Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Lumbar Non-Fusion Techniques

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Spine Surgery

  • 100k Accesses

Abstract

Degeneration of the functional spinal unit can lead to back pain and – in case of nerve root irritation – sciatica. Spinal fusion, i.e. spondylodesis, has evolved as standard treatment against the painful mobility that may accompany disc arthrosis, degenerative segmental instability, and spondylolisthesis. If neural tissue is compressed, direct surgical decompression represents standard of treatment. During the last years, several non-fusion techniques (AKA: dynamic techniques) arose in spine surgery as alternative for spinal fusion and direct decompression, respectively. The following case illustrations are meant to elucidate clinical situations, in which the use of traditional techniques should be weighed up against non-fusion techniques. The clinical decisions will be justified by scientific evidence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

IPD

  1. Ghiselli G, Wang JC, Bhatia NN, et al. Adjacent segment degeneration in the lumbar spine. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004 Jul;86-A(7):1497–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Fritzell P, Hägg O, Nordwall A, Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. Complications in lumbar fusion surgery for chronic low back pain: comparison of three surgical techniques used in a prospective randomized study. A report from the Swedish lumbar spine study group. Eur Spine J. 2003;12(2):178–89.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, Tosteson A, Abdu WA, Zhao W, Morgan TS, Weinstein JN. Long-term outcomes of lumbar spinal stenosis: eight-year results of the spine patient outcomes research trial (SPORT). Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015;40(2):63–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Overdevest GM, Jacobs W, Vleggeert-Lankamp C, Thomé C, Gunzburg R, Peul W. Effectiveness of posterior decompression techniques compared with conventional laminectomy for lumbar stenosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(3).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Moojen WA, Arts MP, Bartels RH, Jacobs WC, Peul WC. Effectiveness of interspinous implant surgery in patients with intermittent neurogenic claudication: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Spine J. 2011;20(10):1596–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Wu AM, Zhou Y, Li QL, Wu XL, Jin YL, Luo P, Chi YL, Wang XY. Interspinous spacer versus traditional decompressive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(5):e97142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Meyer B, Baranto A, Schils F, Collignon F, Zoega B, Tan L, LeHuec JC; NICE Trial Study Group. Percutaneous Interspinous Spacer vs Decompression in Patients with Neurogenic Claudication: An Alternative in Selected Patients?. Neurosurgery. 2017.

    Google Scholar 

TDR

  1. Hellum C, Johnsen LG, Storheim K, Nygaard OP, Brox JI, Rossvoll I, et al. Surgery with disc prosthesis versus rehabilitation in patients with low back pain and degenerative disc: two year follow-up of randomised study. BMJ. 2011;342:d2786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hellum C, Berg L, Gjertsen Ø, Johnsen LG, Neckelmann G, Storheim K, et al. Adjacent level degeneration and facet arthropathy after disc prosthesis surgery or rehabilitation in patients with chronic low back pain and degenerative disc: second report of a randomized study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37(25):2063–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Jacobs W, Van der Gaag NA, Tuschel A, de Kleuver M, Peul W, Verbout AJ, Oner FC. Total disc replacement for chronic back pain in the presence of disc degeneration. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Siepe CJ, Heider F, Wiechert K, Hitzl W, Ishak B, Mayer MH. Mid- to long-term results of total lumbar disc replacement: a prospective analysis with 5- to 10-year follow-up. Spine J. 2014;14(8):1417–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Plais N, Thevenot X, Cogniet A, Rigal J, Le Huec JC. Maverick total disc arthroplasty performs well at 10 years follow-up: a prospective study with HRQL and balance analysis. Eur Spine J. 2017.

    Google Scholar 

Pedicle-screw based systems

  1. Abdu RW, Abdu WA, Pearson AM, Zhao W, Lurie JD, Weinstein JN. Reoperation for recurrent intervertebral disc herniation in the spine patient outcomes research trial: analysis of rate, risk factors, and outcome. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017;42(14):1106–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Watters WC 3rd, Resnick DK, Eck JC, Ghogawala Z, Mummaneni PV, Dailey AT, Choudhri TF, Sharan A, Groff MW, Wang JC, Dhall SS, Kaiser MG. Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 13: injection therapies, low-back pain, and lumbar fusion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014;21(1):79–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Wang JC, Dailey AT, Mummaneni PV, Ghogawala Z, Resnick DK, Watters WC 3rd, Groff MW, Choudhri TF, Eck JC, Sharan A, Dhall SS, Kaiser MG. Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 8: lumbar fusion for disc herniation and radiculopathy. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014;21(1):48–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Stoll TM, Dubois G, Schwarzenbach O. The dynamic neutralization system for the spine: a multi-center study of a novel non-fusion system. Eur Spine J. 2002;11(Suppl 2):S170–8. Epub 2002 Sep 10

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Maleci A, Sambale RD, Schiavone M, Lamp F, Özer F, von Strempel A. Nonfusion stabilization of the degenerative lumbar spine. J Neurosurg Spine. 2011;15(2):151–8. https://doi.org/10.3171/2011.3.SPINE0969. Epub 2011 May 13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, Helios Klinikum Krefeld, Krefeld, Germany

    Michael Stoffel

Authors
  1. Michael Stoffel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Stoffel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany

    Bernhard Meyer

  2. Department of Spine Surgery, Sana Klinikum Offenbach, Offenbach, Germany

    Michael Rauschmann

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Stoffel, M. (2019). Lumbar Non-Fusion Techniques. In: Meyer, B., Rauschmann, M. (eds) Spine Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98875-7_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98875-7_15

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-98874-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-98875-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation