Volume 30, Issue 142 (September & October 2022)                   J Adv Med Biomed Res 2022, 30(142): 417-422 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rezaeipour M, Moallem S M H, Afzalaghaee M, Omidi-Kashani F. Surgical Outcome in Different Types of L4-L5 Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Based on CARDS Classification. J Adv Med Biomed Res 2022; 30 (142) :417-422
URL: http://journal.zums.ac.ir/article-1-6625-en.html
Surgical Outcome in Different Types of L4-L5 Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Based on CARDS Classification
Mohsen Rezaeipour1 , Seyed Mohammad Hassan Moallem1 , Monavar Afzalaghaee2 , Farzad Omidi-Kashani * 3
1- Dept. of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
2- Dept. of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
3- Dept. of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran , omidif@mums.ac.ir
Abstract:   (47392 Views)

Background and Objective: Clinical and Radiologic Degenerative Spondylolisthesis (CARDS) classification is a relatively newer system than Meyerding’s to better categorize lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of surgery in patients with different types of LDS based on CARDS classification.
Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, we assessed 49 (38 female and 11 male) patients with refractory L4-L5 LDS undergoing decompression, reduction and instrumented fusion in Imam Reza Hospital of Mashhad from February 2015 to January. Patients' classification, disability, and pain were assessed based on CARDS classification, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and visual analogue scale (VAS). Finally, a statistical analysis was performed to find out any correlation between different types of the disease and their clinical improvement.
Results: The mean follow-up period was 40.5±6.8 months (26 -72 months). Type B had the highest prevalence, and A had the lowest. Type C had the highest body mass index. Surgery could significantly improve both pain and disability in all types of the disease; however, we could not find any significant difference between the types in response to the surgery (p-value > 0.477). Gender distribution was similar among the types, but body mass index was the highest in type C.
Conclusion: Although all types of refractory L4-L5 LDS benefit from the operation, this improvement is not different among the types. It seems here, like other areas of the spine, that no significant relationship exists between the clinical and radiological characteristics.

Keywords: Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis, CARDS classification, Visual Analogue Scale, Oswestry Disability index
Full-Text [PDF 317 kb]   (24416 Downloads) |   |   Full-Text (HTML)  (966 Views)  

✅ Although all types of refractory L4-L5 LDS benefit from the operation, this improvement is not different among the types. It seems here, like other areas of the spine, that no significant relationship exists between the clinical and radiological characteristics.


Type of Study: Original Article | Subject: Clinical medicine
Received: 2021/07/15 | Accepted: 2022/07/4 | Published: 2022/08/8
References
1. Koreckij TD, Fischgrund JS. Degenerative spondylolisthesis. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2015; 28(7): 236-41. [DOI:10.1097/BSD.0000000000000298] [PMID]
2. Kalichman L, Hunter DJ. Diagnosis and conservative management of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J. 2008; 17(3): 327-35. [DOI:10.1007/s00586-007-0543-3] [PMID] [PMCID]
3. Anderson DG, Limthongkul W, Sayadipour A, et al. A radiographic analysis of degenerative spondylolisthesis at the L4-5 level. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012; 16(2): 130-4. [DOI:10.3171/2011.10.SPINE11140] [PMID]
4. Bydon M, Alvi MA, Goyal A. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: definition, natural history, conservative management, and surgical treatment. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2019; 30(3): 299-304. [DOI:10.1016/j.nec.2019.02.003] [PMID]
5. Meyerding HW. Spondylolisthesis. Surg Gynecol Obs. 1932; 54: 371-7.
6. Sobol GL, Hilibrand A, Davis A, et al. Reliability and clinical utility of the CARDS classification for degenerative spondylolisthesis. Clin spine Surg. 2018; 31(1): E69-73. [DOI:10.1097/BSD.0000000000000571] [PMID]
7. Kepler CK, Hilibrand AS, Sayadipour A, et al. Clinical and radiographic degenerative spondylolisthesis (CARDS) classification. Spine J. 2015; 15(8): 1804-11. [DOI:10.1016/j.spinee.2014.03.045] [PMID]
8. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The oswestry disability index. Spine. 2000; 25(22): 2940-52. [DOI:10.1097/00007632-200011150-00017] [PMID]
9. Wewers ME, Lowe NK. A critical review of visual analogue scales in the measurement of clinical phenomena. Res Nurs Health. 1990; 13(4): 227-36. [DOI:10.1002/nur.4770130405] [PMID]
10. Mousavi SJ, Parnianpour M, Mehdian H, Montazeri A, Mobini B. The oswestry disability index, the roland-morris disability questionnaire, and the Quebec back pain disability scale: translation and validation studies of the Iranian versions. Spine. 2006; 31(14): E454-9. [DOI:10.1097/01.brs.0000222141.61424.f7] [PMID]
11. Gille O, Bouloussa H, Mazas S, et al. A new classification system for degenerative spondylolisthesis of the lumbar spine. Eur Spine J. 2017; 26(12): 3096-3105. [DOI:10.1007/s00586-017-5275-4] [PMID]
12. Gille O, Challier V, Parent H, et al. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: cohort of 670 patients, and proposal of a new classification.Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2014; 100(6 Suppl): S311-5. [DOI:10.1016/j.otsr.2014.07.006] [PMID]
13. Ghailane S, Bouloussa H, Challier V, et al. Radiographic classification for degenerative spondylolisthesis of the lumbar spine based on sagittal balance: a reliability study. Spine Deform. 2018: 6(4): 358-365. [DOI:10.1016/j.jspd.2017.12.001] [PMID]
14. Rosenberg NJ. Degenerative spondylolisthesis. Predisposing factors. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1975; 57(4): 467-74. [DOI:10.2106/00004623-197557040-00004]
15. Kong C, Sun X, Ding J, Guo M, Li X, Lu S. Comparison of the French and CARDS classifications for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: reliability and validity. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019; 20(1): 1-7. [DOI:10.1186/s12891-019-2753-3] [PMID] [PMCID]
16. Chen X, Zhou Q, Xu L, et al. Does kyphotic configuration on upright lateral radiograph correlate with instability in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis? Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2018; 173: 96-100. [DOI:10.1016/j.clineuro.2018.07.020] [PMID]
17. Matz PG, Meagher RJ, Lamer T, et al. Guideline summary review: An evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Spine J. 2016; 16(3): 439-48. [DOI:10.1016/j.spinee.2015.11.055] [PMID]
18. Rihn JA, Radcliff K, Hilibrand AS, et al. Does obesity affect outcomes of treatment for lumbar stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis? Analysis of the spine patient outcomes research trial (SPORT). Spine. 2012; 37(23): 1933-46. [DOI:10.1097/BRS.0b013e31825e21b2] [PMID] [PMCID]
19. Kanayama M, Hashimoto T, Shigenobu K, Oha F, Ishida T, Yamane S. Intraoperative biomechanical assessment of lumbar spinal instability: validation of radiographic parameters indicating anterior column support in lumbar spinal fusion. Spine. 2003; 28(20): 2368-72. [DOI:10.1097/01.BRS.0000085357.24025.27] [PMID]
20. Chen X, Xu ,Qiu Y , et al. Higher improvement in patient-reported outcomes can be achieved after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for clinical and radiographic degenerative spondylolisthesis classification type D degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. World Neurosurg. 2018; 114: e293-e300. [DOI:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.02.175] [PMID]
Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Journal of Advances in Medical and Biomedical Research

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb