Evaluation of Surgical Management of Spondylolithesis in Osteoporotic patients

Document Type : Original Article

Abstract

Background: Osteoporosis has become a major medical problem as the aged population of the world rapidly grows. Aim of the Work: We aimed to assess different methods of surgical treatment of Spondylolithesis in osteoprotic patients.
Patient and methods: This prospective study was conducted on 30 cases with spondylolithesis and osteoporosis at Al-Azhar university hospitals. All patients were operated upon by posterior approach with neural decompression and internal metallic fixation.
Results: The percentage of improvement (6.7%), fair (33.3%), good (46.7%), excellent (13.3%) of low back pain, also Fair (6.7%), good (33.3%),Excellent (60.0%) of Sciatica; good (50.0%), excellent (50.0%) of claudication; while Fair (25.0%), good (25.0%) and excellent (50.0%) of motor; Good (66.7%), excellent (33.3%) of Sensory; as well as Good (50.0%), excellent (50.0%) of sphincter.
Conclusion: In patients with osteoporosis, spine surgery presents a difficult challenge, and a multidisciplinary approach is encouraged for medical optimization and preparation of patients for whom surgery is indicated. Preoperative planning is imperative for the success of the procedure, and the treating surgeon must be aware of potential complications and pitfalls. Multiple techniques can be used to improve fixation and construct stability, and the literature continues to evolve as additional clinical evidence is reported. Despite the challenges inherent in this patient population, with appropriate patient selection and surgical techniques, spine surgery can provide pain relief, deformity correction, and improved function. The surgical interventions with proper instrumented techniques with no postponing until improvement BMD showed better outcome with post operative satisfying improvement.

Keywords


INTRODUCTION

Osteoporosis is a skeletal disorder characterized by compromised bone mass accompanied by micro architectural deterioration of bone tissue predisposing a person to an increased risk of fracture1

According to the World Health Organization, patients are considered osteoporotic when they have a bone mineral density (BMD) measurement that is 2.5 standard deviations below the typical bone mass of young healthy white woman2.

Osteoporosis has become one of the most prevalent public-health concerns and a major medical problem,as the age of patients needing spine surgery is increasing steadily as the average lifespan increases3.

Surgical treatment of osteoporosis is still not widely accepted by orthopedic surgeons. Patients with osteoporosis are difficult to treat surgically because of advanced age and associated risks of anesthesia, making them poor candidates for surgery 4.

However, spinal surgery in elderly patients with osteoporosis has been gaining support. Furthermore, the outcomes of surgical treatment are more favorable than conservative treatment, and patients who undergo spine surgery have a good outcome 5.

There are different types of spondylolithesis. Degenerative and isthmic types are the most common in old age especially

 

 

 

 

women, and most usually occurs at the L4-L5 level, it causes back pain and radiculopathy 6.

There is no universal agreement regarding the optimal surgical approach for the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis7.

This work aimed to assess different methods of surgical treatment of Spondylolithesis in osteoprotic patients.

 

PATIENT AND METHODS

Prospective and retrospective study on 30 cases with spondylolithesis and osteoporosisat Al-Azharuniversity hospitals.This study was started at May 2017 and continued for 2 years.The study included all cases of spondylolythesis with osteoprotic vertebrae with failed conservative treatement. While all cases of spondylolithesis with normal bone density or Osteopenia were excluded from the study.

There is a new study that describe a new detailed VAS, which can detect the difference between elderly and young patients with nonspecific low back pain, while the difference couldn´t be detected by the traditional VAS and ODI8.

Statistical analysis:

Recorded data were analyzed using the statistical package for social sciences, version 20.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois, USA). Quantitative data were expressed as mean± standard deviation (SD). Qualitative data were expressed as frequency and percentage.


 

 

 

 

Results

 

                                    The results of the present study are demonstrated in the following tables and figures

 

Personal history

No.

%

Sex

 

 

Female

26

86.7%

Male

4

13.3%

Age (years)

 

Range [Mean±SD]

50-a67 [57.60±4.85]

Occupation

 

 

Driver

2

6.7%

Housewife

24

80.0%

Worker

4

13.3%

Marital status

 

 

Married

30

100.0%

Special habits

 

 

Negative

28

93.3%

X-heavy smoker

2

6.7%

Comorbidities

 

 

None

10

33.3%

Complications

20

66.7%

DM

16

80.0%

HTN

10

50.0%

IHD

4

20.0%

 

Table 1: Distribution of cases patients according to their sex, age, occupation, marital status, special habits, comorbidities (n=30). This table shows that the most common are females (86.7%), occupation:housewife (80.0%), married(100.0%), special habits X-heavy smoker (6.7%), as well as complications (66.7%)

 

 

Surgical management

No.

%

Transpedicular Fixation after injection of bone cement in the track

18

60.0%

Transpedicular Fixation with canulated screws & bone cement

6

20.0%

Transpedicular Fixation

4

13.3%

Lumber cage

2

6.7%

 

 

 

 

Table 2: Distribution of patients according to their surgical management (n=30). This table shows that the transpedicular fixation after injection of bone cement in the track (60.0%), transpedicular fixation with canulated screws & bone cement (20.0%), transpedicularfixation(13.3%), and lumber cage (6.7%) of surgical management.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fig,1A

 

Fig.1B

Fig.1 A, B: show the steps of using bone cement with ordinary screws as the preformed track by screw is achieved, then bone cement is injected in the track then the screw is re inserted.

 

 

 

 

Fig.2 A

Fig.2 B


Fig.2 A: Operative complications, B: Pie chart postoperative complications distribution of the study group

 

 

 

 

 

Outcome

No.

%

x2

p-value

Low back pain

 

 

 

 

No improve

2

6.7%

22.350

<0.001**

Fair

10

33.3%

Good

14

46.7%

Excellent

4

13.3%

Sciatica

 

 

 

 

Fair

2

6.7%

45.522

<0.001**

Good

10

33.3%

Excellent

18

60.0%

Claudication (n=16)

 

 

 

 

Good

8

50.0%

53. 792

<0.001**

Excellent

8

50.0%

Motor (n=8)

 

 

 

 

Fair

2

25.0%

32.871

<0.001**

Good

2

25.0%

Excellent

4

50.0%

Sensory (n=6)

 

 

 

 

Good

4

66.7%

8.333

0.004*

Excellent

2

33.3%

Sphincter (n=4)

 

 

 

 

Good

2

50.0%

4.500

0.034*

Excellent

2

50.0%

Table 3: shows statistically significant improvement outcome.The percentage of improvement of patient complain as regard low back pain: fair (33.3%),good (46.7%),excellent (13.3%), as regard sciatica: fair (6.7%),good (33.3%),excellent(60.0% , as regard claudication: good (50.0%), excellent (50.0%), as regard motor: fair (25.0%), good (25.0%) , excellent (50.0%) , as regard sensory Good (66.7%), excellent (33.3%),and as regard sphincter : good (50.0%), excellent (50.0%) .


 

 

DISCUSSION

Spondylolisthesis is the slippage of one vertebral body in respect to the adjacent vertebral body causing mechanical or radicular symptoms or pain. It can be due to congenital, acquired or idiopathic causes. Spondylolisthesis is graded based on the degree of slippage of one vertebral body on the adjacent vertebral body6.

Degenerative spondylolisthesis predominately occurs in adults and is more common in females than males with increased risk

 

 

 

in the obese. Grade I spondylolisthesis accounts for 75% of all cases. Spondylolisthesis most commonly occurs at the L5-S1

level with anterior translation of the L5 vertebral body on the S1 vertebral body. The L4-5 level is the second mose common location for Spondylolisthesis.

Symptoms can range in severity from non-existent to a loss of urination and bowel movement control in more severe cases.

In most cases non-surgical treatment is successful in relieving the patient’s pain, but if not surgery may be considered22.

In our study medical treatement was tried for at least 1 month in every cases and surgical intervention was done only after failure of medical treatement.

A posterior fusion with pedicle screw instrumentation is generally considered the gold standard form of lumbar spinal fusion23.

Our study showed different types of posterior fusion.

Okuda et al. examined the surgical outcomes of posterior lumbar interbody fusion in patients who were younger and older than 70 years and found that patients older than 70 years had a higher rate of delayed union than did younger patients, but the overall rate of fusion was not statistically different. Patients who have undergone appropriate screening and workup for osteoporosis and are considering spine surgery should be counseled preoperatively on the risk of delayed fusion. It is also important to note that a direct link between osteoporosis and worse clinical outcomes and a correlation between clinical outcomes and decreased rates of radiographic fusion or loss of deformity correction have not been definitively proven9.

In our study all patient have been subjected to DEXA scan to  detect osteoporosis in elders  specially females.

At the 2000 National Institutes of Health (NIH) Consensus Conference, osteoporosis was defined as a skeletal disorder characterized by compromised bone strength predisposing to an increased risk of fracture1.

 

Occurrence and development of osteoporosis is a painless process. The set of degenerative changes appearing in aging spines in symptomatic patients, are identical to those with degenerated spines in asymptomatic subjects5.

However, profound inactivity from a progressive and painful degeneration and destabilization of the spine coupled with the pain and inactivity from a symptomatic osteoporotic compression fracture can lead to a downward spiral of further bone loss and degeneration, more vertebral fractures, more pain and inactivity Zygapophysial joint osteoarthritis, degenerative changes in the discs, intervertebral space narrowing, and bony remodeling due to osteoporosis they are all degenerative changes associated with the aging of the spine5.

 

These degenerative changes induce to deformities in the vertebrae, modifications and alterations in the stress distribution and the normal alienation of the spine accountable for the occurrence of degenerative segmental instabilities and subluxations like spinal stenosis, degenerative spondylolisthesis, and scoliosis. Degenerative spondylolisthesis and scoliosis are generally asymptomatic, but they can associate or aggravate a preexisting symptomatic spinal stenosis10.

In our study patients with back pain and sciatica have been subjected to complete history taking and full general and neurological examination and radiological evaluation to detect bone abnormalities.

 

The majority of patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis will respond well to non-operative treatment, including NSAIDs, epidural injections, and lumbar flexibility and strengthening exercises. Patients with severe or persistent symptoms that interfere significantly with quality of life, or those with neurological deficit, may benefit from surgical decompression removing all bony and soft-tissue pressure on their neural elements.There is no universal agreement regarding the optimal surgical approach for the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis: current controversies include the need for an additional fusion (either posterolateral or interbody fusion) with or without instrumentation, compared with decompression only.

In our study posterior decompression was associated with instrumental fixation.

A recent study showed that, in patients with lumbar disk herniation, a delay of ≥12 weeks in time to surgery was more likely to result in greater pain at 6 months postoperatively, suggesting that delays in surgical treatment of patients with this and other degenerative lumbar conditions may predispose patients to worse clinical outcomes11.

Therefore, postponing elective spine procedures to allow for medical optimization of osteoporosis is controversial, and no consensus on this topic currently exists. Improvements in BMD occur over relatively longer periods of time and, in many patients, it is not reasonable to consider waiting until evidence of improved BMD has been confirmed on DEXA.

In our study surgical intervention has not been postponed after failure of medical treatement even  with poor BMD.

Specific affected levels should be identified and treated, and appropriate sagittal alignment should be restored, although evidence suggests that larger deformity correction in older patients (average age, ≥60 years) increases the risk of junctional kyphosis13.

In our study the affected level was properly identified and appropriate sagittal alignment was restored .

The trajectory of the sacral screws should ideally be toward the promontory to improve purchase because screws inserted in this tricortical manner have been shown to have twice the insertional torque of bicortical screws12.

In our study all patient with sacral fixation all trajectories were towards the promontory.Augmentation of pedicle screws with polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) or calcium phosphate as a method of improving fixation strength has been studied extensively14,15,16,17.

 

Previous clinical studies have reported peri/postoperative complication incidences when operating on patients with adult spinal deformity and poor bone quality of up to or more than 40%. However, to the present day there are still very few studies evaluating the incidence and specific types of complications associated with its surgical treatment.

In our study operative complications were about 20% and post operative complications were about 20% also.

Amendola et al. published a study of 21 patients who had a poor bone stock condition due to osteoporosis or tumor and who underwent posterior stabilization by fenestrated pedicle screws and PMMA All patients were clinically and radiographically followed up for a mean of 36 months. No case of loosening was recorded after a mean follow-up of 36 months. augmentation18..

In our study the combination between transpedicular screws and bone cement provided a safe and effective method of fixation.

Carreon et al. reported the results of a study examining the rate of perioperative medical complications in 98 elderly patients who underwent posterior decompression and lumbar arthrodesis with instrumentation to treat degenerative disorders of the spine19.

 

The mean age was 72 years (65 to 84 years). Perioperative complications occurred in 78 patients (79%). Twenty-one patients (22%) had at least one major complication including 2 deaths both from postoperative wound sepsis, and 69 had at least one minor complication (70%). The most frequent complications were wound infection (10%) among the major complications and urinary tract infection (34%) among the minor complications. A greater blood loss, a prolonged operative time, a greater number of levels fused, and an older age, all were associated with an increased occurrence of perioperative complications. The presence, type, or number of preoperative medical conditions was not related to the occurrence of complications. This finding is similar to that of Benz et al., who reported that the presence of associated medical diseases did not affect the incidence of postoperative complications20.

However, other studies showed that the prevalence of postoperative morbidity increased as the number of premorbid diseases increased21.

In our study 30 cases  of spondylolithesis with osteoporosis were done at al azhar university hospitals over 2 years; the Transpedicular Fixation after injection of bone cement in the track (60.0%), Transpedicular Fixation with canulated screws & bone cement (20.0%), Transpedicular Fixation (13.3%), and Lumber cage (6.7%) of Surgical management

According to the financial aspects of the patients using ordinary pedicular screws after bone cement injecrtion in the track provided an effective alternative  to the cannulated screws with such suitable cost. The results show that the percentage  of improvement of patient complain as regard low back pain: fair (33.3%),good (46.7%),excellent (13.3%), as regard sciatica: fair (6.7%),good (33.3%),excellent(60.0% , as regard claudication: good (50.0%), excellent (50.0%), as regard motor: fair (25.0%), good (25.0%) , excellent (50.0%) , as regard sensory Good (66.7%), excellent (33.3%),and as regard sphincter : good (50.0%),excellent (50.0%) .

CONCLUSION

In patients with osteoporosis,the DEXA scan is the most effective method to detect these patients .We recommend DEXA scan in all patients above 50 years old specially females .Surgical treatement with transpedicular screw fixation combined with use of bone cement is safe and effective method for treatement of osteoprotic patient with spondylolithesis not responding to medical treatement .

 

 

  1.  

    1. Klibanski A, Adams-Campbell L, Bassford T, et al. Osteoporosis prevention, diagnosis, and therapy. J Am Med Assoc. 2001; 285(6):785–95..
    2. Hadjipavlou AG, Katonis PG, et al. Principles of management of osteometabolic disorders affecting the aging spine. Eur Spine J. 2003;12 (Suppl 2):S113–31.
    3. Chin DK, Park JY, Yoon YS, et al. Prevalence of osteoporosis in patients requiring spine surgery: incidence and significance of osteoporosis in spine disease. Osteoporos Int. 2007;18(9):1219–24.
    4. Ponnusamy KE, Iyer S, Gupta G, et al. Instrumentation of the osteoporotic spine: biomechanical and clinical considerations. Spine J. 2011;11(1):54–63.
    5. Benoist, M. Natural history of the aging spine. In The aging spine (pp. 4-7). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. 2005.
    6. Koreckij T and Fischgrund S. Degenerative Spondylolisthesis. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2015 Aug;28(7):236-41
    7. Lombardi S, Wiltse L, Reynolds J, et al. Treatment of degenerativespondylolisthesis. Spine. 1985;10(9):821–7, . Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2017.
    8. Aoki, Yasuchika, Arata Nakajima, et al. "Influence of pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch on surgical outcomes of short-segment transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion." BMC musculoskeletal disorders 16, no. 1 (2015): 213.
    9. Okuda, S., Yamashita, T., Matsumoto, et al. Adjacent segment disease after posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a case series of 1000 patients. Global spine journal. 2018 8(7):722-727.
    10. Weinstein, J. N., Lurie, J. D., Tosteson, T. D., Hanscom, B., Tosteson, A. N., Blood, E. A., ... & Albert, T. Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. New England Journal of Medicine. 2007; 356 (22): 2257-2270.
    11. Quon, J, Sobolev B, Levy, et al. The effect of waiting time on pain intensity after elective surgical lumbar discectomy. The Spine Journal. 2003; 13(12): 1736-1748.
    12. Lehman Jr, R. A., Polly Jr, et al. Straight-forward versus anatomic trajectory technique of thoracic pedicle screw fixation: a biomechanical analysis. Spine. 2003; 28(18), 2058-2065.
    13. Kim, Han Jo, Keith H. et al. "Patients with proximal junctional kyphosis requiring revision surgery have higher postoperative lumbar lordosis and larger sagittal balance corrections." Spine 2014; 39(9): E576-E580.
    14. Choma, T, Pfeiffer, F. M., et al. Pedicle screw design and cement augmentation in osteoporotic vertebrae: effects of fenestrations and cement viscosity on fixation and extraction. Spine. 2002; 37 (26): E1628-
    15. Chen J, Lai L, Niu C, et al. Surgical treatment of adjacent instability after lumbar spine fusion. Spine 2001; 26(22):E519–E524
    16. Pfeifer A, Krag H and Johnson C. Repair of failed transpedicle screw fixation: A biomechanical study comparing polymethylmethacrylate, milled bone, and matchstick bone reconstruction. Spine. 1994; 19 (3): 350–53
    17. Sawakami K, Yamazaki A, Ishikawa Set al. Polymethylmethacrylate augmentation of pedicle screws increases the initial fixation in osteoporotic spine patients. J Spinal Disord Tech 2012; 25(2):E28–E35.
    18. Amendola L, Gasbarrini A, Fosco M, et al. Fenestrated pedicle screws for cement-augmented purchase in patients with bone softening: a review of 21 cases. J Orthop Traumatol. 2011; 12(4):193–9.
    19. Carreon L, Puno M, Dimar Ret al. Perioperative complications of posterior lumbar decompression and arthrodesis in older adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003; 85-A(11):2089–92.
    20. Benz R, Ibrahim Z, Afshar P,et al. Predicting complications in elderly patients undergoing lumbar decompression. Clin Orthop. 2001; 384(11):116–21.
    21. Smith B and Hanigan C. Surgical results and complications in elderly patients with benign lesions of the spinal canal. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1992;40 (9):867–70.
    22. Kreiner S, Baisden J, Mazanec J, et al. Guideline summary review: an evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of adult isthmic spondylolisthesis. Spine J. 2016; 16(12):1478-1485.

    Schöller K, Alimi M, Cong G, et al. Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Associated With Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Secondary Fusion Rates Following Open vs Minimally Invasive Decompression. Neurosurgery. 2017; 80 (3):355-367.