METHODS: A retrospective case-control propensity score-matching study.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to longitudinally evaluate whether preoperative ligamentous stenosis at the spondylolisthetic segments could affect the incidence of symptomatic adjacent canal stenosis following one-segment fusion surgery.
BACKGROUND: Several risk factors for symptomatic adjacent canal stenosis following fusion surgery have been assessed. Patients with lumbar canal stenosis mainly due to ligamentum flavum (LF) hypertrophy (ligamentous stenosis) also have LF hypertrophy in other segments.
METHODS: In total, 76 patients participated in this case-control study (neurologically symptomatic adjacent canal stenosis, n=33; neurologically asymptomatic cases at follow-up, n=43). Their risk factors during surgery and magnetic resonance (MR) images before the surgery and at follow-up were evaluated. Data from the two groups (n=25 each) were matched using propensity scores for age, sex, time to MR imaging at follow-up, surgical procedure, and LF hypertrophy in adjacent segments before the surgery and analyzed.
RESULTS: Compared with the asymptomatic group, the symptomatic adjacent canal stenosis group had a significantly larger LF area/spinal canal area in the spondylolisthetic segments before the surgery. During the follow-up periods (in months), they had a larger LF area/ spinal canal area in the adjacent segments: the two values were significantly correlated. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for determining symptomatic adjacent canal stenosis were high compared with on the cutoff value for the LF area/spinal canal area at the spondylolisthetic segments before the surgery. These results were the same after matching.
CONCLUSIONS: Symptomatic adjacent canal stenosis is mainly caused by LF hypertrophy. Ligamentous stenosis at the spondylolisthetic segments before fusion surgery might be strongly associated with symptomatic adjacent canal stenosis at follow-up.

METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using the Kaplan-Meier method with propensity-score matching.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the presence of prevalent morphometric vertebral fractures (VFs) poses a risk for subsequent clinical VFs after short-fusion surgery in women aged ≥60 years with degenerative spondylolisthesis.
BACKGROUND: VFs are common osteoporotic fractures and are associated with a low quality of life. Subsequent VFs are a complication of instrumented fusion in patients with degenerative lumbar disorders. Thus, risk factors for subsequent VFs after fusion surgery must be analyzed. Population-based studies have suggested that prevalent morphometric VFs led to a higher incidence of subsequent VFs in postmenopausal women; however, no studies have investigated whether prevalent morphometric VFs are a risk factor for subsequent VFs after fusion surgery in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis.
METHODS: The study enrolled a total of 237 older female patients: 50 and 187 patients had prevalent morphometric VFs (VF [+] group) and nonprevalent morphometric VFs (VF [-] group), respectively. The time to subsequent clinical VFs after fusion surgery was compared between the two groups using the Kaplan-Meier method. Moreover, 40 and 80 patients in the VF (+) and VF (-) groups, respectively, were analyzed and matched by propensity scores for age, follow-up duration, surgical procedure, number of fused segments, body mass index, and number of patients treated for osteoporosis.
RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated that the VF (+) group had a higher incidence of subsequent clinical VFs than the VF (-) group, and Cox regression analysis showed that the presence of prevalent morphometric VFs was an independent risk factor for subsequent clinical VFs before matching. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated comparable results after matching.
CONCLUSIONS: The presence of prevalent morphometric VFs may be a risk factor for subsequent clinical VFs in older women with degenerative spondylolisthesis who underwent short-fusion surgery.

Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) is widely used to treat degenerative spondylolisthesis because it provides definitive decompression and fixation. Although it has several advantages, it has some disadvantages and risks, such as paraspinal muscle injury, potential intraoperative bleeding, postoperative pain, hardware failure, subsidence, and medical comorbidity. Lumbar decompressive bilateral laminectomy with interspinous fixation (DLISF) is less invasive and can be used on some patients with PLIF, but this has not been reported. To compare the efficacy and safety of DLISF in the treatment of low-grade lumbar spondylolisthesis with that of PLIF. We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 81 patients with grade I spondylolisthesis, who had undergone PLIF or DLISF and were followed up for more than 1 year. Surgical outcomes, visual analog scale, radiologic outcomes, including Cobb angle and difference in body translation, and postoperative complications were assessed. Forty-one patients underwent PLIF, whereas 40 underwent DLISF. The operative times were 271.0 ± 57.2 and 150.6 ± 29.3 minutes for the PLIF and DLISF groups, respectively. The estimated blood loss was significantly higher in the PLIF group versus the DLISF group (290.7 ± 232.6 vs 122.2 ± 82.7 mL, P < .001). Body translation did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. Overall pain improved during the 1-year follow-up when compared with baseline data. Medical complications were significantly lower in the DLISF group, whereas perioperative complications and hardware issues were higher in the PLIF group. The outcomes of DLISF, which is less invasive, were comparable to PLIF outcomes in patients with low-grade spondylolisthesis. As a salvage technique, DLISF may be a good option when compared with PLIF.

BACKGROUND Cervical spondylolysis with spondylolisthesis is a rare disorder. According to previous reports, the spondylolisthesis is usually Meyerding Grade I, with only a limited number of cases receiving surgical treatment. We hereby report a special case of cervical spondylolysis with Grade-II spondylolisthesis, treated with single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), and present a literature review related to this problem. CASE REPORT Here, we report the case of a 52-year-old man who complained of posterior neck pain and numbness of the bilateral upper limbs. Radiological examination showed bilateral spondylolysis of the C6 and Meyerding Grade-II spondylolisthesis of C6 on C7 with instability. The patient underwent a single-level C6/C7 ACDF surgery. The symptoms of neck pain and bilateral upper-limb numbness were relieved immediately after surgery. The immediate postoperative radiological examination showed successful restoration of sagittal alignment. At 3-month follow-up, the patient had returned to normal life without any symptoms. At 2-year follow-up, computed tomography showed that C6-C7 fusion had been achieved and alignment was maintained. CONCLUSIONS Cervical spondylolysis, as an uncommon spinal disorder, has been regarded as a congenital abnormity, and has unique radiological characteristics. For most of the cases with cervical spondylolysis, even with Grade-II spondylolisthesis, single-level ACDF can achieve good clinical and radiological outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and spondylolisthesis (SPL) are characterized as degenerative spinal pathologies and share considerable similarities. However, opinions vary on whether to recommend exercise or restrict it for these diseases. Few studies have objectively compared the effects of daily physical activity on LSS and SPL because it is impossible to restrict activities ethnically and practically. We investigated the effect of restricting physical activity due to social distancing (SoD) on LSS and SPL, focusing on the aspect of healthcare burden changes during the pandemic period.
METHODS: We included first-visit patients diagnosed exclusively with LSS and SPL in 2017 and followed them up for two years before and after the implementation of the SoD policy. As controls, patients who first visited in 2015 and were followed for four years without SoD were analyzed. The common data model was employed to analyze each patient\'s diagnostic codes and treatments. Hospital visits and medical costs were analyzed by regression discontinuity in time to control for temporal effects on dependent variables.
RESULTS: Among 33,484 patients, 2,615 with LSS and 446 with SPL were included. A significant decrease in hospital visits was observed in the LSS (difference, -3.94 times/month·100 patients; p = 0.023) and SPL (difference, -3.44 times/month·100 patients; p = 0.026) groups after SoD. This decrease was not observed in the data from the control group. Concerning medical costs, the LSS group showed a statistically significant reduction in median copayment (difference, -$45/month·patient; p < 0.001) after SoD, whereas a significant change was not observed in the SPL group (difference, -$19/month·patient; p = 0.160).
CONCLUSIONS: Restricted physical activity during the SoD period decreased the healthcare burden for patients with LSS or, conversely, it did not significantly affect patients with SPL. Under circumstances of physical inactivity, patients with LSS may underrate their symptoms, while maintaining an appropriate activity level may be beneficial for patients with SPL.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the morphometry of paraspinal muscles in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS), isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS), and healthy individuals.
METHODS: Thirty-seven pairs of DS patients were selected using propensity score matching with IS patients, while 37 healthy individuals matched for age, sex, and BMI were selected as controls. The relative cross-sectional area (rCSA), and relative functional cross-sectional area (rfCSA) of paraspinal muscles were measured, and the degree of fatty infiltration (FI) was calculated. Based on occupational differences, the patients were also divided into worker and farmer groups, and the same measurements were taken on them.
RESULTS: At the L3/L4 level, the multifidus (MF) FI was greater in the DS and IS groups than in the control group, the erector spinae (ES) rfCSA was higher in the IS group than in the DS and control groups. At the L4/L5 level, MF rfCSA was smaller in the DS and IS groups than in the control group; ES rfCSA was higher in the IS group than in the DS and control groups. At the L5/S1 level, MF rfCSA was smaller in the DS and IS groups than in the control group; ES rfCSA was higher in the IS group than in the DS group. At the L3/L4, L4/L5 level, MF rfCSA were higher in the worker group than in the farmer group (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The morphological changes in paraspinal muscles in patients with DS were dominated by selective atrophy of the MF, while in patients with IS, the morphological changes in paraspinal muscle showed selective atrophy of the MF accompanied by compensatory hypertrophy of the ES. The surgeon should consider the morphological differences in paraspinal muscle between different types of lumbar spondylolisthesis when establishing the appropriate surgical program.

UNASSIGNED: To compare the effectiveness of unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (UBE-TLIF) and endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF) in the treatment of single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with lumbar spondylolisthesis.
UNASSIGNED: Between November 2019 and May 2023, a total of 81 patients with single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with lumbar spondylolisthesis who met the selection criteria were enrolled. They were randomly divided into UBE-TLIF group (39 cases) and Endo-TLIF group (42 cases). There was no significant difference in baseline data between the two groups ( P>0.05), including gender, age, body mass index, surgical segment, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for low back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and serum markers including creatine kinase (CK) and C reactive protein (CRP). Total blood loss (TBL), intraoperative blood loss, hidden blood loss (HBL), postoperative drainage volume, and operation time were recorded and compared between the two groups. Serum markers (CK, CRP) levels were compared between the two groups at 1 day before operation and 1, 3, and 5 days after operation. Furthermore, the VAS scores for low back and leg pain, and ODI at 1 day before operation and 1 day, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after operation, and intervertebral fusion rate at 12 months after operation were compared between the two groups.
UNASSIGNED: All surgeries were completed successfully without occurrence of incision infection, vascular or nerve injury, epidural hematoma, dural tear, or postoperative paraplegia. The operation time in UBE-TLIF group was significantly shorter than that in Endo-TLIF group, but the intraoperative blood loss, TBL, and HBL in UBE-TLIF group were significantly more than those in Endo-TLIF group ( P<0.05). There was no significant difference in postoperative drainage volume between the two groups ( P>0.05). The levels of CK at 1 day and 3 days after operation and CRP at 1, 3, and 5 days after operation in UBE-TLIF group were slightly higher than those in the Endo-TLIF group ( P<0.05), while there was no significant difference in the levels of CK and CPR between the two groups at other time points ( P>0.05). All patients were followed up 12 months. VAS score of low back and leg pain and ODI at each time point after operation significantly improved when compared with those before operation in the two groups ( P<0.05); there was no significant difference in VAS score of low back and leg pain and ODI between the two groups at each time point after operation ( P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the intervertebral fusion rate between the two groups at 12 months after operation ( P>0.05).
UNASSIGNED: UBE-TLIF and Endo-TLIF are both effective methods for treating degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with lumbar spondylolisthesis. However, compared to Endo-TLIF, UBE-TLIF requires further improvement in minimally invasive techniques to reduce tissue trauma and blood loss.
UNASSIGNED: 比较单侧双通道脊柱内镜下经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术（unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion，UBE-TLIF）与单通道脊柱内镜下经椎间孔腰椎椎间融合术（endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion，Endo-TLIF）对单节段退行性腰椎管狭窄症伴腰椎滑脱的治疗效果。.
UNASSIGNED: 纳入2019年11月—2023年5月收治且符合选择标准的81例单节段退行性腰椎管狭窄症伴腰椎滑脱患者，随机分为UBE-TLIF组（39例）和Endo-TLIF组（42例）。两组患者性别、年龄、身体质量指数、手术节段及术前腰、腿痛疼痛视觉模拟评分（VAS）、Oswestry功能障碍指数（ODI）、血清学指标肌酸激酶（creatine kinase，CK）和C反应蛋白（C reactive protein，CRP）水平等基线资料比较差异均无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。记录并比较两组患者总失血量（total blood loss，TBL）、术中失血量、隐性失血量（hidden blood loss，HBL）、术后引流量、手术时间；比较两组术前1 d及术后1、3、5 d血清学指标CK、CRP水平，术前1 d及术后1 d、3个月、6个月、12个月腰、腿痛VAS评分、ODI及术后12个月椎间融合率。.
UNASSIGNED: 所有手术均顺利完成，无切口感染、血管神经损伤、硬膜外血肿、硬脑膜撕裂和术后截瘫等情况发生。UBE-TLIF组手术时间少于Endo-TLIF组，但术中失血量、TBL、HBL均多于Endo-TLIF组，差异均有统计学意义（ P<0.05）；两组术后引流量比较差异无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。UBE-TLIF组术后1、3 d CK水平及术后1、3、5 d CRP水平均高于Endo-TLIF组（ P<0.05）；其余时间点两组CK和CPR水平比较差异无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。两组患者均获随访12个月。两组术后各时间点腰、腿痛VAS评分及ODI均较术前显著改善（ P<0.05）；术后各时间点两组间腰、腿痛VAS评分及ODI比较差异均无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。术后12个月两组椎间融合率比较差异亦无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。.
UNASSIGNED: UBE-TLIF与Endo-TLIF均为治疗退行性腰椎管狭窄症伴腰椎滑脱的有效方法，但与Endo-TLIF相比，UBE-TLIF需在微创技术上进一步改进，以减少组织创伤与失血量。.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to compare surgical outcomes, clinical outcomes, and complications between minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS TLIF) and midline lumbar interbody fusion (MIDLIF) in patients with spondylolisthesis.
METHODS: This study retrospectively compared the patients who underwent MIS TLIF (n = 37) or MIDLIF (n = 50) for spinal spondylolisthesis. Data of surgical outcomes (postoperative one-year fusion rate and time to bony fusion), clinical outcomes (visual analog scale [VAS] for pain and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] for spine function), and complications were collected and analyzed.
RESULTS: There was more 2-level fusion in MIDLIF (46% vs. 24.3%, p = 0.038). The MIS TLIF and MIDLIF groups had similar one-year fusion rate and time to fusion. The MIDLIF group had significantly lower VAS at postoperative 3-months (2.2 vs. 3.1, p = 0.002) and postoperative 1-year (1.1 vs. 2.1, p = < 0.001). ODI was not significantly different. The operation time was shorter in MIDLIF (166.1 min vs. 196.2 min, p = 0.014). The facet joint violation is higher in MIS TLIF (21.6% vs. 2%, p = 0.009). The other complications were not significantly different including rate of implant removal, revision, and adjacent segment disease.
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, postoperative VAS, operation time, and the rate of facet joint violation were significantly higher in the MIS TLIF group. Comparable outcomes were observed between MIDLIF and MIS TLIF in terms of fusion rate, time to fusion, and postoperative ODI score.

UNASSIGNED: This study aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of reduction vs. arthrodesis in situ with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for low-grade lumbar spondylolisthesis.
UNASSIGNED: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
UNASSIGNED: A comprehensive literature search was implemented in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Randomized or non-randomized controlled trials that were published until July 2023 that compared reduction vs. arthrodesis in situ techniques with minimally invasive or open-TLIF for low-grade spondylolisthesis were selected. The quality of the included studies was evaluated by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Data were extracted according to the predefined outcome measures, including operation time and intraoperative blood loss; short- and long-time follow-up of visual analog scale (VAS) back pain (VAS-BP) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI); slippage and segmental lordosis; and the complication and fusion rate.
UNASSIGNED: Five studies (n = 495 patients) were finally included. All of them were retrospective cohort studies with Evidence Level II. The pooled data revealed that both techniques had similar patient-reported outcomes (VAS, ODI, and good and excellent rate) during short- and long-term follow-up. In addition, no significant differences were observed in the fusion and complication rates. However, although the reduction group did achieve better slippage correction, it was associated with increased operation time and intraoperative blood loss compared with the in situ arthrodesis group.
UNASSIGNED: Based on the available evidence, intraoperative reduction does not result in better clinical outcomes in low-grade spondylolisthesis after minimally invasive or open-TLIF, and the in situ arthrodesis technique could be an alternative.

Robust reference data, representing a large and diverse population, are needed to objectively classify measurements of spondylolisthesis and disc space narrowing as normal or abnormal. The reference data should be open access to drive standardization across technology developers. The large collection of radiographs from the 2nd National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey was used to establish reference data. A pipeline of neural networks and coded logic was used to place landmarks on the corners of all vertebrae, and these landmarks were used to calculate multiple disc space metrics. Descriptive statistics for nine SPO and disc metrics were tabulated and used to identify normal discs, and data for only the normal discs were used to arrive at reference data. A spondylolisthesis index was developed that accounts for important variables. These reference data facilitate simplified and standardized reporting of multiple intervertebral disc metrics.