<link rel="stylesheet" href="styles.f3b1fba60ec7970c.css">

Publication:
Unilateral posterior stabilization in adult spinal pathologies: Comparative clinical, radiological, and complication outcomes of dynamic versus rigid systems

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Departments

School / College / Institute

Item type:Organizational Unit,
SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
Upper Org Unit
Item type:Organizational Unit,
Item type:Organizational Unit,

Program

Organization Authors

Co-Authors

Erdoǧan, Uzay

Bulgur Balay, Feride

Berikol, Gürkan

Albas, Ibrahim Taha

Date

Language

Embargo Status

No

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Alternative Title

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Unilateral spinal stabilization has emerged as a less invasive alternative to bilateral fixation in the management of lateralized spinal pathologies. While both rigid and dynamic systems are utilized, comparative data regarding their clinical efficacy, radiological outcomes, and complication profiles—particularly in multilevel applications—remain limited. Materials and Methods: A retrospective, two-center analysis was conducted on 113 patients who underwent unilateral posterior spinal stabilization between 2019 and 2023. Patients were divided into unilateral rigid stabilization (URS, n = 41) and unilateral dynamic stabilization (UDS, n = 72) groups. Pathologies of the patients include disc herniations, foraminal and spinal stenosis, tumoral lesions and spondylolisthesis. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) over a 24-month follow-up. Radiological parameters included fusion status, superior adjacent disc height, and foraminal height index. Complication rates, including adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), pseudoarthrosis, and screw loosening, were analyzed according to type-of-stabilization and construct length (two, three, or four levels). Results: Both URS and UDS groups demonstrated significant VAS improvement at final follow-up, with no significant differences between groups (p < 0.001). Fusion rates were significantly higher in the URS group (85.37% vs. 27.78%, p < 0.001), while pseudoarthrosis (39.02% vs. 16.62%, p = 0.081) were more frequent in URS. No cases of rod fracture or infection were observed. Complication rates, particularly ASD, increased with longer constructs (6.56%, 21.21%, vs. 31.58% p = 0.01), independent of stabilization type. Conclusions: Unilateral stabilization—whether rigid or dynamic—offers effective symptom relief with reduced surgical morbidity. However, dynamic systems may provide biomechanical advantages by preserving motion and minimizing adjacent segment stress. While rigid constructs yield higher fusion rates, they are associated with increased complications. These findings support the use of dynamic stabilization, particularly in multilevel constructs, and highlight the need for patient-specific surgical strategies to optimize outcomes and mitigate long-term complications. © 2025 by the authors.

Source

Publisher

Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)

Subject

Citation

item.page.haspartof

Source

Medicina (Lithuania)

item.page.ispartofseries

item.page.edition

DOI

10.3390/medicina61111958

item.page.datauri

item.page.link

Rights

CC BY (Attribution)

Copyrights Note

Creative Commons license

Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as CC BY (Attribution)

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By

Related Patent

Related Goal

Google Scholar
Scholar'da Ara ↗
1
Görüntülenme
13
İndirme
Altmetric
Dimensions
PlumX Metrikleri
BIP! Indicators