Advertisement

Current treatment and decision-making factors leading to fusion vs decompression for one-level degenerative spondylolisthesis: survey results from members of the Lumbar Spine Research Society and Society of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery

      Abstract

      BACKGROUND

      Degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) is one of the most common pathologies spine surgeons treat. While a number of potential factors have been identified, there is no current consensus on which variables most impact the decision to fuse vs. decompress alone in this population.

      PURPOSE

      The purpose of this study was to describe current DS treatment practices and identify both the radiographic and clinical factors leading to the decision to fuse segments for one level DS.

      STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

      Descriptive cross-sectional survey.

      PATIENT SAMPLE

      Surveys were administered to members of Lumbar Spine Research Society and Society of Minimally Invasive Spine Surgery.

      OUTCOME MEASURES

      Surgeon demographics and treatment practices were reported. Radiographic and clinical parameters were ranked by each surgeon with regards to their importance.

      METHODS

      The primary analysis was limited to completed surveys. Baseline characteristics were summarized. Clinical and radiographic parameters were ranked and compared. Ranking of each clinical and radiographic parameters was reported using best and worst rank, mean rank position, and percentiles. The most important, top 3 most important, and top 5 most important parameters were ordered given each parameter's ranking frequency.

      RESULTS

      381 surveys were returned completed. With regards to fusion vs. decompression, 19.9% fuse all cases, 39.1% fuse > 75%, 17.8% fuse 50%–75%, and 23.2% fuse <25%. The most common decompressive technique was a partial laminotomy (51.4%), followed by full laminectomy (28.9%). 82.2% of respondents instrument all fusion cases. Instability (93.2%), spondylolisthesis grade (59.8%), and laterolisthesis (37.3%) were the most common radiographic factors impacting the decision to fuse. With regards to the clinical factors leading to fusion, mechanical low back pain (83.2%), activity level (58.3%), and neurogenic claudication (42.8%) were the top 3 clinical parameters.

      CONCLUSIONS

      There is little consensus on the treatment of DS, with society members showing substantial variation in treatment patterns with the majority utilizing fusion for treatment. The most common radiographic parameters impacting treatment are instability, spondylolisthesis grade, and laterolisthesis while mechanical low back pain, activity level, and neurogenic claudication are the most common clinical parameters.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to The Spine Journal
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Jacobsen S
        • Sonne-Holm S
        • Rovsing H
        • Monrad H
        • Gebuhr P
        Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: an epidemiological perspective: the Copenhagen Osteoarthritis Study.
        Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007; 32: 120-125https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000250979.12398.96
        • Kepler CK
        • Vaccaro AR
        • Hilibrand AS
        • Anderson DG
        • Rihn JA
        • Albert
        • Todd JMD
        • et al.
        National trends in the use of fusion techniques to treat degenerative spondylolisthesis.
        Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014; 39: 1584-1589https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000486
        • Martin BI
        • Mirza SK
        • Spina N
        • Spiker WR
        • Lawrence B
        • Brodke DS
        Trends in lumbar fusion procedure rates and associated hospital costs for degenerative spinal diseases in the United States, 2004 to 2015.
        Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019; 44: 369-376https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002822
        • Weinstein JN
        • Lurie JD
        • Tosteson TD
        • Hanscom B
        • Tosteson ANA
        • Blood EA
        • et al.
        Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis.
        N Engl J Med. 2007; 356: 2257-2270https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa070302
        • Weinstein JN
        • Lurie JD
        • Tosteson TD
        • Zhao W
        • Blood EA
        • Tosteson ANA
        • et al.
        Surgical compared with nonoperative treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. four-year results in the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) randomized and observational cohorts.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009; 91: 1295-1304https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.H.00913
        • Försth P
        • Ólafsson G
        • Carlsson T
        • Frost A
        • Borgström F
        • Fritzell P
        • et al.
        A randomized, controlled trial of fusion surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis.
        N Engl J Med. 2016; 374: 1413-1423https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1513721
        • Ghogawala Z
        • Dziura J
        • Butler WE
        • Dai F
        • Terrin N
        • Magge SN
        • et al.
        Laminectomy plus fusion versus laminectomy alone for lumbar spondylolisthesis.
        N Engl J Med. 2016; 374: 1424-1434https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1508788
        • Austevoll IM
        • Hermansen E
        • Fagerland MW
        • Storheim K
        • Brox JI
        • Solberg T
        • et al.
        Decompression with or without fusion in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.
        N Engl J Med. 2021; 385: 526-538https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2100990
        • Liang HF
        • Liu SH
        • Chen ZX
        • Fei QM.
        Decompression plus fusion versus decompression alone for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Eur Spine J. 2017; 26: 3084-3095https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5200-x
        • Ulrich NH
        • Burgstaller JM
        • Pichierri G
        • Wertli MM
        • Farshad M
        • Porchet F
        • et al.
        Decompression surgery alone versus decompression plus fusion in symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis: a swiss prospective multicenter cohort study with 3 years of follow-up.
        Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017; 42: E1077-E1086https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002068
        • Inose H
        • Kato T
        • Yuasa M
        • Yamada T
        • Maehara H
        • Hirai T
        • et al.
        Comparison of Decompression, Decompression plus fusion, and decompression plus stabilization for degenerative spondylolisthesis: a prospective, randomized study.
        Clin Spine Surg. 2018; 31: E347-E352https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000000659
        • Dijkerman ML
        • Overdevest GM
        • Moojen WA
        • Vleggeert-Lankamp CLA
        Decompression with or without concomitant fusion in lumbar stenosis due to degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review.
        Eur Spine J. 2018; 27: 1629-1643https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5436-5
        • Pearson AM
        • Lurie JD
        • Blood EA
        • Frymoyer JW
        • Braeutigam H
        • An H
        • et al.
        Spine patient outcomes research trial: radiographic predictors of clinical outcomes after operative or nonoperative treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis.
        Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008; 33: 2759-2766https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31818e2d8b
        • Liao JC
        • Lu ML
        • Niu CC
        • Chen WJ
        • Chen LH.
        Surgical outcomes of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with anterior vacuum disc: can the intervertebral cage overcome intradiscal vacuum phenomenon and enhance posterolateral fusion?.
        J Orthop Sci. 2014; 19: 851-859https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-014-0618-z
        • Pearson AM
        • Lurie JD
        • Tosteson TD
        • Zhao W
        • Abdu WA
        • Weinstein JN
        Who should undergo surgery for degenerative spondylolisthesis? Treatment effect predictors in SPORT.
        Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013; 38: 1799-1811https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182a314d0
        • Harris PA
        • Taylor R
        • Minor BL
        • Elliott V
        • Fernandez M
        • O'Neal L
        • et al.
        The REDCap consortium: Building an international community of software platform partners.
        J Biomed Inform. 2019; 95103208https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103208
        • Harris PA
        • Taylor R
        • Thielke R
        • Payne J
        • Gonzalez N
        • Conde JG
        Research electronic data capture (REDCap)–a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support.
        J Biomed Inform. 2009; 42: 377-381https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010
        • Kim CH
        • Chung CK
        • Choi Y
        • Kim M-J
        • Kim MJ
        • Shin S
        • et al.
        Increased proportion of fusion surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis and changes in reoperation rate: a nationwide cohort study with a minimum 5-year follow-up.
        Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019; 44: 346-354https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002805
        • Strube P
        • Putzier M
        • Siewe J
        • Eicker SO
        • Dreimann M
        • Zippelius T
        To fuse or not to fuse: a survey among members of the German Spine Society (DWG) regarding lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis.
        Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2019; 139: 613-621https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-018-3096-5
        • Resnick DK
        • Schmidt BT
        • Momin E
        • Hetzel SJ
        • Ghogawala Z
        Interobserver variance and patient heterogeneity influencing the treatment of grade I spondylolisthesis.
        Spine J. 2020; 20: 1934-1939https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2020.06.001
        • Debono B
        • Lonjon G
        • Galovich LA
        • Kerever S
        • Guiot B
        • Eicker S-O
        • et al.
        Indication variability in degenerative lumbar spine surgery: a four-nation survey.
        Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2018; 43: 185-192https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002272
        • Glennie RA
        • Bailey CS
        • Abraham E
        • Manson N
        • Casha S
        • Thomas K
        • et al.
        Variation in surgical treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis in Canada: surgeon assessment of stability and impact on treatment.
        Eur Spine J. 2021; 30: 3709-3719https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-021-06928-8
        • Schroeder GD
        • Kepler CK
        • Kurd MF
        • Vaccaro AR
        • Hsu WK
        • Patel A
        • et al.
        Rationale for the Surgical Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis.
        Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015; 40: E1161-E1166https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000001116
        • Reitman CA
        • Cho CH
        • Bono CM
        • Zoher G
        • Glaser J
        • Kauffman C
        • et al.
        Management of degenerative spondylolisthesis: development of appropriate use criteria.
        Spine J. 2021; 21: 1256-1267https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2021.03.005
        • Kulkarni AG
        • Kunder TS
        • Dutta S
        Degenerative spondylolisthesis: when to fuse and when not to? A new scoring system.
        Clin Spine Surg. 2020; 33: E391-E400https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000000970
        • Matz PG
        • Meagher RJ
        • Lamer T
        • Tontz WL
        • Annaswamy TA
        • Cassidy RC
        • et al.
        Guideline summary review: an evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.
        Spine J. 2016; 16: 439-448https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2015.11.055
      1. Kashigar A, Laratta JL, Carreon LY, Bisson EF, Ghogawala Z, Yew AY, et al. Is There Additional Value to Flexion-Extension Radiographs for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis? Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2021 Apr 1;46(7):E458–E462. PMID: 33181769

        • Liu N
        • Wood KB
        • Schwab JH
        • Cha TD
        • Pedlow FX
        • Puhkan R
        • et al.
        Utility of Flexion-extension radiographs in lumbar spondylolisthesis: a prospective study.
        Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015; 40: E929-E935https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000941
        • Schneider N
        • Fisher C
        • Glennie A
        • Urquhart J
        • Street J
        • Dvorak M
        • et al.
        Lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: factors associated with the decision to fuse.
        Spine J. 2021; 21: 821-828https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2020.11.010
        • Boden SD
        • Riew KD
        • Yamaguchi K
        • Branch TP
        • Schellinger D
        • Wiesel SW
        Orientation of the lumbar facet joints: association with degenerative disc disease.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996; 78: 403-411https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199603000-00012
        • Grobler LJ
        • Robertson PA
        • Novotny JE
        • Pope MH
        Etiology of spondylolisthesis. Assessment of the role played by lumbar facet joint morphology.
        Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993; 18: 80-91
        • Norton RP
        • Bianco K
        • Klifto C
        • Errico TJ
        • Bendo JA
        Degenerative spondylolisthesis: an analysis of the nationwide inpatient sample database.
        Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015; 40: 1219-1227https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000987
        • Kepler CK
        • Hilibrand AS
        • Sayadipour A
        • Koerner JD
        • Rihn JA
        • Radcliff KE
        • et al.
        Clinical and radiographic degenerative spondylolisthesis (CARDS) classification.
        Spine J. 2015; 15: 1804-1811https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2014.03.045