• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• 제46권4호
• /
• pp.292-299
• /
• 2009

Objective : Clinical and radiological results of posterior dynamic stabilization using interspinous U (ISU, $Coflex^{TM}$, Paradigm Spine $Inc.^{(R)}$, NY, USA) were analyzed in comparison with posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Methods : A retrospective study was conducted for a consecutive series of 61 patients with degenerative LSS between May 2003 and December 2005. We included only the patients completed minimum 24 months follow up evaluation. Among them, 30 patients were treated with implantation of ISU after decompressive laminectomy (Group ISU) and 31 patients were treated with wide decompressive laminectomy and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF; Group PLIF). We evaluated visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for clinical outcomes (VAS, ODI), disc height ratio disc height (DH), disc height/vertebral body length ${\times}100$), static vertebral slip (VS) and depth of maximal radiolucent gap between ISU and spinous process) in preoperative, immediate postoperative and last follow up. Results : The mean age of group ISU ($66.2{\pm}6.7$ years) was 6.2 years older than the mean age of group PLIF ($60.4{\pm}8.1$ years; p=0.003). In both groups, clinical measures improved significantly than preoperative values (p<0.001). Operation time and blood loss was significantly shorter and lower in group ISU than group PLIF (p<0.001). In group ISU, the DH increased transiently in immediate postoperative period ($15.7{\pm}4.5%{\rightarrow}18.6{\pm}5.9%$), however decreased significantly in last follow up ($13.8{\pm}6.6%$, p=0.027). Vertebral slip (VS) of spondylolisthesis in group ISU increased during postoperative follow-up ($2.3{\pm}3.3{\rightarrow}8.7{\pm}6.2$, p=0.040). Meanwhile, the postoperatively improved DH and VS was maintained in group PLIF in last follow up. Conclusion : According to our result, implantation of ISU after decompressive laminectomy in degenerative LSS is less invasive and provides similar clinical outcome in comparison with the instrumented fusion. However, the device has only transient effect on the postoperative restoration of disc height and reduction of slip in spondylolisthesis. Therefore, in the biomechanical standpoint, it is hard to expect that use of Interspinous U in decompressive laminectomy for degenerative LSS had long term beneficial effect.

• 대한의용생체공학회:의공학회지
• /
• 제36권6호
• /
• pp.276-282
• /
• 2015

Recently, during the multi-level fusion with pedicle screws, interspinous spacer are sometimes substituted for the most superior level of the fusion in an attempt to reduce the number of fusion level and likelihood of degeneration process at the adjacent level. In this study, a finite element (FE) study was performed to assess biomechanical efficacies of the interspinous spacer combined with posterior lumbar fusion with a previously-validated 3-dimensional FE model of the intact lumbar spine (L1-S1). The post-operative models were made by modifying the intact model to simulate the implantation of interspinous spacer and pedicle screws at the L3-4 and L4-5. Four different configurations of the post-op model were considered: (1) a normal spinal model; (2) Type 1, one-level fusion using posterior pedicle screws at the L4-5; (3) Type 2, two-level (L3-5) fusion; (4) Type 3, Type 1 plus Coflex$^{TM}$ at the L3-4. hybrid protocol (intact: 10 Nm) with a compressive follower load of 400N were used to flex, extend, axially rotate and laterally bend the FE model. As compared to the intact model, Type 2 showed the greatest increase in Range of motion (ROM) at the adjacent level (L2-3), followed Type 3, and Type 1 depending on the loading type. At L3-4, ROM of Type 2 was reduced by 34~56% regardless of loading mode, as compared to decrease of 55% in Type 3 only in extension. In case of normal bone strength model (Type 3_Normal), PVMS at the process and the pedicle remained less than 20% of their yield strengths regardless of loading, except in extension (about 35%). However, for the osteoporotic model (Type 3_Osteoporotic), it reached up to 56% in extension indicating increased susceptibility to fracture. This study suggested that substitution of the superior level fusion with the interspinous spacer in multi-level fusion may be able to offer similar biomechanical outcome and stability while reducing likelihood of adjacent level degeneration.