Preview

Russian Journal of Spine Surgery (Khirurgiya Pozvonochnika)

Advanced search

EFFECT OF INTERSPINOUS SPACER ON SEGMENTAL RANGE OF MOTION AND PAIN AFTER TOTAL MICRODISCECTOMY WITH CURETTAGE OF THE DISC SPACE

https://doi.org/10.14531/ss2015.1.69-75

Abstract

Objective. To assess the efficacy of dynamic stabilization with interspinous spacer after decompression of neural structures and curettage of the disc space in surgical treatment of patients with degenerative disc disease.

Material and Methods. A total of 100 patients operated on for degenerative lumbar disc disease were enrolled in the study. Patients were divided into two groups. All patients underwent microsurgical discectomy with curettage of the disc space and decompression of neural structures. Interspinous spacer was implanted additionally in patients from the study group. CT, MRI, and functional X-ray studies were performed before and after surgery. The quality of treatment was assessed using VAS and Oswestry questionnaire.

Results. There were no statistically significant differences in the rate of surgical complications between groups. Patients operated on with interspinous spacer had better outcomes, lower VAS and Oswestry scores, and decreased segmental range of motion during the first year after surgery.

Conclusion. The use of interspinous spacer provides relief of back pain, decrease in segmental instability, and improved quality of life of patients. Interspinous spacer does not affect the adjacent segment degeneration. 

About the Authors

Arslan Bagautinovich Bamatov
City Clinical Hospital № 67 n.a. L.A. Vorokhobov, Moscow
Russian Federation


Dmitry Nikolayevich Dzukaev
City Clinical Hospital № 67 n.a. L.A. Vorokhobov, Moscow
Russian Federation


Oleg Nikolayevich Dreval
Russian Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education, Moscow
Russian Federation


Aleksey Vitalyevich Kuznetsov
Russian Medical Academy of Postgraduate Education, Moscow
Russian Federation


References

1. Практическая нейрохирургия: рук-во для врачей // Под ред. Б.В. Гайдара. СПб., 2002. Гл. 23. С. 533-536.

2. Симонович А.Е., Маркин С.П., Нуралиев И.И. и др. Влияние динамической фиксации поясничных позвоночных сегментов на их подвижность // Хирургия позвоночника. 2008. № 4. С. 30-36.

3. Хорева Н.Е., Гринь А.А., Дзукаев Д.Н. и др. Некоторые показатели качества оказания нейрохирургической помощи больным дегенеративными заболеваниями позвоночника в стационарах Департамента здравоохранения г. Москвы. // Нейрохирургия. 2010. № 2. С. 65-71.

4. Ambrossi GL, McGirt MJ, Sciubba DM, et al. Recurrent lumbar disc herniation after single-level lumbar discectomy: incidence and health care cost analysis. Neurosurgery. 2009; 65: 574-578. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000350224.36213.F9.

5. Bundschuh CV, Modic MT, Ross JS, et al. Epidural fibrosis and recurrent disk herniation in the lumbar spine: MR imaging assessment. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1988; 150: 923-932.

6. Etebar S, Cahill DW. Risk factors for adjacent-segment failure following lumbar fixation with rigid instrumentation for degenerative instability. J Neurosurg. 1999; 90(2 Suppl): 163-169.

7. Haid RW, Fessler RG, McLaughlin MR, eds. Lumbar Interbody Fusion Techniques: Cages, Dowels, and Grafts. St. Louis: Quality Medical Publishing Inc., 2001: 3.

8. Highsmith JM, Tumialan LM, Rodts GE Jr. Flexible rods and the case for dynamic stabilization. Neurosurg Focus. 2007; 22: E11.

9. Kern S, Frank MP. DIAM (Device for Intervertebral Assisted Motion) spinal stabilization system. In: Dynamic Reconstruction of the Spine, ed. by Kim DH, Kamissa FP, Fessler RG. Thieme, 2006: 274-283.

10. Loupasis GA, Stamos K, Katonis PG, et al. Seven- to 20-year outcome of lumbar discectomy. Spine. 1999; 24: 2313-2317.

11. Martinez Quinones JV, Aso J, Consolini F, et al. [Long-term outcomes of lumbar microdiscectomy in a working class sample]. Neurocirugia (Astur). 2011; 22: 235-244. In Spanish.

12. McGirt MJ, Ambrossi GL, Datoo G, et al. Recurrent disc herniation and long-term back pain after primary lumbar discectomy: review of outcomes reported for limited versus aggressive disc removal. Neurosurgery. 2009; 64: 338-345. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000337574.58662.E2.

13. Moliterno JA, Knopman J, Parikh K, et al. Results and risk factors for recurrence following single-level tubular lumbar microdiscectomy. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010; 12: 680-686. doi: 10.3171/2009.12.SPINE08843.

14. Phillips FM, Voronov LI, Gaitanis IN, et al. Biomechanics of posterior dynamic stabilizing device (DIAM) after facetectomy and discectomy. Spine J. 2006; 6: 714-722.

15. Tao H, Fan H. Implantation of amniotic membrane to reduce postlaminectomy epidural adhesions. Eur Spine J. 2009; 18: 1202-1212. doi: 10.1007/s00586-009-1013-x.

16. Schaller B. Failed back surgery syndrome: the role of symptomatic segmental single-level instability after lumbar microdiscectomy. Eur Spine J. 2004; 13: 193-198.

17. Wilke HJ, Drumm J, Haussler K, et al. Biomechanical effect of different lumbar interspinous implants on flexibility and intradiscal pressure. Eur Spine J. 2008; 17: 1049-1056. doi: 10.1007/s00586-008-0657-2.


Review

For citations:


Bamatov A.B., Dzukaev D.N., Dreval O.N., Kuznetsov A.V. EFFECT OF INTERSPINOUS SPACER ON SEGMENTAL RANGE OF MOTION AND PAIN AFTER TOTAL MICRODISCECTOMY WITH CURETTAGE OF THE DISC SPACE. Russian Journal of Spine Surgery (Khirurgiya Pozvonochnika). 2015;12(1):69-75. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.14531/ss2015.1.69-75



Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 1810-8997 (Print)
ISSN 2313-1497 (Online)