metricas
covid
Buscar en
Revista Española de Cirugía Ortopédica y Traumatología (English Edition)
Toda la web
Inicio Revista Española de Cirugía Ortopédica y Traumatología (English Edition) New Horizons in the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Disease
Información de la revista
Vol. 51. Núm. 5.
Páginas 296-306 (septiembre - octubre 2007)
Compartir
Compartir
Descargar PDF
Más opciones de artículo
Vol. 51. Núm. 5.
Páginas 296-306 (septiembre - octubre 2007)
Review article
Acceso a texto completo
New Horizons in the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Disease
Nuevas perspectivas en el tratamiento de la enfermedad discal lumbar
Visitas
1519
M.A. Plasencia-Arriba
Autor para correspondencia
mplasencia.hupa@salud.madrid.org

Corresponding author: C/ Vicente Aleixandre, 10. 28220 Majadahonda. Madrid. Spain.
, C. Maestre-García
Department of Spine Surgery. Príncipe de Asturias University Hospital. Alcalá de Henares. Madrid. Spain
Este artículo ha recibido
Información del artículo
Introduction

Lumbar pain secondary to disc degeneration constitutes one of the most formidable challenges currently facing orthopedic surgery. The purpose of this paper is to present a bibliographical review of the techniques used at present for treating disc-related lumbar pain in its different evolutional stages.

Review of the literature

There are several alternatives to conventional lumbar fusion for the treatment of intervertebral disc degeneration. Among the techniques reviewed we should mention the so-called optimized arthrodesis, which incorporates minimally invasive techniques, the use of navigation and biomaterials that promote lumbar fusion; disc prostheses and dynamic lumbar stabilization. For the disc's surgical treatment in the initial stages, the techniques of choice are: intrasdiscal annuloplasty, nucleus pulposus prostheses and several types of cell therapy. We weigh the pros and cons of the different techniques, of the designs and mechanisms of action of the various implants and the clinical results published in the last few years.

Conclusions

Spine surgeons can avail themselves of several possibilities when treating disc degeneration. Nonetheless, most of these are either not sufficiently developed or have not been the subject of high quality comparative clinical studies. In other cases, it is difficult to determine at what point in the evolution of the degeneration they should be used. It is necessary to acquire a higher degree of experience of the use of these techniques and to limit their indications by to stringent patient selection criteria.

Key words:
degenerative disc disease
biomaterials
lumbar fusion
disc prosthesis
cell therapy
Introducción

El dolor lumbar secundario a la degeneración del disco representa uno de los retos más importantes a los que se enfrenta la cirugía ortopédica actual. El objetivo de este trabajo es presentar una revisión bibliográfica de las actuales técnicas quirúrgicas utilizadas para el tratamiento del dolor lumbar de origen discal en sus distintas fases evolutivas.

Revisión de la bibliografía

Se presentan diferentes alternativas quirúrgicas a la fusión lumbar convencional para el tratamiento de la degeneración del disco intervertebral. Entre las técnicas evaluadas cabe destacar la denominada «artrodesis optimizada», que incorpora la cirugía mínimamente invasiva, el uso de navegadores y la utilización de biomateriales que favorezcan la fusión lumbar; la prótesis discal y la estabilización dinámica lumbar. Para el tratamiento quirúrgico del disco degenerado en su fase más inicial se analizan la anuloplastia intradiscal, las prótesis de núcleo pulposo y la terapia celular en sus distintas modalidades. Se revisan las ventajas e inconvenientes de las distintas técnicas, el diseño y mecanismo de acción propuesto para cada implante, y los resultados clínicos publicados durante los últimos años.

Conclusiones

Distintas posibilidades terapéuticas están al alcance de los cirujanos de columna para el tratamiento de la degeneración discal. No obstante, la mayoría de ellas no están suficientemente desarrolladas, se desconoce el momento más adecuado para su ejecución durante la evolución de la enfermedad o carecen de estudios clínicos comparativos de calidad. Debe alcanzarse un mayor nivel de experiencia con estas técnicas y limitar sus indicaciones a estrictos criterios de selección de pacientes.

Palabras clave:
enfermedad degenerativa discal
biomateriales
fusión lumbar
prótesis discal
terapia celular
El Texto completo está disponible en PDF
References
[1.]
M.C. Battiè, T. Videman, E. Parent.
Lumbar Disc Degeneration. Epidemiology and genetic influences.
Spine, 29 (2004), pp. 2679-2690
[2.]
C.M. Bono, C.K. Lee.
Critical analysis of trens in fusion for degenerative disc disease over the past 20 years. Influence of technique on fusion rate and clinical outcome.
Spine, 29 (2004), pp. 455-463
[3.]
T. Ozawa, S. Ohtori, G. Inoue, Y. Aoki, H. Moriya, K. Takahashi.
The degenerated lumbar intervertebral disc is innervated primarily by peptide-containing sensory nerve fibers in humans.
[4.]
M.A. Adams, P.J. Roughley.
What is intervertebral disc degeneration, and what causes it?.
[5.]
S.D. Boden.
The use of radiographic imaging studies in the evaluation of patients who have degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine.
J Bone Joint Surg Am, 78-A (1996), pp. 114-124
[6.]
E.J. Carragee, T. Lincoln, V.S. Parmar, T. Alamin.
A gold standard evaluation of the «discogenic pain» diagnosis as determined by provocative discography.
[7.]
P. Fritzell, O. Hagg, P. Wessberg, A. Nordwall, 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, 27 (2002), pp. 1131-1141
[8.]
H. Möller, R. Hedlund.
Surgery versus conservative management in adult isthmic spondylolisthesis: a prospective, randomized study: part 1.
Spine, 25 (2000), pp. 1711-1715
[9.]
J.C. Wang, P.V. Mummaneni, R.W. Haid.
Current treatment strategies for the painful lumbar motion segment. Posterolateral fusion versus interbody fusion.
Spine, (2005), pp. S33-S43
[10.]
S.S. Madan, J.M. Harley, N.R. Boeree.
Circumferential and posterolateral fusion for lumbar disc disease.
Clin Orthop, 409 (2003), pp. 114-123
[11.]
T.G. Lowe, A.D. Tahernia.
Unilateral transforaminal posterior lumbar interbody fusion.
Clin Orthop, 394 (2002), pp. 64-72
[12.]
J.W. Brantigan, A. Neidre, J.S. Toohey.
The lumbar I/F cage for posterior lumbar interbody fusion with the variable screw placement system: 10-year results of a food and drug administration clinical trial.
[13.]
P. Katonis, J. Chistoforakis, A.C. Aligizakis, C.h. Papadopoulos, G. Sapkas, A. Hadjipavlou.
Complications and problems related to pedicle screw fixation of the spine.
[14.]
J.W. German, K.T. Foley.
Minimal access surgical techniques in the management of the painful lumbar motion segment.
Spine, (2005), pp. 52S-59S
[15.]
F.L. Acosta Jr., T.L. Thompson, S. Campbell, P.R. Weinstein, C.P. Ames.
Use of intraoperative isocentric C-arm 3D fluoroscopy for sextant percutaneous pedicle screw placement: case report and review of the literature.
[16.]
L.T. Holly, K.T. Foley.
Intraoperative spinal navigation.
Spine, (2003), pp. 54S-61S
[17.]
S.D. Boden.
Overview of the biology of lumbar spine fusion and principles for selecting a bone graft substitute.
Spine, (2002), pp. 26S-31S
[18.]
A.J.M. Yee, H.W. Bae, D. Friess, M. Robbin, B. Johnstone, J.U. Yoo.
Augmentation of rabbit posterolateral spondylodesis using a novel desmineralized bone matrix-hyaluronan putty.
[19.]
L.Y. Carreon, S.D. Glassman, Y. Anekstein, R.M. Puno.
Platelet gel (AGF) fails to increase fusion rates in instrumented posterolateral fusions.
Spine, 30 (2005), pp. E243-E246
[20.]
J.K. Burkus, E.E. Transfeldt, S.H. Kitchel, R.G. Watkins, R.A. Balderston.
Clinical and radiographic outcomes of anterior lumbar interbody fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2.
[21.]
S.D. Boden, J. Kang, H. Sandhu, J.G. Heller.
Use of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 to achieve posterolateral lumbar spine fusion in humans: a prospective, randomized clinical pilot trial: 2002 Volvo Award in clinical studies.
[22.]
A.R. Vaccaro, T. Patel, J. Fischgrund, D.G. Anderson, E. Truumees, H.N. Herkowitz, et al.
A pilot study evaluating the safety and efficacy of OP-1 Putty (rhBMP-7) as a replacement for iliac crest autograft in posterolateral lumbar arthrodesis for degenerative spondylolisthesis.
Spine, 29 (2004), pp. 1885-1892
[23.]
R.D. Guyer, D.D. Ohnmeiss.
Intervertebral disc prostheses.
Spine, (2003), pp. 15S-23S
[24.]
R.C. Huang, M.R. Lim, F.P. Girardi, F.P. Cammisa Jr..
The prevalence of contraindications to total disc replacement in a cohort of lumbar surgical patients.
Spine, 29 (2004), pp. 2538-2541
[25.]
S. Blumenthal, P.C. McAffe, R.D. Guyer, S.H. Hochschuler, F.H. Geisler, R.T. Holt, et al.
A prospective, randomized, multicenter food and drug administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITÉ artificial disc versus lumbar fusion. Part I: Evaluation of clinical outcomes.
Spine, 30 (2005), pp. 1565-1575
[26.]
J.P. Lemaire, W. Skalli, F. Lavaste, A. Templier, F. Mendes, A. Diop, et al.
Intervertebral disc prosthesis. Results and prospects for the year 2000.
Clin Orthop, 337 (1997), pp. 64-76
[27.]
R. Bertagnoli, S. Kumar.
Indications for full prosthetic disc arthroplasty: a correlation of clinical outcome against a variety of indications.
Eur Spine J, (2002), pp. S131-S136
[28.]
P. Tropiano, R.C. Huang, F.P. Girardi, F.P. Cammisa, T. Marnay.
Lumbar total disc replacement. Seven to eleven year followup.
J Bone Joint Surg Am, 87-A (2005), pp. 490-496
[29.]
B.J. Freeman, J. Davenport.
Total disc replacement in the lumbar spine: a systematic review of the literature.
Eur Spine J, 15 (2006), pp. S439-S447
[30.]
J.W. German, K.T. Foley.
Disc arthroplasty in the management of the painful lumbar motion segment.
Spine, (2005), pp. 60S-67S
[31.]
P.C. McAffe, B. Cunningham, G. Holsapple, K. Adams, S. Blumenthal, R.D. Guyer, et al.
A prospective, randomized, multicenter food and drug administration investigational device exemption study of lumbar total disc replacement with the CHARITÉ artificial disc versus lumbar fusion. Part II: Evaluation of radiographic outcomes and correlation of surgical technique accuracy with clinical outcomes.
Spine, 30 (2005), pp. 1576-1583
[32.]
K.J. Schnake, M. Putzier, N.P. Haas, F. Kandziora.
Mechanical concepts for disc regeneration.
Eur Spine J, 15 (2006), pp. S354-S360
[33.]
K.E. Swanson, D.P. Lindsey, K.Y. Hsu, J.F. Zucherman, S.A. Yerby.
The effects of an interspinous implant on intervertebral disc pressures.
[34.]
D. Grob, A. Benini, A. Junge, A.F. Mannion.
Clinical experience with the Dynesys semirigid fixation system for the lumbar spine. Surgical and patient-oriented outcome in 50 cases after an average of 2 years.
Spine, 30 (2005), pp. 324-331
[35.]
K.J. Schnake, S. Schaeren, B. Jeanneret.
Dynamic stabilization in addition to decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis.
[36.]
J. Senegas.
Mechanical supplementation by non-rigid fixation in degenerative intervertebral lumbar segments: the Wallis system.
Eur Spine J, (2002), pp. S164-S169
[37.]
J.F. Zucherman, K.Y. Hsu, C.A. Hartjen, T.F. Mehalic, D.A. Implicito, M.J. Martin, et al.
A prospective randomized multi-center study for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with the X STOP interspinous implant: 1-year results.
Eur Spine J, 13 (2004), pp. 22-31
[38.]
A. Biyani, G.B.J. Andersson, H. Chaudhary, H.S. An.
Intradiscal Electrothermal Therapy. A treatment option in patients with internal disc disruption.
Spine, (2003), pp. S8-S14
[39.]
J.A. Saal, J.S. Saal.
Intradiscal electrothermal treatment for chronic discogenic low back pain. Prospective outcome study with a minimum 2-year follow-up.
Spine, 27 (2002), pp. 966-974
[40.]
B.J.C. Freeman, R.C. Fraser, C.M.J. Cain, C.M.J. Cain, D.J. Hall, D.C.L. Chapple.
A randomised, double-blind, controlled trial. Intra-discal electrothermal therapy versus placebo for the treatment of chronic discogenic low back pain.
Spine, 30 (2005), pp. 2369-2377
[41.]
S.P. Cohen, T. Larkin, S. Abdi, A. Chang, M. Stojanovic.
Risk factors failure and complications of intradiscal electrothermal therapy: a pilot study.
[42.]
C.M. Bono, K.I. Kobi, A. Jalota, K. Dawson, S.R. Garfin.
Temperatures within the lumbar disc and endplates during intradiscal electrothermal therapy: formulation of a predictive temperature map in relation to distance from the catheter.
Spine, 29 (2004), pp. 1124-1131
[43.]
M.L. Goins, D.W. Wimberley, P.S. Yuan, L.N. Fitzhenry, A.R. Vaccaro.
Nucleus pulposus replacement: an emerging technology.
Spine J, (2005), pp. 317S-324S
[44.]
P.M. Klara, C.D. Ray.
Artificial nucleus replacement. Clinical experience.
Spine, 27 (2002), pp. 1371-1377
[45.]
A. Korge, T. Nydegger, J.L. Polard, H.M. Mayer, J.L. Husson.
A spiral implant as nucleus prosthesis in the lumbar spine.
Eur Spine J, (2002), pp. S149-S153
[46.]
K.D. Luk, D.K. Ruan, D.S. Lu, Z.Q. Fei.
Fresh frozen intervertebral disc allografting in a bipedal animal model.
[47.]
T. Ganey, J. Libera, V. Moos, O. Alasevic, K.G. Fritsch, H.J. Meisel, et al.
Disc chondrocyte transplantation in a canine model: a treatment for degenerated or damaged intervertebral disc.
[48.]
D. Sakai, J. Mochida, T. Iwashina, T. Watanabe, T. Nakai, K. Ando, et al.
Differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells transplanted to a rabbit degenerative disc model. Potential and limitations for stem cell therapy in disc regeneration.
Spine, 30 (2005), pp. 2379-2387
[49.]
D.G. Anderson, M.V. Risbud, I.M. Shapiro, A.R. Vaccaro, T.J. Albert.
Cell-based therapy for disc repair.
Spine J, (2005), pp. 297S-303S
[50.]
D.J. Kim, S.H. Moon, H. Kim, U.H. Kwon, M.S. Park, K.J. Han, et al.
Bone morphogenetic protein-2 facilitates expression of chondrogenic, not osteogenic, phenotype of human intervertebral disc cells.
Copyright © 2007. Sociedad Española de Cirugía Ortopédica y Traumatología (SECOT). All rights reserved
Opciones de artículo
es en pt

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

Você é um profissional de saúde habilitado a prescrever ou dispensar medicamentos