Key result
Successful pseudarthrosis repair during revision surgery for failed back surgery syndrome yielded an 81% satisfactory outcome rate, compared to 23% for failed repair.
Why the study?
Does revision surgery improve pain and function in patients with failed back surgery syndrome?
Cohort (n=50)
Does revision surgery improve pain and function in patients with failed back surgery syndrome?
Absolute Event Rate: 81% vs 23%
Successful pseudarthrosis repair is critical for achieving a satisfactory clinical outcome in revision surgery for failed back surgery syndrome.
Successful pseudarthrosis repair may improve revision outcomes in FBSS; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective confirmation.
Results of surgical treatment in 50 failed back surgery patients were retrospectively reviewed to determine what factors influenced surgical outcome. Before surgery, all patients had disabling pain and limited function. Overall significant improvement in pain and function was obtained in 66% of the patients. Thirteen of 16 patients (81%) who had successful fusion of pseudarthrosis had a satisfactory outcome, whereas only 3 of 13 patients (23%) who had failed pseudarthrosis repair had a satisfactory outcome. Successful pseudarthrosis repair is the key to a high clinical success rate in revision surgery for failed back surgery syndrome. Pseudarthrosis repair by conventional posterolateral fusion with postoperative lumbosacral corset immobilization showed a high failure rate. The success rate of reoperation on failed back surgery syndrome patients is low.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (1992) conducted a cohort in Failed back surgery syndrome (n=50). Successful fusion of pseudarthrosis vs. Failed pseudarthrosis repair was evaluated on Satisfactory outcome (significant improvement in pain and function). Successful pseudarthrosis repair during revision surgery for failed back surgery syndrome yielded an 81% satisfactory outcome rate, compared to 23% for failed repair.