactory clinical outcome. Its possible advantage is shorter operation time and reduced surgical extent. We believe that the reduced stiffness of unilateral fixation was compensated by pedicle screw augmentation and interbody fusion.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Attias N, Hayman A, Hipp JA Noble P, Esses SI : Assessment of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of lumbar spine foraminal stenosis- a surgeon's perspective. J Spinal Disord Tech 19 : 249-256, 2006 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.bsd.0000203942.81050.c8
  2. Burton CV, Kirkaldy-Willis WH, Young-Hing K, Heithoff KB : Causes of failure of surgery on the lumbar spine. Clin Orthop Relat Res 157 : 191-199, 1981
  3. Cheng L, Nie L, Zhang L : Posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion in spondylolisthesis : a prospective controlled study in the Han nationality. Int Orthop 2008 (Epub ahead of print)
  4. Cho DY, Lee WY, Sheu PC : Treatment of thoracolumbar burst fractures with polymethyl methacrylate vertebroplasty and shortsegment pedicle screw fixation. Neurosurgery 53 : 1354-1360; discussion 1360-1361, 2003
  5. Cinotti G, De Santis P, Nofroni I, Postacchini F : Stenosis of lumbar intervertebral foramen : anatomic study on predisposing factors. Spine 27 : 223-229, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200202010-00002
  6. Cook SD, Salkeld SL, Stanley T, Faciane A, Miller SD : Biomechanical study of pedicle screw fixation in severely osteoporotic bone. Spine J 4 : 402-408, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2003.11.010
  7. Dehoux E, Fourati E, Madi K, Reddy B, Segal P : Posterolateral versus interbody fusion in isthmic spondylolisthesis : functional results in 52 cases with a minimum follow-up of 6 years. Acta Orthop Belg 70 : 578-582, 2004
  8. Fern$\acute{a}$ndez-Fairen M, Sala P, Ramirez H, Gil J : A prospective randomized study of unilateral versus bilateral instrumented posterolateral lumbar fusion in degenerative spondylolisthesis. Spine 32 : 395-401, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000255023.56466.44
  9. Goel VK, Lim TH, Gwon J, Chen JY, Winterbottom, Park JB, et al. : Effects of rigidity of an internal fixation device : A comprehensive biomechanical investigation. Spine 16 : S155-S161, 1991 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199103001-00023
  10. Jenis LG, An HS : Spine update : lumbar foraminal stenosis. Spine 25 : 389-394, 2000 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200002010-00022
  11. Kabins MB, Weinstein JN, Spratt KF, Found EM, Goel VK, Woody J, et al. : Isolated L4-L5 fusions using the variable screw placement system: Unilateral versus bilateral. J Spinal Disord 5 : 39-49, 1992 https://doi.org/10.1097/00002517-199203000-00006
  12. Kunogi J, Hasue M : Diagnosis and operative treatment of intraforaminal and extraforaminal nerve root compression. Spine 16 : 1312-1320, 1991 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199111000-00012
  13. Macnab I : Negative disc exploration. An analysis of the causes of nerve root involvement in sixty-eight patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 53 : 891-903, 1971
  14. Madan S, Boeree NR : Outcome of posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion for spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. Spine 27 : 1536-1542, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200207150-00011
  15. Maher CO, Henderson FC : Lateral exit-zone stenosis and lumbar radiculopathy. J Neurosurg 90 : 52-58, 1999
  16. Oner FC, Verlaan JJ, Verbout AJ, Dhert WJ : Cement augmentation techniques in traumatic thoracolumbar spine fractures. Spine 31 : S89-S95; discussion S104, 2006 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000217950.60516.e6
  17. Ozeki N, Aota Y, Uesugi M, Kaneko K, Mihara H, Niimura T, et al. : Clinical results of intrapedicular partial pediculectomy for lumbar foraminal stenosis : J Spinal Disord Tech 21 : 324-327, 2008 https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0b013e318149e681
  18. Schofferman J, Reynolds J, Herzog R, Covington E, Dreyfuss P, O'Neill C : Failed back surgery : etiology and diagnostic evaluation. Spine J 3 : 400-403, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1529-9430(03)00122-0
  19. Suk KS, Lee HM, Kim NH, Ha JW : Unilateral versus bilateral pedicle screw fixation in lumbar spinal fusion. Spine 25 : 1843-1847, 2000 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200007150-00017
  20. Wittenberg RH, Lee KS, Shea M, White AA 3rd, Hayes WC : Effect of screw diameter, insertion technique, and bone cement augmentation of pedicular screw fixation strength. Clin Orthop Relat Res 296 : 278-287, 1993
  21. Y$\ddot{u}$cesoy K, Y$\ddot{u}$ksel KZ, Baek S, Sonntag VK, Crawford NR : Biomechanics of unilateral compared with bilateral lumbar pedicle screw fixation for stabilization of unilateral vertebral disease. J Neurosurg Spine 8 : 44-51, 2008 https://doi.org/10.3171/SPI-08/01/044
  22. Zindrick MR, Wiltse LL, Wedell EH, Thomas JC, Holland WR, Field BT, et al. : A biomechanical study of intrapeduncular screw fixation in the lumbosacral spine. Clin Orthop Relat Res 203 : 99-112, 1986

피인용 문헌

  1. Short-Term Effect of Unilateral Pedicle Screw Fixed Intervertebral Fusion in Treatment of Degenerative Disc Disease Via MAST QUADRANT Minimally Invasive System vol.70, pp.1, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12013-014-9881-z
  2. Radiographic Analysis of One-level Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MI-TLIF) With Unilateral Pedicle Screw Fixation for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases vol.29, pp.1, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1097/bsd.0000000000000042
  3. Operative Treatment of Lumbar Foraminal and Extraforaminal Lesions : -Special Focus on the Surgical Outcome in Patients with and without Degenerative Scoliosis and Fixation- vol.30, pp.2, 2009, https://doi.org/10.2531/spinalsurg.30.185