Semirigid Instrumentation in the Management of Lumbar Spinal Conditions Combined With Circumferential Fusion

Abstract

This technique produces a satisfactory fusion rate (97%) and a good clinical outcome based on pain reduction and return to a satisfactory level of activity (77%). It is associated with few, but significant, complications that compare well with other reported series in a difficult group of patients. This procedure should be reserved for patients who are considered to be at high risk for not achieving spinal fusion.

Comparison of instrumented anterior interbody fusion with instrumented circumferential lumbar fusion

“…Kuslich et al [28] reported a 91% fusion rate, 84% pain relief and 91% functional improvement at 24 months' follow-up using the BAK method of lumbar interbody fusion. Other authors [1,2,3,10,16,50,52] have reported more than 70% satisfactory clinical results with instrumented interbody fusion. Our patients had a 72% rate of clinical satisfaction with ALIF and 74% with circumferential fusion (PLIF) using subjective scores, and 79.5% and 80% clinical satisfaction using the Oswestry Disability Index.…”

“…PLIF offers several advantages [1,10,16,50,52]. It restores disc height, the load bearing ability of anterior ligaments and muscles, root canal dimensions, and spinal balance.…”

Do autologous growth factors enhance transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion?

“…The radiological results were all assessed in a similar way using the method described by Gertzbein et al [17]. Briefly, fusion was considered solid if the anterior interbody area was fused, if the two posterolateral areas were fused, or if all three areas were fused.…”

Evaluation of indication-based use of transpedicular instrumentations with different rigidity for lumbar spinal fusion: a prospective pilot study with 3 years of follow-up

“…Note that the implant in use must not be confused with mere "tension-band" augmentation [6,15]. The biomechanical characteristics of semi-rigid implants for lumbar fusion purposes currently available on the market have occasionally featured at least as a partial aspect of clinical papers [4,12,13,17,25,27] and, thus, should briefly be reiterated.…”