A randomized prospective study of posterolateral lumbar fusion: Outcomes with and without pedicle screw instrumentation

J. C. France, Michael J Yaszemski, W. C. Lauerman, J. E. Cain, J. M. Glover, K. J. Lawson, J. D. Coe, S. M. Topper, R. D. Fraser

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

170 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Study Design. A prospective evaluation of the clinical and radiographic outcomes of 71 patients who underwent lumbar fusion, with or without transpedicular instrumentation. The patients completed a questionnaire that determined pain relief, medication use, return to work, and overall satisfaction with surgery. Objectives. To explore the effect, if any, of instrumentation on the outcome of lumbar fusion surgery, according to reports of the patients, and whether there is a correlation between the radiographic determination of a solid fusion and the same patient-reported outcome. Summary of Background Data. The literature on this topic reports pseudarthrosis rates from 0% to 57% and good to excellent results from 56% to 95%. These studies provide no clear-cut recommendations concerning the effect of added lumbar instrumentation on patient-reported outcome in a prospective manner using concurrent control subjects. Methods. The patients were randomized to groups with and without instrumentation after deciding to undergo a lumbar fusion and consenting to enter the study. Radiographs were obtained and questionnaires filled out at 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery. Results. There was no statistical difference in patient- reported outcome between the two groups. There was a slight nonsignificant trend toward increased radiographic fusion rate in the group with instrumentation that did not correlate with an increased patient-reported improvement rate. Conclusions. These results do not provide data that indicate a benefit in outcome from added instrumentation in elective lumbar fusions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)553-560
Number of pages8
JournalSpine
Volume24
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 15 1999

Fingerprint

Prospective Studies
Pseudarthrosis
Return to Work
Job Satisfaction
Pedicle Screws
Pain
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Surveys and Questionnaires

Keywords

  • Instrumentation
  • Lumbar vertebrae
  • Spinal fusion
  • Treatment outcome

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physiology
  • Clinical Neurology
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

A randomized prospective study of posterolateral lumbar fusion : Outcomes with and without pedicle screw instrumentation. / France, J. C.; Yaszemski, Michael J; Lauerman, W. C.; Cain, J. E.; Glover, J. M.; Lawson, K. J.; Coe, J. D.; Topper, S. M.; Fraser, R. D.

In: Spine, Vol. 24, No. 6, 15.03.1999, p. 553-560.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

France, JC, Yaszemski, MJ, Lauerman, WC, Cain, JE, Glover, JM, Lawson, KJ, Coe, JD, Topper, SM & Fraser, RD 1999, 'A randomized prospective study of posterolateral lumbar fusion: Outcomes with and without pedicle screw instrumentation', Spine, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 553-560. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199903150-00010
France, J. C. ; Yaszemski, Michael J ; Lauerman, W. C. ; Cain, J. E. ; Glover, J. M. ; Lawson, K. J. ; Coe, J. D. ; Topper, S. M. ; Fraser, R. D. / A randomized prospective study of posterolateral lumbar fusion : Outcomes with and without pedicle screw instrumentation. In: Spine. 1999 ; Vol. 24, No. 6. pp. 553-560.
@article{0272555bd8fb40169ba9601213643207,
title = "A randomized prospective study of posterolateral lumbar fusion: Outcomes with and without pedicle screw instrumentation",
abstract = "Study Design. A prospective evaluation of the clinical and radiographic outcomes of 71 patients who underwent lumbar fusion, with or without transpedicular instrumentation. The patients completed a questionnaire that determined pain relief, medication use, return to work, and overall satisfaction with surgery. Objectives. To explore the effect, if any, of instrumentation on the outcome of lumbar fusion surgery, according to reports of the patients, and whether there is a correlation between the radiographic determination of a solid fusion and the same patient-reported outcome. Summary of Background Data. The literature on this topic reports pseudarthrosis rates from 0{\%} to 57{\%} and good to excellent results from 56{\%} to 95{\%}. These studies provide no clear-cut recommendations concerning the effect of added lumbar instrumentation on patient-reported outcome in a prospective manner using concurrent control subjects. Methods. The patients were randomized to groups with and without instrumentation after deciding to undergo a lumbar fusion and consenting to enter the study. Radiographs were obtained and questionnaires filled out at 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery. Results. There was no statistical difference in patient- reported outcome between the two groups. There was a slight nonsignificant trend toward increased radiographic fusion rate in the group with instrumentation that did not correlate with an increased patient-reported improvement rate. Conclusions. These results do not provide data that indicate a benefit in outcome from added instrumentation in elective lumbar fusions.",
keywords = "Instrumentation, Lumbar vertebrae, Spinal fusion, Treatment outcome",
author = "France, {J. C.} and Yaszemski, {Michael J} and Lauerman, {W. C.} and Cain, {J. E.} and Glover, {J. M.} and Lawson, {K. J.} and Coe, {J. D.} and Topper, {S. M.} and Fraser, {R. D.}",
year = "1999",
month = "3",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1097/00007632-199903150-00010",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "24",
pages = "553--560",
journal = "Spine",
issn = "0362-2436",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A randomized prospective study of posterolateral lumbar fusion

T2 - Outcomes with and without pedicle screw instrumentation

AU - France, J. C.

AU - Yaszemski, Michael J

AU - Lauerman, W. C.

AU - Cain, J. E.

AU - Glover, J. M.

AU - Lawson, K. J.

AU - Coe, J. D.

AU - Topper, S. M.

AU - Fraser, R. D.

PY - 1999/3/15

Y1 - 1999/3/15

N2 - Study Design. A prospective evaluation of the clinical and radiographic outcomes of 71 patients who underwent lumbar fusion, with or without transpedicular instrumentation. The patients completed a questionnaire that determined pain relief, medication use, return to work, and overall satisfaction with surgery. Objectives. To explore the effect, if any, of instrumentation on the outcome of lumbar fusion surgery, according to reports of the patients, and whether there is a correlation between the radiographic determination of a solid fusion and the same patient-reported outcome. Summary of Background Data. The literature on this topic reports pseudarthrosis rates from 0% to 57% and good to excellent results from 56% to 95%. These studies provide no clear-cut recommendations concerning the effect of added lumbar instrumentation on patient-reported outcome in a prospective manner using concurrent control subjects. Methods. The patients were randomized to groups with and without instrumentation after deciding to undergo a lumbar fusion and consenting to enter the study. Radiographs were obtained and questionnaires filled out at 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery. Results. There was no statistical difference in patient- reported outcome between the two groups. There was a slight nonsignificant trend toward increased radiographic fusion rate in the group with instrumentation that did not correlate with an increased patient-reported improvement rate. Conclusions. These results do not provide data that indicate a benefit in outcome from added instrumentation in elective lumbar fusions.

AB - Study Design. A prospective evaluation of the clinical and radiographic outcomes of 71 patients who underwent lumbar fusion, with or without transpedicular instrumentation. The patients completed a questionnaire that determined pain relief, medication use, return to work, and overall satisfaction with surgery. Objectives. To explore the effect, if any, of instrumentation on the outcome of lumbar fusion surgery, according to reports of the patients, and whether there is a correlation between the radiographic determination of a solid fusion and the same patient-reported outcome. Summary of Background Data. The literature on this topic reports pseudarthrosis rates from 0% to 57% and good to excellent results from 56% to 95%. These studies provide no clear-cut recommendations concerning the effect of added lumbar instrumentation on patient-reported outcome in a prospective manner using concurrent control subjects. Methods. The patients were randomized to groups with and without instrumentation after deciding to undergo a lumbar fusion and consenting to enter the study. Radiographs were obtained and questionnaires filled out at 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery. Results. There was no statistical difference in patient- reported outcome between the two groups. There was a slight nonsignificant trend toward increased radiographic fusion rate in the group with instrumentation that did not correlate with an increased patient-reported improvement rate. Conclusions. These results do not provide data that indicate a benefit in outcome from added instrumentation in elective lumbar fusions.

KW - Instrumentation

KW - Lumbar vertebrae

KW - Spinal fusion

KW - Treatment outcome

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033559587&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033559587&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/00007632-199903150-00010

DO - 10.1097/00007632-199903150-00010

M3 - Article

C2 - 10101819

AN - SCOPUS:0033559587

VL - 24

SP - 553

EP - 560

JO - Spine

JF - Spine

SN - 0362-2436

IS - 6

ER -