Skip to main content
Log in

Outcome of posterior lumbar interbody fusion for L4-L5 degenerative spondylolisthesis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) has become the standard in the treatment for degenerative spondylolisthesis since improvement of spinal instrumentation However, few published studies have reported long term outcomes of PLIF using a same surgical procedure. The purpose of this study is to evaluate a long term outcome of PLIF using a same surgical procedure for L4-L5 degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Materials and Methods: Out of 45 patients who underwent L4-L5 PLIF for degenerative spondylolisthesis between 1995 and 2003, 37 patients (16 males and 21 females) were evaluated in this study. Mean age was 61.8 years. The average followup period was 121 months. We evaluated % slip, lordosis at L4/L5, lumbar lordosis, Japanese Orthopedic Association’s (JOA) score and adjacent segment degeneration.

Results: The % slip significantly improved from an average of 17.0% before surgery to 9.7% at the last followup. Lordosis at L4/L5 averaged 3.6° before surgery, 8.2° after surgery and 6.9° at the last followup. Although patients experienced some loss of correction at last followup, their lordosis at L4/L5 at last followup still was significantly different from their lordosis at L4/L5 before surgery. Lumbar lordosis did not significantly change. Mean JOA score was 13.4 before surgery and 24.5 at the last followup; mean recovery ratio was 71.2%. Adjacent segment degeneration occurred in 40.5% of patients, almost all of which occurred in the cranial adjacent segment. Three patients (8.1%) required reoperation due to adjacent segment degeneration, at an average of 76 months after their initial surgery.

Conclusions: With more than 10-year followup after L4-L5 PLIF for degenerative spondylolisthesis, the adjacent segment degeneration occurred in 40.5% and reoperation was required in 8.1%.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cloward RB. The treatment of ruptured lumbar intervertebral discs by vertebral body fusion. I. Indications, operative technique, after care. J Neurosurg 1953;10:154–68.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Steffee AD, Sitkowski DJ. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion and plates. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988;227:99–102.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Roy-Camille R, Saillant G, Mazel C. Internal fixation of the lumbar spine with pedicle screw plating. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1986;203:7–17.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cheng L, Nie L, Zhang L. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion in spondylolisthesis: A prospective controlled study in the Han nationality. Int Orthop 2009;33:1043–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cho KS, Kang SG, Yoo DS, Huh PW, Kim DS, Lee SB. Risk factors and surgical treatment for symptomatic adjacent segment degeneration after lumbar spine fusion. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 2009;46:425–30.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Sakaura H, Yamashita T, Miwa T, Ohzono K, Ohwada T. Symptomatic adjacent segment pathology after posterior lumbar interbody fusion for adult low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis. Global Spine J 2013;3:219–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Wang YT, Wu XT, Chen H, Wang C. Endoscopy-assisted posterior lumbar interbody fusion in a single segment. J Clin Neurosci 2014;21:287–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Taillard WF. Etiology of spondylolisthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1976;117:30–9.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cobb J. Outline for the study of scoliosis. In: Edwards JW, editor. Instructional Course Lectures. Ann Arhor, MI: The American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons; 1948. p. 261–75.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hirabayashi K, Miyakawa J, Satomi K, Maruyama T, Wakano K. Operative results and postoperative progression of ossification among patients with ossification of cervical posterior longitudinal ligament. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1981;6:354–64.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Okuyama K, Kido T, Unoki E, Chiba M. PLIF with a titanium cage and excised facet joint bone for degenerative spondylolisthesis: In augmentation with a pedicle screw. J Spinal Disord Tech 2007;20:53–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Patil SS, Rawall S, Nagad P, Shial B, Pawar U, Nene AM. Outcome of single level instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion using corticocancellous laminectomy bone chips. Indian J Orthop 2011;45:500–3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Greiner-Perth R, Boehm H, Allam Y, Elsaghir H, Franke J. Reoperation rate after instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion: A report on 1680 cases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2004;29:2516–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ye YP, Xu H, Chen D. Comparison between posterior lumbar interbody fusion and posterolateral fusion with transpedicular screw fixation for isthmic spondylolithesis: A meta-analysis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2013;133:1649–55.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Miwa T, Sakaura H, Yamashita T, Suzuki S, Ohwada T. Surgical outcomes of additional posterior lumbar interbody fusion for adjacent segment disease after single-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J 2013;22:2864–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Jackson RP, McManus AC. Radiographic analysis of sagittal plane alignment and balance in standing volunteers and patients with low back pain matched for age, sex, and size. A prospective controlled clinical study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1994;19:1611–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Kawakami M, Tamaki T, Ando M, Yamada H, Hashizume H, Yoshida M. Lumbar sagittal balance influences the clinical outcome after decompression and posterolateral spinal fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2002;27:59–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Akamaru T, Kawahara N, Tim Yoon S, Minamide A, Su Kim K, Tomita K, et al. Adjacent segment motion after a simulated lumbar fusion in different sagittal alignments: A biomechanical analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2003;28:1560–6.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ohwada T, Yamashita T, Onoue K, Suzuki S, Yamamoto T, Ohkohchi T. Long term followup study of posterior lumbar interbody fusion with pedicle screw and plates for degenerative spondylolisthesis. Spine Spinal Cord 2008;21:461–9.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Okuda S, Iwasaki M, Miyauchi A, Aono H, Morita M, Yamamoto T. Risk factors for adjacent segment degeneration after PLIF. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2004;29:1535–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Van Horn JR, Bohnen LM. The development of discopathy in lumbar discs adjacent to a lumbar anterior interbody spondylodesis. A retrospective matched-pair study with a postoperative followup of 16 years. Acta Orthop Belg 1992;58:280–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hiroyuki Hayashi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hayashi, H., Murakami, H., Demura, S. et al. Outcome of posterior lumbar interbody fusion for L4-L5 degenerative spondylolisthesis. IJOO 49, 284–288 (2015). https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.156188

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.156188

Key words

MeSH terms

Navigation