MINIMALLY INVASIVE INTRAOPERATIVE STIFFNESS MEASUREMENT OF LUMBAR SPINAL MOTION SEGMENTS

OBJECTIVE To test a new tiny-tipped intraoperative diagnostic tool that was designed to provide the surgeon with reliable stiffness data on the motion segment during microdiscectomy. A decrease in stiffness after nuclectomy and a measurable influence of muscle tension were assumed. If the influence of muscle tension on the motion segment could at least be ruled out, there should be no difference with regard to stiffness between women and men. If these criteria are met, this new intraoperative diagnostic tool could be used in further studies for objective decision-making regarding additional stabilization systems after microdiscectomy. METHODS After evaluation of the influence of muscle relaxation during in vivo measurements with a spinal spreader between the spinous processes, 21 motion segments were investigated in 21 patients. Using a standardized protocol, including quantified muscle relaxation, spinal stiffness was measured before laminotomy and after nuclectomy. RESULTS The decrease in stiffness after microdiscectomy was highly significant. There were no statistically significant differences between men and women. The average stiffness value before discectomy was 33.7 N/mm, and it decreased to 25.6 N/mm after discectomy. The average decrease in stiffness was 8.1 N/mm (24%). CONCLUSION In the moderately degenerated spine, stiffness decreases significantly after microdiscectomy. Control for muscle relaxation is essential when measuring in vivo spinal stiffness. The new spinal spreader was found to provide reliable data. This spreader could be used in further studies for objective decision-making about additional stabilization systems after microdiscectomy.

[1]  P. Schmiedek,et al.  Outcome after lumbar sequestrectomy compared with microdiscectomy: a prospective randomized study. , 2005, Journal of neurosurgery. Spine.

[2]  B. Schaller.  Failed back surgery syndrome: the role of symptomatic segmental single-level instability after lumbar microdiscectomy , 2004, European Spine Journal.

[3]  K. Shigenobu,et al.  Intraoperative Biomechanical Assessment of Lumbar Spinal Instability: Validation of Radiographic Parameters Indicating Anterior Column Support in Lumbar Spinal Fusion , 2003, Spine.

[4]  Mark D. Brown,et al.  Intraoperative Measurement of Lumbar Spine Motion Segment Stiffness , 2002, Spine.

[5]  A. D. Heiner,et al.  The Clinical Usefulness of Intraoperative Spinal Stiffness Measurements , 2002, Spine.

[6]  P. Eysel,et al.  [Effect of enucleation on the biomechanical behavior of the lumbar motion segment]. , 2000, Zentralblatt fur Neurochirurgie.

[7]  L. Dai,et al.  Effects of discectomy on the stress distribution in the lumbar spine. , 1992, Chinese medical journal.

[8]  Y. Morimoto,et al.  Intraoperative Measurement of Lumbar Spinal Instability , 1992, Spine.

[9]  Hou Ts.  [Kinematic effects of discectomy on the lumbar spine: an experimental study]. , 1989 .

[10]  Y K Liu,et al.  Mechanical Properties of Lumbar Spinal Motion Segments as Affected by Partial Disc Removal , 1986, Spine.

[11]  V. Goel,et al.  Kinematics of the Whole Lumbar Spine: Effect of Discectomy , 1985, Spine.

[12]  M H Pope,et al.  Biomechanical Definitions of Spinal Instability , 1985, Spine.

[13]  Manohar M. Panjabi,et al.  Clinical Biomechanics of the Spine , 1978 .