A modified posterior spinal fusion technique: surgical technique and clinical outcome in minimal 2-year follow-up

1. Hoover NW. Methods of lumbar fusion. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1968; 50:194-210.10.2106/00004623-196850010-00017Search in Google Scholar

2. Herkowitz H. Lumbar spine fusions in the treatment of degenerative conditions: current indications and recommendations. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 1995; 3: 123-35.10.5435/00124635-199505000-0000210790661Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

3. Henley EN, David SM. Current concept review- Lumbar arthrodesis for the treatment of back pain. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999; 81:716-30.10.2106/00004623-199905000-0001510360702Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

4. Brodsky AE, Kovalsky ES, Khalil MA. Correlation of radiologic assessment of lumbar spine fusions with surgical exploration. Spine. 1991; 16(6 Suppl):S261-5.10.1097/00007632-199106001-000171862422Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

5. Blumenthal SL, Gill K. Can lumbar spine radiographs accurately determine fusion in postoperative patients? Correlation of routine radiographs with a second surgical look at lumbar fusions. Spine. 1993; 18: 1186-9.10.1097/00007632-199307000-000108362324Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

6. Kant AP, Daum WJ, Dean SM, Uchida T. Evaluation of lumbar spine fusion. Plain radiographs versus direct surgical exploration and observation. Spine. 1995; 20:2313-27.10.1097/00007632-199511000-00009Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

7. Chafetz N, Cann CE, Morris JM, Steinbach LS, Goldberg HI, Ax L. Pseudarthrosis following lumbar fusion: detection by direct coronal CT scanning. Radiology. 1987; 162:803-5.10.1148/radiology.162.3.38094973809497Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

8. Rothman SLG, Glenn WV Jr. CT evaluation of interbody fusion. Clin Orthop Rel Res. 1985; 193: 47-56.Search in Google Scholar

9. Fritzell P, Hagg O, Wessberg P, Nordwall A; Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. Volvo award winner in clinical studies: lumbar fusion versus nonsurgical treatment for chronic low back pain: a multicenter randomized controlled trial from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. Spine. 2001; 26:2521-32.10.1097/00007632-200112010-0000211725230Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

10. Fritzell P, Hagg O, Wessberg P, Nordwall A; Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group.. Chronic low back pain and fusion: A comparison of three surgical techniques- A prospective multicenter randomized study from the Swedish lumbar spine study group. Spine. 2002; 27:1131-41.10.1097/00007632-200206010-0000212045508Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

11. Stauffer RN, Coventry MB. Posterolateral lumbar spine fusion. J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1972; 54: 1195-204.10.2106/00004623-197254060-00006Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

12. Agazzi S, Reverdin A, May D. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cages: an independent review of 71 cases. J Neurosurg. 1999; 91:186-92.10.3171/spi.1999.91.2.018610505503Search in Google Scholar

13. Brantigan JW, Steffee AD. A carbon fiber implant to aid interbody lumbar fusion. Two-year clinical results in the first 26 patients. Spine. 1993; 18:2106-7.10.1097/00007632-199310001-000308272967Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

14. Lidar Z, Beaumont A, Lifshutz J, Maiman DJ: Clinical and radiological relationship between posterior lumbar interbody fusion and posterolateral lumbar fusion. Surg Neurol. 2005; 64:303-8.10.1016/j.surneu.2005.03.02516181997Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

15. Kim KT, Lee SH, et al. Clinical Outcomes of 3 Fusion Methods through the Posterior Approach in the Lumbar Spine. Spine. 2006; 31:1351-7.10.1097/01.brs.0000218635.14571.5516721298Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

16. Lin PM. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion: Complication and pitfall. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985; 193:90-102.10.1097/00003086-198503000-00012Search in Google Scholar

17. Deyo RA, Ciol MA, Cherkin DC, Loeser JD, Bigos SJ. Lumbar spinal fusion: a cohort study of complications, reoperations, and resource use in the Medicare population. Spine. 1993; 18:1463-70.10.1097/00007632-199318110-00010Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

18. Katz JN. Lumbar spinal fusion: surgical rates, costs, and complications. Spine. 1995; 20(24 Suppl):78S-83S.10.1097/00007632-199512151-00003Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

19. Okuda S,MiyauchiA, Oda T, Haku T, Yamamoto T, Iwasaki M. Surgical complications of posterior lumbar interbody fusionwith total facetectomy in 251 patients. J Neurosurg Spine. 2006; 4:304-9.10.3171/spi.2006.4.4.30416619677Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

20. Lee C. Accelerated degeneration of the segment adjacent to a lumbar fusion. Spine. 1988; 13:375-7.10.1097/00007632-198803000-000293388124Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

21. Kumar M, Jacquot F, Hall H. Long-term follow-up of functional outcomes and radiographic changes at adjacent levels following lumbar spine fusion for degenerative disc disease. Eur Spine J. 2001; 10: 309-13.10.1007/s005860000207361151411563616Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

22. Hayashi T, Arizono T, Fujimoto T, Moro-oka T, Shida J, Fukumoto S, et al. Degenerative change in the adjacent segments to the fusion site after posterolateral lumbar fusion with pedicle screw instrumentation-a minimum 4-year follow-up. Fukuoka Igaku Zasshi. 2008; 99:107-13.Search in Google Scholar

23. Yang J, Lee J, Song H. The impact of adjacent segment degeneration on the clinical outcome after lumbar spinal fusion. Spine. 2008; 33:503-7. 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181657dc318317193Open DOISearch in Google Scholar