Objective To review the research progress of the risk factors for slip progression and the pathogenesis of lumbosacral spondylolisthesis, and to discuss the value of Spinal Deformity Study Group (SDSG) classification system for lumbosacral spondylolisthesis. Methods Recent articles about the risk factors for slip progression and the pathogenesis of lumbosacral spondylolisthesis were reviewed and comprehensively analyzed with SDSG classification system of lumbosacral spondylolisthesis. Results Pelvic incidence (PI) is the key pathogenic factor of lumbosacral spondylolisthesis. The Meyerding grade of slip, PI, sacro-pelvic balance, and spino-pelvic balance not only are the fundamental risk factors of slip progression, but also are the key factors to determine how to treat and influence the prognosis. Therefore, compared with Wiltse, Marchetti-Bartolozzi, and Mac-Thiong-Labelle classification systems of lumbosacral spondylolisthesis, SDSG classification based on these factors mentioned above, has better homogeneity between the subjects of subgroup, and better reliability, moreover, could better guide operative plan and judge the prognosis. Conclusion It is suggested that the SDSG classification system should be the standard classification for lumbosacral spondylolisthesis for the clinical and research work.
ObjectiveTo investigate the value of smart phone Scoliometer software in obtaining optimal lumbar lordosis (LL) during L4-S1 fusion surgery. MethodsBetween November 2014 and February 2015, 20 patients scheduled for L4-S1 fusion surgery were prospectively enrolled the study. There were 8 males and 12 females, aged 41-65 years (mean, 52.3 years). The disease duration ranged from 6 months to 6 years (mean, 3.4 years). Before operation, the pelvic incidence (PI) and Cobb angle of L4-S1 (CobbL4-S1) were measured on lateral X-ray film of lumbosacral spine by PACS system; and the ideal CobbL4-S1 was then calculated according to previously published methods [(PI+9°)×70%]. Subsequently, intraoperative CobbL4-S1 was monitored by the Scoliometer software and was defined as optimal while it was less than 5° difference compared with ideal CobbL4-S1. Finally, the CobbL4-S1 was measured by the PACS system after operation and the consistency was compared between Scoliometer software and PACS system to evaluate the accuracy of this software. In addition, value of this method in obtaining optimal LL was validated by comparing the difference between ideal CobbL4-S1 and preoperative one with that between ideal CobbL4-S1 and postoperative one. ResultsThe CobbL4-S1 was (36.17±1.53)° for ideal one, (22.57±5.50)° for preoperative one, (32.25±1.46)° for intraoperative one measured by Scoliometer software, and (34.43±1.72)° for postoperative one, respectively. The observed intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was excellent [ICC=0.96, 95% confidence interval (0.93, 0.97)] and the mean absolute difference (MAD) was low (MAD=1.23) between Scoliometer software and PACS system. The deviation between ideal CobbL4-S1 and postoperative CobbL4-S1 was (2.31±0.23)°, which was significantly lower than the deviation between ideal CobbL4-S1 and preoperative CobbL4-S1 (13.60±1.85)° (t=6.065, P=0.001). ConclusionScoliometer software can help surgeon obtain the optimal LL and deserve further dissemination.
ObjectiveTo investigate the relationship between lumbar facet joint degeneration of each segment and spine-pelvic sagittal balance parameters. MethodsA retrospective analysis was made the clinical data of 120 patients with lumbar degenerative disease, who accorded with the inclusion criteria between June and November 2014. There were 58 males and 62 females with an average age of 53 years (range, 24-77 years). The disease duration ranged from 3 to 96 months (mean, 6.6 months). Affected segments included L3, 4 in 32 cases, L4, 5 in 47 cases, and L5, S1 in 52 cases. The CT and X-ray films of the lumbar vertebrae were taken. The facet joint degeneration was graded based on the grading system of Pathria. The spine-pelvic sagittal balance parameters were measured, including lumbar lordosis (LL), upper lumbar lordosis (ULL), lower lumbar lordosis (LLL), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), and sacral slope (SS). According to normal range of PI, the patients were divided into 3 groups: group A (PI was 1ess than normal range), group B (PI was within normal range), and group C (PI was more than normal range). The facet joint degeneration was compared;according to the facet joint degeneration degree, the patients were divided into group N (mild degeneration group) and group M (serious degeneration group) to observe the relationship of lumbar facet joint degeneration of each segment and spine-pelvic sagittal balance parameters. ResultsAt L4, 5 and L5, S1, facet joint degeneration showed significant difference among groups A, B, and C (P<0.05), more serious facet joint degeneration was observed in group C;no significant difference was found in facet joint degeneration at L3, 4 (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the other spine-pelvic sagittal balance parameters between groups N and M at each segment (P>0.05) except for PT (P<0.05). ConclusionPI of more than normal range may lead to or aggravate lumbar facet joint degeneration at L4, 5 and L5, S1;PT and PI are significantly associated with facet joint degeneration at the lower lumbar spine.