Short-segment pedicle screw-based semi-rigid stabilization with poly (etheretherketone) rods for treatment of degenerative lumbar scoliosis in elderly patients

Aim: This study analyzed outcomes after short-segment pedicle screw-based semi-rigid stabilization with Poly (etheretherketone)(PEEK-polymer) rods in elderly patients with degenerative lumbar scoliosis. To date, there is no high level of evidence (Level-I) in therelevant literature. Therefore, this is the initial report about use of PEEK-polymer rods in elderly patients with degenerative lumbarscoliosis.Material and Methods: From January 2015 to June 2017, 31 patients aged over 60 years with degenerative lumbar scoliosis,who underwent pedicle screw-based semi-rigid stabilization with PEEK-polymer rods were investigated. All medical records andradiological images were reviewed to evaluate surgery-related complications and clinical outcomes.Results: Patients demonstrated clinically significant functional improvement (Oswestry Disability Index) with an average of 69.3%during an average follow-up of 36.1 months (range, 24–54 months) after surgery. Patients displayed significant Visual Analog Scale(VAS) improvements when comparing pre- and postoperative scores at an average change of 76% and 80% for VAS for back pain andleg pain, respectively. No neurological deficit was observed after surgery.Conclusion: Satisfactory percentage in functional and pain improvement as well as low rate of instrument-related complicationswas obtained after pedicle screw-based stabilization with PEEK-polymer rods. This system can now be considered a viable optionin elderly patients with the degenerative lumbar scoliosis.

PDF

___

1. Vanderpool DW, James JIP, Wynne-Davies R. Scoliosis in the elderly. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1969;51:446-55.
2. Kobayashi T, Atsuta Y, Takemitsu M, et al. A prospective study of de novo scoliosis in a community based cohort. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006;31:178-82.
3. Schwab F, Dubey A, Gamez L, et al. Adult scoliosis: prevalence, SF-36, and nutritional parameters in an elderly volunteer population. Spine 2005;30:1082-5.
4. Weinstein SL, Ponseti IV. Curve progression in idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1983;65:447-55.
5. Pritchett JW, Bortel DT. Degenerative symptomatic lumbar scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1993;18:700-3.
6. Aebi M. The adult scoliosis. Eur Spine J 2005;14:925-48.
7. Robin GC, Span Y, Steinberg R, et al. Scoliosis in the elderly: a follow-up study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1982;7:355-9.
8. Murata Y, Takahashi K, Hanaoka E, et al. Changes in scoliotic curvature and lordotic angle during the early phase of degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Spine 2002;27:2268-73.
9. Benoist M. Natural history of the aging spine. Eur Spine J 2003;12:86–98.
10. Ploumis A, Transfledt EE, Denis F. Degenerative lumbar scoliosis associated with spinal stenosis. Spine J 2007;7:428-36.
11. Liu H, Ishihara H, Kanamori M, et al. Characteristics of nerve root compression caused by degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with scoliosis. Spine J 2003;3:524-9.
12. Simmons ED. Surgical treatment of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis with associated scoliosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001;384:45-53.
13. Carreon LY, Puno RM, Dimar JR 2nd, et al. Perioperative complications of posterior lumbar decompression and arthrodesis in older adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003;85:2089-92.
14. Cho KJ, Suk SI, Park SR, et al. Complications in posterior fusion and instrumentation for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007;32:2232-7.
15. Cho KJ, Suk SI, Park SR, et al. Short fusion versus long fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Eur Spine J 2008;17:650-6.
16. Ozer AF, Cevik OM, Erbulut DU, et al. A Novel Modular Dynamic Stabilization System for the Treatment of Degenerative Spinal Pathologies. Turk Neurosurg 2019;29:115-20.
17. Lee SE, Jahng TA, Kim HJ. Decompression and nonfusion dynamic stabilization for spinal stenosis with degenerative lumbar scoliosis: Clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 2014;21:585-94.
18. Di Silvestre M, Lolli F, Bakaloudis G. Degenerative lumbar scoliosis in elderly patients: dynamic stabilization without fusion versus posterior instrumented fusion. Spine J 2014;14:1-10.
19. Kurtz SM, Devine JN. PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants. Biomaterials 2007;28:4845-69.
20. Ahn YH, Chen WM, Lee KY, et al. Comparison of the load-sharing characteristics between pediclebased dynamic and rigid rod devices. Biomed Mater 2008;3:044101.
21. Ponnappan RK, Serhan H, Zarda B, et al. Biomechanical evaluation and comparison of polyetheretherketone rodsystem to traditional titanium rod fixation. Spine J 2009;9:263-7.
22. Highsmith JM, Tumialán LM, Rodts GE Jr. Flexible rods and the case for dynamic stabilization. Neurosurg Focus 2007;22:11.
23. Cavagna R, Tournier C, Aunoble S, et al. Lumbar decompression and fusion in elderly osteoporotic patients: a prospective study using less rigid titanium rod fixation. J Spinal Disord Tech 2008;21:86-91.
24. Dakhil-Jerew F, Jadeja H, Cohen A, et al. Inter-observer reliability of detecting Dynesys pedicle screw using plain X-rays: a study on 50 post-operative patients. Eur Spine J 2009;18:1486-93.
25. Deyo RA, Ciol MA, Cherkin DC, et al. Lumbar spinal fusion. A cohort study of complications, reoperations, and resource use in the Medicare population. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1993;18:1463-70.
26. Raffo CS, Lauerman WC. Predicting morbidity and mortality of lumbar spine arthrodesis in patients in their ninth decade. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006;31:99-103.
27. Daubs MD, Lenke LG, Cheh G, et al. Adult spinal deformity surgery. Complications and outcomes in patients over age 60. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007;32:2238-44.
28. Wang MY, Green BA, Shah S, et al. Complications associated with lumbar stenosis surgery in patients older than 75 years of age. Neurosurg Focus 2003;14:7.
29. Benz RJ, Ibrahim ZG, Afshar P, et al. Predicting complications in elderly patients undergoing lumbar decompression. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001;384:116-21.
30. Xia XP, Chen HL, Cheng HB. Prevalence of adjacent segment degeneration after spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013;38:597-608.
31. Panjabi MM. Hybrid multidirectional test method to evaluate spinal adjacent-level effects. Clin Biomech 2007;22:257-65.
32. De Iure F, Bosco G, Cappuccio M, et al. Posterior lumbar fusion by peek rods in degenerative spine: preliminary report on 30 cases. Eur Spine J 2012;21:50-54.
33. Athanasakopoulos M, Mavrogenis AF, Triantafyllopoulos G, et al. Posterior spinal fusion using pedicle screws. Orthopedics 2013;36:951-7.
34. Qi L, Li M, Zhang S, et al. Comparative effectiveness of PEEK rods versus titanium alloy rods in lumbar fusion: a preliminary report. Acta Neurochirurgica 2013;155:1187-93.
35. Colangeli S, Barbanti Brodàno G, Gasbarrini A, et al. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) rods: short-term results in lumbar spine degenerative disease. J Neurosurg Sci 2015;59:91-6.
36. Ormond DR, Albert L Jr, Das K. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) rods in lumbar spine degenerative disease: a case series. Clin Spine Surg 2016;29:371-5.
37. Huang W, Chang Z, Song R, et al. Non-fusion procedure using PEEK rod systems for lumbar degenerative diseases: clinical experience with a 2-year follow-up. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2016;17:53.
38. Li C, Liu L, Shi JY, et al. Clinical and biomechanical researches of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) rods for semi-rigid lumbar fusion: a systematic review. Neurosurg Rev 2018;41:375-89.
39. Selim A, Mercer S, Tang F. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Rods for Lumbar Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int J Spine Surg 2018;12:190-200.