Download PDF
Die Wirbelsäule 2017; 01(02): 129-132
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-102186
Übersicht
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

„Iatrogenes Wirbelgleiten – Inzidenz, Risikofaktoren, Management“

Iatrogenic Spondylolisthesis – incidence, risk factors, management
Güliz Acker
Neurochirurgische Klinik, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
,
Peter Vajkoczy
Neurochirurgische Klinik, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
03 May 2017 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Iatrogenes Wirbelgleiten ist eine Subform der Olisthese nach erfolgter Wirbelsäulenoperation und wurde 1989 in die Klassifikation nach Wiltse, Newman und McNab hinzugefügt. Als Ursache werden in erster Linie die Entfernung der dorsalen ossären sowie ligamentären Strukturen nach Dekompressionsoperationen sowie die iatrogene Spondylolyse nach Fusionsoperationen beschrieben. Die Inzidenz wird in der Literatur mit einer Spannweite von 3,7 bis 20 % nach erfolgter Wirbelsäulenoperation angegeben. Folgende Risikofaktoren sind unter anderem für die iatrogene Olisthese in der Literatur erwähnt: präoperativ bestehende Olisthese, Beweglichkeit über 1.25 mm in dem betroffenen Segment bei Flexion-Extension, die Geometrie sowie Höhe des Bandscheibenfaches über 6.5 mm und Facettenwinkel über 50°. Die Therapie der symptomatischen iatrogenen Olisthese beinhaltet die Fusion der betroffenen Wirbelsegmente. In der Literatur sind verschieden Fusionsverfahren beschrieben, i. e. posterolaterale Fusion, TLIF, OLIF, XLIF und ALIF. Eine Evidenz bezüglich der Managements der Wahl existiert aufgrund mangelnder Studienlage aktuell nicht.

Abstract

Iatrogenic spondylolisthesis is a subtyp of spondylisthesis that occurs after spine surgeries. This subtyp was included in year 1989 to the previous classification from Wiltse, Newman und McNab. Common causes are mainly extensive resection of posterior structures during a decompression operation and iatrogenic spondolyse during or after fusion operations. The incidence has been reported between 3,7 – 20 % after spine surgeries. Some of the major risk factors for iatrogenic spondlolisthesis are: preexisiting spondylolisthesis, motion at the level of spondylolisthesis above 1,25 mm during flexion-extension, disc geometry and height above 6,5 mm und facet angle above 50 degrees. The treatment of iatrogenic symptomatic spondylolisthesis includes fusion operations of the affected segment. Different fusion operations have been described in the literature such as posterolateral fusion, TLIF, OLIF, XLIF and ALIF. However, there is still no evidence for the treatment of choice due to the deficiency of studies.

Schlüsselwörter

iatrogene Olisthesis - Instabilität - iatrogene Spondylolyse

Keywords

iatrogenic spondylolisthesis - instability - iatrogenic spondylolyse
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Harris RI, Wiley JJ. Acquired Spondylolysis as a Sequel to Spine Fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1963; 45: 1159-1170
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Wiltse LL, Rothman LG. Spondylolisthesis: Classification, diagnosis, and natural history. Seminars in Spine Surgery 1989; 2: 78-94
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Wiltse LL, Newman PH, Macnab I. Classification of spondylolisis and spondylolisthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1976; 117: 23-29
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Marchetti PC, Bartolozzi P. Classification of spondylolisthesis as a guideline for treatment. In: Bridwell KH, DeWald RL, Hammerberg KW. et al., Hrsg. The textbook of spinal surgery. 2. Aufl. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1997: 1211-1254
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Guha D, Heary RF, Shamji MF. Iatrogenic spondylolisthesis following laminectomy for degenerative lumbar stenosis: systematic review and current concepts. Neurosurg Focus 2015; DOI: 10.3171/2015.7.FOCUS15259.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Konig MA, Ebrahimi FV, Nitulescu A. et al. Early results of stand-alone anterior lumbar interbody fusion in iatrogenic spondylolisthesis patients. Eur Spine J 2013; 22: 2876-2883
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Frymoyer JW, Matteri RE, Hanley EN. et al. Failed lumbar disc surgery requiring second operation. A long-term follow-up study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1978; 3: 7-11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Wiltse LL, Hambly MF. Degenerative changes in the first two segments above a lumbosacral fusion: A 22.6 year (average) Follow-up. In: Wittenberg RH, Steffen R. , Hrsg. Insrumented Spinal Fusion. Stuttgart: Thieme; 1994: 178-189
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Adams MA, Hutton WC. The mechanical function of the lumbar apophyseal joints. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1983; 8: 327-330
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Suzuki K, Ishida Y, Ohmori K. Spondylolysis after posterior decompression of the lumbar spine. 35 patients followed for 3-9 years. Acta Orthop Scand 1993; 64: 17-21
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Gillespie KA, Dickey JP. Biomechanical role of lumbar spine ligaments in flexion and extension: determination using a parallel linkage robot and a porcine model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2004; 29: 1208-1126
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Tai CL, Hsieh PH, Chen WP. et al. Biomechanical comparison of lumbar spine instability between laminectomy and bilateral laminotomy for spinal stenosis syndrome - an experimental study in porcine model. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2008; 9: 84
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Celik SE, Celik S, Goksu K. et al. Microdecompressive laminatomy with a 5-year follow-up period for severe lumbar spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord Tech 2010; 23: 229-235
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Hong SW, Choi KY, Ahn Y. et al. A comparison of unilateral and bilateral laminotomies for decompression of L4-L5 spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2011; 36: E172-178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Ho YH, Tu YK, Hsiao CK. et al. Outcomes after minimally invasive lumbar decompression: a biomechanical comparison of unilateral and bilateral laminotomies. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2015; 16: 208
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Ghogawala Z, Benzel EC, Amin-Hanjani S. et al. Prospective outcomes evaluation after decompression with or without instrumented fusion for lumbar stenosis and degenerative Grade I spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 2004; 1: 267-272
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Fox MW, Onofrio BM, Onofrio BM. et al. Clinical outcomes and radiological instability following decompressive lumbar laminectomy for degenerative spinal stenosis: a comparison of patients undergoing concomitant arthrodesis versus decompression alone. J Neurosurg 1996; 85: 793-802
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Mori G, Mikami Y, Arai Y. et al. Outcomes in cases of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis more than 5 years after treatment with minimally invasive decompression: examination of pre- and postoperative slippage, intervertebral disc changes, and clinical results. J Neurosurg Spine 2016; 24: 367-374
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Blumenthal C, Curran J, Benzel EC. et al. Radiographic predictors of delayed instability following decompression without fusion for degenerative grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 2013; 18: 340-346
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Bisschop A, van Royen BJ, Mullender MG. et al. Which factors prognosticate spinal instability following lumbar laminectomy?. Eur Spine J 2012; 21: 2640-2648
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Brunet JA, Wiley JJ. Acquired spondylolysis after spinal fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1984; 66: 720-724
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Samartzis D, Cheung JP, Rajasekaran S. et al. Is lumbar facet joint tropism developmental or secondary to degeneration? An international, large-scale multicenter study by the AOSpine Asia Pacific Research Collaboration Consortium. Scoliosis Spinal Disord 2016; 11: 9
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Guigui P, Ferrero E. Surgical treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2017; 103: S11-S20
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Bae HW, Davis RJ, Lauryssen C. et al. Three-Year Follow-up of the Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial of Coflex Interlaminar Stabilization vs Instrumented Fusion in Patients With Lumbar Stenosis. Neurosurgery 2016; 79: 169-181
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 L'Heureux Jr EA, Perra HJ, Pinto MR. et al. Functional outcome analysis including preoperative and postoperative SF-36 for surgically treated adult isthmic spondylolisthesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2003; 28: 1269-1274
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Mobbs RJ, Phan K, Malham G. et al. Lumbar interbody fusion: techniques, indications and comparison of interbody fusion options including PLIF, TLIF, MI-TLIF, OLIF/ATP, LLIF and ALIF. J Spine Surg 2015; 1: 2-18
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Wang SJ, Han YC, Liu XM. et al. Fusion techniques for adult isthmic spondylolisthesis: a systematic review. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2014; 134: 777-784
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Heller JG, Ghanayem AJ, McAfee P. et al. Iatrogenic lumbar spondylolisthesis: treatment by anterior fibular and iliac arthrodesis. J Spinal Disord 2000; 13: 309-318
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Ghogawala Z, Dziura J, Butler WE. et al. Laminectomy plus Fusion versus Laminectomy Alone for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis. N Engl J Med 2016; 374: 1424-1434
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Cheung JP, Cheung PW, Cheung KM. et al. Decompression without Fusion for Low-Grade Degenerative Spondylolisthesis. Asian Spine J 2016; 10: 75-84
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Glassman S, Gornet MF, Branch C. et al. MOS short form 36 and Oswestry Disability Index outcomes in lumbar fusion: a multicenter experience. Spine J 2006; 6: 21-26
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Deguchi M, Rapoff AJ, Zdeblick TA. Biomechanical comparison of spondylolysis fixation techniques. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1999; 24: 328-333
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar