This is our experience in using cement augmentation as pretreatment before percutaneous lumbar interbody fusion(PLIF)[1,2,3],in two patients with antherolisthesis and osteoporosis[4],using consistently low volumes of Cortoss cement[5,6,8]rather than polymethylmethacrylate(PMMA). We used Cortoss cement for osteoplasty and titanium screws and bars for PLIF in two different ways: one patient has been pre-treated two months before the PLIF and the other patient has been treated with osteoplasty during the PLIF procedure.

We present our experience of two adult patients treated in the period between December 2017 and March 2018. They were enrolled after giving written informed consent. The patients were one man and one woman; mean age was 78 ( range 74-82) years. They presented at our observation with neurogenic claudicatio for stenosis of the vertebral canal due to degenerative spondylolisthesis at the level of the L4-L5 segment. Average preprocedural pain level,assessed with visual analog scale (VAS[7]),was 9/10. Post-procedural VAS pain level was 2/10. The comorbidities...

Clinical follow-up and VAS evaluation of back pain were performed one and six months later. Using thevisual analogue scale (VAS), pain decreased from 9/10 preoperatively to 4/10 at the one month follow-up forboth patients and decreased to 2/10 six months later. An AP and LL RX,performed one and six months after the procedure, confirmed the correct position of Cortoss and screws, with no vertebral compression fractures adjacent to the cemented vertebrae. In all cases, bone cement was successfully placed around the loosened screw and inside...

In our preliminary experience we can assert that the Cortoss cement ensures a valid osteoplasty during the percutaneous lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) procedure and in the combined procedure,at 6 months follow-up, a more solid stabilization is achieved. There were no increased risks of complications during and after procedure, such as cement leakage, displacement of bone fragments, loss of blood and infections[17,18]. With a 6-month follow-up, we had a better outcome of patients, with reduction of back-pain and no development of adjacent level fractures or required...

1,2. Division of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology Policlinico Tor Vergata, Rome/IT

1. Mummanemi PV, Haid RW, Rodts GE (2004) Lumbar interbody fusion: state-of-the-art, technicaladvances Invited submission from the joint section meeting on disorders of the spine and peripheral nerves. March 2004. J Neurosurg Spine 1:24–30 2. Starkweather A (2006) Posterior lumbar interbody fusion: an old concept with new techniques. J NeurosciNurs 38:13–20 3. Cole CD, McCall TD, Schmidt MH, Dailey AT (2009) Comparison of low back fusion techniques:transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) or posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) approaches. Curr Rev Musculoskeletal Med 2(2):118–126 4. Okuyama...