| Title |
Operative management of high-grade dysplastic L5 spondylolisthesis with the use of external transpedicular fixation: advantages and drawbacks
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Orthopaedics, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00264-016-3166-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Oksana G. Prudnikova, Elena N. Shchurova |
| Abstract |
The aim of our study was to analyze clinical and radiographic outcomes of operative management of L5 high-grade dysplastic spondylolisthesis with the apparatus for external transpedicular fixation (AETF), and to compare the results of its use for reduction and spondylodesis. There were 13 patients with L5 dysplastic spondylolisthesis of grade 4 (Meyerding grading) and having a mean age of 25.0 ± 3.6 years. The management included two stages: gradual reduction with the AETF, followed by either isolated anterior spondylodesis with the same AETF (group 1, n = 8), or by spondylodesis using a combined method (internal transpedicular instrumentation and posterior lumbar interbody fusion [PLIF]) (group 2, n = 5). Clinical evaluation included pain (VAS scale) and functional status (Oswestry questionnaire [ODI]). Reduction and fusion completeness were assessed radiographically after treatment and at a mean follow-up of 2.1 ± 0.4 years. Initial slippage was reduced by 51.6 % with AETF and was of grade 1 or 2. Reduction made up 31.1 % at follow-ups (grade 2 or 3). Pain decreased by 57.6 % (p < 0.01). The functional status improved. ODI decreased by 37.7 % (p < 0.01) after treatment and by 41.7 % (p < 0.01) at follow-ups. Fusion at the level of the involved segment was poor in group 1. All the cases fused in group 2. The use of AETF for L5 high-grade dysplastic spondylolisthesis provides gradual controlled reduction of the slipped vertebra, decompression of cauda equine roots, and recovery of the local sagittal spinal column balance. It creates conditions for achieving stability of lumbosacral segments with combined spondylodesis (internal transpedicular instrumentation and PLIF). AETF is not suitable for spondylodesis due to a high rate of pseudarthrosis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 18% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 32% |
| Engineering | 3 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 March 2016.
All research outputs
#20,315,221
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from International Orthopaedics
#1,252
of 1,433 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,769
of 299,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Orthopaedics
#24
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,433 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 299,781 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.