TREATMENT OUTCOMES IN ELDERLY AND SENILE PATIENTS WITH DEGENERATIVE DEFORMATIONS AND INSTABILITY OF THE SPINAL COLUMN

Cover Page

Abstract

Degenerative  scoliosis  is  a  prevalent  issue  among  the  aging  population.  Controversy  remains   over  the  role of surgical intervention in patients with such disease. The authors  present  the results of 14-year experience in treatment of this pathology.  Various approaches  to the surgical treatment depending  on the stage of the disease and the degree of deformation, including  decompression, instrumental posterior spinal fusion, anterior spinal fusion, and osteotomy were examined. Above treatment options are based on the analysis of clinical aspects, mechanical  stability of deformation, the degree of imbalance in the body and causes of pain or neurological  deficit.

The  risk of postoperative complications is extremely  high and seems to be outweighed by the  possible successful outcomes of surgical treatment. The results presented in the treatment of degenerative scoliosis mainly provide positive outcomes and can assist in the selection of treatment for this group of patients.

The purpose of the  study  is to  evaluate  the  treatment outcomes  of elderly  and  senile patients with  degenerative deformations and instability of the spinal column using various surgical techniques.

Material and methods. During  the present  retrospective study the authors  analyzed 437 patients (337 (77%) women and  100  (23%)  men)  aged  60 years  and  older  who  underwent surgical  treatment at  Russian  Research  institute of traumatology and orthopaedics named  after  R.R.Vreden between  2000 and 2016. The  study  group  included  patients with  diseases and consequences  of injuries  in the  spine, leading  to its deformation and following spinal stenosis  with development of neurological  deficit in some cases.

The  patients were subdivided into  four  groups  depending  on surgical  procedure.  Patients in group  I underwent decompression  of neural  structures at affected levels on both  sides without implants  for fixation. This group was used as the  comparison  group.  Patients in group  II  underwent fixation  the  affected  spinal  motion  segments  locally  with transpedicular system without correction of deformity  and with decompression  of neural structures at the level of spine stenosis.  Patients of group  III  underwent surgery  for fixation  of affected  PDS  up to lower thoracic  spine using short transpedicular system along with decompression  of the neural  structures and correction of spine deformity.  Patients in group IV underwent surgery  for fixation  of affected PDS  up to upper thoracic  spine using transpedicular system, bone cement, decompression  of neural structures and correction of spine deformity.

The average postoperative follow up was 5 years (from 3 months  to 15 years), 266 patients were followed for more than three years.

Results.  The  best  results   were  obtained  in  group  IV:  good  results   – 57,2%  (60  patients),  satisfactory  40% (42 patients), poor 2,8% (3 patients).

The  worst  results  were  obtained in group  I: after  5 years  follow up satisfactory results  were  observed  in 13,4% (15 patients), poor in 86,6% (97 patients) and no good results were reported.

Conclusion. Thus, the performed  study  and observed outcomes indicate  the rationale for performing a full deformity correction by transpedicular fixation and bone cement, applying all the required  methods  and techniques of osteotomy. This approach  allows to maximally  quickly  achieve  the  desired  treatment outcomes  in mid-and long-term follow up period and to avoid complications and revisions.

About the authors

D. A. Mikhaylov

Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics

Author for correspondence.
Email: dim.m.a@mail.ru

Dmitry  A. Mikhaylov  – Cand.  Sci. (Med) Neurosurgeon at Spine Surgery  and Oncology  Department.

8, ul. Akad. Baykova, St. Petersburg, 195427

Russian Federation

D. A. Ptashnikov

Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics; Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Dmitry A. Ptashnikov – Dr. Sci. (Med) Professor  Head  of Spine  Surgery  and  Oncology  Department, VRRITO; Head of Traumatology and  Orthopedics Department N-WSMU.

8, ul. Akad. Baykova, St. Petersburg, 195427; 41, Kirochnaya ul., St. Petersburg, 191015

Russian Federation

S. V. Masevnin

Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Sergey  V.  Masevnin   –  Orthopedic Surgeon   at   Spine Surgery and Oncology Department.

8, ul. Akad. Baykova, St. Petersburg, 195427

Russian Federation

O. A. Smekalenkov

Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics

Email: fake@neicon.ru

8, ul. Akad. Baykova, St. Petersburg, 195427

Russian Federation

N. S. Zaborovski

Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Nikita  S.  Zaborovskii  – graduate  Student,  Orthopedic Surgeon at Spine Surgery and Oncology Department.

8, ul. Akad. Baykova, St. Petersburg, 195427

Russian Federation

O. A. Lapaeva

Vreden Russian Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics

Email: fake@neicon.ru

Olga A. Lapaeva  – Orthopedic Surgeon.

8, ul. Akad. Baykova, St. Petersburg, 195427

Russian Federation

Z. Mooraby

Mechnikov North-Western State Medical University

Email: fake@neicon.ru

41, Kirochnaya ul., St. Petersburg, 191015

Russian Federation

References

  1. Докиш М.Ю., Усиков В.Д., Пташников Д.А., Фадеев Е.М., Магомедов Ш.Ш., Карагодин Д.Ф., Михайлов Д.А., Смекаленков О.А. Варианты хирургического лечения патологических переломов позвоночника у пациентов пожилого возраста с сопутствующим системным остеопорозом. Травматология и ортопедия России. 2008;(3):80-81.
  2. Козлов Д.М., Крутько А.В., Колотов Е.Б., Ахметьянов Ш.А. Отдаленные результаты хирургического лечения дегенеративных заболеваний поясничного отдела позвоночника у пациентов старше 60 лет. Вопросы нейрохирургии им. Н.Н. Бурденко. 2011;75(3):57-61.
  3. Крутько А.В., Дурни П., Васильев А.И., Булатов А.В. Минимально-инвазивные технологии в хирургическом лечении дегенеративного поясничного сколиоза взрослых. Хирургия позвоночника. 2014;(4):49-56.
  4. Усиков В.Д., Пташников Д.А., Михайлов Д.А., Смекаленков О.А. Результат хирургического лечения тяжелой кифотической деформации позвоночника. Хирургия позвоночника. 2010;(2):89-93.
  5. Хао Мэн, Пташников Д.А., Масевнин С.В., Михайлов Д.А. Оценка значимости сагиттального баланса и патологии межпозвонковых дисков в развитии дегенеративных изменений смежных позвоночно-двигательных сегментов после спондилодеза. Фундаментальные исследования. 2014;10(9):1811-1817.
  6. Albert T.J., Purtill J., Mesa J., McIntosh T., Balderston R.A. Health outcome assessment before and after adult deformity surgery. A prospective study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1995;20(18):2002-2004.
  7. Bridwell K.H. Decision Making Regarding SmithPetersen vs. Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy vs. Vertebral Column Resection for Spinal Deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006;31(19 Suppl):171-178. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000231963.72810.38.
  8. Carreon L.Y., Puno R.M., Dimar J.R. 2nd, Glassman S.D., Johnson J.R. Perioperative complications of posterior lumbar decompression and arthrodesis in older adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-A(11):2089-2092.
  9. Charosky S., Guigui P., Blamoutier A., Roussouly P., Chopin D. Complications and risk factors of primary adult scoliosis surgery: a multicenter study of 306 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37(8):693-700. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31822ff5c1.
  10. Cho K.J., Suk S.I., Park S.R., Kim J.H., Kim S.S., Choi W.K., Lee K.Y., Lee S.R. Complications in posterior fusion and instrumentation for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32(20):2232-2237. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31814b2d3c.
  11. Dangelmajer S., Zadnik B.A., Rodriguez S.T., Gokaslan Z.L., Daniel M. Sciubba D.M. Minimally invasive spine surgery for adult degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Neurosurgical Focus. 2014;36(5):E7. doi: 10.3171/2014.3.FOCUS144.
  12. De Wald C.J., Stanley T. Instrumentation-related complications of multilevel fusions for adult spinal deformity patients over age 65: surgical considerations and treatment options in patients with poor bone quality. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006;31(19 Suppl):144-151. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000236893.65878.39.
  13. Fischer C.R., Terran J., Baron L., Mchugh B., Warren D., Glassman S., Bridell K., Schwab F., Lafage V. Factors predicting cost-effectiveness of adult spinal deformity surgery at 2 years. Spine Deform. 2014;2(5):415-422. doi: 10.1016/j.jspd.2014.04.011.
  14. Glassman S.D., Dimar II J.R., Carreon L.Y. Revision rate after adult deformity surgery. Spine Deform. 2015;3(2): 199-203. doi: 10.1016/j.jspd.2014.08.005.
  15. Park J., Carreon L.Y., Glassman S.D. Adult lumbar degenerative scoliosis 40 or less: outcomes of surgical treatment with minimum 2-year follow-up. Spine Deform. 2013;1(3):211-216. doi: 10.1016/j.jspd.2013.03.003.
  16. Ploumis A., Transfledt E.E., Denis F. Degenerative lumbar scoliosis associated with spinal stenosis. Spine J. 2007;7(4):428-36. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2006.07.015.
  17. Raffo C.S., Lauerman W.C. Predicting morbidity and mortality of lumbar spine arthrodesis in patients in their ninth decade. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006;31(1):99-103.
  18. Schwab F., Ungar B., Blondel B., Buchowski J., Coe J., Deinlein D., Dewald C., Mehdian H., Shaffrey C., Tribus C., Lafage V. Scoliosis Research Society-Schwab adult spinal deformity classification – a validation study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37(12):1077-1082. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31823e15e2.
  19. Seo H.J., Kim H.J., Ro Y.J., Yang H.S. Non-neurologic complications following surgery for scoliosis. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2013;64(1):40-46. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2013.64.1.40.
  20. Silva F., Lenke L.G. Adult Degenerative scoliosis: evaluation and management. Neurosurg Focus. 2010;28(3):E1. doi: 10.3171/2010.1.FOCUS09271.
  21. Smith J., Kasliwal M., Crawford A., Shaffrey C.I. Outcomes, Expectations, and Complications Overview for the Surgical Treatment of Adult and Pediatric Spinal Deformity. Spine Deform. 2012. URL: http://www.spinedeformity.org/article/S2212-134X(12)00015-9/pdf.
  22. Transfeldt E.E., Topp R., Mehbod A.A., Winter R.B. Surgical outcomes of decompression, decompression with limited fusion, and decompression with full curve fusion for degenerative scoliosis with radiculopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35(20):1872-1875. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181ce63a2.
  23. Weber M.H., Mathew J.E., Takemoto S.K., Na L.N., Berven S. Postoperative recovery outcomes in adult scoliosis: a prospective multicenter database with 5-year follow-up. Spine Deform. 2014;2(3):226-232. doi: 10.1016/j.jspd.2014.01.001.
  24. Yadla S., Maltenfort M.G., Ratliff J.K., Harrop J.S. Adult scoliosis surgery outcomes: a systematic review. Neurosurgical Focus. 2010;28(3):E3. doi: 10.3171/2009.12.FOCUS09254.

Statistics

Views

Abstract: 606

Cited-by

CrossRef: 1

  1. Denisov AA, Ptashnikov DA, Mikhaylov DA, Masevnin SV, Smekalenkov OA, Zaborovskii NS. Individual Lordotic Cages Implantation and Radiographic Evaluation of Segmental and Lumbar Lordosis Correction for Patients with Adult Degenerative Scoliosis. Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia. 2020;26(2):71. doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-2-71-78

Dimensions

Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

PlumX


Copyright (c)



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies