THE VARIABLE SCREW PLACEMENT SPINAL FIXATION SYSTEM - REPORT OF A PROSPECTIVE-STUDY OF 250 PATIENTS ENROLLED IN FOOD-AND-DRUG-ADMINISTRATION CLINICAL-TRIALS

被引:80
作者
STEFFEE, AD
BRANTIGAN, JW
机构
[1] Cleveland Spine and Arthritis Center, Cleveland, OH
[2] Department of Surgery, Division of Orthopaedics, Creighton University, Omaha, NE
关键词
PEDICLE SCREW; SPINE PLATE; FUSION; SEGMENTAL FIXATION; STABILIZATION; POSTSURGICAL FAILED BACK;
D O I
10.1097/00007632-199307000-00007
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
The variable screw placement (VSP) system uses transpedicular screws and slotted plates to achieve constrained segmental fixation of the spine. A prospective multicenter study of 250 patients was performed under a Food and Drug Administration approved protocol to test the safety and effectiveness of this system. Complete 2-year follow-up data are reported for 169 of 223 (73%) patients who had fixation of three spinal levels or fewer. ''Clinical success'' was defined as an excellent or good result or improvement of two grades in a 10-point combined pain and function scale. ''Fusion success'' was defined by presence of continuous trabecular bone bridging the fusion area. For 86 patients with postsurgical failed back syndrome, clinical success was achieved in 69 (80.2%) and fusion success in 76 of 83 (91.6%) patients. These success rates were statistically higher than previous literature reports (P = 0.01 for clinical success and P= 0.02 for fusion success). For spondylolisthesis, clinical success was achieved in 44 of 57 patients (86.3%) and fusion success in 43 of 47 (91.5%) patients. For spinal stenosis, clinical success was achieved in 25 of 32 patients (78.1%) and fusion success in 30 of 31 (96.8%) patients. Overall fusion success was achieved in 186 of 200 (93%) patients with no statistical difference when comparing the numbers of levels fused. There were 21 device-related complications (8.4%) and 16 non-device-related complications (6.4%).
引用
收藏
页码:1160 / 1172
页数:13
相关论文
共 75 条
[41]  
Ma G.S., Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with specialized instruments, Clin Orthop, 193, pp. 57-63, (1985)
[42]  
Melzack R., The McGill Pain Questionnaire: Major properties and scoring methods, Pain, 1, pp. 277-299, (1975)
[43]  
Millard R.W., Jones R.H., Construct validity of practical questionnaires for assessing disability of low-back pain, Spine, 16, pp. 835-838, (1991)
[44]  
Million R., Hall W., Nilsen K.H., Baker R.D., Jayson M., Assessment of the progress of the back-pain patient, Spine, 7, pp. 204-212, (1982)
[45]  
Naylor A., The late results of laminectomy for lumbar disc prolapsed-A review after ten to twenty-five years, J Bone Joint Surg, 56B, pp. 17-29, (1974)
[46]  
Panjabi M.M., Krag M.H., Chung T.Q., Effects of disc injury on mechanical behavior of the lumbar spine, Spine, 9, pp. 707-713, (1984)
[47]  
Panjabi M.M., White A.A., Basic biomechanics of the spine, Neurosurgery, 7, pp. 76-93, (1980)
[48]  
Prolo D.J., Oklund S.A., Butcher M., Toward Uniformity in Evaluating Results of Lumbar Spine Operations: A Paradigm Applied to Plffi Spine, 11, pp. 601-606, (1986)
[49]  
Prothero S.R., Parkes J.C., Stinchfield F.E., Complications after low-back fusion in 1000 patients, J Bone Joint Surg, 48A, pp. 57-65, (1966)
[50]  
Quimjian J.D., Matrka P.J., Decompression laminectomy and lateral spinal fusion in patients with previously failed lumbar spine surgery, Orthopaedics, 11, pp. 563-659, (1988)