Functional and radiological analysis of posterior lumbar interbody fusion in spondylolisthesis

Ramanujam Muthu Manickam, Ganesan G. Ram, S. Sundar, A. Prakash


Background:Spondylolisthesis is present in 5% of the adult population with clinical evidence of low back pain. These patients are treated initially by conservative measures, failing of which surgical intervention is mandatory. Majority of patients with varying degree of slip and disability ultimately require surgical intervention. In this study we are trying to analyse the functional outcome following posterior lumbar interbody fusion in spondylolisthesis.

Methods: Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using pedicle screw and rods with cage was performed on 25 patients. 6 months follow-up was completed in 25 patients who were then reviewed at regular intervals. Out of the 25 patients, 17(68%) were females and 8(32%) were males. The mean age of the patients was 40.64 years. Out of 25 patients, 14 patients had listhesis at L4 – L5 level and another 11 at L5 – S1 level. 21(84%) were Isthmic variant and 4 (16%) were Degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Results:The mean follow up period in this study of 25 patients is 19 months. Out of 25 patients, there was mean improvement of 18.96 in the Oswestry scoring index. The Visual analogue scale score showed a mean improvement of 6.48. Radiologically, the percentage of slip was decreased by a mean of 8.40%. One patient had a cage extrusion with no neurological deficit.

Conclusions:The pedicle screw with rod and cage system is easy to use and provides the anatomic restoration of the isthmus in isthmic spondylolisthesis or restoring the stability after laminectomy/discectomy in degenerative spondylolisthesis. From our study, we strongly believe that this technique is very useful in low grade degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis.


Spondylolisthesis, Oswestry scoring index, Visual analogue scale, Neurological deficit

Full Text:



Fairbank J, Couper J, Davies J. The Oswestry low back pain questionnaire. Physiotherapy. 1980;66(8):271-3.

Tonosu J, Takeshita K, Hara N, Matsudaira K, Kato S, Masuda K. The normative score and the cut-off value of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).Eur Spine J. 2012;21(8):1596-602.

Huskisson EC. Measurement of pain. Lancet. 1974;2(7889):1127-31.

Madan S, Boeree NR. Outcome of posterior lumbar interbody fusions versus posterolateral fusion for spondylolisthesis. Spine. 2002;27:1536-42.

Yuan HA, Garfin SR, Dickman CA, Mardjetko SM. A historical cohort of pedicle screw fixation in thoracic, lumbar, and sacral spinal fusions. Spine. 1994;19:2279-96.

Moller H, Hedelund R. Surgery versus conservative management in adult isthmic spondylolisthesis: a prospective randomized study. Spine. 2000;25:1711-5.

Miyakoshi N, Abe E, Shimada Y, Okuyama K, Suzuki T, Sato K. Outcome of one-level posterior lumbar interbody Fusion for spondylolisthesis and postoperative intervertebral disc degeneration adjacent to the fusion. Spine. 2000;25(14):1837-42.

Dreyzin V, Esses SI. A comparative analysis of Spondylolysis repair. Spine. 1994;19:1909-15.

Deguchi M, Rapoff AJ, et al. Biomechanical comparison of spondylolysis fixation techniques. Spine. 1998;24:328-33.

Suk S, Lee CK, kim W, Lee J, Cho K. Adding posterior lumbar interbody fusion to pedicle screw fixation and posterior fusion after decompression in spondillytic spondylolisthesis. Spine. 1997;22:210-20.