ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Removal of spine instrumentation for the treatment of recurrent low back pain remains controversial in the absence of pseudarthrosis and when no obvious pain generators are present. It is our practice to offer these patients surgical exploration and removal of instrumentation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five patients underwent an anterior and posterior lumbar spinal fusion. The removal of instrumentation was performed by the same surgeon and senior author of this paper (MRP). The reason for the revision surgery was recurrent low back and leg pain. All patients had a solid fusion based on a thorough surgical exploration of the fusion mass. Instrumentation was deemed either solid or loose at time of removal based on the purchase at the screw-bone interface. Final outcomes were determined using a functional and satisfactory questionnaire and compared between the two groups (Loose Instrumentation versus Solid Instrumentation). RESULTS: The majority of the patients in both groups would recommend the surgery to a family member (79% overall), would have the surgery again themselves (82%) and consider the surgery a success (77%). Pain was significantly decreased from pre-operatively to post-operatively and from pre-operative to final follow-up in both groups. The group of patients with loose instrumentation were significantly more likely to have a successful outcome than the group without loose instrumentation. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that the removal of instrumentation in the absence of pseudarthrosis is beneficial in the relief of low back pain and leg pain symptoms. Increased success rates were noted in patients with loose instrumentation. However, this classification was based on inter-operative inspection. Further studies of the ability to diagnose and predict success prior to surgery needs to be done.
