Lumbar degenerative disc disease is extremely common. Current evidence supports surgery in carefully selected patients who have failed non-operative treatment and do not exhibit any substantial psychosocial overlay. Fusion surgery employing the correct grafting and stabilization techniques has long-term results demonstrating successful clinical outcomes. However, the best approach for fusion remains debatable. There is some evidence supporting the more complex, technically demanding and higher risk interbody fusion techniques for the younger, active patients or patients with a higher risk of non-union. Lumbar disc arthroplasty and hybrid techniques are still relatively novel procedures despite promising short-term and mid-term outcomes. Long-term studies demonstrating superiority over fusion are required before these techniques may be recommended to replace fusion as the gold standard. Novel stem cell approaches combined with tissue engineering therapies continue to be developed in expectation of improving clinical outcomes. Results with appropriate follow-up are not yet available to indicate if such techniques are safe, cost-effective and reliable in the long-term.
Arthroplasty ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration ; Low Back Pain ; Stem Cells ; Tissue Engineering ; Transplants

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study. PURPOSE: To evaluate the primary outcomes and radiographic results of percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) in patients with singlelevel osteoporotic vertebral fracture (OVF) with intravertebral cleft (IVC) to identify the risk factors for cement loosening after PVP. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: PVP is a widely accepted method for managing painful OVF; however, cement loosening occasionally occurs with poor outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective study involved 195 patients treated with PVP for single-level OVF with IVC. Six months thereafter, the primary outcomes were evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back pain and the modified Oswestry Disability Index. Computed tomography was conducted to detect cement loosening. Possible risk factors, such as age, sex, wedging angle, intravertebral instability, Parkinson’s disease, spinous process fracture, ankylosing spinal hyperostosis, split vertebrae, and adjacent intervertebral vacuum, were assessed. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients (25%) experienced cement loosening 6 months after PVP. The mean VAS scores were significantly higher in patients with cement loosening than in those without (50 vs. 26 mm, respectively; p < 0.01). Cement loosening was closely associated with intravertebral instability (odds ratio [OR], 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04–1.40; p =0.015), Parkinson’s disease (OR, 54.31; 95% CI, 4.47–659.53; p =0.002), spinous process fracture (OR, 7.11; 95% CI, 1.65–30.60; p =0.009), and split vertebrae (OR, 11.59; 95% CI, 1.64–82.02; p =0.014). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with cement loosening experienced worse back pain than those without cement loosening. The important risk factors that influenced cement loosening after PVP were high intravertebral instability, Parkinson’s disease, spinous process fracture, and split vertebrae.
Back Pain ; Case-Control Studies ; Humans ; Hyperostosis ; Methods ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors ; Spine ; Vacuum ; Vertebroplasty ; Visual Analog Scale

No abstract available.
Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors ; Vertebroplasty