Background: Individuals with achondroplasia are prone to symptomatic spinal stenosis requiring surgery. Revision rates are thought to be high; however, the precise causes and rates of reoperation are unknown. The primary aim of this study is to investigate the causes of reoperation after initial surgical intervention in individuals with achondroplasia and spinal stenosis. In addition, we report on surgical techniques aimed at reducing the risks of these reoperations.

Methods: A retrospective review was conducted over an 8-year period of all patients with achondroplasia at a single institution that serves as a large referral center for patients with skeletal dysplasias. Patients with achondroplasia who underwent spinal surgery for stenosis were identified and the need for revision surgery was studied. Data collected included demographic, surgical, and revision details. Fisher exact test was used to determine if an association existed between construct type and the need for revisions.

Results: Thirty-three of the 130 (22%) patients with achondroplasia required spinal stenosis surgery. Twenty-four individuals who met the criteria were selected for analysis. The initial spine surgery was at an average age of 18.7 years (SD: 10.1 y). Nine patients (38%) required revision surgeries, and 3 required multiple revisions. Five of 9 (56%) of the revisions had primary surgery at an outside institution. Revision surgeries were due to caudal pseudarthrosis (the distal instrumented segment) (8), proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) (7), and new neurological symptoms (7). There was a significant association found between construct type and the need for revision ( P =0.0111). The pairwise comparison found that short fusions were significantly associated with the need for revision compared with the interbody group ( P =0.0180). PJK was associated with short fusions when compared with the long fusion group ( P =0.0294) and the interbody group ( P =0.0300). Caudal pseudarthrosis was associated with short fusions when compared with the interbody group ( P =0.0015). Multivariate logistic regression found long fusion with an interbody was predictive of and protective against the need for revision surgery ( P =0.0246). To date, none of the initial cases that had long fusions with caudal interbody required a revision for distal pseudarthrosis.

Conclusions: In patients with achondroplasia, the rate of surgery for spinal stenosis is 22% and the risk of revision is 38% and is primarily due to pseudarthrosis, PJK, and recurrent neurological symptoms. Surgeons should consider discussing spinal surgery as part of the patient's life plan and should consider wide decompression of the stenotic levels and long fusion with the use of an interbody cage at the caudal level in all patients to reduce risks of revision.

Level Of Evidence: Level IV-Retrospective case series.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/BPO.0000000000002687DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

spinal stenosis
20
patients achondroplasia
16
short fusions
12
interbody group
12
long fusion
12
surgery
10
revision
10
surgery spinal
8
individuals achondroplasia
8
spinal surgery
8

Similar Publications

The influence of sintering of osteoporotic vertebral fractures on the sagittal lumbar profile and degenerative changes.

J Orthop Surg Res

January 2025

Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Medical Faculty, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany.

Background: Osteoporosis, a skeletal disorder affecting nearly 20% of the global population, poses a significant health concern, with osteoporotic vertebral body fractures (VBF) representing a common clinical manifestation. The impact of osteoporotic sintering fractures in the thoracolumbar spine on the sagittal lumbar profile is incompletely understood and may lead to the onset of clinical symptoms in previously asymptomatic patients.

Methods: This retrospective single-center study analyzed data from patients presenting with osteoporotic spine fractures between 2017 and 2022.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

The traditional posterior median approach laminectomy is widely used for lumbar decompression. However, the bilateral dissection of paraspinal muscles during this procedure often leads to postoperative muscle atrophy, chronic low back pain, and other complications. The posterior midline spinous process-splitting approach (SPSA) offers a significant advantage over the traditional approach by minimizing damage to the paraspinal muscles.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Importance: The ability of surgeons to choose the right patient for fusion in addition to decompression when operating for degenerative spondylolisthesis with symptomatic spinal stenosis is debated. The addition of fusion increases risk, morbidity, and costs but has been claimed to give better results for selected patients.

Objective: To investigate whether following surgeons' opinions regarding fusion was associated with clinical outcomes.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Approximately 103 million people across the globe suffer from symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis, impacting their health and quality of life. The unilateral biportal endoscopic technique is effective for treating single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis and is seen as a viable alternative to traditional open lumbar laminectomy. However, research on the application of this technique for multilevel lumbar spinal stenosis remains lacking.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Introduction: It is reasonable to assume that lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) affects the cauda nerve roots also at night.

Research Question: Does microsurgical decompression influence sleep quality and position?

Materials And Methods: A study nurse interviewed 140 patients scheduled for LSS decompression using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Spinal Stenosis Measure (SSM), Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for back and leg pain, Douleur Neuropathique (DN4), and Charlson Comorbidity Index. Epidemiologic and MRI data were collected along with self-reported rankings of preferred sleep positions (prone, supine, side, and fetal).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!