These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A new classification system for degenerative spondylolisthesis of the lumbar spine.
    Author: Gille O, Bouloussa H, Mazas S, Vergari C, Challier V, Vital JM, Coudert P, Ghailane S.
    Journal: Eur Spine J; 2017 Dec; 26(12):3096-3105. PubMed ID: 28836019.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: There is no consensus for a comprehensive analysis of degenerative spondylolisthesis of the lumbar spine (DSLS). A new classification system for DSLS based on sagittal alignment was proposed. Its clinical relevance was explored. METHODS: Health-related quality-of-life scales (HRQOLs) and clinical parameters were collected: SF-12, ODI, and low back and leg pain visual analog scales (BP-VAS, LP-VAS). Radiographic analysis included Meyerding grading and sagittal parameters: segmental lordosis (SL), L1-S1 lumbar lordosis (LL), T1-T12 thoracic kyphosis (TK), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), and sagittal vertical axis (SVA). Patients were classified according to three main types-1A: preserved LL and SL; 1B: preserved LL and reduced SL (≤5°); 2A: PI-LL ≥10° without pelvic compensation (PT < 25°); 2B: PI-LL ≥10° with pelvic compensation (PT ≥ 25°); type 3: global sagittal malalignment (SVA ≥40 mm). RESULTS: 166 patients (119 F: 47 M) suffering from DSLS were included. Mean age was 67.1 ± 11 years. DSLS demographics were, respectively: type 1A: 73 patients, type 1B: 3, type 2A: 8, type 2B: 22, and type 3: 60. Meyerding grading was: grade 1 (n = 124); grade 2 (n = 24). Affected levels were: L4-L5 (n = 121), L3-L4 (n = 34), L2-L3 (n = 6), and L5-S1 (n = 5). Mean sagittal parameter values were: PI: 59.3° ± 11.9°; PT: 24.3° ± 7.6°; SVA: 29.1 ± 42.2 mm; SL: 18.2° ± 8.1°. DSLS types were correlated with age, ODI and SF-12 PCS (ρ = 0.34, p < 0.05; ρ = 0.33, p < 0.05; ρ = -0.20, and p = 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION: This classification was consistent with age and HRQOLs and could be a preoperative assessment tool. Its therapeutic impact has yet to be validated. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]