eMedicine Specialties > Orthopedic Surgery > Spine

Spondylolisthesis, Spondylolysis, and Spondylosis

Author: Amir Vokshoor, MD, Staff Neurosurgeon, Department of Neurosurgery, Spine Surgeon, Diagnostic and Interventional Spinal Care, St John's Health Center
Contributor Information and Disclosures

Updated: Jan 12, 2009

Introduction

Spondylolisthesis refers to the forward slippage of one vertebral body with respect to the one beneath it. This most commonly occurs at the lumbosacral junction with L5 slipping over S1, but it can occur at higher levels as well. It is classified based on etiology into 5 types: congenital or dysplastic, isthmic, degenerative, traumatic, and pathologic.1 Many cases can be managed conservatively. However, in persons with incapacitating symptoms, radiculopathy, neurogenic claudication, postural or gait abnormality resistant to nonoperative measures, and significant slip progression, surgery is indicated. The goal of surgery is to stabilize the spinal segment and decompress the neural elements if needed.2,3,4,5,6,7,8

Spondylolisthesis, spondylolysis, and spondylosis...

Spondylolisthesis, spondylolysis, and spondylosis. Isthmic spondylolisthesis (type IIa) with grade 2 slippage of L5 over S1 and spondylolysis (lytic pars defect) is depicted posteriorly.

Spondylolisthesis, spondylolysis, and spondylosis...

Spondylolisthesis, spondylolysis, and spondylosis. Isthmic spondylolisthesis (type IIa) with grade 2 slippage of L5 over S1 and spondylolysis (lytic pars defect) is depicted posteriorly.


Spondylolisthesis, spondylolysis, and spondylosis...

Spondylolisthesis, spondylolysis, and spondylosis. Although interbody devices afford immediate stability to the anterior column, their use as stand-alone devices has been associated with pseudoarthrosis. Thus, concomitant posterior fixation is often used to augment their stability.

Spondylolisthesis, spondylolysis, and spondylosis...

Spondylolisthesis, spondylolysis, and spondylosis. Although interbody devices afford immediate stability to the anterior column, their use as stand-alone devices has been associated with pseudoarthrosis. Thus, concomitant posterior fixation is often used to augment their stability.


Related eMedicine topics:

Spondylolisthesis

Spondylolysis

Lumbar Spondylosis

Cervical Spondylosis: Diagnosis and Management

Lumbosacral Spondylolysis

History of the Procedure

In 1854, Killian coined the term spondylolisthesis to describe the gradual slippage of the L5 vertebra due to gravity and posture. In 1858, Lambi demonstrated the neural arch defect (absence or elongation of pars interarticularis) in isthmic spondylolisthesis. Albee and Hibbs separately published their initial work on spinal fusion. Their methods were applied quickly to cases involving trauma, tumors, and, later, scoliosis. In the latter half of the 20th century, spinal fusion was used increasingly to treat degenerative disorders of the spine, including degenerative spondylolisthesis and degenerative scoliosis.

Problem

Spondylolisthesis is the forward slippage of one vertebra on another. This may or may not be associated with gross instability of the spine. Some individuals remain asymptomatic even with high-grade slips, but most complain of some discomfort. It may cause any degree of symptoms, from minimal symptoms of occasional low back pain to incapacitating mechanical pain, radiculopathy from nerve root compression, and neurogenic claudication.

Frequency

The incidence of isthmic type (see Etiology for definition) of spondylolisthesis is believed to be approximately 5% based on autopsy studies.

Degenerative spondylolisthesis is observed more frequently as the population ages and occurs most frequently at the L4-L5 level. Up to 5.8% of men and 9.1% of women are believed to have this type of listhesis.

Etiology

The etiology of spondylolisthesis is multifactorial. A congenital predisposition exists in types 1 and 2, and posture, gravity, rotational forces, and high concentration of stress loading all play parts in the development of the slip.

The following scheme of spondylolisthesis types, based on etiology, is adapted from Wiltse et al1 :

  • Type 1: The dysplastic (congenital) type represents a defect in the upper sacrum or arch of L5. A high rate of associated spina bifida occulta and a high rate of nerve root involvement exist (see Pathophysiology).
  • Type 2: The isthmic (early in life) type results from a defect in pars interarticularis, which permits forward slippage of the superior vertebra, usually L5. The following 3 subcategories are recognized:
    • Lytic (ie, spondylolysis) or stress fracture of the pars
    • Elongated yet intact pars
    • Acutely fractured pars
  • Type 3: The degenerative (late in life) type is an acquired condition resulting from chronic disc degeneration and facet incompetence, leading to long-standing segmental instability and gradual slippage, usually at L4-5. Spondylosis is a general term reserved for acquired age-related degenerative changes of the spine (ie, discopathy or facet arthropathy) that can lead to this type of spondylolisthesis.
  • Type 4: The traumatic (any age) type results from fracture of any part of the neural arch or pars that leads to listhesis.
  • Type 5: The pathologic type results from a generalized bone disease, such as Paget disease or osteogenesis imperfecta.

Pathophysiology

Spondylolisthesis can be graded based on the amount of vertebral subluxation in the sagittal plane, as adapted from Meyerding (1932):

  • Grade 1 - Less than 25% of vertebral diameter
  • Grade 2 - 25-50%
  • Grade 3 - 50-75%
  • Grade 4 - 75-100%
  • Spondyloptosis - Greater than 100%

The dysplastic type occurs from a neural arch defect in the upper sacrum or L5. In this type, 94% of cases are associated with spina bifida occulta. A high rate of nerve root compression at the S1 foramen exists, although the slip may be minimal (ie, grade 1).

The pars interarticularis, or isthmus, is the bone between the lamina, pedicle, articular facets, and the transverse process. This portion of the vertebra can resist significant forces during normal motion. The pars may be congenitally defective (eg, in spondylolytic subtype of isthmic spondylolisthesis) or undergo repeated stress under hyperflexion and rotation, resulting in microfractures. If a fibrous nonunion forms from ongoing insult, elongation of the pars and progressive listhesis results. This occurs in the second and third subtypes of type 2 (isthmic) spondylolisthesis. These typically present in the teenage or early adulthood years and are most common at L5-S1.

A unilateral pars defect (spondylolysis) may not demonstrate any degree of slippage; thus, a patient may have spondylolysis without spondylolisthesis. The reverse is also true as in the degenerative-type slips described below.

Biomechanical factors are significant in the development of spondylolysis leading to spondylolisthesis. Gravitational and postural forces cause the greatest stress at the pars interarticularis. Both lumbar lordosis and rotational forces are also believed to play a role in the development of lytic pars defects and the fatigue of the pars in the young. An association exists between high levels of activity during childhood and the development of pars defects. Genetic factors also play a role.

In the degenerative type, intersegmental instability is present as a result of degenerative disc disease and facet arthropathy. These processes are collectively known as spondylosis (ie, acquired age-related degeneration). The slip occurs from progressive spondylosis within this 3-joint motion complex. This typically occurs at L4-5, and elderly females are most commonly affected. The L5 nerve root is usually compressed from lateral recess stenosis as a result of facet and/or ligamentous hypertrophy.

In the traumatic type, any part (usually not pars) of the neural arch can be fractured, leading to the unstable vertebral subluxation.

Pathologic spondylolisthesis results from generalized bone disease, which causes abnormal mineralization, remodeling, and attenuation of the posterior elements leading to the slip.

Presentation

The clinical presentation differs, depending on the type of slip and the age of the patient.

During the early years of life, the presentation is one of mild low back pain that occasionally radiates into the buttocks and posterior thighs, especially during high levels of activity. The symptoms rarely correlate with the degree of slip, although they are attributable to segmental instability. Neurologic signs often correlate with the degree of slippage and involve motor, sensory, and reflex changes corresponding to nerve root impingement (usually S1). Progression of listhesis in these young adults usually occurs in the setting of bilateral pars defects and can be associated with the following physical findings:

  • Palpable step-off in higher-grade slips
  • Restricted spinal motion
  • Hamstring tightness
  • Inability to flex hips with fully extended knees
  • Hyperlordosis of the lumbar and thoracolumbar regions
  • Hyperkyphosis at lumbosacral junction (as the center of gravity shifts to compensate for slip progression)
  • Trunk shortening when a complete slip is present (spondyloptosis)
  • Gait difficulty (worse with high-grade slips)

The patient with degenerative spondylolisthesis is typically older and presents with back pain, radiculopathy, neurogenic claudication, or a combination of these symptoms. The slip is most common at L4-5 and less common at L3-4. The radicular symptoms often result from lateral recess stenosis from facet and ligamentous hypertrophy and/or disc herniation. The L5 nerve root is affected most commonly and causes weakness of the extensor hallucis longus. Concomitant central stenosis and neurogenic claudication may or may not exist.

The cause of claudication symptoms during ambulation is multifactorial. The pain is relieved when the patient flexes the spine by sitting or by leaning on shopping carts. Flexion increases canal size by stretching the protruding ligamentum flavum, reduction of the overriding laminae and facets, and enlargement of the foramina. This relieves the pressure on the exiting nerve roots and, thus, decreases the pain.

Indications

The goal of surgery is to stabilize the segment with listhesis and decompress any of the neural elements under pressure. Restoration of normal sagittal alignment must also be achieved. When evaluating a patient, many factors, such as age, degree of slip, and risk of slip progression, must be considered. Thus, each patient's treatment algorithm should be individualized to achieve optimal outcome.

The indications for spinal fusion clearly differ in the pediatric and adult populations. For the younger population, the following factors are known to correlate with higher risk of slip progression:

  • Younger age (<15 y)
  • High-grade listhesis (>30%)
  • Female sex
  • Ligamentous laxity
  • Type 1 (dysplastic) slip
  • Lumbosacral hypermobility

However, many young patients are treated with immobilization or activity modification alone, with a significant success rate. In the absence of high-grade slips, minimal symptomatology, and lack of slip progression, fusion is generally not indicated in this population.

Before surgery is considered for adult patients presenting with degenerative spondylolisthesis, minimal neurologic signs, or mechanical back pain alone, conservative measures should be exhausted, and a thorough evaluation of social and psychological factors should be undertaken.

Indications for surgical intervention (fusion) are as follows:

  • Neurologic signs - Radiculopathy (unresponsive to conservative measures), myelopathy, neurogenic claudication
  • Any high-grade slip (>50%)
  • Type 1 and type 2 slips, with evidence of instability, progression of listhesis, or lack of response to conservative measures
  • Traumatic spondylolisthesis
  • Iatrogenic spondylolisthesis
  • Type 3 (degenerative) listhesis with gross instability and incapacitating pain
  • Postural deformity and gait abnormality

Relevant Anatomy

In persons with congenital-type spondylolisthesis, dysplastic articular facets predispose the spinal segment to listhesis due to their inability to resist anterior shear stress. The pars may be intact, or it may undergo microfractures. Thus, it may not be the initiator of listhesis in dysplastic types. The risk of slip progression is high.

The pars interarticularis, or isthmus, resists significant forces during normal motion. The pars may be congenitally defective (isthmic spondylolisthesis is spondylolysis) or undergo repeated stress under hyperflexion and rotation resulting in microfractures. Lumbar lordosis, gravity, posture, high-intensity activities (eg, gymnastics), and genetic factors all play a role in the slip development. If a fibrous nonunion forms from ongoing insult, elongation of the pars and progressive listhesis results; this is observed in another subtype of type 2 (isthmic) spondylolisthesis. In persons with spondylolysis, 30-50% are believed to progress to spondylolisthesis. The most common location is at L5-S1.

Degenerative spondylolisthesis results from intersegmental instability. The pathophysiology of disc degeneration and facet arthropathy has been investigated extensively; however, the nature and etiology of pain generation in the absence of canal or lateral recess stenosis is still debated. Degeneration of the annulus fibrosis results in radial tears through which a posteriorly migrated nucleus pulposus can herniate. Degeneration of the disc may also lead to changes affecting the stability of the spinal motion segment, thus affecting the articular facets. Disc desiccation places greater stress on the facets, which are then subjected to shear forces. The subluxation occurs as a result of progressive facet incompetence. This type most commonly occurs at L4-5 and L3-4.

Contraindications

Surgery is contraindicated if the patient is in poor medical health and if the operative risk is not outweighed by the potential benefits.

Anticoagulation with warfarin, or antiplatelet therapy, can make the risk of hemorrhage much higher than routinely expected. Antiplatelet therapy should be discontinued 3-5 days prior to the procedure. Coumadin should be stopped 5-7 days prior to the procedure, and a prothrombin time result within reference range should be achieved before surgery.

Smoking significantly decreases the chance for a successful fusion. Some surgeons prefer that a patient commit to smoking cessation up to one month before the surgical procedure.

Correction of the listhesis is associated with risk of neurologic injury, both transient and permanent. Some surgeons prefer to fuse the spine in place rather than to reduce the subluxation. In persons with higher-grade spondylolisthesis, use of interbody grafts is associated with a high rate of complications. However, the use of these devices adds to the stability of the spinal segment, helps with the reduction of the deformity, and helps achieve sagittal balance, thus ensuring better outcome.

More on Spondylolisthesis, Spondylolysis, and Spondylosis

Overview: Spondylolisthesis, Spondylolysis, and Spondylosis
Workup: Spondylolisthesis, Spondylolysis, and Spondylosis
Treatment: Spondylolisthesis, Spondylolysis, and Spondylosis
Follow-up: Spondylolisthesis, Spondylolysis, and Spondylosis
Multimedia: Spondylolisthesis, Spondylolysis, and Spondylosis
References
Further Reading

References

  1. Wiltse LL, Newman PH, Macnab I. Classification of spondylolisis and spondylolisthesis. Clin Orthop. Jun 1976;(117):23-9. [Medline].

  2. Ikuta K, Tono O, Oga M. Clinical outcome of microendoscopic posterior decompression for spinal stenosis associated with degenerative spondylolisthesis--minimum 2-year outcome of 37 patients. Minim Invasive Neurosurg. Oct 2008;51(5):267-71. [Medline].

  3. Schaeren S, Broger I, Jeanneret B. Minimum four-year follow-up of spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis treated with decompression and dynamic stabilization. Spine. Aug 15 2008;33(18):E636-42. [Medline].

  4. Yan DL, Pei FX, Li J, Soo CL. Comparative study of PILF and TLIF treatment in adult degenerative spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J. Oct 2008;17(10):1311-6. [Medline].

  5. Hu SS, Tribus CB, Diab M, Ghanayem AJ. Spondylolisthesis and spondylolysis. Instr Course Lect. 2008;57:431-45. [Medline].

  6. Majid K, Fischgrund JS. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: trends in management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. Apr 2008;16(4):208-15. [Medline].

  7. Acosta FL Jr, Ames CP, Chou D. Operative management of adult high-grade lumbosacral spondylolisthesis. Neurosurg Clin N Am. Apr 2007;18(2):249-54. [Medline].

  8. Weinstein JN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, Hanscom B, Tosteson AN, Blood EA, et al. Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. N Engl J Med. May 31 2007;356(22):2257-70. [Medline].

  9. Dean CL, Gabriel JP, Cassinelli EH, Bolesta MJ, Bohlman HH. Degenerative spondylolisthesis of the cervical spine: analysis of 58 patients treated with anterior cervical decompression and fusion. Spine J. Dec 24 2008;[Medline].

  10. Zdeblick TA. A prospective, randomized study of lumbar fusion. Preliminary results. Spine. Jun 15 1993;18(8):983-91. [Medline].

  11. Zdeblick TA. The treatment of degenerative lumbar disorders. A critical review of the literature. Spine. Dec 15 1995;20(24 Suppl):126S-137S. [Medline].

  12. Franklin GM, Haug J, Heyer NJ. Outcome of lumbar fusion in Washington State workers'' compensation. Spine. Sep 1 1994;19(17):1897-903; discussion 1904. [Medline].

  13. Herkowitz HN, Kurz LT. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. A prospective study comparing decompression with decompression and intertransverse process arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Jul 1991;73(6):802-8. [Medline].

  14. Blumenthal SL, Baker J, Dossett A. The role of anterior lumbar fusion for internal disc disruption. Spine. May 1988;13(5):566-9. [Medline].

  15. Bridwell KH, Sedgewick TA, O''Brien MF, et al. The role of fusion and instrumentation in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord. Dec 1993;6(6):461-72. [Medline].

  16. Caputy AJ, Luessenhop AJ. Long-term evaluation of decompressive surgery for degenerative lumbar stenosis. J Neurosurg. Nov 1992;77(5):669-76. [Medline].

  17. Crock HV. Internal disc disruption. A challenge to disc prolapse fifty years on. Spine. Jul-Aug 1986;11(6):650-3. [Medline].

  18. Detwiler PW, Marciano FF, Porter RW. Lumbar Stenosis: indications for fusion with and without instrumentation. Neurosurg Focus. 1997;3(2):1-12.

  19. diPierro CG, Helm GA, Shaffrey CI, et al. Treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis by extensive unilateral decompression and contralateral autologous bone fusion: operative technique and results. J Neurosurg. Feb 1996;84(2):166-73. [Medline].

  20. Feffer HL, Wiesel SW, Cuckler JM, Rothman RH. Degenerative spondylolisthesis. To fuse or not to fuse. Spine. Apr 1985;10(3):287-9. [Medline].

  21. Frymoyer JW, Hanley E, Howe J. Disc excision and spine fusion in the management of lumbar disc disease. A minimum ten-year followup. Spine. Mar 1978;3(1):1-6. [Medline].

  22. Greenberg MS. Spinal stenosis. In: Handbook of Neurosurgery. 4th ed. Georg Thieme Verlag; 1997:207-217.

  23. Hanley EN Jr, Levy JA. Surgical treatment of isthmic lumbosacral spondylolisthesis. Analysis of variables influencing results. Spine. Jan 1989;14(1):48-50. [Medline].

  24. Harris IE, Weinstein SL. Long-term follow-up of patients with grade-III and IV spondylolisthesis. Treatment with and without posterior fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Sep 1987;69(7):960-9. [Medline].

  25. Heller JG. The syndromes of degenerative cervical disease. Orthop Clin North Am. Jul 1992;23(3):381-94. [Medline].

  26. Johnson JR, Kirwan EO. The long-term results of fusion in situ for severe spondylolisthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. Jan 1983;65(1):43-6. [Medline].

  27. Johnsson KE, Uden A, Rosen I. The effect of decompression on the natural course of spinal stenosis. A comparison of surgically treated and untreated patients. Spine. Jun 1991;16(6):615-9. [Medline].

  28. Johnsson KE, Willner S, Johnsson K. Postoperative instability after decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine. Mar 1986;11(2):107-10. [Medline].

  29. Katz JN. Lumbar spinal fusion. Surgical rates, costs, and complications. Spine. Dec 15 1995;20(24 Suppl):78S-83S. [Medline].

  30. Kohno K, Kumon Y, Oka Y, et al. Evaluation of prognostic factors following expansive laminoplasty for cervical spinal stenotic myelopathy. Surg Neurol. Sep 1997;48(3):237-45. [Medline].

  31. Kumar VG, Rea GL, Mervis LJ, et al. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: functional and radiographic long-term outcome after laminectomy and posterior fusion. Neurosurgery. Apr 1999;44(4):771-7; discussion 777-8. [Medline].

  32. Macdonald RL, Fehlings MG, Tator CH, et al. Multilevel anterior cervical corpectomy and fibular allograft fusion for cervical myelopathy. J Neurosurg. Jun 1997;86(6):990-7. [Medline].

  33. Markwalder TM. Surgical management of neurogenic claudication in 100 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis due to degenerative spondylolisthesis. Acta Neurochir. 1993;120:136-42.

  34. Mullin BB, Rea GL, Irsik R, et al. The effect of postlaminectomy spinal instability on the outcome of lumbar spinal stenosis patients. J Spinal Disord. Apr 1996;9(2):107-16. [Medline].

  35. Nasca RJ. Rationale for spinal fusion in lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine. Apr 1989;14(4):451-4. [Medline].

  36. Nasca RJ. Surgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine. Oct 1987;12(8):809-16. [Medline].

  37. Panjabi MM. Biomechanical evaluation of spinal fixation devices: I. A conceptual framework. Spine. Oct 1988;13(10):1129-34. [Medline].

  38. Panjabi MM, Krag MH, Chung TQ. Effects of disc injury on mechanical behavior of the human spine. Spine. Oct 1984;9(7):707-13. [Medline].

  39. Papadopoulos SM, Hoff JT. Anatomical treatment of cervical spondylosis. Clin Neurosurg. 1994;41:270-85. [Medline].

  40. Pappas CT, Sonntag VK. Lumbar stenosis in the elderly. Neurosurg Q. 1994;4:102-112.

  41. Rosenberg NJ. Degenerative spondylolisthesis. Predisposing factors. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Jun 1975;57(4):467-74. [Medline].

  42. Silvers HR, Lewis PJ, Asch HL. Decompressive lumbar laminectomy for spinal stenosis. J Neurosurg. May 1993;78(5):695-701. [Medline].

  43. Sonntag VK, Marciano FF. Is fusion indicated for lumbar spinal disorders?. Spine. Dec 15 1995;20(24 Suppl):138S-142S. [Medline].

  44. Stokes IA, Frymoyer JW. Segmental motion and instability. Spine. Sep 1987;12(7):688-91. [Medline].

  45. Suk SI, Lee CK, Kim WJ. Adding posterior lumbar interbody fusion to pedicle screw fixation and posterolateral fusion after decompression in spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. Spine. Jan 15 1997;22(2):210-9; discussion 219-20. [Medline].

  46. Swezey RL, Swezey AM, Warner K. Efficacy of home cervical traction therapy. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. Jan-Feb 1999;78(1):30-2. [Medline].

  47. Teresi LM, Lufkin RB, Reicher MA, et al. Asymptomatic degenerative disk disease and spondylosis of the cervical spine: MR imaging. Radiology. Jul 1987;164(1):83-8. [Medline].

  48. Thomas NW, Rea GL, Pikul BK, et al. Quantitative outcome and radiographic comparisons between laminectomy and laminotomy in the treatment of acquired lumbar stenosis. Neurosurgery. Sep 1997;41(3):567-74; discussion 574-5. [Medline].

  49. Vaccaro AR, Garfin SR. Internal fixation (pedicle screw fixation) for fusions of the lumbar spine. Spine. Dec 15 1995;20(24 Suppl):157S-165S. [Medline].

  50. Weatherley CR, Prickett CF, O''Brien JP. Discogenic pain persisting despite solid posterior fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Br. Jan 1986;68(1):142-3. [Medline].

  51. White AA, Panjabi MM. Clinical Biomechanics of the Spine. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; 1990:342-378.

  52. Yasuma T, Koh S, Okamura T, Yamauchi Y. Histological changes in aging lumbar intervertebral discs. Their role in protrusions and prolapses. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Feb 1990;72(2):220-9. [Medline].

  53. Yu S, Haughton VM, Sether LA, et al. Criteria for classifying normal and degenerated lumbar intervertebral disks. Radiology. Feb 1989;170(2):523-6. [Medline].

Keywords

spondylolisthesis, spondylolysis, spondylosis, subluxation, spondyloptosis, spine, vertebra, vertebrae, spinal instability, radiculopathy, neurogenic claudication, postural abnormality, gait abnormality, slip progression, back pain

Contributor Information and Disclosures

Author

Amir Vokshoor, MD, Staff Neurosurgeon, Department of Neurosurgery, Spine Surgeon, Diagnostic and Interventional Spinal Care, St John's Health Center
Amir Vokshoor, MD is a member of the following medical societies: Alpha Omega Alpha, American Association of Neurological Surgeons, American Medical Association, and North American Spine Society
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Medical Editor

Lee H Riley III, MD, Chief, Division of Orthopedic Spine Surgery, Assistant Professor, Departments of Orthopedic Surgery and Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins University
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Pharmacy Editor

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD, Senior Pharmacy Editor, eMedicine
Disclosure: eMedicine Salary Employment

Managing Editor

William O Shaffer, MD, Professor, Vice-Chairman and Residency Program Director, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Kentucky at Lexington
William O Shaffer, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, American Orthopaedic Association, International Society for the Study of the Lumbar Spine, Kentucky Medical Association, Kentucky Orthopaedic Society, North American Spine Society, Southern Medical Association, and Southern Orthopaedic Association
Disclosure: DePuySpine 1997-2007 (not presently) Royalty Consulting; DePuySpine 2002-2007 (closed) Grant/research funds SacroPelvic Instrumentation Biomechanical Study; DePuyBiologics 2005-2008 (closed) Grant/research funds Healos study just closed; No present Industry grants or funds. None None

CME Editor

Dinesh Patel, MD, FACS, Associate Clinical Professor of Orthopedic Surgery, Harvard Medical School; Chief of Arthroscopic Surgery, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital
Dinesh Patel, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, American Association of Physicians of Indian Origin, American College of International Physicians, and American College of Surgeons
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

Mary Ann E Keenan, MD, Professor, Vice Chair for Graduate Medical Education, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine; Chief of Neuro-Orthopedics Program, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania
Mary Ann E Keenan, MD is a member of the following medical societies: Alpha Omega Alpha, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, American Orthopaedic Association, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society, American Society for Surgery of the Hand, and Orthopaedic Rehabilitation Association
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

 
 
HONcode

We subscribe to the
HONcode principles of the
Health On the Net Foundation

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright© 1994- by Medscape.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

DISCLAIMER: The content of this Website is not influenced by sponsors. The site is designed primarily for use by qualified physicians and other medical professionals. The information contained herein should NOT be used as a substitute for the advice of an appropriately qualified and licensed physician or other health care provider. The information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only. In no way should it be considered as offering medical advice. Please check with a physician if you suspect you are ill.