Lumbar spondylolysis: tactical approaches, indications and types of surgical interventions, treatment results. A systematic review

Objective. To analyze the literature data on treatment tactics for patients with spondylolysis of the lumbar vertebrae, and to determine indications for surgical treatment, types of surgical interventions, criteria for assessing treatment results, complications and rehabilitation after treatment.

Material and Methods. Full text articles were selected from the Pubmed, EMBASE, eLibrary, Google and Yandex databases. The type of articles was a systematic review and meta-analysis, and the search period was 10 years. The literature search was carried out by three researchers. The study was conducted in accordance with the international PRISMA guidelines for writing systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The levels of evidence reliability and gradation of strength of recommendations were assessed according to the ASCO protocol.

Results. A total of 6812 articles on the topic under consideration were found, of them 4922 articles with full text, 2155 over the past 10 years, 115 systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Fourteen articles met the inclusion criteria.

Conclusion. Indications for surgical treatment of spondylolysis are the failure of conservative treatment for 6 months, worsening of clinical symptoms, and development of spondylolisthesis. The goal of the surgery is bone fusion formation at the level of the defect, restoration of  spinal stability and preservation of mobility of the corresponding segment. Surgical treatment methods for spondylolysis using transpedicular screws and a beam (Gillet) showed a higher fusion result than the Scott and Morscher methods. Minimally invasive methods (Buck method and its modifications) provide better functional results. The highest complication rate is observed in surgical interventions using the Scott method (wire rupture, transverse process fracture, lack of fusion) and those using the Morscher method (superficial infection, instability of implants and persistent back pain). The choice of surgical method should be based on the surgeon’s preferences and experience.

1. Berjano P, Ristori G, Ismael Aguirre MF, Langella F, Damilano M, Cecchinato R, Pun A, Lamartina C. A novel technique for spondylolysis repair with pedicle screws, rod and polyester band: case report with technical note and systematic literature review. Spine. 2020;45:E1682–E1691. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003697.

2. Muthiah N, Ozpinar A, Eubanks J, Peretti M, Yolcu YU, Anthony A, Sekula RF Jr. Direct pars repair with cannulated screws in adults: a case series and systematic literature review. World Neurosurg. 2022;163:e263–e274.

3. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2022.03.107.

4. Westacott DJ, Cooke SJ. Functional outcome following direct repair or intervertebral fusion for adolescent spondylolysis: a systematic review. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2012;21:596–601. DOI: 10.1097/BPB.0b013e328355393d.

5. Bouras T, Korovessis P. Management of spondylolysis and low-grade spondylolisthesis in fine athletes. A comprehensive review. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2015;25 Suppl 1:S167–S175. DOI: 10.1007/s00590-014-1560-7.

6. Grazina R, Andrade R, Santos FL, Marinhas J, Pereira R, Bastos R, Espregueira-Mendes J. Return to play after conservative and surgical treatment in athletes with spondylolysis: A systematic review. Phys Ther Sport. 2019;37:34–43.

7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ptsp.2019.02.005.

8. Kolcun JPG, Chieng LO, Madhavan K, Wang MY. Minimally-invasive versus conventional repair of spondylolysis in athletes: a review of outcomes and return to play. Asian Spine J. 2017;11:832–842. DOI: 10.4184/asj.2017.11.5.832.

9. Kumar N, Madhu S, Pandita N, Ramos MRD, Tan BWL, Lopez KG, Alathur Ramakrishnan S, Jonathan P, Nolan CP, Shree Kumar D. Is there a place for surgical repair in adults with spondylolysis or grade-I spondylolisthesis – a systematic review and treatment algorithm. Spine J. 2021;21:1268–1285.

10. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.03.011.

11. Lin LH, Lin TY, Chang KV, Wu WT, Ozcakar L. Effectiveness of lumbar segmental stabilization exercises in managing disability and pain intensity among patients with lumbar spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Spine. 2024. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004989.

12. Mohammed N, Patra DP, Narayan V, Savardekar AR, Dossani RH, Bollam P, Bir S, Nanda A. A comparison of the techniques of direct pars interarticularis repairs for spondylolysis and low-grade spondylolisthesis: a meta-analysis. Neurosurg Focus. 2018;44:E10. DOI: 10.3171/2017.11.FOCUS17581.

13. Overley SC, McAnany SJ, Andelman S, Kim J, Merrill RK, Cho SK, Qureshi SA, Hecht AC. Return to play in adolescent athletes with symptomatic spondylolysis without listhesis: a meta-analysis. Global Spine J. 2018;8:190–197. DOI: 10.1177/2192568217734520.

14. Scheepers MS, Streak Gomersall J, Munn Z. The effectiveness of surgical versus conservative treatment for symptomatic unilateral spondylolysis of the lumbar spine in athletes: a systematic review. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015;13:137–173. DOI: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1926.

15. Sellyn GE, Hale AT, Tang AR, Waters A, Shannon CN, Bonfield CM. Pediatric thoracolumbar spine surgery and return to athletics: a systematic review. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2019;24:702–712. DOI: 10.3171/2019.7.PEDS19290.

16. Tsai SHL, Chang CW, Chen WC, Lin TY, Wang YC, Wong CB, Yolcu YU, Alvi MA, Bydon M, Fu TS. Does direct surgical repair benefit pars interarticularis fracture? a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pain Physician. 2022;25:265–282.

17. Tanveer F, Arslan SA, Darain H, Ahmad A, Gilani SA, Hanif A. Prevailing treatment methods for lumbar spondylolysis: A systematic review. Medicine (Baltimore). 2021;100:e28319. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000028319.