Top

Published in:

01-07-2009 | Original Article

Clinical evaluation of a lumbar interspinous dynamic stabilization device (the Wallis system) with a 13-year mean follow-up

Authors: Jacques Sénégas, Jean-Marc Vital, Vincent Pointillart, Paolo Mangione

Published in: Neurosurgical Review | Issue 3/2009

Abstract

The authors determined current health status of patients who had been included in a long-term survivorship analysis of a lumbar dynamic stabilizer. Among 133 living patients, 107 (average age at surgery, 44.2 ± 9.9 years) completed health questionnaires. All patients had initially been scheduled for decompression and fusion for canal stenosis, herniated disc, or both. In 20 patients, the implant was removed, and fusion was performed. The other 87 still had the dynamic stabilizer. Satisfaction, Oswestry disability index, visual analog scales for back and leg pain, short-form (SF-36) quality-of-life physical composite score, physical function, and social function were significantly better (p ≤ 0.05) in the patients who still had the dynamic stabilization device. SF-36 scores of the fused subgroup were no worse than those reported elsewhere in patients who had primary pedicle-screw enhanced lumbar fusion. This anatomy-sparing device provided a good 13-year clinical outcome and obviated arthrodesis in 80% of patients.

Ala-Kokko L (2002) Genetic risk factors for lumbar disc disease. Ann Med 34:42–47PubMedCrossRef

Borenstein DG, O’Mara JW Jr, Boden SD et al (2001) The value of magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine to predict low-back pain in asymptomatic subjects: a seven-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 83-A:1306–1311PubMed

Calmels P, Bethoux F, Condemine A et al (2005) Low back pain disability assessment tools. Ann Readapt Med Phys 48:288–297PubMed

David T (2007) Long-term results of one-level lumbar arthroplasty: minimum 10-year follow-up of the CHARITE artificial disc in 106 patients. Spine 32:661–666PubMedCrossRef

Elfering A, Semmer N, Birkhofer D et al (2002) Risk factors for lumbar disc degeneration: a 5-year prospective MRI study in asymptomatic individuals. Spine 27:125–134PubMedCrossRef

Etminan M, Girardi FP, Khan SN et al (2002) Revision strategies for lumbar pseudarthrosis. Orthop Clin North Am 33:381–392PubMedCrossRef

Ghiselli G, Wang JC, Bhatia NN et al (2004) Adjacent segment degeneration in the lumbar spine. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A:1497–1503PubMed

Glaser J, Stanley M, Sayre H et al (2003) A 10-year follow-up evaluation of lumbar spine fusion with pedicle screw fixation. Spine 28:1390–1395PubMedCrossRef

Guehring T, Omlor GW, Lorenz H et al (2006) Disc distraction shows evidence of regenerative potential in degenerated intervertebral discs as evaluated by protein expression, magnetic resonance imaging, and messenger ribonucleic acid expression analysis. Spine 31:1658–1665PubMedCrossRef

10.

Guigui P, Wodecki P, Bizot P et al (2000) [Long-term influence of associated arthrodesis on adjacent segments in the treatment of lumbar stenosis: a series of 127 cases with 9-year follow-up]. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 86:546–557PubMed

11.

Hartigan C, Rainville J, Sobel JB et al (2000) Long-term exercise adherence after intensive rehabilitation for chronic low back pain. Med Sci Sports Exerc 32:551–557PubMedCrossRef

12.

Katz JN, Lipson SJ, Chang LC et al (1996) Seven- to 10-year outcome of decompressive surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 21:92–98PubMedCrossRef

13.

Kawaguchi Y, Ishihara H, Kanamori M et al (2007) Adjacent segment disease following expansive lumbar laminoplasty. Spine J 7:273–279PubMedCrossRef

14.

Keller SD, Ware JE Jr, Bentler PM et al (1998) Use of structural equation modeling to test the construct validity of the SF-36 health survey in ten countries: results from the IQOLA project. International quality of life assessment. J Clin Epidemiol 51:1179–1188PubMedCrossRef

15.

Khoueir P, Kim KA, Wang MY (2007) Classification of posterior dynamic stabilization devices. Neurosurg Focus 22:E3PubMedCrossRef

16.

Kroeber M, Unglaub F, Guehring T et al (2005) Effects of controlled dynamic disc distraction on degenerated intervertebral discs: an in vivo study on the rabbit lumbar spine model. Spine 30:181–187PubMedCrossRef

17.

Lemaire JP, Carrier H, Sariali el H et al (2005) Clinical and radiological outcomes with the Charite artificial disc: a 10-year minimum follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech 18:353–359PubMedCrossRef

18.

Leplege A, Ecosse E, Verdier A et al (1998) The French SF-36 health survey: translation, cultural adaptation and preliminary psychometric evaluation. J Clin Epidemiol 51:1013–1023PubMedCrossRef

19.

Martin BI, Mirza SK, Comstock BA et al (2007) Are lumbar spine reoperation rates falling with greater use of fusion surgery and new surgical technology? Spine 32:2119–2126PubMedCrossRef

20.

Okuda S, Miyauchi A, Oda T et al (2006) Surgical complications of posterior lumbar interbody fusion with total facetectomy in 251 patients. J Neurosurg Spine 4:304–309PubMedCrossRef

21.

Pellise F, Hernandez A, Vidal X et al (2007) Radiologic assessment of all unfused lumbar segments 7.5 years after instrumented posterior spinal fusion. Spine 32:574–579PubMedCrossRef

22.

Rohlmann A, Neller S, Bergmann G et al (2001) Effect of an internal fixator and a bone graft on intersegmental spinal motion and intradiscal pressure in the adjacent regions. Eur Spine J 10:301–308PubMedCrossRef

23.

Senegas J (1991) Surgery of the intervertebral ligaments, alternative to arthrodesis in the treatment of degenerative instabilities. Acta Orthop Belg 57(Suppl 1):221–226PubMed

24.

Senegas J (2002) Mechanical supplementation by non-rigid fixation in degenerative intervertebral lumbar segments: the Wallis system. Eur Spine J 11(Suppl 2):S164–S169PubMed

25.

Senegas J, Vital JM, Pointillart V et al (2007) Long-term actuarial survivorship analysis of an interspinous stabilization system. Eur Spine J 16:1279–1287PubMedCrossRef

26.

Shono Y, Kaneda K, Abumi K et al (1998) Stability of posterior spinal instrumentation and its effects on adjacent motion segments in the lumbosacral spine. Spine 23:1550–1558PubMedCrossRef

27.

Videman T, Battie MC, Ripatti S et al (2006) Determinants of the progression in lumbar degeneration: a 5-year follow-up study of adult male monozygotic twins. Spine 31:671–678PubMedCrossRef

28.

Wilke H-J, Drumm J, Haeussler K, et al (2007) Biomechanical comparison of the segmental stability and intradiscal pressure achieved with different interspinous implants. In: 53rd annual meeting of the Orthopaedic Research Society. Orthopaedic Research Society, San Diego, CA, p 88

Title: Clinical evaluation of a lumbar interspinous dynamic stabilization device (the Wallis system) with a 13-year mean follow-up
Authors: Jacques Sénégas
Jean-Marc Vital
Vincent Pointillart
Paolo Mangione
Publication date: 01-07-2009
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Neurosurgical Review / Issue 3/2009
Print ISSN: 0344-5607
Electronic ISSN: 1437-2320
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-009-0199-z

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Clinical evaluation of a lumbar interspinous dynamic stabilization device (the Wallis system) with a 13-year mean follow-up

Abstract

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2009

A report of a desmoplastic non-infantile ganglioglioma in a 6-year-old boy with review of the literature

One-stage reconstruction using a vascularized calvarial flap for intractable scalp ulcers in relation with cranial implants without removing the whole prosthesis

Intramedullary lesions of the conus medullaris: differential diagnosis and surgical management

Brain tumors and epilepsy: pathophysiology of peritumoral changes

Value of high-definition imaging in neuroendoscopy

A historical analysis of severe head injury