
|
|
Surgical Management of
Genomic
Spine Disease
|
|
|
The surgical management of genomic spine disorders is a unique endeavor. The treatment of these
entities involves a host of challenges which
require a different mind set and different approach by the physicians and surgeons who encounter
these patients. To begin with they need to understand the nature of
the pathology. A primary challenge is to find radiologists and spine care
professionals who even have a clue regarding the nature of
genomic
spinal disorders in general and Juvenile Discogenic Disease in particular. A patient can not
expect intelligent treatment from a physician who is uninformed or
ill-advised regarding the basic reasons for their disability.
The Editor's experience has confirmed that the great majority of genomic
spine disorder patients
can be effectively treated without
surgery. In addition to the many standard
treatment programs
provided by physical therapists, chiropractors, osteopaths and physicians
there are specialized treatment and continuing health maintenance programs
which now exist for these patients. Programs which provide appropriate
patient education as well as training in a number of important areas such
as stabilization exercise, stretching and anti-gravitational spinal
distraction. The key to success is that patients self-administer
these programs on a lifetime daily basis.
|
| When
Surgery Becomes Necessary |
|
The typical patient with underlying genomic disease such as juvenile
discogenic disease comes to surgery when there is extensive spinal pathology
accompanied by neurologic problems. The role of the spine surgeon
should be to not only to
effectively address the immediate problem but to also address impending
disease and also to prevent creating more
problems for the patient later on (i.e. extensive scar tissue,
transitional syndromes, etc.) than those being solved initially. The challenge here is particularly
great because none of the spinal discs are
normal. It has been the Editor's experience that even those patients
who have undergone previous multiple operations can be
reasonably salvaged. The ones who typically can not be salvaged
by additional primary surgery are often afflicted with conditions such as
adhesive arachnoiditis where only
implanted neurostimulators may be effective
(if the patient is not on strong narcotic drugs).
As to health factors, it is essential that all patients with genomic
spine disorders be non-smokers,
this is particularly true of patients coming to surgery. Simply put, nicotine and carbon monoxide are poisons.
The intervertebral disc because of its dependence on the diffusion of
nutrients across the endplate is at higher risk than most other tissues to
the toxic effects of nicotine and carbon monoxide. Particularly in JDD, because
of the abnormal development of the endplate, producing an impaired
nutritional status under normal conditions, this additional insult compounds
the liabilities. Smokers are known to have a 3-4x higher incidence
of disc degeneration. In smokers with JDD this risk is clearly much higher. If JDD patients, who are smokers, require
surgery their risk
factors for surgery failure are also significantly higher than in the
normal population. Unless the need for surgery is urgent it is in
the JDD patient's best interest to become a non-smoker (for a period of at
least 3 months) prior to surgery.
The degenerative changes associated with genomic disorders gradually progress over time. Initially individuals may be asymptomatic or simply
have nonspecific low back
pain. It is often a minor incident which acts as the "straw
that breaks the camel's back" to produce sudden onset of
incapacitation from which the patient does not recover. It
is important to recognize, however, that the great majority of genomic
spine disorder
patients, if highly motivated, can look forward to a basically normal and fully active
lifestyle. Patients have even continued as be professional athletes
(but invest a significant part of their day in preventive
programs).
When these patients are subject to trauma, as in a
motor vehicle accident, their disability is typically greater than would
usually be the case because the resulting injury is greater.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
The saggital MRI image on the left
shows a classic case of JDD. The red line connects the
congenital notochord cleft defects at each vertebral level.
The patient is a 37 year old nursing assistant who injured her back
assisting a client. Her complaint was only that of low back
pain; she was
neurologically intact on examination. After minimal physical
therapy a five level 360o fusion
was recommended by a spine specialist. This patient chose, as
an alternative to surgery, conservative care. She attended, a
four day educational and instructional program which trained her to
start a daily health maintenance program at home. She has done
well with this and continues to do well 2 years after ill-advised
surgery was recommended. |
 |
If You Are A Hammer...
"If you are a hammer all the rest of the world looks like a
nail." To some surgeons, particularly those trained in treating
scoliosis and deformity, the only treatment for a degenerated disc is
fusion; and for multi-level disc degeneration multi-level
fusion. This philosophy is, quite frankly, very disturbing. The
film to the left is of a young patient with JDD who chose surgical
treatment and a 5 level 360o
fusion with pedicle screw and rod instrumentation was performed (no other
alternative was suggested). This patient continued to be
disabled. There are few salvage surgery options open to a JDD patient
such as this.
|
|
|
|
| The three images above relate to a
51 year old with classic JDD who was told that he had "two
herniated discs." The treatment primary
treatment offered was a 2 level anterior interbody fusion with BAK
cages. The patient did not improve and wasn't informed that
being a one pack/ day smoker was compounding his problem.
|
The most common reason for a genomic spine disease patient to require surgery is
nerve compression secondary to a disc herniation or spinal stenosis such
as lateral spinal
stenosis. In
JDD patients the nature of the pathology being encountered by a surgeon is typically different from that
which surgeons expect to encounter with a simple discectomy. In JDD patients the pathologic processes
is chronic in nature and gradually progressive. Disc
herniations are typically "hard" rather than being
"soft" and associated
with osteophytes reflecting the chronic segmental dysfunction. It may take
only a miniscule progression in the pathologic process for the patient to become symptomatic. This represents
a circumstance more akin to the "straw that
breaks the camel's back" than the more normal surgical situation.
Failure to accurately diagnose these conditions, with appropriate imaging
studies, prior to surgery may lead to a succession of surgeries
culminating in a "failed
back surgery syndrome." The JDD patient is at high
risk to becoming an unwilling participant on what has been termed the
"surgical merry-go-round" of ill-advised operative
procedures. As the following case illustrates that some patients do
require repeat surgery. The difference is that repeat surgery may be
necessary. It is important for patients to be aware of the fact that
other, more rational
surgical options may be open to them.
|
|
|
The images above relate the
experience of a previously unoperated upon neurologically intact 45
year old male. After multiple injections and blocks which did
not produce improvement the patient was referred to a
neurosurgeon in general practice who obtained the MRI scan
shown. Neither the radiologist or the neurosurgeon recognized
the presence of a genomic disease process. The neurosurgeon's
assessment is a classic example of "fuzzy" thinking ending
in a totally inappropriate, and probably disabling, recommendation
for three level fusion. This example is not unique and is
evidence as to why
board certification of spine surgeons is an
important need in the medical community.
|
|
|
|
Steven Bemgreat dealt is a 36 year old ex-logger and heavy equipment
operator (identified with permission). Between
1980 and 2000 this patient with known Juvenile Discogenic Disease required
7 decompressive procedures for the treatment of recurrent disc herniations and lateral spinal
stenosis. The April, 1999 recurrent disc herniation at L5-S1 is
shown with a red dot. The yellow dots indicate normal appearing perineural and epidural fat, instead of fibrosis,
because of previous autogenous fat grafting. Recurring disc
herniation and lateral spinal stenosis are not infrequently associated with JDD.
|
Fusion in JDD Patients
In genomic spine disease patients, because of the nature of the disease process, all of the
intervertebral discs at birth are abnormal and become degenerated, to varying
degrees, during life. A basic rule
of performing a rigid ("hard") fusion is to make sure that the
adjacent segments are normal so that the added stress can be tolerated and
a "transitional syndrome" does not occur. In JDD all
of of the adjacent segments are abnormal. Every
degenerated segment has some degree of associated segmental dysfunction or
even,
segmental instability. JDD patients are the poorest
candidates for fusion unless special consideration is brought to bear on
the case.
|
|
|
George Ginther, is a 45 year old power
company lineman (identified with permission), shown here 2 years after
decompressive surgery and two level posterior interbody fusion utilizing
titanium cages to treat segmental instability. The vertebral molding
produced by JDD can be seen involving the lumbar vertebrae above the
fusion. As an active and athletic individual this patient has
practiced a daily self-administered health maintenance program consisting
of stabilization and stretching exercises and anti-gravitational spinal
distraction. As a conscientious and compliant individual his
long-term outlook is a good one for continued high quality of life.
|
|
|
Gerald Ruprecht, is a 51 year old construction foreman (identified by
permission), shown 1 year following spine surgery. In addition to having Juvenile
Discogenic Disease, a congenitally small spinal canal, central and lateral
spinal stenosis, Mr. Ruprecht also had a G1 isthmic spondylolisthesis at
the L4-5 level. Twin Ray titanium cages (14mm X 21mm) were placed
posteriorally with an anterior lie to achieve immediate segmental
stability and to avoid spinal nerve compression. Dorso-lateral
strut stabilizations were placed bilaterally from L3 to L4 and L5-S1
to protect these degenerated segments. By combining "hard"
and "soft" fusions the likelihood of inordinate stress being
transmitted to adjacent segments was reduced. Patient has
been in a daily health maintenance program since surgery. He was
functioning at a normal level of activity with good quality of life at his
one year follow-up examination.
|
| The "Mongo"
Mind-Set
|
|
It is unfortunate to observe that genomic spine disease
patients are frequently operated upon by well-intended, but misguided surgeons
who have little real understanding of the true nature of genomic problems
and employ the "Mongo"
Mind-Set for their surgical management of the unfortunate
patient. The continued occurrence of this phenomenon (see below) makes clear that
the best protection available to patients is to be well-informed on subjects such as this and be in the driver's seat
regarding their health care destiny.
|
|
|
| The images above belong to a JDD patient
whose primary treatment was a 2 level anterior interbody fusion with BAK
titanium cages. Patient was not
improved, it was evident that there was a radiolucency around the cages
and the diagnosis of "pseudoarthosis" was made. The next
step was to treat the pseudoarthrosis with a anterior interbody bone graft
and 3 level posterior instrumented (TSRH) fusion. Following this the
patient continued to be disabled with back pain and radicular symptoms
secondary to lateral spinal stenosis which had not been addressed.
There is no indication that the treating surgeons ever read, or
understood, the radiologist's MRI scan diagnosis (shown below) prior to
the first surgery. The primary management for this patient should
have been effective non-surgical therapy.
|
|
|
|

|