Download PDF
Z Orthop Unfall 2016; 154(01): 85-99
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-109882
Refresher Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Indikationen zur Korrekturspondylodese bei degenerativer Spondylolisthesis

Indications for Surgical Correction of Degenerative Spondylolisthesis
C.-H. Hoffmann
Zentrum für Wirbelsäulenchirurgie und Neurotraumatologie, Berufsgenossenschaftliche Unfallklinik, Frankfurt a.M.
,
M. Scholz
Zentrum für Wirbelsäulenchirurgie und Neurotraumatologie, Berufsgenossenschaftliche Unfallklinik, Frankfurt a.M.
,
F. Kandziora
Zentrum für Wirbelsäulenchirurgie und Neurotraumatologie, Berufsgenossenschaftliche Unfallklinik, Frankfurt a.M.
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
22 February 2016 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Es gibt keinen allgemeingültigen Konsens über die Indikationen zur chirurgischen Therapie der degenerativen Spondylolisthesis. Dies liegt zumindest teilweise an der geringen Evidenz der vorliegenden Literatur und den begrenzten Kenntnissen zum natürlichen Verlauf und zu den Langzeitergebnissen konservativer Therapie. Neurologische Defizite und konservativ-therapieresistente Instabilitätsbeschwerden stellen absolute Indikationen dar. Neben der Dekompression neuraler Strukturen ist die Stabilisation der 2. integrale Bestandteil der Operation. Die Dekompression und instrumentierte Fusion stellt den Standard dar. Die Wahl des Operationsverfahrens ist aber eine Herausforderung angesichts der zahlreichen Techniken und Implantate. Der Operateur sollte seine Entscheidung für jeden Patienten individuell treffen, um allen spezifischen Besonderheiten Rechnung zu tragen. Der Artikel gibt einen Überblick über die derzeitige Evidenz bei der operativen Versorgung sowie die OP-Verfahren und soll auf diesem Wege die Therapieentscheidungen erleichtern.

Abstract

There is no general consensus about indications for surgical treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis. This is – in part – due to a paucity of knowledge of its natural history and outcomes of conservative treatment, as well as a relatively small number of sufficiently powered outcome studies for surgical treatment. We aim to provide an overview of current surgical techniques and deduce indications based on two simple principles: presence of neurological deficits and instability. Today, decompression and instrumented fusion is the standard of care. However, the complete armamentarium of possible treatment options should be carefully considered, and the adequate procedures and instruments used should be chosen individually, when a decision to operate is made.

Key words

degenerative Spondylolisthesis - Fusion - Stabilisation - Dekompression - Spondylodese

Key words

degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis - fusion - stabilisation - decompression - spondylodesis
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Junghanns H. Die gesunde und kranke Wirbelsäule in Röntgenbild und Klinik. 2. Aufl. Stuttgart: Thieme; 1951
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Love TW, Fagan AB, Fraser RD. Degenerative spondylolisthesis. J Bone Joint Surg 1999; 81-B: 670-674
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Boden SD, Riew KD, Yamaguchi K et al. Orientation of the lumbar facet joints: association with degenerative disc disease. J Bone Joint Surg 1996; 78-A: 403-411
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Grobler LJ, Robertson PA, Novotny JE et al. Etiology of spondylolisthesis: assessment of the role played by lumbar facet joint morphology. Spine 1993; 18: 80-91
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Toyone T, Ozawa T, Kamikawa K et al. Facet joint orientation difference between cephalad and caudad portions: a possible cause of degenerative spondylolisthesis. Spine 2009; 34: 2259-2262
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Wang J, Yang X. Age-related changes in the orientation of lumbar facet joints. Spine 2009; 34: E596-E598
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Andersen T, Christensen F, Langdahl BL et al. Degenerative Spondylolisthesis is associated with low spinal bone density: a comparative study between spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. Biomed Res Int 2013; 2013: 123847
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Aono K, Kobayashi T, Jimbo S et al. Radiographic analysis of newly developed degenerative spondylolisthesis in a mean twelve-year prospective study. Spine 2010; 35: 887-891
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Benoist M. Natural history of the ageing spine. Eur Spine J 2003; 12 (Suppl. 02) S86-S89
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Benoist M. The natural history of lumbar degenerative spinal stenosis. Joint Bone Spine 2002; 69: 450-457
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Matsunaga S, Sakou T, Morizono Y et al. Natural history of degenerative spondylolisthesis. Pathogenesis and natural course of the slippage. Spine 1990; 15: 1204-1210
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Matsunaga S, Ijiri K, Hayashi K. Nonsurgically managed patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis: a 10- to 18-year follow-up study. J Neurosurg 2000; 93 (2 Suppl.) S194-S198
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Parker SL, Godil SS, Mendenhall SK et al. Two-year comprehensive medical management of degenerative lumbar spine disease (lumbar spondylolisthesis, stenosis, or disc herniation): a value analysis of cost, pain, disability, and quality of life: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 2014; 21: 143-149
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 North American Spine Society ed. Diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Evidence-based clinical guidelines for multidisciplinary spine care. Revised 2014. ISBN 1-929988-36-2.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Resnick DK, Watters 3rd WC, Sharan A et al. Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 9: lumbar fusion for stenosis with spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 2014; 21: 54-61
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Mannion AF, Pittet V Steiger Fet al. Zürich Appropriateness of Spine Surgery (ZASS) Group. Development of appropriateness criteria for the surgical treatment of symptomatic lumbar degenerativespondylolisthesis (LDS). Eur Spine J 2014; 23: 1903-1917
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Caterini R, Mancini F, Bisicchia S et al. The correlation between exaggerated fluid in lumbar facet joints and degenerative spondylolisthesis: prospective study of 52 patients. J Orthop Traumatol 2011; 12: 87-91
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Delank KS, Eysel P, Zöllner J et al. [Undercutting decompression versus laminectomy. Clinical and radiological results of a prospective controlled trial]. Orthopade 2002; 31: 1048-1056
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Gunzburg R, Keller TS, Szpalski M et al. A prospective study on CT scan outcomes after conservative decompression surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003; 16: 261-267
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Jansson KG, Nemeth G, Granath F et al. Spinal stenosis reoperation rate in Sweden is 11 % at 10 years – a national analysis of 9,664 operations. Eur Spine J 2005; 14: 659-663
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Bridwell KH, Sedgewick TA, OʼBrien MF et al. The role of fusion and instrumentation in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord 1993; 6: 461-472
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Fischgrund JS, Mackay M, Herkowitz HN et al. Volvo Award winner in clinical studies. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis: a prospective, randomized study comparing decompressive laminectomy and arthrodesis with and without spinal instrumentation. Spine 1997; 22: 2807-2812
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Kimura I, Shingu H, Murata M et al. Lumbar posterolateral fusion alone or with transpedicular instrumentation in L4–L5 degenerative spondylolisthesis. J Spinal Disord 2001; 14: 301-310
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Mardjetko SM, Connolly PJ, Shott S. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. A meta-analysis of literature 1970–1993. Spine 1994; 19 (20 Suppl.) 2256S-2265S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Martin CR, Gruszczynski AT, Braunsfurth HA et al. The surgical management of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review. Spine 2007; 32: 1791-1798
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Scheer JK, Auffinger B, Wong RH et al. Minimally invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) for Spondylolisthesis in 282 patients: in situ arthrodesis versus reduction. World Neurosurg 2015; 84: 108-113
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Wegmann K, Gundermann S, Siewe J et al. Correlation of reduction and clinical outcome in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2013; 133: 1639-1644
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Lian XF, Hou TS, Xu JG et al. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion for aged patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis: is intentional surgical reduction essential?. Spine J 2013; 13: 1183-1189
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Gibson JN, Depreitere B, Pflugmacher R et al. Decompression and paraspinous tension band: a novel treatment method for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. Spine J 2015; 15 (3 Suppl.) S23-S32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Anekstein Y, Floman Y, Smorgick Y et al. Seven years follow-up for total lumbar facet joint replacement (TOPS) in the management of lumbar spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J 2015; 24: 2306-2314
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Davis R, Auerbach JD, Bae H et al. Can low-grade spondylolisthesis be effectively treated by either coflex interlaminar stabilization or laminectomy and posterior spinal fusion? Two-year clinical and radiographic results from the randomized, prospective, multicenter US investigational device exemption trial: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 2013; 19: 174-184
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Sakaura H, Yamashita T, Miwa T et al. Outcomes of 2-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion for 2-level degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 2013; 19: 90-94
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Hikata T, Kamata M, Furukawa M. Risk factors for adjacent segment disease after posterior lumbar interbody fusion and efficacy of simultaneous decompression surgery for symptomatic adjacent segment disease. J Spinal Disord Tech 2014; 27: 70-75
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Wang JC, Arnold PM, Hermsmeyer JT et al. Do lumbar motion preserving devices reduce the risk of adjacent segment pathology compared with fusion surgery? A systematic review. Spine 2012; 37 (22 Suppl.) S133-S143
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Hoppe S, Schwarzenbach O, Aghayev E et al. Long-term outcome after monosegmental L4/5 stabilization for degenerative spondylolisthesis with the Dynesys Device. J Spinal Disord Tech 2012; [Epub ahead of print]
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Kurd M, Cohick S, Park A et al. Fusion in degenerative spondylolisthesis: comparison of osteoconductive and osteoinductive bone graft substitutes. Eur Spine J 2014; 24: 1066-1073
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Siewe J, Bredow J, Oppermann J et al. Evaluation of efficacy of a new hybrid fusion device: a randomized, two-centre controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2014; 15: 294
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Brodano GB, Martikos K, Lolli F et al. Transforaminal Lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative disc disease and spondylolisthesis grade I: minimally invasive versus open surgery. J Spinal Disord Tech 2015; 28: E559-E564
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Hartensuer R, Riesenbeck O, Schulze M et al. Biomechanical evaluation of the Facet Wedge: a refined technique for facet fixation. Eur Spine J 2014; 23: 2321-2329
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Pérez-Prieto D, Lozano-Álvarez C, Saló G et al. Should age be a contraindication for degenerative lumbar surgery?. Eur Spine J 2014; 23: 1007-1012
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Kong LD, Zhang YZ, Wang F et al. Radiographic restoration of sagittal spinopelvic alignment after posterior lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative spondylolisthesis. J Spinal Disord Tech 2014; [Epub ahead of print]
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Park Y, Ha JW, Lee YT et al. Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis and degenerative spondylosis: 5-year results. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014; 472: 1813-1823
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Lamartina C, Berjano P, Petruzzi M et al. Criteria to restore the sagittal balance in deformity and degenerative spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J 2012; 21 (Suppl. 01) S27-S31
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Weinstein JN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD et al. Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. N Engl J Med 2007; 356: 2257-2270
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Tosteson AN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD et al. Comparative effectiveness evidence from the spine patient outcomes research trial: surgical versus nonoperative care for spinal stenosis, degenerative spondylolisthesis, and intervertebral disc herniation. Spine 2011; 36: 2061-2068
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Freedman MK, Hilibrand AS, Blood EA et al. The impact of diabetes on the outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical treatment of patients in the spine patient outcomes research trial. Spine 2011; 36: 290-307
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Rihn JA, Hilibrand AS, Zhao W et al. Effectiveness of surgery for lumbar stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis in the octogenarian population: analysis of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) data. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2015; 97: 177-185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Pearson A, Blood E, Lurie J et al. Predominant leg pain is associated with better surgical outcomes in degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis: results from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT). Spine 2011; 36: 219-229
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar