Clin Orthop Surg.  2015 Sep;7(3):323-329. 10.4055/cios.2015.7.3.323.

A Systematic Review of Interspinous Dynamic Stabilization

• Lee SH
• Seol A
• Cho TY
• Kim SY
• Kim DJ
• Lim HM

• KMID: 2234086
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4055/cios.2015.7.3.323

Abstract

BACKGROUND
A systematic literature review of interspinous dynamic stabilization, including DIAM, Wallis, Coflex, and X-STOP, was conducted to assess its safety and efficacy.
METHODS
The search was done in Korean and English, by using eight domestic databases which included KoreaMed and international databases, such as Ovid Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. A total of 306 articles were identified, but the animal studies, preclinical studies, and studies that reported the same results were excluded. As a result, a total of 286 articles were excluded and the remaining 20 were included in the final assessment. Two assessors independently extracted data from these articles using predetermined selection criteria. Qualities of the articles included were assessed using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN).
RESULTS
The complication rate of interspinous dynamic stabilization has been reported to be 0% to 32.3% in 3- to 41-month follow-up studies. The complication rate of combined interspinous dynamic stabilization and decompression treatment (32.3%) was greater than that of decompression alone (6.5%), but no complication that significantly affected treatment results was found. Interspinous dynamic stabilization produced slightly better clinical outcomes than conservative treatments for spinal stenosis. Good outcomes were also obtained in single-group studies. No significant difference in treatment outcomes was found, and the studies compared interspinous dynamic stabilization with decompression or fusion alone.
CONCLUSIONS
No particular problem was found regarding the safety of the technique. Its clinical outcomes were similar to those of conventional techniques, and no additional clinical advantage could be attributed to interspinous dynamic stabilization. However, few studies have been conducted on the long-term efficacy of interspinous dynamic stabilization. Thus, the authors suggest further clinical studies be conducted to validate the theoretical advantages and clinical efficacy of this technique.

Keyword

Spine; Spinal stenosis; Therapeutics; Review

MeSH Terms

Decompression, Surgical
Humans
Postoperative Complications
*Spinal Fusion/adverse effects/methods
Spinal Stenosis/physiopathology/surgery

Reference

1. Scott-Young M. Posterior dynamic stabilization devices in the coming age of lumbar disc replacement. Neurosurg Focus. 2007; 22(1):E14.

2. Bono CM, Vaccaro AR. Interspinous process devices in the lumbar spine. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007; 20(3):255–261.

3. Anderson PA, Tribus CB, Kitchel SH. Treatment of neurogenic claudication by interspinous decompression: application of the X STOP device in patients with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2006; 4(6):463–471.

4. Zucherman JF, Hsu KY, Hartjen CA, et al. A multicenter, prospective, randomized trial evaluating the X STOP interspinous process decompression system for the treatment of neurogenic intermittent claudication: two-year follow-up results. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(12):1351–1358.

5. Kim KA, McDonald M, Pik JH, Khoueir P, Wang MY. Dynamic intraspinous spacer technology for posterior stabilization: case-control study on the safety, sagittal angulation, and pain outcome at 1-year follow-up evaluation. Neurosurg Focus. 2007; 22(1):E7.

6. Hsu KY, Zucherman JF, Hartjen CA, et al. Quality of life of lumbar stenosis-treated patients in whom the X STOP interspinous device was implanted. J Neurosurg Spine. 2006; 5(6):500–507.

7. Siddiqui M, Karadimas E, Nicol M, Smith FW, Wardlaw D. Effects of X-STOP device on sagittal lumbar spine kinematics in spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2006; 19(5):328–333.

8. Siddiqui M, Karadimas E, Nicol M, Smith FW, Wardlaw D. Influence of X Stop on neural foramina and spinal canal area in spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006; 31(25):2958–2962.

9. Lee J, Hida K, Seki T, Iwasaki Y, Minoru A. An interspinous process distractor (X STOP) for lumbar spinal stenosis in elderly patients: preliminary experiences in 10 consecutive cases. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2004; 17(1):72–77.

10. Brussee P, Hauth J, Donk RD, Verbeek AL, Bartels RH. Self-rated evaluation of outcome of the implantation of interspinous process distraction (X-Stop) for neurogenic claudication. Eur Spine J. 2008; 17(2):200–203.

11. Siddiqui M, Smith FW, Wardlaw D. One-year results of X Stop interspinous implant for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007; 32(12):1345–1348.

12. Kondrashov DG, Hannibal M, Hsu KY, Zucherman JF. Interspinous process decompression with the X-STOP device for lumbar spinal stenosis: a 4-year follow-up study. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2006; 19(5):323–327.

13. Verhoof OJ, Bron JL, Wapstra FH, van Royen BJ. High failure rate of the interspinous distraction device (X-Stop) for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis caused by degenerative spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J. 2008; 17(2):188–192.

14. Kong DS, Kim ES, Eoh W. One-year outcome evaluation after interspinous implantation for degenerative spinal stenosis with segmental instability. J Korean Med Sci. 2007; 22(2):330–335.

15. Taylor J, Pupin P, Delajoux S, Palmer S. Device for intervertebral assisted motion: technique and initial results. Neurosurg Focus. 2007; 22(1):E6.

16. Floman Y, Millgram MA, Smorgick Y, Rand N, Ashkenazi E. Failure of the Wallis interspinous implant to lower the incidence of recurrent lumbar disc herniations in patients undergoing primary disc excision. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007; 20(5):337–341.

17. Lim DH, Kim DH, Park CK. Preliminary report about clinical usefulness of interspinous stabilization with interspinous-U in lumbar spinal degenerative diseases. Korean J Spine. 2004; 1(4):450–455.

18. Lim HJ, Rho SW, Jeon SR, Rhim SC. Early experience with interspinous U in the management of the degenerative lumbar disease. Korean J Spine. 2004; 1(4):456–462.

19. Lee SI, Kim WK, Yoo CJ, Lee SG, Park CW, Lee U. Clinical experience of 'interspinous U' device for degenerative spinal diseases. Korean J Spine. 2006; 3(3):153–157.

20. Mariottini A, Pieri S, Giachi S, et al. Preliminary results of a soft novel lumbar intervertebral prothesis (DIAM) in the degenerative spinal pathology. Acta Neurochir Suppl. 2005; 92:129–131.