Outcomes of Minimally Invasive versus Open Surgery for Intermediate to High-grade Spondylolisthesis: A 10-Year Retrospective, Multicenter Experience.

STUDY DESIGN Retrospective cohort study OBJECTIVE.: The primary objective of our study was to evaluate the surgical outcomes and complications of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) versus open surgery in the management of intermediate to high grade spondylolisthesis, and secondarily to compare the outcomes following MIS in-situ fusion vs MIS reduction and open in-situ fusion vs open reduction subgroups. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA High-grade spondylolisthesis is a relatively rare spine pathology with unknown prevalence. The optimal management and long-term prognosis of high-grade spondylolisthesis remain controversial. METHODS A multicenter, retrospective cohort study of adult patients who were surgically treated for grade II or higher lumbar or lumbosacral spondylolisthesis from January 2008 until February 2019, was conducted. RESULTS A total of 57 patients were included in this study. Forty cases were treated with open surgery and 17 with MIS. Specifically, 07 patients underwent MIS in-situ fusion, 11 patients open in-situ fusion, an additional 10 patients underwent MIS reduction and 29 had open reduction. Patients who underwent open surgery had significantly better pain relief at short-term follow-up with no statistically significant difference in the rate of complications (25% vs 35.2%, p = 0.44), as compared to MIS. The most common complications were related to instrumentation (17.7%), followed by neurological complications (14.5%), wound infection/dehiscence (6.5%) and post laminectomy syndrome (1.6%). The average follow-up time was 9.1± 6.2 months. In a subgroup comparison, the complication rate in the open in-situ fusion (36.3%) vs open reduction (20.6%) subgroup was non-significant (p = 0.42). However, complication rate in the MIS reduction group (55%) was significantly higher than MIS in-situ fusion (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS MIS reduction is associated with a higher rate of complications in the management of grade II or higher lumbar or lumbosacral spondylolisthesis. The management of this complex pathology may be better addressed via traditional open surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 3.

[1]  Timothy R. Smith,et al.  Reduction versus In-situ fusion for Adult High-Grade Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. , 2020, World neurosurgery.

[2]  L. Lenke,et al.  Restoration of normal pelvic balance from surgical reduction in high-grade spondylolisthesis , 2019, European Spine Journal.

[3]  Jie Hao,et al.  Minimally Invasive Versus Traditional Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Single-Level Spondylolisthesis Grades 1 and 2: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. , 2019, World neurosurgery.

[4]  Ankit Sharma,et al.  Complete anatomic reduction and monosegmental fusion for lumbar spondylolisthesis of Grade II and higher: use of the minimally invasive "rocking" technique. , 2017, Neurosurgical focus.

[5]  Adam S. Kanter,et al.  A Multicenter Evaluation of Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes Following High-grade Spondylolisthesis Reduction and Fusion , 2014, Clinical spine surgery.

[6]  L. Lenke,et al.  Variations in Sagittal Alignment Parameters Based on Age: A Prospective Study of Asymptomatic Volunteers Using Full-Body Radiographs , 2016, Spine.

[7]  L. Lenke,et al.  Variations in Occipitocervical and Cervicothoracic Alignment Parameters Based on Age: A Prospective Study of Asymptomatic Volunteers Using Full-Body Radiographs , 2016, Spine.

[8]  Y. Rampersaud,et al.  Perioperative Outcomes and Adverse Events of Minimally Invasive versus Open Posterior Lumbar Fusion: Meta-Analysis , 2015, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[9]  V. Lafage,et al.  Surgical Treatment Strategies for High-Grade Spondylolisthesis: A Systematic Review , 2015, International Journal of Spine Surgery.

[10]  W. Mei,et al.  Comparison of MIS vs. open PLIF/TLIF with regard to clinical improvement, fusion rate, and incidence of major complication: a meta-analysis , 2015, European Spine Journal.

[11]  Adam S. Kanter,et al.  Management of high-grade spondylolisthesis. , 2013, Neurosurgery clinics of North America.

[12]  M. N. Carvi y Nievas,et al.  Comparison of minimally invasive fusion and instrumentation versus open surgery for severe stenotic spondylolisthesis with high-grade facet joint osteoarthritis , 2013, European Spine Journal.

[13]  Christopher P Ames,et al.  Short-term complications associated with surgery for high-grade spondylolisthesis in adults and pediatric patients: a report from the scoliosis research society morbidity and mortality database. , 2012, Neurosurgery.

[14]  M. Grevitt,et al.  High-grade spondylolisthesis: gradual reduction using Magerl’s external fixator followed by circumferential fusion technique and long-term results , 2012, European spine journal.

[15]  J. Mac-Thiong,et al.  Spino-pelvic sagittal balance of spondylolisthesis: a review and classification , 2011, European Spine Journal.

[16]  H. Hakimzadeh,et al.  Part 1 , 2011 .

[17]  T. Albert,et al.  Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes After Instrumented Reduction and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion of Mid and High-grade Isthmic Spondylolisthesis , 2009, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[18]  Joseph M. Zavatsky,et al.  Novel concepts in the evaluation and treatment of high-dysplastic spondylolisthesis , 2009, European Spine Journal.

[19]  A. Mehbod,et al.  Evidence-Based Medicine Analysis of Isthmic Spondylolisthesis Treatment Including Reduction Versus Fusion In Situ for High-Grade Slips , 2007, Spine.

[20]  C. Ames,et al.  Operative management of adult high-grade lumbosacral spondylolisthesis. , 2007, Neurosurgery clinics of North America.

[21]  D. Schlenzka,et al.  Treatment of Severe Spondylolisthesis in Adolescence With Reduction or Fusion In Situ: Long-term Clinical, Radiologic, and Functional Outcome , 2006, Spine.

[22]  N. Kettner,et al.  Spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis: a narrative review of etiology, diagnosis, and conservative management. , 2005, Journal of chiropractic medicine.

[23]  N. Demartines,et al.  Classification of Surgical Complications: A New Proposal With Evaluation in a Cohort of 6336 Patients and Results of a Survey , 2004, Annals of Surgery.

[24]  H. Möller,et al.  Surgery versus conservative management in adult isthmic spondylolisthesis--a prospective randomized study: part 1. , 2000, Spine.

[25]  C Perka,et al.  Surgical Management of Severe Spondylolisthesis in Children and Adolescents: Anterior Fusion in Situ Versus Anterior Spondylodesis With Posterior Transpedicular Instrumentation and Reduction , 1997, Spine.

[26]  P. Pizzutillo,et al.  Nonoperative Treatment for Painful Adolescent Spondylolysis or Spondylolisthesis , 1989, Journal of pediatric orthopedics.

[27]  G. Macewen,et al.  Posterolateral Fusion for Spondylolisthesis in Adolescence , 1986, Journal of pediatric orthopedics.

[28]  R. Dewald,et al.  Severe lumbosacral spondylolisthesis in adolescents and children. Reduction and staged circumferential fusion. , 1981, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[29]  R. Winter,et al.  Management of severe spondylolisthesis in children and adolescents. , 1979, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[30]  H. W. Meyerding.  Surgical fusion of the vertebral articular facets; technique and instruments employed. , 1947, Surgery, gynecology & obstetrics.