Priyesh Dhoke, Ben Goss, Satyen Mehta, Sanela Stanojevic, Richard Williams
{"title":"在重组BMP的时代,额外的前路稳定是否会增加后外侧融合的价值?","authors":"Priyesh Dhoke, Ben Goss, Satyen Mehta, Sanela Stanojevic, Richard Williams","doi":"10.1055/s-0032-1328139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\n Study design: Retrospective cohort study. Clinical question or objective: Is there a benefit to additional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) if a solid posterolateral (PL) fusion can be achieved with routine bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) use in low-grade spondylolisthesis? Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients who had undergone surgery for grade I or II lumbar spondylolisthesis stratified into two groups. Group 1 had 46 patients who underwent TLIF along with PL instrumented fusion. Group 2 had 40 patients who underwent PL instrumented fusion alone. In both groups, adequate posterior decompression with pedicle screw instrumentation was performed and rhBMP-7 was used. All patients were evaluated clinically using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and by independent radiological examination at 3 and 12 months. Results: At a minimum follow-up of 12 months, there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of fusion. In addition, there were no differences in the proportion of patients who had a minimal clinically significant difference in their ODI. There was a similar rate of complications between each cohort. Conclusions: The use of BMP was associated with a high rate of PL lumbar fusion. In the presence of a PL fusion, there appears to be little clinical benefit to additional anterior TLIF in degenerative spondylolisthesis. Final class of evidence-treatment Study design RCT Cohort • Case control Case series Methods Concealed allocation (RCT) Intention to treat (RCT) Blinded/independent evaluation of primary outcome F/U ≥ 85% • Adequate sample size • Control for confounding Overall class of evidence III The definiton of the different classes of evidence is available here.","PeriodicalId":89675,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based spine-care journal","volume":" ","pages":"21-5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1055/s-0032-1328139","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In the era of recombinant BMP, does additional anterior stabilization add value to a posterolateral fusion?\",\"authors\":\"Priyesh Dhoke, Ben Goss, Satyen Mehta, Sanela Stanojevic, Richard Williams\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0032-1328139\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT\\n Study design: Retrospective cohort study. Clinical question or objective: Is there a benefit to additional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) if a solid posterolateral (PL) fusion can be achieved with routine bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) use in low-grade spondylolisthesis? Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients who had undergone surgery for grade I or II lumbar spondylolisthesis stratified into two groups. Group 1 had 46 patients who underwent TLIF along with PL instrumented fusion. Group 2 had 40 patients who underwent PL instrumented fusion alone. In both groups, adequate posterior decompression with pedicle screw instrumentation was performed and rhBMP-7 was used. All patients were evaluated clinically using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and by independent radiological examination at 3 and 12 months. Results: At a minimum follow-up of 12 months, there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of fusion. In addition, there were no differences in the proportion of patients who had a minimal clinically significant difference in their ODI. There was a similar rate of complications between each cohort. Conclusions: The use of BMP was associated with a high rate of PL lumbar fusion. In the presence of a PL fusion, there appears to be little clinical benefit to additional anterior TLIF in degenerative spondylolisthesis. Final class of evidence-treatment Study design RCT Cohort • Case control Case series Methods Concealed allocation (RCT) Intention to treat (RCT) Blinded/independent evaluation of primary outcome F/U ≥ 85% • Adequate sample size • Control for confounding Overall class of evidence III The definiton of the different classes of evidence is available here.\",\"PeriodicalId\":89675,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence-based spine-care journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"21-5\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1055/s-0032-1328139\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence-based spine-care journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1328139\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-based spine-care journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1328139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
In the era of recombinant BMP, does additional anterior stabilization add value to a posterolateral fusion?
ABSTRACT
Study design: Retrospective cohort study. Clinical question or objective: Is there a benefit to additional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) if a solid posterolateral (PL) fusion can be achieved with routine bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) use in low-grade spondylolisthesis? Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients who had undergone surgery for grade I or II lumbar spondylolisthesis stratified into two groups. Group 1 had 46 patients who underwent TLIF along with PL instrumented fusion. Group 2 had 40 patients who underwent PL instrumented fusion alone. In both groups, adequate posterior decompression with pedicle screw instrumentation was performed and rhBMP-7 was used. All patients were evaluated clinically using the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and by independent radiological examination at 3 and 12 months. Results: At a minimum follow-up of 12 months, there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of fusion. In addition, there were no differences in the proportion of patients who had a minimal clinically significant difference in their ODI. There was a similar rate of complications between each cohort. Conclusions: The use of BMP was associated with a high rate of PL lumbar fusion. In the presence of a PL fusion, there appears to be little clinical benefit to additional anterior TLIF in degenerative spondylolisthesis. Final class of evidence-treatment Study design RCT Cohort • Case control Case series Methods Concealed allocation (RCT) Intention to treat (RCT) Blinded/independent evaluation of primary outcome F/U ≥ 85% • Adequate sample size • Control for confounding Overall class of evidence III The definiton of the different classes of evidence is available here.