Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 16, 2026
An Anesthesia, Surgery, and Harvest Method for the Evaluation of Transpedicular Screws Using an In Vivo Porcine Lumbar Spine Model
Published on: May 31, 2017
A randomized prospective study of posterolateral lumbar fusion. Outcomes with and without pedicle screw
J C France1, M J Yaszemski, W C Lauerman
1University of West Virginia, Morgantown, USA.
Study Design:
A prospective evaluation of the clinical and radiographic outcomes of 71 patients who underwent lumbar fusion, with or without transpedicular instrumentation. The patients completed a questionnaire that determined pain relief, medication use, return to work, and overall satisfaction with surgery.
Objectives:
To explore the effect, if any, of instrumentation on the outcome of lumbar fusion surgery, according to reports of the patients, and whether there is a correlation between the radiographic determination of a solid fusion and the same patient-reported outcome.
Summary Of Background Data:
The literature on this topic reports pseudarthrosis rates from 0% to 57% and good to excellent results from 56% to 95%. These studies provide no clear-cut recommendations concerning the effect of added lumbar instrumentation on patient-reported outcome in a prospective manner using concurrent control subjects.
Methods:
The patients were randomized to groups with and without instrumentation after deciding to undergo a lumbar fusion and consenting to enter the study. Radiographs were obtained and questionnaires filled out at 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after surgery.
Results:
There was no statistical difference in patient-reported outcome between the two groups. There was a slight nonsignificant trend toward increased radiographic fusion rate in the group with instrumentation that did not correlate with an increased patient-reported improvement rate.
Conclusions:
These results do not provide data that indicate a benefit in outcome from added instrumentation in elective lumbar fusions.
