Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Fig. 1
Selected examples of biplanar radiographic images for RSA of lumbar dynamic stabilization (A), posterolateral fusion and instrumentation (B), and discectomy (C).
- Fig. 2
Differences of postoperative sagittal plane rotation after lumbar dynamic stabilization, posterolateral fusion and instrumentation, and discectomy. Asterisks denote statistical significance (P < .05).
Tables
Sex Age (y) Level n Dynamic stabilization 2 men and 2 women 63.5 ± 11.3 L2-3-4 1 L4-5 2 L4-5–S1 1 PLF 2 men and 2 women 64.8 ± 8.3 L2-3-4 1 L3-4-5 2 L4-5 1 Discectomy 4 men and 4 women 42.8 ± 6.2 L4-5 2 L5-S1 6 - Table 2
Radiostereometric segmental rotations in sagittal plane over time after dynamic stabilization with Dynesys, PLF, and discectomy
Motions Time Dynamic stabilization (mean ± SD) (°) PLF (mean ± SD) (°) Discectomy (mean ± SD) (°) Flexion 1 mo 1.2 ± 0.7 1.3 ± 0.3 3.3 ± 2.6 1 y 0.7 ± 0.9 1.3 ± 0.5 2.7 ± 2.8 2 y 1.0 ± 1.1 0.2 ± 0.2 1.7 ± 0.2 Mean 1.0 ± 0.9* 1.0 ± 0.6* 2.9 ± 2.4 Extension 1 mo 2.3 ± 1.6 1.1 ± 0.9 2.7 ± 1.8 1 y 1.0 ± 0.4 1.2 ± 1.1 1.8 ± 1.3 2 y 1.7 ± 1.4 0.7 ± 0.3 1.8 ± 0.3 Mean 1.5 ± 1.2 1.1 ± 0.9* 2.3 ± 1.5 SROM 1 mo 2.9 ± 0.4 1.5 ± 1.1 4.8 ± 1.9 1 y 1.8 ± 1.0 1.8 ± 0.3 5.1 ± 3.2 2 y 2.3 ± 1.7 0.9 ± 0.0 3.4 ± 0.0 Mean 2.3 ± 1.2* 1.5 ± 0.6* 4.7 ± 2.2 ↵* Significantly different compared with discectomy group.
Postoperative Preoperative 1 mo 1 y 2 y VAS Dynamic stabilization 67 ±8 20 ± 22* 4 ± 4 15 ± 20 PLF 75 ± 18 26 ± 15* 30 ± 25 35 ± 18 Discectomy 74 ± 14 31 ± 31* 39 ± 30 35 ± 28 ODI Dynamic stabilization 56 ± 18 21 ± 18* 11 ± 16* 24 ± 14 PLF 49 ± 2 32 ± 8* 22 ± 18 28 ± 8 Discectomy 58 ± 11 31 ± 18* 25 ± 15 28 ± 18 NOTE. The range on both scales is 0 to 100, and values listed are mean ± SD.
↵* Significantly changed from immediately last time point.
Motion (SD) (°) Flexion-extension Flexion Extension Tests Levels measured Measurement Loads Current study 2.1 (1.3) 1.0 (0.9) 1.5 (1.3) In vivo L2-L3, L3-L4, L4-L5, L5-S1 RSA Physiological maximal Cakir et al.19 4.1 (3.7) In vivo L4-L5 Clinical radiograph Physiological maximal Kim et al.10 3.9 (5) In vivo L2-L3, L3-L4, L4-L5, L5-S1 Clinical radiograph Physiological maximal Schulte et al.20 2.0 (0.8) 1.0 (0.4) 1.0 (0.4) In vitro L1-L2, L2-L3, L3-L4, L4-L5 Positioning sensor 5 Nm Cheng et al.21 1.28 (0.42) In vitro L3-L4 Optoelectronic cameras 6 Nm Freudiger et al.23 4.3 (0.9) In vitro L3-L4, L4-L5 Magnetic field–based system 18.3 Nm 1.1 (0.9) 12.5 Nm Niosi et al.12 0.5 (0.4): short spacer 0.5 (0.3) In vitro L3-4 Optoelectronic cameras 7.5 Nm 1.0 (0.6): standard 1.1 (0.7) 1.0 (0.5): long 1.3 (0.9)
In this issue
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- No citing articles found.