Cost-effectiveness of decompression according to Gill versus instrumented spondylodesis in the treatment of sciatica due to low grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis: A prospective randomised controlled trial [NTR1300]

Background. Nerve root decompression with instrumented spondylodesis is the most frequently performed surgical procedure in the treatment of patients with symptomatic low-grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. Nerve root decompression without instrumented fusion, i.e. Gill's procedure, is an alternative and less invasive approach. A comparative cost-effectiveness study has not been performed yet. We present the design of a randomised controlled trial on cost-effectiveness of decompression according to Gill versus instrumented spondylodesis. Methods/design. All patients (age between 18 and 70 years) with sciatica or neurogenic claudication lasting more than 3 months due to spondylolytic spondylolisthesis grade I or II, are eligible for inclusion. Patients will be randomly allocated to nerve root decompression according to Gill, either unilateral or bilateral, or pedicle screw fixation with interbody fusion. The main primary outcome measure is the functional assessment of the patient measured with the Roland Disability Questionnaire for Sciatica at 12 weeks and 2 years. Other primary outcome measures are perceived recovery and intensity of leg pain and low back pain. The secondary outcome measures include, incidence of re-operations, complications, serum creatine phosphokinase, quality of life, medical consumption, costs, absenteeism, work perception, depression and anxiety, and treatment preference. The study is a randomised prospective multicenter trial in which two surgical techniques are compared in a parallel group design. Patients and research nurse will not be blinded during the follow-up period of 2 years. Discussion. Currently, nerve root decompression with instrumented fusion is the golden standard in the surgical treatment of low-grade spondylolytic spondylolisthesis, although scientific proof justifying instrumented spondylodesis over simple decompression is lacking. This trial is designed to elucidate the controversy in best surgical treatment of symptomatic patients with low-

Uninstrumented posterolateral spinal arthrodesis: is it the gold standard technique for I° and II° grade spondylolisthesis in adolescence?

We retrospectively reviewed the outcome of uninstrumented posterolateral spinal arthrodesis in 49 patients with lumbar isthmic spondylolisthesis grades I° and II° in adolescent patients in the time of surgery, who participate at follow-up, between 1980 and 1995. The goal of our study is to analyse the clinical and radiographic imaging at long follow-up in uninstrumented posterolateral arthrodesis and to evaluate the efficiency and the validity of surgical technique in young patients (<18 years). All patients had failed previous conservative treatment. The average age at follow-up was 33.5 years (range 25–42 years) and the average follow-up time was 19.7 years (range 12–27 years). The clinical outcome measures were the Oswestry Disability Index, the SF-36, and the visual analogic score. All measures assessed the endpoint outcomes at 20 years after surgery. The outcome of spinal fusion was good with 43 (87.7%) patients attaining solid fusion, pseudoarthrosis in 6 patients (12.3%). None of our patients complained of excessive postoperative wound pain. Additionally, no complications, such as wound infection, were encountered. Satisfactory results were obtained in 94% of patients and this was closely associated with the rate of successful fusion. The results suggest that clinical outcome is closely related to the attainment of solid fusion

Sas-4 proteins are required during basal body duplication in Paramecium

This study investigated the role of Sas-4 in basal body duplication in Paramecium and found that Sas-4 proteins are required to assemble and stabilize the germinative disk and cartwheel, which suggests that Sas-4 plays an essential role in basal body duplication