Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Surgical treatments for degenerative lumbar scoliosis: a meta analysis

  • Review Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Degenerative lumbar scoliosis (DLS) is a spinal deformity that typically develops in adults over 50 years old. Although its etiology is unclear, asymmetric degeneration of the spine is the main cause. Individuals with DLS may experience no symptoms of the deformity, mild symptoms, or severe disability. Most patients with DLS receive conservative treatment, while a small number of patients receive surgery for severe DLS with back pain and/or progressive neurological symptoms. A variety of surgical procedures have emerged. However, a systemic comparison of these surgical procedures is currently unavailable. This study reviews the main outcomes and complications of surgical treatments.

Methods

A meta analysis of main outcomes and complications of surgical treatments of DLS was conducted through searching PubMed and EMbase databases.

Results

A total of 45 studies were included in this study, which were classified into four surgical categories. Nine studies utilized isolated decompression, 12 used short interbody fusion, 17 used long interbody fusion, and 11 studies included patients using short or long interbody fusion or surgery other than fusion, respectively. Decompression surgery is used to release the symptoms of neurogenic claudication. Spine fusion is widely utilized to prevent worsening of the curve. Instrumentation has been used together with fusion to straighten the spine, correct sagittal imbalance, and repair rotational defects. Decompression is commonly combined with fusion surgery when treating an individual with DLS.

Conclusion

Despite a high rate of complications, this review demonstrates that surgery is an effective and reasonable treatment intervention for severe DLS and ultimately improves spine function and deformity. This review also suggests that large scale, high quality studies with long term follow-up are needed to provide more reliable evidence for future evaluation.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ploumis A, Transfledt EE, Denis F (2007) Degenerative lumbar scoliosis associated with spinal stenosis. Spine J 7:428–436

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Oskouian RJ Jr, Shaffrey CI (2006) Degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Neurosurg Clin N Am 17:299–315

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rothenfluh DA, Koenig M, Stokes OM, Behrbalk E, Boszczyk BM (2014) Access-related complications in anterior lumbar surgery in patients over 60 years of age. Eur Spine J 23(Suppl 1):S86–S92

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Di Silvestre M, Lolli F, Bakaloudis G (2014) Degenerative lumbar scoliosis in elderly patients: dynamic stabilization without fusion versus posterior instrumented fusion. Spine J 14:1–10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Transfeldt EE, Topp R, Mehbod AA, Winter RB (2010) Surgical outcomes of decompression, decompression with limited fusion, and decompression with full curve fusion for degenerative scoliosis with radiculopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35:1872–1875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Lykissas MG, Aichmair A (2013) Current concepts on spinal arthrodesis in degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine. World J Clin Cases 1:4–12

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Phillips FM, Slosar PJ, Youssef JA, Andersson G, Papatheofanis F (2013) Lumbar spine fusion for chronic low back pain due to degenerative disc disease: a systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:E409–E422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Zdeblick TA, Phillips FM (2003) Interbody cage devices. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28:S2–S7

    Google Scholar 

  9. Than KD, Wang AC, Rahman SU, Wilson TJ, Valdivia JM, Park P, La Marca F (2011) Complication avoidance and management in anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Neurosurg Focus 31(4):E6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mehta VA, McGirt MJ, Garcés Ambrossi GL, Parker SL, Sciubba DM, Bydon A, Wolinsky JP, Gokaslan ZL, Witham TF (2011) Trans-foraminal versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion: comparison of surgical morbidity. Neurol Res 33:38–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Shirzadi A, Birch K, Drazin D, Liu JC, Acosta F Jr (2012) Direct lateral interbody fusion (DLIF) at the lumbosacral junction L5-S1. J Clin Neurosci 19:1022–1025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ozgur BM, Aryan HE, Pimenta L, Taylor WR (2006) Extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF): a novel surgical technique for anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J 6:435–443

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Harrington PR (2002) Treatment of scoliosis: correction and internal fixation by spine instrumentation. June 1962. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A(2):316

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Stenning M, Nelson I (2011) Recent advances in the treatment of scoliosis in children. British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery. Retrieved 1 Jan 2014

  15. Gurr KR, McAfee PC, Shih CM (1988) Biomechanical analysis of anterior and posterior instrumentation systems after corpectomy. A calf-spine model. J Bone Joint Surg Am 70:1182–1191

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Di Silvestre M, Lolli F, Greggi T, Vommaro F, Baioni A (2013) Adult’s degenerative scoliosis: midterm results of dynamic stabilization without fusion in elderly patients—is it effective? Adv Orthop 2013:365059

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Di Silvestre M, Lolli F, Bakaloudis G, Parisini P (2010) Dynamic stabilization for degenerative lumbar scoliosis in elderly patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35:227–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Papavero L, Kothe R (2013) Microsurgical extraforaminal decompression of lumbar root canal stenosis. Oper Orthop Traumatol 25:16–30

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hosogane N, Watanabe K, Kono H, Saito M, Toyama Y, Matsumoto M (2013) Curve progression after decompression surgery in patients with mild degenerative scoliosis. J Neurosurg Spine 18:321–326

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Tsutsui S, Kagotani R, Yamada H, Hashizume H, Minamide A, Nakagawa Y, Iwasaki H, Yoshida M (2013) Can decompression surgery relieve low back pain in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis combined with degenerative lumbar scoliosis? Eur Spine J 22:2010–2014

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Daubs MD, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, Cheh G, Kim YJ, Stobbs G (2012) Decompression alone versus decompression with limited fusion for treatment of degenerative lumbar scoliosis in the elderly patient. Evid Based Spine Care J 3:27–32

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Matsumura A, Namikawa T, Terai H, Tsujio T, Suzuki A, Dozono S, Yasuda H, Nakamura H (2010) The influence of approach side on facet preservation in microscopic bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 13:758–765

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hwang DW, Jeon SH, Kim JW, Kim EH, Lee JH, Park KJ (2009) Radiographic progression of degenerative lumbar scoliosis after short segment decompression and fusion. Asian Spine J 3:58–65

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Castro C, Oliveira L, Amaral R, Marchi L, Pimenta L (2014) Is the lateral transpsoas approach feasible for the treatment of adult degenerative scoliosis? Clin Orthop Relat Res 472(6):1776–1783

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lykissas MG, Cho W, Aichmair A, Sama AA, Hughes AP, Lebl DR, Du JY, Cammisa FP, Girardi FP (2013) Is there any relation between the amount of curve correction and postoperative neurological deficit or pain in patients undergoing standalone lateral lumbar interbody fusion? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:1656–1662

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Burneikiene S, Nelson EL, Mason A, Rajpal S, Serxner B, Villavicencio AT (2012) Complications in patients undergoing combined transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and posterior instrumentation with deformity correction for degenerative scoliosis and spinal stenosis. Surg Neurol Int 3:25

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Potter BK, Freedman BA, Verwiebe EG, Hall JM, Polly DW Jr, Kuklo TR (2005) Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: clinical and radiographic results and complications in 100 consecutive patients. J Spinal Disord Tech 18:337–346

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ha KY, Son JM, Im JH, Oh IS (2013) Risk factors for adjacent segment degeneration after surgical correction of degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Indian J Orthop 47:346–351

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Yagi M, Patel R, Lawhorne TW, Cunningham ME, Boachie-Adjei O (2014) Adult thoracolumbar and lumbar scoliosis treated with long vertebral fusion to the sacropelvis: a comparison between new hybrid selective spinal fusion versus anterior-posterior spinal instrumentation. Spine J 14(4):637–645

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Cho KJ, Suk SI, Park SR, Kim JH, Kim SS, Lee TJ, Lee JJ, Lee JM (2008) Short fusion versus long fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Eur Spine J 17:650–656

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Liao JC, Chen WJ, Chen LH, Niu CC (2009) Outcome of the L5-S1 segment after posterior instrumented spinal surgery in degenerative lumbar diseases. Chang Gung Med J 32:81–88

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kluba T, Dikmenli G, Dietz K, Giehl JP, Niemeyer T (2009) Comparison of surgical and conservative treatment for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 129:1–5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hioki A, Miyamoto K, Kodama H, Hosoe H, Nishimoto H, Sakaeda H, Shimizu K (2005) Two-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative disc disease: improved clinical outcome with restoration of lumbar lordosis. Spine J 5:600–607

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Scheufler KM, Cyron D, Dohmen H, Eckardt A (2010) Less invasive surgical correction of adult degenerative scoliosis. Part II: complications and clinical outcome. Neurosurgery 67:1609–1621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Aoki Y, Yamagata M, Nakajima F, Ikeda Y, Takahashi K (2009) Posterior migration of fusion cages in degenerative lumbar disease treated with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a report of three patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:E54–E58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Caputo AM, Michael KW, Chapman TM, Jennings JM, Hubbard EW, Isaacs RE, Brown CR (2013) Extreme lateral interbody fusion for the treatment of adult degenerative scoliosis. J Clin Neurosci 20:1558–1563

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Yagi M, Hosogane N, Okada E, Watanabe K, Machida M, Tezuka M, Matsumoto M, Asazuma T (2014) Factors affecting the post operative progression of thoracic kyphosis in surgically treated adult patient with lumbar degenerative scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 39(8):E521–E528

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Cho KJ, Suk SI, Park SR, Kim JH, Jung JH (2013) Selection of proximal fusion level for adult degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Eur Spine J 22:394–401

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Takahashi S, Delécrin J, Passuti N (2001) Intraspinal metallosis causing delayed neurologic symptoms after spinal instrumentation surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26:1495–1498

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Yagi M, Patel R, Boachie-Adjei O (2013) Complications and unfavorable clinical outcomes in obese and overweight patients treated for adult lumbar or thoracolumbar scoliosis with combined anterior/posterior surgery. J Spinal Disord Tech (Epub ahead of print)

  41. Watanabe K, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, Kim YJ, Koester L, Hensley M (2010) Proximal junctional vertebral fracture in adults after spinal deformity surgery using pedicle screw constructs: analysis of morphological features. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35:138–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Cho KJ, Suk SI, Park SR, Kim JH, Choi SW, Yoon YH, Won MH (2009) Arthrodesis to L5 versus S1 in long instrumentation and fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Eur Spine J 18:531–537

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Crandall DG, Revella J (2009) Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion as an adjunct to posterior instrumented correction of degenerative lumbar scoliosis: three year clinical and radiographic outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:2126–2133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Cho KJ, Suk SI, Park SR, Kim JH, Kim SS, Choi WK, Lee KY, Lee SR (2007) Complications in posterior fusion and instrumentation for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:2232–2237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Cho KJ, Suk SI, Park SR, Kim JH, Kang SB, Kim HS, Oh SJ (2010) Risk factors of sagittal decompensation after long posterior instrumentation and fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35:1595–1601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Keorochana G, Tawonsawatruk T, Laohachareonsombat W, Wajanavisit W, Jaovisidha S (2010) The results of decompression and instrumented fusion with pedicular screw plate system in degenerative lumbar scoliosis patients with spinal stenosis: a prospective observational study. J Med Assoc Thai 93:457–461

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Quraishi NA, Konig M, Booker SJ, Shafafy M, Boszczyk BM, Grevitt MP, Mehdian H, Webb JK (2013) Access related complications in anterior lumbar surgery performed by spinal surgeons. Eur Spine J 22(Suppl 1):S16–S20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Tsai TH, Huang TY, Lieu AS, Lee KS, Kung SS, Chu CW, Hwang SL (2011) Functional outcome analysis: instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 153:547–555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Wu CH, Wong CB, Chen LH, Niu CC, Tsai TT, Chen WJ (2008) Instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion for patients with degenerative lumbar scoliosis. J Spinal Disord Tech 21:310–315

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Acosta FL, Liu J, Slimack N, Moller D, Fessler R, Koski T (2011) Changes in coronal and sagittal plane alignment following minimally invasive direct lateral interbody fusion for the treatment of degenerative lumbar disease in adults: a radiographic study. J Neurosurg Spine 15:92–96

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Li F, Chen Q, Chen W, Xu K, Wu Q (2011) Posterior-only approach with selective segmental TLIF for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. J Spinal Disord Tech 24:308–312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. McPhee IB, Swanson CE (1998) The surgical management of degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Posterior instrumentation alone versus two stage surgery. Bull Hosp Jt Dis 57:16–22

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Xie Y, Fu Q, Chen ZQ, Shi ZC, Zhu XD, Wang CF, Li M (2011) Comparison between two pedicle screw augmentation instrumentations in adult degenerative scoliosis with osteoporosis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 12:286

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Ploumis A, Albert TJ, Brown Z, Mehbod AA, Transfeldt EE (2010) Healos graft carrier with bone marrow aspirate instead of allograft as adjunct to local autograft for posterolateral fusion in degenerative lumbar scoliosis: a minimum 2-year follow-up study. J Neurosurg Spine 13:211–215

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Heary RF, Karimi RJ (2010) Correction of lumbar coronal plane deformity using unilateral cage placement. Neurosurg Focus 28:E10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Khan SN, Hofer MA, Gupta MC (2009) Lumbar degenerative scoliosis: outcomes of combined anterior and posterior pelvis surgery with minimum 2-year follow-up. Orthopedics 32(4) [pii:orthosupersite.com/view.asp?rID=8060]

  57. Kanayama M, Hashimoto T, Shigenobu K, Togawa D, Oha F (2007) A minimum 10-year follow-up of posterior dynamic stabilization using Graf artificial ligament. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:1992–1996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB (2000) The Oswestry disability index. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25:2940–2952

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Prommahachai A, Wittayapirot K, Jirarattanaphochai K, Sae-Jung S (2010) Correction with instrumented fusion versus non-corrective surgery for degenerative lumbar scoliosis: a systematic review. J Med Assoc Thai 93:920–929

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Polly DW Jr, Hamill CL, Bridwell KH (2006) Debate: to fuse or not to fuse to the sacrum, the fate of the L5~S1 disc. Spine 31(19 Suppl):179–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Shen FH, Samartzis D, Khanna AJ, Anderson DG (2007) Minimally invasive techniques for lumbar interbody fusions. Orthop Clin North Am 38:373–386

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Fantini GA, Pappou IP, Girardi FP, Sandhu HS, Cammisa FP (2007) Major vascular injury during anterior lumbar spinal surgery: incidence, risk factors, and management. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:2751–2758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Chrastil J, Patel AA (2012) Complications associated with posterior and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 20:283–291

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Pumberger M, Hughes AP, Huang RR, Sama AA, Cammisa FP, Girardi FP (2012) Neurologic deficit following lateral lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J 21:1192–1199

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Hee HT, Castro FP, Majd ME, Holt RT, Myers L (2001) Anterior/posterior lumbar fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: analysis of complications and predictive factors. J Spinal Disord 14:533–540

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Rosenberg WS, Mummaneni PV (2001) Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: technique, complications, and early results. Neurosurgery 48:569–574

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declared no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Spine Surgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, 410008, People’s Republic of China

    Guohua Wang, Jianzhong Hu & Yong Cao

  2. Department of Spine Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital (Hunan Provincial People’s Hospital), Hunan Normal University, 61 West Jiefang Road, Changsha, Hunan, 410005, People’s Republic of China

    Xiangyang Liu

Authors
  1. Guohua Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jianzhong Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xiangyang Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yong Cao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jianzhong Hu or Xiangyang Liu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, G., Hu, J., Liu, X. et al. Surgical treatments for degenerative lumbar scoliosis: a meta analysis. Eur Spine J 24, 1792–1799 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3942-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-3942-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation