Single bypass fixation for the treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis: Anatomical insights and technical note.

Background: Lumbar spondylolisthesis usually requires surgical management for the stabilization of the spine and to relieve patients of their symptoms. This study aims to provide anatomical insights and evaluate the efficacy of single bypass fixation in the surgical treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis. This technique aims to stabilize the spine with minimal manipulation of the slipped vertebra, thereby reducing potential complications and improving clinical outcomes. Methods: This is a retrospective study carried out at a neurosurgical hospital in Baghdad, Iraq, including 35 cases of lumbar spondylolisthesis subjected to single bypass fixation treatment between December 2012 and December 2019. The procedure involves stabilizing the lumbar spine by fixing the vertebrae above and below the affected segment using pedicle screws and rods, guided by fluoroscopy to ensure accurate placement and avoid neurovascular injury. Laminectomy was performed as needed to decompress the spinal cord and nerve roots. Autograft or allograft bone was used to promote fusion around the stabilized segment. Pre- and postoperative clinical and radiological assessments were conducted. Pre- and postoperative clinical and radiological assessments were done. Results: There have been enormous gains in terms of pain relief, neurological status, and spinal stability, with the achievement of high fusion rates and low complication rates. Conclusion: Single-level bypass fixation proves efficacy for lumbar stabilization in spondylolisthesis patients, with the best clinical result and less complication for patients.

Different Degeneration Patterns of Paraspinal Muscles Between Double-Level and Single-Level Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: An Magnetic Resonance Imaging Analysis of 140 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the degeneration patterns of paraspinal muscles in double-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (dl-DLS) versus single-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (sl-DLS). METHODS: A total of 67 dl-DLS and 73 sl-DLS patients were included. Multifidus (MF), erector spinae (ES), and psoas major (PM)'s fatty infiltration (FI) and relative cross-sectional area (rCSA) were measured. Sagittal parameters such as lumbar lordosis (LL), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS) were also assessed. Comparisons and correlation analysis were performed between the 2 groups. RESULTS: MF atrophy is worse in dl-DLS patients from L3-4 to L5-S1, with higher FI from L1-2 to L5-S1 compared to sl-DLS patients. ES atrophy and FI are more pronounced in dl-DLS patients from L1-2 to L5-S1. PM atrophy is more significant in dl-DLS patients at L2-3 to L5-S1, with heavier FI from L1-2 to L3-4, though no difference in FI from L4-5 to L5-S1. The rCSA and FI of MF and ES show significant differences between adjacent segments in both groups, except for MF rCSA between L3-4 and L4-5 in dl-DLS. In dl-DLS, PM rCSA negatively correlates with PT from L4-5 to L2-3, while FI of MF and ES in L5-S1 positively correlates with LL. In sl-DLS, PM FI in L4-5 and L5-S1 negatively correlates with LL. CONCLUSION: Degeneration of MF, ES, and PM is more severe in dl-DLS patients, particularly at the spondylolisthesis level. Severe paraspinal muscle degeneration can lead to spinal force imbalance and progression from sl-DLS to dl-DLS. The degradation of PM and ES correlates negatively with PT and SVA, indicating a link to pelvic decompensation and SVA abnormalities, potentially causing disproportionate degenerative changes in dl-DLS patients.

Does comorbid depression and anxiety portend poor long-term outcomes following surgery for lumbar spondylolisthesis? Five-year analysis of the Quality Outcomes Database.

OBJECTIVE: Depression and anxiety are associated with poor outcomes following spine surgery. However, the influence of these conditions on achieving a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) following lumbar spine surgery, as well as the potential compounding effects of comorbid depression and anxiety, is not well understood. This study explores the impact of comorbid depression and anxiety on long-term clinical outcomes following surgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of the multicenter, prospectively collected Quality Outcomes Database (QOD). Patients with surgically treated grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis from 12 centers were included. Preoperative baseline characteristics and comorbidities were recorded, including self-reported depression and/or anxiety. Pre- and postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were recorded: the numeric rating scale (NRS) score for back pain (NRS-BP), NRS score for leg pain (NRS-LP), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and EQ-5D. Patients were grouped into 3 cohorts: no self-reported depression or anxiety (non-SRD/A), self-reported depression or anxiety (SRD/A), or presence of both comorbidities (SRD+A). Changes in PROs over time, satisfaction rates, and rates of MCID were compared. A multivariable regression analysis was performed to establish independent associations. RESULTS: Of the 608 patients, there were 452 (74.3%) with non-SRD/A, 81 (13.3%) with SRD/A, and 75 (12.3%) with SRD+A. Overall, 91.8% and 80.4% of patients had ≥ 24 and ≥ 60 months of follow-up, respectively. Baseline PROs were universally inferior for the SRD+A cohort. However, at 60-month follow-up, changes in all PROs were greatest for the SRD+A cohort, resulting in nonsignificant differences in absolute NRS-BP, NRS-LP, ODI, and EQ-5D across the 3 groups. MCID was achieved for the SRD+A cohort at similar rates to the non-SRD/A cohort. All groups achieved > 80% satisfaction rates with surgery without significant differences across the cohorts (p = 0.79). On multivariable regression, comorbid depression and anxiety were associated with worse baseline PROs, but they had no impact on 60-month PROs or 60-month achievement of MCIDs. CONCLUSIONS: Despite lower baseline PROs, patients with comorbid depression and anxiety achieved comparable rates of MCID and satisfaction after surgery for lumbar spondylolisthesis to those without either condition. This quality-of-life benefit was durable at 5-year follow-up. These data suggest that patients with self-reported comorbid depression and anxiety should not be excluded from consideration of surgical intervention and often substantially benefit from surgery.

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion combined with anterolateral screw fixation and stress endplate augmentation for treating degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with osteoporosis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes of Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF)combined with anterolateral screw fixation (AF) and Stress Endplate Augmentation(SEA) versus OLIF-AF in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS)with osteoporosis (OP). METHODS: 30 patients underwent OLIF-AF-SEA (SEA group) were matched with 30 patients received OLIF-AF (control group), in terms of sex, age, body mass index (BMI) and bone mineral density (BMD). Clinical outcomes including visual analog scale (VAS) score of the lower back pain (VAS-LBP), leg pain (VAS-LP), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were evaluated at different postoperative intervals and comparedwith their preoperative counterparts. Radiographic outcomes such as disk height (DH), slip distance (SD), lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), cage subsidence (CS) rate and fusion rate were evaluated at different postoperative intervals and compared with their preoperative counterparts. RESULTS: SEA group presented to be better at 3-month and 12-month follow-up, the VAS-LBP, VAS-LP and ODI scores of the SEA group were significantly lower than the control group (3-month SEA vs control: 2.30±0.70 vs 3.30±0.75, 2.03±0.72 vs 2.90±0.76,15.60±2.36 vs 23.23±3.07, respectively, all p<0.05. VAS-LBP and ODI 12-month SEA vs control: 1.27±0.74 vs 1.93±0.58, 12.20±1.88 vs 14.43±1.89,respectively, all p<0.05). At 24-month follow-up, both groups showed no difference in fusion rate (83.33% vs 90.00%, p=0.45), while SEA group showed a lower CS rate (13.33% vs 53.33%, p<0.05). CONCLUSION: OLIF-AF-SEA was safe with no adverse effects and resulted in lower CS rate and better sagittal balance. OLIF-AF-SEA is a promising surgical method for treating patients with DLS-OP.

Biomechanical changes of oblique lumbar interbody fusion with different fixation techniques in degenerative spondylolisthesis lumbar spine: a finite element analysis.

OBJECTIVE: There is a dearth of comprehensive research on the stability of the spinal biomechanical structure when combining Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (OLIF) with internal fixation methods. Hence, we have devised this experiment to meticulously examine and analyze the biomechanical changes that arise from combining OLIF surgery with different internal fixation techniques in patients diagnosed with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS: Seven validated finite element models were reconstructed based on computed tomography scan images of the L3-L5 segment. These models included the intact model, a stand-alone (S-A) OLIF model, a lateral screw rod (LSR) OLIF model, a bilateral pedicle screw (BPS) OLIF model, an unilateral pedicle screw (UPS) OLIF model, a bilateral CBT (BCBT) OLIF model, and an unilateral CBT(UCBT) OLIF model. The range of motion (ROM), as well as stress levels in the cage, L4 lower endplate, L5 upper endplate, and fixation constructs were assessed across these different model configurations. RESULTS: S-A model had the highest average ROM of six motion modes, followed by LSR, UPS, UCBT, BPS and BCBT. The BCBT model had a relatively lower cage stress than the others. The maximum peak von Mises stress of the fixation constructs was found in the LSR model. The maximum peak von Mises stress of L4 lower endplate was found in the S-A model. The peak von Mises stress on the L4 lower endplate of the rest surgical models showed no significant difference. The maximum peak von Mises stress of the L5 upper endplate was found in the S-A model. The minimum peak von Mises stress of the L5 upper endplate was found in the BCBT model. No significant difference was found for the peak von Mises stress of the L5 upper endplate among LSR, BPS, UPS and UCBT models. CONCLUSION: Among the six different fixation techniques, BCBT exhibited superior biomechanical stability and minimal stress on the cage-endplate interface. It was followed by BPS, UCBT, UPS, and LSR in terms of effectiveness. Conversely, S-A OLIF demonstrated the least stability and resulted in increased stress on both the cage and endplates. Combining OLIF with BCBT fixation technique enhanced biomechanical stability compared to BPS and presented as a less invasive alternative treatment for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

The Research on Spinopelvic Parameters and Clinical Outcomes of Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Complex Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the improvement of spinopelvic parameters and therapeutic efficacy in the treatment of complex degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (CDLS) after oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). METHODS: From January 2018 to December 2020, 71 patients with CDLS underwent OLIF or TLIF at the same hospital: 31 in the OLIF group and 40 in the TLIF group. The spinopelvic parameters, perioperative data, and clinical outcomes were elected and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: There were no statistic differences in demographic perioperative complication rates and preoperative spinopelvic parameters between the two groups. OLIF group showed lower serum C-reactive protein in the early postoperative stage, shorter length of stay, less estimated blood loss and larger slippage correction rate (88.05 vs. 62.37%) (all P ＜ 0.05). There was no significant difference in the visual analog scale and Oswestry disability index scores before operation and three and six months after surgery, but OLIF group was better in the long-term with visual analog scale and Oswestry disability index (1.7/13.2 vs. 2.3/16.5). And it was significantly different in the lumbar lordosis angle, segmental lordosis angle, pelvic tilt, sacral slope (46.0°/9.3°/18.2°/35.9° vs. 40.4°/7.2°/23.9°/31.1°), and sagittal vertical axis (21.6 vs. 31.7mm) after surgery between OLIF and TLIF groups (all P ＜ 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In the therapy of CDLS, OLIF can better reduce pelvic tilt, L1 axis S1 distance, and sagittal vertical axis, and increase lumbar lordosis angle and sacral slope, showing advantages over TLIF in improving and maintaining spinopelvic parameters. Although there was no difference in complication rates between OLIF and TLIF, OLIF was more minimally invasive, had less tissue damage, had faster recovery, and had better long-term outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness of posterior lumbar interbody fusion and/or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis: a 5-year Quality Outcomes Database study.

OBJECTIVE: Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and/or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF), referred to as "PLIF/TLIF," is a commonly performed operation for lumbar spondylolisthesis. Its long-term cost-effectiveness has not been well described. The aim of this study was to determine the 5-year cost-effectiveness of PLIF/TLIF for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis using prospective data collected from the multicenter Quality Outcomes Database (QOD). METHODS: Patients enrolled in the prospective, multicenter QOD grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis module were included if they underwent single-stage PLIF/TLIF. EQ-5D scores at baseline, 3 months, 12 months, 24 months, 36 months, and 60 months were used to calculate gains in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) associated with surgery relative to preoperative baseline. Healthcare-related costs associated with the index surgery and related reoperations were calculated using Medicare reimbursement-based cost estimates and validated using price transparency diagnosis-related group (DRG) charges and Medicare charge-to-cost ratios (CCRs). Cost per QALY gained over 60 months postoperatively was assessed. RESULTS: Across 12 surgical centers, 385 patients were identified. The mean patient age was 60.2 (95% CI 59.1-61.3) years, and 38% of patients were male. The reoperation rate was 5.7%. DRG 460 cost estimates were stable between our Medicare reimbursement-based models and the CCR-based model, validating the focus on Medicare reimbursement. Across the entire cohort, the mean QALY gain at 60 months postoperatively was 1.07 (95% CI 0.97-1.18), and the mean cost of PLIF/TLIF was $31,634. PLIF/TLIF was associated with a mean 60-month cost per QALY gained of $29,511. Among patients who did not undergo reoperation (n = 363), the mean 60-month QALY gain was 1.10 (95% CI 0.99-1.20), and cost per QALY gained was $27,591. Among those who underwent reoperation (n = 22), the mean 60-month QALY gain was 0.68 (95% CI 0.21-1.15), and the cost per QALY gained was $80,580. CONCLUSIONS: PLIF/TLIF for degenerative grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis was associated with a mean 60-month cost per QALY gained of $29,511 with Medicare fees. This is far below the well-established societal willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000, suggesting long-term cost-effectiveness. PLIF/TLIF remains cost-effective for patients who undergo reoperation.

Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Grading: Current Standards and Important Factors to Consider for Management.

Spondylolisthesis is a common condition with a prevalence of 4-6% in childhood and 5-10% in adulthood. The Meyerding Classification, developed in 1932, assigns grades (I to V) based on the degree of slippage observed on standing, neutral lateral lumbar radiographs. Despite its historical significance and reliability, more factors should be evaluated to predict spondylolisthesis progression, especially in low-grade cases. The manuscript highlights areas for improvement in spondylolisthesis classification, emphasizing the need for considering factors beyond vertebral slippage. Factors such as global and segmental alignment, pelvic incidence, overhang, the number of affected levels, and the use of lateral flexion-extension radiographs to assess for stability using the kyphotic angle and slippage degree are identified as crucial in predicting progression and determining effective management strategies.

Case Report: Lumbar spondylolisthesis with unilateral pedicle cleft and contralateral spondylolysis: a report of two cases and literature review.

Background: The causes of pedicle cleft include congenital dysplasia and stress fractures, both of which are rare conditions. Secondary lumbar spondylolisthesis with combined unilateral pedicle cleft and contralateral spondylolysis is extremely rare and can be easily misdiagnosed. We report two cases with these conditions from different causes and discuss the diagnostic and therapeutic features in the context of the literature review. Case description: Case 1 was a 58-year-old female with a stress fracture change at the left L5 pedicle. Case 2 was a 47-year-old female with a pedicle cleft due to hypoplasia of the left L5 pedicle. Both patients had a combined contralateral spondylolysis and Meyerding grade one lumbar spondylolisthesis, while neither had a clear history of lumbar trauma. After initial conservative treatments failed, both patients underwent a single-segment posterior lumbar interbody fusion with bilateral pedicle screw fixation. Both patients were followed up for more than 1 year postoperatively with clinical symptom relief and bony fusion at the pedicle cleft suggested by a CT scan. Conclusion: Lumbar spondylolisthesis with unilateral pedicle cleft and contralateral spondylolysis is rarely reported and can be clinically misdiagnosed as simple spondylolisthesis with bilateral spondylolysis. There is no widely accepted surgical option for patients for whom conservative treatment has failed. Our experience suggests that good clinical results may be achieved by single-segment posterior interbody fusion and bilateral pedicle screw fixation. Precise screw placement into the deficient pedicle and sufficient exiting nerve decompression are prerequisites for the success of this surgical option.

Evaluating the efficacy and suggesting technical optimizations for endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion across different lumbar spondylolisthesis types.

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy of the endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion technique across different types of lumbar spondylolisthesis, specifically Grade I and Grade II, and suggest technical optimizations based on therapeutic outcomes, complications, and patient satisfaction for both grades. Methods: We analyzed data from 57 L4 to 5 spondylolisthesis patients, all categorized as either Grade I or Grade II, comprising 31 males and 26 females. Of these, 36 were diagnosed with Grade I and 21 with Grade II. All subjects underwent the endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion procedure. Primary evaluation metrics included pre and post-operative Vasual Analogue Scale（VAS） pain scores, Osewewtry Disability Index（ODI） functional scores, surgical duration, intraoperative blood loss, degree of spondylolisthesis correction, complications, and patient satisfaction levels. Results: At a minimum of 6 months post-operation, the VAS score for the Grade I cohort reduced from an initial 7.30 ± 0.69 to 2.97 ± 0.47, while the Grade II cohort saw a decrease from 7.53 ± 0.56 to 3.37 ± 0.62 (P = 0.0194). The ODI score in the Grade I group declined from 66.88 ± 5.15 % pre-operation to 29.88 ± 6.36 % post-operation, and in the Grade II group, it decreased from 69.33 ± 5.27 % to 34.66 ± 6.01 % (P = 0.0092). The average surgical duration for the Grade I group stood at 155.72 ± 17.75 min, compared to 180.38 ± 14.72 min for the Grade II group (P < 0.001). The mean intraoperative blood loss for the Grade I group was 144.58 ± 28.61 ml, whereas the Grade II group registered 188.23 ± 9.41 ml (P < 0.001). Post-surgery, 83 % of the Grade I patients achieved a correction degree exceeding 80 %, and 61 % of the Grade II patients surpassed 50 % (P = 0.0055). Complication rates were recorded at 8 % for Grade I and 16 % for Grade II. Patient satisfaction reached 94 % in the Grade I cohort and 90 % in the Grade II cohort. Conclusion: Endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion showcases promising therapeutic outcomes for both Grade I and Grade II lumbar spondylolisthesis. However, surgeries for Grade II spondylolisthesis tend to be lengthier, more challenging, involve greater blood loss, and have a heightened complication risk. Tailored technical adjustments and enhancements are essential for addressing the distinct spondylolisthesis types.

[Prospective comparative study of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for treatment of single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with lumbar spondylolisthesis].

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-TLIF) and endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF) in the treatment of single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with lumbar spondylolisthesis. Methods: Between November 2019 and May 2023, a total of 81 patients with single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with lumbar spondylolisthesis who met the selection criteria were enrolled. They were randomly divided into UBE-TLIF group (39 cases) and Endo-TLIF group (42 cases). There was no significant difference in baseline data between the two groups ( P>0.05), including gender, age, body mass index, surgical segment, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for low back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and serum markers including creatine kinase (CK) and C reactive protein (CRP). Total blood loss (TBL), intraoperative blood loss, hidden blood loss (HBL), postoperative drainage volume, and operation time were recorded and compared between the two groups. Serum markers (CK, CRP) levels were compared between the two groups at 1 day before operation and 1, 3, and 5 days after operation. Furthermore, the VAS scores for low back and leg pain, and ODI at 1 day before operation and 1 day, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after operation, and intervertebral fusion rate at 12 months after operation were compared between the two groups. Results: All surgeries were completed successfully without occurrence of incision infection, vascular or nerve injury, epidural hematoma, dural tear, or postoperative paraplegia. The operation time in UBE-TLIF group was significantly shorter than that in Endo-TLIF group, but the intraoperative blood loss, TBL, and HBL in UBE-TLIF group were significantly more than those in Endo-TLIF group ( P<0.05). There was no significant difference in postoperative drainage volume between the two groups ( P>0.05). The levels of CK at 1 day and 3 days after operation and CRP at 1, 3, and 5 days after operation in UBE-TLIF group were slightly higher than those in the Endo-TLIF group ( P<0.05), while there was no significant difference in the levels of CK and CPR between the two groups at other time points ( P>0.05). All patients were followed up 12 months. VAS score of low back and leg pain and ODI at each time point after operation significantly improved when compared with those before operation in the two groups ( P<0.05); there was no significant difference in VAS score of low back and leg pain and ODI between the two groups at each time point after operation ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the intervertebral fusion rate between the two groups at 12 months after operation ( P>0.05). Conclusion: UBE-TLIF and Endo-TLIF are both effective methods for treating degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with lumbar spondylolisthesis. However, compared to Endo-TLIF, UBE-TLIF requires further improvement in minimally invasive techniques to reduce tissue trauma and blood loss.

Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Foraminotomy for the Treatment of L5-S1 Isthmic Lumbar Spondylolisthesis with Foraminal Stenosis: A 1-Year Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Isthmic lumbar spondylolisthesis (ILS) is a prevalent spinal pathology. Radicular pain in patients is often attributed to L5-S1 ILS combined with foraminal stenosis (FS), making such patients prime candidates for surgical intervention. We herein aimed to elucidate the surgical technique and clinical outcomes of transforaminal endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy (TELF) in the treatment of L5-S1 ILS with FS. METHODS: From September 2021 to December 2022, 20 consecutive patients were diagnosed with L5-S1 ILS with FS and underwent TELF. All patients were followed up for at least 12 months. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index, and modified MacNab criteria. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 62.4 ± 10.9 years. The mean preoperative VAS score for low back, VAS score of the leg, and Oswestry Disability Index score was 5.1 ± 1.7, 7.4 ± 0.7, and 58.0 ± 8.4, respectively. These scores significantly improved to 1.8 ± 0.7, 1.5 ± 0.6, and 15.3 ± 7.1 at 12 months postoperatively, respectively (P < 0.01). Evaluation based on the modified MacNab criteria revealed that 95.0% of patients achieved a good-to-excellent outcome. One patient underwent revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: TELF emerges as a potentially safe and effective surgical option for alleviating radicular pain in patients with L5-S1 stable ILS combined with FS. While our short-term clinical results are satisfactory, it is necessary to expand the sample size and extend the follow-up time to validate the effectiveness and long-term efficacy of TELF.

Meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of OLIF and TLIF in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the difference in clinical efficacy between two surgical approaches, oblique lateral approach and intervertebral foraminal approach, in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. METHODS: English databases, including PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science, were systematically searched using keywords such as "oblique lumbar interbody fusion" and "transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion." Concurrently, Chinese databases, including CNKI, WanFang data, VIP, and CBM, were also queried using corresponding Chinese terms. The search spanned from January 2014 to February 2024, focusing on published studies in both Chinese and English that compared the clinical efficacy of OLIF and TLIF. The literature screening was conducted by reviewing titles, abstracts, and full texts. Literature meeting the inclusion criteria underwent quality assessment, and relevant data were extracted. Statistical analysis and a meta-analysis of the observational data for both surgical groups were performed using Excel and RevMan 5.4 software. Findings revealed a total of 14 studies meeting the inclusion criteria, encompassing 877 patients. Of these, 414 patients were in the OLIF group, while 463 were in the TLIF group. Meta-analysis of the statistical data revealed that compared to TLIF, OLIF had a shorter average surgical duration (P < 0.05), reduced intraoperative bleeding (P < 0.05), shorter average hospital stay (P < 0.05), better improvement in postoperative VAS scores (P < 0.05), superior enhancement in postoperative ODI scores (P < 0.05), more effective restoration of disc height (P < 0.05), and better correction of lumbar lordosis (P < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences between OLIF and TLIF in terms of the incidence of surgical complications (P > 0.05) and fusion rates (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: When treating degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, OLIF demonstrates significant advantages over TLIF in terms of shorter surgical duration, reduced intraoperative bleeding, shorter hospital stay, superior improvement in postoperative VAS and ODI scores, better restoration of disc height, and more effective correction of lumbar lordosis.

Two-Stage Deep Learning Model for Diagnosis of Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Based on Lateral X-Ray Images.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosing early lumbar spondylolisthesis is challenging for many doctors because of the lack of obvious symptoms. Using deep learning (DL) models to improve the accuracy of X-ray diagnoses can effectively reduce missed and misdiagnoses in clinical practice. This study aimed to use a two-stage deep learning model, the Res-SE-Net model with the YOLOv8 algorithm, to facilitate efficient and reliable diagnosis of early lumbar spondylolisthesis based on lateral X-ray image identification. METHODS: A total of 2424 lumbar lateral radiographs of patients treated in the Beijing Tongren Hospital between January 2021 and September 2023 were obtained. The data were labeled and mutually identified by 3 orthopedic surgeons after reshuffling in a random order and divided into a training set, validation set, and test set in a ratio of 7:2:1. We trained 2 models for automatic detection of spondylolisthesis. YOLOv8 model was used to detect the position of lumbar spondylolisthesis, and the Res-SE-Net classification method was designed to classify the clipped area and determine whether it was lumbar spondylolisthesis. The model performance was evaluated using a test set and an external dataset from Beijing Haidian Hospital. Finally, we compared model validation results with professional clinicians' evaluation. RESULTS: The model achieved promising results, with a high diagnostic accuracy of 92.3%, precision of 93.5%, and recall of 93.1% for spondylolisthesis detection on the test set, the area under the curve (AUC) value was 0.934. CONCLUSIONS: Our two-stage deep learning model provides doctors with a reference basis for the better diagnosis and treatment of early lumbar spondylolisthesis.

The relationship between paraspinal muscle atrophy and degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis at the L4/5 level.

BACKGROUND/CONTEXT: Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) is a prevalent spinal condition that can result in significant disability. DLS is thought to result from a combination of disc and facet joint degeneration, as well as various biological, biomechanical, and behavioral factors. One hypothesis is the progressive degeneration of segmental stabilizers, notably the paraspinal muscles, contributes to a vicious cycle of increasing slippage. PURPOSE: To examine the correlation between paraspinal muscle status on MRI and severity of slippage in patients with symptomatic DLS. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cross-sectional study at an academic tertiary care center. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients who underwent surgery for DLS at the L4/5 level between 2016-2018 were included. Those with multilevel DLS or insufficient imaging were excluded. OUTCOME MEASURES: The percentage of relative slippage (RS) at the L4/5 level evaluated on standing lateral radiographs. Muscle morphology measurements including functional cross-sectional area (fCSA), body height normalized functional cross-sectional area (HI) of Psoas, erector spinae (ES) and multifidus muscle (MF) and fatty infiltration (FI) of ES and MF were measured on axial MR. Disc degeneration and facet joint arthritis were classified according to Pfirrmann and Weishaupt, respectively. METHODS: Descriptive and comparative statistics, univariable and multivariable linear regression models were utilized to examine the associations between RS and muscle parameters, adjusting for confounders sex, age, BMI, segmental degeneration, and back pain severity and symptom duration. RESULTS: The study analyzed 138 out of 183 patients screened for eligibility. The median age of all patients was 69.5 years (IQR 62 to 73), average BMI was 29.1 (SD±5.1) and average preoperative ODI was 46.4 (SD±16.3). Patients with Meyerding-Grade 2 (M2, N=25) exhibited higher Pfirrmann scores, lower MFfCSA and MFHI, and lower BMI, but significantly more fatty infiltration in the MF and ES muscles compared to those with Meyerding Grade 1 (M1). Univariable linear regression showed that each cm2 decrease in MFfCSA was associated with a 0.9%-point increase in RS (95% CI -1.4 to - 0.4, p<.001), and each cm2/m2 decrease in MFHI was associated with an increase in slippage by 2.2%-points (95% CI -3.7 to -0.7, p=.004). Each 1%-point rise in ESFI and MFFI corresponded to 0.17%- (95% CI 0.05-0.3, p=.01) and 0.20%-point (95% CI 0.1-0.3 p<.001) increases in relative slippage, respectively. Notably, after adjusting for confounders, each cm2 increase in PsoasfCSA and cm2/m2 in PsoasHI was associated with an increase in relative slippage by 0.3% (95% CI 0.1-0.6, p=.004) and 1.1%-points (95% CI 0.4-1.7, p=.001). While MFfCSA tended to be negatively associated with slippage, this did not reach statistical significance (p=.105). However, each 1%-point increase in MFFI and ESFI corresponded to increases of 0.15% points (95% CI 0.05-0.24, p=.002) and 0.14% points (95% CI 0.01-0.27, p=.03) in relative slippage, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study found a significant association between paraspinal muscle status and severity of slippage in DLS. Whereas higher degeneration of the ES and MF correlate with a higher degree of slippage, the opposite was found for the psoas. These findings suggest that progressive muscular imbalance between posterior and anterior paraspinal muscles could contribute to the progression of slippage in DLS.

The Classification of Lumbar Spondylolisthesis X-Ray Images Using Convolutional Neural Networks.

We aimed to develop and validate a deep convolutional neural network (DCNN) model capable of accurately identifying spondylolysis or spondylolisthesis on lateral or dynamic X-ray images. A total of 2449 lumbar lateral and dynamic X-ray images were collected from two tertiary hospitals. These images were categorized into lumbar spondylolysis (LS), degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS), and normal lumbar in a proportional manner. Subsequently, the images were randomly divided into training, validation, and test sets to establish a classification recognition network. The model training and validation process utilized the EfficientNetV2-M network. The model's ability to generalize was assessed by conducting a rigorous evaluation on an entirely independent test set and comparing its performance with the diagnoses made by three orthopedists and three radiologists. The evaluation metrics employed to assess the model's performance included accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and F1 score. Additionally, the weight distribution of the network was visualized using gradient-weighted class activation mapping (Grad-CAM). For the doctor group, accuracy ranged from 87.9 to 90.0% (mean, 89.0%), precision ranged from 87.2 to 90.5% (mean, 89.0%), sensitivity ranged from 87.1 to 91.0% (mean, 89.2%), specificity ranged from 93.7 to 94.7% (mean, 94.3%), and F1 score ranged from 88.2 to 89.9% (mean, 89.1%). The DCNN model had accuracy of 92.0%, precision of 91.9%, sensitivity of 92.2%, specificity of 95.7%, and F1 score of 92.0%. Grad-CAM exhibited concentrations of highlighted areas in the intervertebral foraminal region. We developed a DCNN model that intelligently distinguished spondylolysis or spondylolisthesis on lumbar lateral or lumbar dynamic radiographs.

Biomechanical response of decompression alone in lower grade lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis--A finite element analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated the clinical efficacy of decompression alone in lower-grade spondylolisthesis. A higher rate of surgical revision and a lower rate of back pain relief was also observed. However, there is a lack of relevant biomechanical evidence after decompression alone for lower-grade spondylolisthesis. PURPOSE: Evaluating the biomechanical characteristics of total laminectomy, hemilaminectomy, and facetectomy for lower-grade spondylolisthesis by analyzing the range of motion (ROM), intradiscal pressure (IDP), annulus fibrosus stress (AFS), facet joints contact force (FJCF), and isthmus stress (IS). METHODS: Firstly, we utilized finite element tools to develop a normal lumbar model and subsequently constructed a spondylolisthesis model based on the normal model. We then performed total laminectomy, hemilaminectomy, and one-third facetectomy in the normal model and spondylolisthesis model, respectively. Finally, we analyzed parameters, such as ROM, IDP, AFS, FJCF, and IS, for all the models under the same concentrate force and moment. RESULTS: The intact spondylolisthesis model showed a significant increase in the relative parameters, including ROM, AFS, FJCF, and IS, compared to the intact normal lumbar model. Hemilaminectomy and one-third facetectomy in both spondylolisthesis and normal lumbar models did not result in an obvious change in ROM, IDP, AFS, FJCF, and IS compared to the pre-operative state. Moreover, there was no significant difference in the degree of parameter changes between the spondylolisthesis and normal lumbar models after undergoing the same surgical procedures. However, total laminectomy significantly increased ROM, AFS, and IS and decreased the FJCF in both normal lumbar models and spondylolisthesis models. CONCLUSION: Hemilaminectomy and one-third facetectomy did not have a significant impact on the segment stability of lower-grade spondylolisthesis; however, patients with LDS undergoing hemilaminectomy and one-third facetectomy may experience higher isthmus stress on the surgical side during rotation. In addition, total laminectomy changes the biomechanics in both normal lumbar models and spondylolisthesis models.

Differences in the surgical management of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis based on self-reported sex: analysis of the CSORN prospective DLS study.

OBJECTIVE: Surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) reliably improves patient-reported quality of life; however, patient population heterogeneity, in addition to other factors, ensures ongoing equipoise in choosing the ideal surgical treatment. Surgeon preference for fusion or decompression alone influences surgical treatment decision-making. Meanwhile, at presentation, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) differ considerably between females and males. The aims of this study were to determine whether there exists a difference in the rates of decompression and fusion versus decompression alone based on patient-reported sex, and to determine if widely accepted indications for fusion justify any observed differences or if surgeon preference plays a role. METHODS: This study is a retrospective cohort analysis of patients enrolled in the Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network (CSORN) DLS study, a multicentered Canadian prospective study, investigating the surgical management and outcome of DLS. Decompression and fusion rates, patient characteristics, preoperative PROMs, and radiographic measures were compared between males and females before and after propensity score matching. RESULTS: In the unmatched cohort, female patients were more likely to undergo decompression and fusion than male patients. Females were more likely to have the recognized indications for fusion, including kyphotic disc angle, higher spondylolisthesis grade and slip percentage, and patient-reported back pain. Other radiographic findings associated with the decision to fuse, including facet effusion, facet distraction, or facet angle, were not more prevalent in females. After propensity score matching for demographic and radiographic characteristics, similar proportions of male and female patients underwent decompression and fusion and decompression alone. CONCLUSIONS: Although it remains unclear who should or should not undergo fusion, in addition to surgical decompression of DLS, female patients undergo fusion at a higher rate than their male counterparts. After matching baseline radiographic factors indicating fusion, this analysis showed that the decision to fuse was not biased by sex differences. Rather, the higher proportion of females undergoing fusion is largely explained by the radiographic and clinical indications for fusion, suggesting that specific clinical and anatomical features of this condition are indeed different between sexes.

Long-term Outcome of Isobar TTL System for the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disc Diseases.

OBJECTIVE: The Isobar TTL dynamic fixation system has demonstrated favorable outcomes in the short-term treatment of lumbar degenerative disc diseases (LDDs). However, there is a paucity of extensive research on the long-term effects of this system on LDDs. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term clinical and radiological outcomes of patients with LDDs who underwent treatment utilizing the Isobar TTL dynamic fixation system. METHODS: The study analyzed the outcomes of 40 patients with LDDs who underwent posterior lumbar decompression and received single-segment Isobar TTL dynamic internal fixation at our hospital between June 2010 and December 2016. The evaluation of clinical therapeutic effect involved assessing postoperative pain levels using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI), both before surgery, 3 months after, and the final follow-up. To determine the preservation of functional motion in dynamically stable segments, we measured the range of motion (ROM) and disc height of stabilized and adjacent segments preoperatively and during the final follow-up. Additionally, we investigated the occurrence of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). RESULTS: Forty patients were evaluated, with an average age of 44.65 years and an average follow-up period of 79.37 months. Fourteen patients belonged to the spondylolisthesis group, while the remaining 26 were categorized under the stenosis or herniated disc group. The preoperative ROM of the stabilized segment exhibited a significant reduction from 8.15° ± 2.77° to 5.00° ± 1.82° at the final follow-up (p < 0.001). In contrast, there was a slight elevation in the ROM of the adjacent segment during the final follow-up, increasing from 7.68° ± 2.25° before surgery to 9.36° ± 1.98° (p < 0.001). The intervertebral space height (IH) in the stabilized segment exhibited a significant increase from 10.56 ± 1.99 mm before surgery to 11.39 ± 1.90 mm at the one-week postoperative follow-up (p < 0.001). Conversely, there was a notable decrease in the IH of the adjacent segment from 11.09 ± 1.82 mm preoperatively to 10.86 ± 1.79 mm at the one-week follow-up after surgery (p < 0.001). The incidence of ASD was 15% (6/40) after an average follow-up period of 79.37 months, with a rate of 15.38% (4/26) in the stenosis or herniated disc group and 14.29% (2/14) in the spondylolisthesis group; however, no statistically significant difference was observed in the occurrence of ASD among these groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The Isobar TTL dynamic fixation system is an effective treatment for LDDs, improving pain relief, quality of life (QoL) and maintaining stabilized segmental motion. It has demonstrated excellent long-term clinical and radiographic results.