Search In this Thesis
   Search In this Thesis  
العنوان
Fusion In chronic Lumbar Spine Instability.
المؤلف
Youssef, Magdy Gamal
هيئة الاعداد
باحث / ممدوح زكي سعد
مشرف / عبدالمحسن عرفة
مشرف / محمد عبدالسلاك وفا
تاريخ النشر
1997.
عدد الصفحات
249P. ;
اللغة
الإنجليزية
الدرجة
الدكتوراه
التخصص
جراحة العظام والطب الرياضي
تاريخ الإجازة
1/1/1997
مكان الإجازة
جامعة عين شمس - كلية الطب - جراحة العظام
الفهرس
Only 14 pages are availabe for public view

from 249

from 249

Abstract

Spinal instability is a loosely used tenn resulting from a variety of
causes affecting the lwnbar spine. The role of treatment in these cases is to
rehabilitate a disabled patient. The role of fusion in the lwnbar spine
instability is to stabilize the spine to make rehabilitation possible.
In this study, 50 patients having spondylolithesis (3 7 of them were
lytic and 13 were degenerative) were assessed clinically and radiologically
to detect the main problems and their possible contributors so that a
suitable decision is chosen.
The clinical data were collected in a special sheet fonn covering all
the important information and the radiological workup included:
Plain X-ray
C.T
Myelograms
MRl
Discography, that was of great help for detecting the level of fusion
The patients were divided into 3 groups.
A. PLIF with iliac bone blocks (30 cases)
B. PLIF using RAMPs (10 cases)
C. 360” fusion with iliac bone blocks (I 0 cases)
Intraoperatively, the blood loss, levels of fusion, operative time and
complications were registered for comparison, and the instrumentation svstem was identical biomechanically in all patients
com pan son
Summary
for better
Climcally, the Henderson system was used together with the
Steffee-Brantlgan radiological system for assessmg the patients
postoperatively
The patients then were followed up for about
22.4 months in group A
18 months in group B
20.3 months in group C
Group B showed the best results:
90% excellent clinical results and
90% excellent fusion that was fast and solid owing to the load
sharing of the RAMPs.
Then follows group A when clinical assessment is used or group C
’t radiological assessment is the one used.
TI1e most 1mportant for patients is the clinical outcome that makes
PLIF the best choice for a fusion when both decompressiOn and stabilitv
are needed
While combined fusion is a good choice when decompression is not
needed to avoid the virgin neural canaL