Effectiveness of dynamic fixation Coflex treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis

Zhang,Jun-Xi; Jing,Xi-Wei; Cui,Ping; He,Xin; Hao,Ding-Jun; Li,Shu-Jing

doi:10.3892/etm.2017.5508

Effectiveness of dynamic fixation Coflex treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis

Authors:
- Jun-Xi Zhang
- Xi-Wei Jing
- Ping Cui
- Xin He
- Ding-Jun Hao
- Shu-Jing Li
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Orthopedics, People's Hospital of Rizhao, Rizhao, Shandong 276800, P.R. China, Department of Rehabilitation, People's Hospital of Rizhao, Rizhao, Shandong 276800, P.R. China, Department of Oncology, Binzhou Central Hospital, Binzhou, Shangdong 251700, P.R. China, Department of Spine Surgery, Hong-Hui Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710054, P.R. China, Department of Medical Imaging, Jinan Central Hospital, Jinan, Shandong 250013, P.R. China
Published online on: November 13, 2017 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2017.5508
Pages: 667-672
Copyright: © Zhang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to examine the curative effect of dynamic fixation Coflex treatment for patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. In the present study, 78 patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis were recruited and divided equally into the control and observation groups. The control group was treated with traditional decompression fusion and the observation group received dynamic fixation Coflex system. Surgery and hospitalization were shorter in the observation group than in the control group. Intraoperative blood loss and drainage volume after surgery were significantly lower in the observation group compared to the control group. The treatment effective rate for the observation group was significantly higher. Visual analogue scale, Oswestry disability index and Japanese Orthopaedic Association pain and functional scores as well as postoperative vertebral canal area and adjacent segment quantitative scores improved after surgery in the two groups, but the observation group showed greater improvement. The curative effect of dynamic fixation Coflex treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis demonstrates advantages over traditional surgery, including less trauma and bleeding, pain reduction, improved postoperative rehabilitation, and lower incidence of adjacent segment degeneration.

View Figures

View References

1	Fay LY, Wu JC, Tsai TY, Wu CL, Huang WC and Cheng H: Dynamic stabilization for degenerative spondylolisthesis: Evaluation of radiographic and clinical outcomes. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 115:535–541. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Choudhri TF, Mummaneni PV, Dhall SS, Eck JC, Groff MW, Ghogawala Z, Watters WC III, Dailey AT, Resnick DK, Sharan A, et al: Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine Part 4 Radiographic assessment of fusion status. J Neurosurg Spine. 21:23–30. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Shin JS, Oh SH and Cho PG: Surgical outcome of a zero-profile device comparing with stand-alone cage and anterior cervical plate with iliac bone graft in the anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Korean J Spine. 11:169–177. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Wu X-L, Wu L-J, Zheng RM and Ni WF: Finite element model testing on Coflex dynamic fixation for L4/5 and L5/S1 segment of lower lumbar. Yiyong Shengwu Lixue. 28:477–483. 2013.(In Chinese).
5	Resnick DK, Choudhri TF, Dailey AT, Groff MW, Khoo L, Matz PG, Mummaneni P, Watters WC III, Wang J, Walters BC, et al: Guidelines 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 21: 37–41. 2014.
6	Urrutia J, Besa P, Campos M, Cikutovic P, Cabezon M, Molina M and Cruz JP: The Pfirrmann classification of lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration: An independent inter- and intra-observer agreement assessment. Eur Spine J. 25:2728–2733. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Li Z, Li F, Yu S, Ma H, Chen Z, Zhang H and Fu Q: Two-year follow-up results of the Isobar TTL Semi-Rigid Rod System for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease. J Clin Neurosci. 20:394–399. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Kreiner DS, Shaffer WO, Baisden JL, Gilbert TJ, Summers JT, Toton JF, Hwang SW, Mendel RC and Reitman CA: An evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (update). Spine J. 13:734–743. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Shamji MF, Mroz T, Hsu W and Chutkan N: Management of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly. Neurosurgery. 77:S68–S74. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Passmore SR, Johnson MG, Kriellaars DJ, Pelleck V, Enright A and Glazebrook CM: Fitts's Law using lower extremity movement: Performance driven outcomes for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Hum Mov Sci. 44:277–286. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Yi H, Wei X, Zhang W, Chen Z, Wang X, Ji X, Zhu X, Wang F, Xu X, Li Z, et al: Reliability and validity of simplified Chinese version of Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire for patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine. 39:820–825. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Puzzilli F, Gazzeri R, Galarza M, Neroni M, Panagiotopoulos K, Bolognini A, Callovini G, Agrillo U and Alfieri A: Interspinous spacer decompression (X-STOP) for lumbar spinal stenosis and degenerative disk disease: A multicenter study with a minimum 3-year follow-up. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 124:166–174. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Galarza M, Fabrizi AP, Maina R, Gazzeri R and Martínez-Lage JF: Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic intermittent claudication and treatment with the Aperius PercLID System: A preliminary report. Neurosurg Focus. 28:E32010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Yu SW, Yang SC, Ma CH, Wu CH, Yen CY and Tu YK: Comparison of Dynesys posterior stabilization and posterior lumbar interbody fusion for spinal stenosis L4L5. Acta Orthop Belg. 78:230–239. 2012.PubMed/NCBI
15	Yang M, Li C, Chen Z, Bai Y and Li M: Short term outcome of posterior dynamic stabilization system in degenerative lumbar diseases. Indian J Orthop. 48:574–581. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Haddad B, Makki D, Konan S, Park D, Khan W and Okafor B: Dynesys dynamic stabilization: Less good outcome than lumbar fusion at 4-year follow-up. Acta Orthop Belg. 79:97–103. 2013.PubMed/NCBI
17	Wu X-L, Wu L-J, Zheng RM, Wang JS, Xu HZ, Zhou Y and Wu AM: Biomechanical characteristics analysis on discs with Coflex fixation on the different segments of lower lumbar spine. Zhongguo gu shang. China J Orthop Traumatol. 27:938–942. 2014.(In Chinese).
18	Heuer F, Schmidt H, Käfer W, Graf N and Wilke HJ: Posterior motion preserving implants evaluated by means of intervertebral disc bulging and annular fiber strains. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 27:218–225. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Hartmann F, Dietz SO, Kuhn S, Hely H, Rommens PM and Gercek E: Biomechanical comparison of an interspinous device and a rigid stabilization on lumbar adjacent segment range of motion. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 78:404–409. 2011.PubMed/NCBI
20	Lo CC, Tsai KJ, Chen SH, Zhong ZC and Hung C: Biomechanical effect after Coflex and Coflex rivet implantation for segmental instability at surgical and adjacent segments: A finite element analysis. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 14:969–978. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI