Objective To provide evidence-based therapeutic schedule for an adult patient with Lumber Isthmic Spondylolisthesis grading II. Methods Based on fully assessing the patient’s conditions, the clinical problems were put forward according to PICO principles. Such database as The Cochrane Library (2005 to April 2011), DARE (April 2011), CENTRAL (April 2011), MEDLINE (April 2011), EMbase and CBM were searched to collect high quality clinical evidence, and then we told a patient information about treatment plans. The plan was chosen by the patient for she knew her conditions and the plans. Results We included 1 meta-analysis, 3 randomized controlled trials, 5 systematic reviews and 1 prospective study on the natural course of isthmic spondylolisthesis were included. Literature evidence indicated that the prognosis of isthmic spondylolisthesis was good. Surgery should be selected when there was neither no remission of symptom, nor progression of lumber olisthy with conservative treatment. The long-term effect of surgery may be good, but it cannot change the natural course of the disease. Based on literature evidence, the patient chose the conservative treatment. After one year’s treatment the patient recovered, her sciatica relieved, and CT showed no progression of lumber olisthy. Conclusion Patient with low grand isthmic spondylolisthesis chose conservative treatment may achieves good effects, whereas on the process of the treatment, regular follow-up to monitor the progression of lumber olisthy should be conducted.
Objective To investigate the relationship between the volume of bone-graft and fusion efficacy in posterior lumbar interbody fusion and internal fixation of spondylolisthesis. Methods Between May 2004 and June 2007, 79 patients with spondylolisthesis were treated with posterior lumbar interbody fusion and internal fixation. The patients were randomly divided into 3 groups according to the volume of bone-graft for interbody fusion: group A (n=27), 5 bone granules/ cm3 on average; group B (n=26), 11 bone granules/cm3 on average; and group C (n=26), 25 bone granules/cm3 on average. There was no significant difference in gender, age, disease duration, affected segment, and the degree of vertebral slip among 3 groups (P gt; 0.05). The volume of bone-graft, the fusion rate, the loss of intervertebral height, and the incidence of internal fixation failure were compared among 3 groups. Results All cases were followed up 24-43 months (mean, 35 months). There were significant differences in volume of bone-graft among 3 groups (P lt; 0.05). There was no significant difference in total volume of bone-graft and Cage height among 3 groups (P gt; 0.05). The Oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of low back pain and leg pain at last follow-up were significantly decreased when compared with preoperative scores in 3 groups (P lt; 0.05); but no significant difference was found among 3 groups (P gt; 0.05). The fusion rate was significantly higher in group B than in groups A and C, and in group A than in group C at 1 and 2 years after operation (P lt; 0.05). The change values of the intervertebral height were (2.2 ± 1.4), (0.8 ± 1.3), and (2.3 ± 1.6) mm respectively in groups A, B, and C; it was significantly lower in group B than in groups A and C (P lt; 0.05). The degree of vertebral slip at immediately after operation and last follow-up was significantly improved when compared with preoperative one in 3 groups (P lt; 0.05); the loss of vertebral slip in group B was significantly lower than that in groups A and C at last follow-up (P lt; 0.05). After operation, nail breaking occurred in 1 case (3.7%) of group C at 1 year, depinning in 1 case (3.8%) of group A at 2 years, and no nail breaking or depinning in group B. There was no significant difference in the incidence of internal fixation failure among 3 groups (χ2=3.950, P=0.604). Conclusion The application of bone-graft with middle volume (11 bone granules/cm3 on average) in internal fixation and posterior lumbar interbody fusion has a good imageology outcome, which can increase the fusion rate and decrease the loss of intervertebral height.
Objective To assess the effectiveness of surgical interventions for lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults.Methods RCTs of surgical treatment for adult lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis were identified from specialized trials registered in Cochrane Back Group, The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2004)，additional electronic search (including MEDLINE (1966 to 2004)，EMBASE (1980 to 2004) and CBM), handsearching for Chinese journals. Two reviewers assessed the quality of the trials and extracted data independently. Meta analysis was conducted using RevMan 4.2. Results Four published trials including a total of 277 patients were included. Three trials compared different operative procedures and one trial considered conservative versus surgical treatment for lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults. Two trials had limitations of trial design which at times gave considerable potential for bias. As very few studies and patients were included, and different score criteria were used to assess the clinical outcomes in the review, we decided to provide a descriptive summary only. All trials drew a conclusion that lumbar posterolateral fusion for adult isthmic spondylolisthesis could relieve pain and improve clinical outcome. There was no significant difference in fusion rate and improvement of clinical outcomes between different operative procedures. One trial showed that the lumbar posterolateral fusion could improve function and relieve pain more efficiently than an exercise program. Three trials indicated there was no difference in fusion rate and improvement of clinical outcomes between different operative methods. One trial suggested that instrumented posterolateral fusion did not improve fusion rate but increased complication rates, operation time and bleeding loss. Two trials considered the role of decompressive laminectomy and reached a conflicting conclusion. Conclusions There is no adequate evidence about the most effective technique of treatment for adult lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis. There is limited evidence that the lumbar posterolateral fusion for adult isthmic spondylolisthesis can efficiently relieve pain and improve clinical outcome. There is no evidence that the use of pedicle screw fixation can improve the fusion rate or the clinical outcome. At present, there is no enough evidence available from randomised trials to support the routine clinical use of instrumented fusion for lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis in adults. As very few studies and patients were included in the review, it was cautious to draw any conclusions from the review. More trials with high quality on methodology are needed.