Asian Spine J Search

CLOSE


Asian Spine J > Online first
Qiu, Xu, Yu, Chen, Qu, Xia, Zheng, and Chen: Preoperative bone mineral density quantitatively assessed by Hounsfield units is associated with failed back surgery syndrome after lumbar fusion surgery: a retrospective study

Abstract

Study Design

Retrospective analysis.

Purpose

To evaluate preoperative bone mineral density (BMD), as quantified by computerized tomography (CT)-derived Hounsfield unit (HU) values, in patients who underwent lumbar fusion and to examine the link between BMD and failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS).

Overview of Literature

FBSS is a serious complication affecting 10%–40% of patients undergoing lumbosacral spinal surgery. Given the detrimental impact of FBSS on the psychological and physiological wellbeing of patients, preoperative identification of those at risk for developing FBSS and the implementation of targeted interventions to minimize this complication are highly important.

Methods

Preoperatively, all 115 patients underwent BMD assessments using both CT-derived HUs and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and were administered multiple questionnaires, including the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), and Beck Depression Index (BDI). Both pain intensity and pain-related disability were assessed before and after lumbar fusion surgery.

Results

Postoperatively, 14 patients (14/115, 12.2%) experienced FBSS. Multivariate logistic regression was used to examine all preoperative covariates with significant differences between the patients with and without FBSS. The numeric rating pain scale score at rest, BAI score, PCS score, and HU value were found to be independently associated with FBSS (p<0.05).

Conclusions

This study revealed that preoperative BMD, as quantified by CT-derived HU values, may be associated with FBSS. Preoperative assessments of CT-derived HU values might provide additional details for identifying patients susceptible to FBSS, which could help prevent this complication.

Introduction

Surgical intervention remains a standard and effective approach for managing degenerative lumbar diseases (DLDs) in patients who do not respond to conservative treatment strategies [1]. Although many prior studies have documented the excellent clinical outcomes of lumbosacral spinal surgeries, serious complications can occur [2]. Among these complications, failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) is a term that describes an unsatisfactory outcome following anatomically and radiologically successful lumbosacral spinal surgery, characterized by persistent, worsening, or recurrent low back pain (LBP), with or without radiating pain to the lower limbs [3,4]. Significantly, 10%–40% of people receiving lumbosacral spinal surgery experience this debilitating consequence [3,4]. Given the serious negative impact of FBSS on patients’ psychological and physiological statuses, attempts to mitigate the risk of this complication are crucial.
Although the precise pathophysiological mechanism of FBSS remains unclear, increasing evidence has revealed a strong correlation between postoperative spinal instability and FBSS [3,5]. This spinal instability affects not only the surgical segments but also the adjacent segments [3]. Numerous previous studies have demonstrated that osteoporosis is a significant risk factor for postoperative spinal instability [6,7]. Furthermore, osteoporosis is commonly associated with persistent LBP [8]. Thus, decreased bone mineral density (BMD) may play a role in the etiology of FBSS. However, few studies have investigated the correlation between BMD and FBSS.
Computerized tomography (CT)-derived Hounsfield unit (HU) values have been extensively utilized in the evaluation of bone quality in patients with spinal disorders [9,10]. A growing body of studies have demonstrated a strong relationship between CT-derived HU values and the BMD assessments provided by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) [9,10]. Several previous studies have further demonstrated that compared with DEXA, CT-derived HU values yield significantly more accurate BMD assessments of the lumbar spine and demonstrate a superior diagnostic accuracy for osteoporosis, especially in patients undergoing spine surgery [11,12].
Thus, this study aimed to assess BMD, as quantified by preoperative CT-derived HU values, in patients with DLDs and to explore the relationship between BMD and FBSS following lumbar fusion surgery, thereby providing a theoretical basis for its clinical prevention.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective study was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and all study protocols were approved by the Human Ethics Committee (2024LIK02).

Participants

This study enrolled patients with symptomatic DLDs who presented to our institution between January 2020 and December 2023 and provided informed consent. The inclusion criteria for the patients were as follows: adults (over 18 years old) who underwent successful lumbar fusion surgery between January 2020 and December 2023. The exclusion criteria included lumbar structural pathologies (such as trauma, tumors, and infections), perioperative complications (e.g., infection, nerve injuries, and cerebrospinal fluid leakage), history of previous failed lumbar spine surgery, and loss to follow-up.
The diagnostic criteria of FBSS were as follows [13]: (1) a documented history of anatomically and technically successful lumbosacral spinal surgery confirmed by intraoperative findings (e.g., monitoring potential stability, absence of nerve injuries or dural sac tear), early postoperative assessments (e.g., no hematoma, infection, or cerebrospinal fluid leakage), and 1-year postoperative assessments (e.g., imaging demonstrating complete decompression and fusion without implant displacement, electrophysiological assessments showing absence of progressive nerve injuries). (2) increased/persistent pain in the lumbosacral area with or without radiation to the leg at the 1-year postoperative assessment; and (3) an intensity of LBP at rest or with movements greater than or equal to 3 on the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) (0=no pain, 10=maximum tolerable pain).

Surgical treatment and perioperative analgesia

Upon hospital admission, resident physicians provided patients with verbal instructions regarding perioperative information, including the surgical approach, pain assessment, and rehabilitation protocols. All patients in this study underwent modified transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) performed by experienced spinal surgeons at our institution in accordance with the detailed modified TLIF procedure outlined in a previous study [14]. Flurbiprofen axetil (50 mg) was administered during the first 24 hours following surgery, and the patients were instructed to consume acetaminophen (500 mg) every 12 hours for 5 days after the operation. Patients experiencing severe pain were permitted to use additional and/or prolonged pain medication. Patients were typically discharged from the hospital approximately 10 days following the operation.

Data measurements

CT-derived HU values

In accordance with standard procedures outlined in previous studies [9,10], all patients underwent preoperative quantitative CT imaging (Lightspeed 64-VCT; General Electric, Boston, MA, USA). Two-dimensional reconstructions were obtained in the sagittal plane using the CT parameters, which included a slice thickness of 1.25 mm with a 0.625-mm interval. The Picture Archiving and Communication Systems imaging software (Tomorrow Medical Network Technology Co. Ltd., Ningbo, China) was used to calculate the HU values. The largest possible elliptical region of interest was placed within the medullary space of the vertebral body to minimize beam hardening and volume averaging artifacts from adjacent cortical bone (Fig. 1). Regions of interest were measured on axial images at the mid-vertebral level from L1 to L4, and the mean HU value for each patient was derived from the average of these four different measurements (Fig. 1). The measurements were performed by two independent clinicians who were blinded to the patients’ information, and the final values were obtained by averaging their results.

T scores

For DEXA measurements, the average T scores from the L1 to L4 vertebrae were determined using a Lunar Prodigy Advance densitometer (General Electric).

Demographic and other medical data collection

The following perioperative data were extracted from the patients’ medical records: age, sex, body mass index, primary diagnosis, preoperative disease duration, number of surgical segments, operative time, and intraoperative bleeding volume.
All patients completed an NRS assessment to evaluate LBP at rest and during movement, conducted preoperatively, 1–3 days postoperatively, and at 1-year follow-up. In addition, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was administered to these patients both before and 1-year following the procedure. Prior to the procedure, all patients filled out a number of questionnaires, such as the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), and Beck Depression Index (BDI). Furthermore, all patients with postoperative chronic LBP underwent further imaging assessments—including X-ray, CT, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)—at the 1-year postoperative follow-up. Dynamic lateral lumbar X-ray detected neither obvious activities in the surgical segments nor implant loosening/displacement, and the latter was further verified on CT scans (e.g., no obvious bone resorption around the pedicle screws and intervertebral fusion device with or without sagittal CT scans demonstrating the formation of bone connections in the surgical segments). Furthermore, lumbar MRI detection was used to confirm adequate decompression of both the spinal canal and intervertebral foramina and to exclude adjacent segment spinal stenosis or disc herniation.

Statistical methods

All the data were analyzed using IBM SPSS ver. 20.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA), and the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was employed to confirm a normal distribution. Measurements between patients with and without FBSS were compared using independent t-tests or Mann-Whitney tests, and preoperative and 1-year postoperative measurements were compared using paired t-tests. The frequencies of various metrics between patients with and without FBSS were compared using Fisher’s exact test or the chi-square test. For patients with FBSS, Pearson correlation analysis was used to evaluate the relationships between the 1-year postoperative LBP intensity and the preoperative measurements. Statistically significant preoperative covariates based on univariate analyses were subjected to multivariate logistic regression analysis. Cutoff values (CVs) and areas under the curve were determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis based on the results of the multivariate model. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

This study included 115 patients (Fig. 2), and their clinical characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Compared to preoperative outcomes, the 115 patients who underwent lumbar fusion surgery demonstrated significantly reduced NRS scores both at rest (1.1±1.5 vs. 0.5±1.1, p<0.05) and during movement (4.3±2.1 vs. 1.3±1.5, p<0.05), as well as decreased ODI scores (51.0%±25.8% vs. 20.2%±23.4%, p<0.05) at the 1-year postoperative follow-up.
At the 1-year postoperative follow-up, 14 patients (14/115, 12.2%) were detected to have developed FBSS. Among the 14 patients with FBSS, nine patients (9/14, 64.3%) exhibited increased 1-year postoperative LBP at rest or with movement compared to their preoperative assessments. Three of them also experienced lower limb pain; however, only one of them reported lower limb pain NRS ratings of more than 3. Furthermore, the other five patients (9/14, 35.7%) still exhibited NRS scores of LBP greater than 3 at the 1-year postoperative assessments, which was similar to the preoperative LBP intensities, and only one of these five patients also experienced mild persistent lower limb pain (NRS <3). Importantly, 1-year postoperative imaging—including dynamic X-ray, computed tomography (CT), and MRI—along with electrophysiological assessments, confirmed complete decompression of both the spinal canal and intervertebral foramina. No internal implant failure, adjacent segment spinal stenosis or disc herniation, or progressive lumbosacral nerve injuries were observed in any of the FBSS patients included in this study.
Among these 14 patients with FBSS, the 1-year postoperative NRS score at rest was correlated with both the preoperative PCS score (r=0.58, p<0.05) and the average NRS score 1–3 days postoperatively (r=0.58, p<0.05) (Fig. 3), and the 1-year postoperative NRS score with movements was associated with the T score (r=−0.58, p<0.05) and the HU value (r=−0.64, p<0.05) (Fig. 3). In addition, the 1-year postoperative ODI scores were correlated with HU values (r=−0.66, p<0.05) (Fig. 3).

Comparison between patients with and without FBSS

Preoperatively, the patients with FBSS exhibited higher NRS scores at rest, higher PCS scores, and higher BAI scores, as well as lower T scores and HU values, than those without FBSS (Table 2). Furthermore, the FBSS patients presented with comparatively greater intraoperative hemorrhage and extended operative times, as well as higher average NRS scores 1–3 days after operation, than did those without FBSS (Tables 1, 2). Patients with FBSS had significantly higher NRS ratings at rest and with movements, as well as higher ODIs, than patients without FBSS at the 1-year preoperative evaluation (Table 2).

Perioperative predictors of FBSS after lumbar fusion surgery

Multivariate logistic regression was used to examine all preoperative covariates with significant differences (p<0.05) between patients with and without FBSS. These included the NRS scores at rest, PCS scores, BAI scores, T scores, and HU values, as well as the average NRS scores 1–3 days after operation, intraoperative bleeding, and the operative time. The findings demonstrated that the preoperative NRS score at rest, preoperative BAI score, preoperative PCS score, and preoperative HU value were independently associated with FBSS (Table 3). ROC curve analysis revealed that the CVs for the prediction of FBSS were 0.5 for the preoperative NRS score at rest, 3.5 for the preoperative BAI score, 15.5 for the preoperative PCS score, and 106.0 for the preoperative HU value (p<0.05) (Fig. 4).

Discussion

The notable incidence of chronic LBP after lumbar fusion surgery (12.2%, 14/115 patients) in this study highlights that more than one in 10 patients who underwent lumbar fusion developed FBSS. Additionally, during the 1-year postoperative follow-up, all patients in the FBSS group had evident pain-related impairment, and around two-thirds of the patients required ongoing pain medication. Therefore, clinicians should be mindful of this serious complication and exercise caution when considering using lumbar fusion surgery for treating patients with DLDs.
The study results demonstrated that low preoperative BMD was linked to chronic postoperative LBP. Many previous studies have demonstrated that osteoporosis is a significant risk factor for both pedicle screw loosening and fusion device displacement/settlement [15,16], and these conditions have been shown to be strongly linked to FBSS [3,5]. However, the 1-year postoperative imaging assessments in this study contradicted this possibility. There is growing evidence that patients with osteoporosis are more prone to experience fusion-induced adjacent segment degeneration [6]. Although no patients with FBSS in this study presented with spinal stenosis or disc herniation of adjacent segments, Sun et al. [6] demonstrated that low bone mass may negatively impact the functional integrity of the endplate vascular microstructure and disturb matrix metabolism in the nucleus pulposus and annulus fibrosus, which may stimulate the sinovertebral nerve and subsequently lead to chronic postoperative LBP.
According to previous studies [17,18], the co-occurrence of osteoporosis and sarcopenia is prevalent in middle-aged and older individuals, and this syndrome is termed “osteosarcopenia.” Although the exact pathophysiological process of osteosarcopenia remains unclear, a recent study revealed that osteocalcin released from the bone plays a critical role in the communication between the muscle and bone [19], and the Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway has been reported to mediate bone-muscle crosstalk by regulating osteoblastic activity [20]. Therefore, low BMD influences the interaction between myokines and osteokines, which may not only induce a loss of muscle mass and strength but also impact muscle function, thereby causing poor recovery of soft tissues at surgical sites. Numerous earlier investigations have demonstrated the crucial role of the lumbar muscles in maintaining spinal stability [21,22]; thus, inadequate posterior lumbar muscle recovery after operation may exacerbate the instability of the surgical and/or adjacent segments. Importantly, poor recovery following operation may impair blood circulation within the muscles at the surgical site, which could facilitate the local buildup of inflammatory mediators during physical activities [23]. This local buildup stimulates the peripheral terminals of primary sensory neurons and induces LBP [23]. These presumptions were further confirmed by the study’s findings that BMD measures were linked to 1-year postoperative LBP with movements but not with LBP at rest. Thus, osteosarcopenia may be another potential reason for the correlation between low preoperative BMD and FBSS.
Another key finding of this study is that CT-derived HU values, but not T values, were independently associated with FBSS, despite both being feasible methods for quantifying BMD. According to previous studies [9,11], the trabecular bone is more affected by osteoporosis than is the cortical bone. Therefore, lumbar spine images obtained by CT allow for the selective direct measurement of HU values of the trabecular bone [9,10]. Thus, this approach can circumvent the influence of the cortical bone and osteophyte growth, providing a more accurate reflection of the vertebral quality. In contrast, the T scores measured by DEXA reflect an average BMD that includes both cortical and trabecular bone [11]. Therefore, their measurements may be prone to overestimation owing to variations in the bone size and the presence of surrounding bone hypertrophy. Although DEXA-derived T scores have demonstrated relatively high efficacy in predicting thoracolumbar fragility fractures, it is important to acknowledge the potential influence of factors such as spinal degeneration, osteophyte formation, and osteosclerosis on BMD, as emphasized in numerous previous studies [11]. Equally important, preoperative CTs are routinely performed for many DLD patients before they undergo lumbar spinal surgery. Therefore, utilizing HU values can help avoid additional costs and radiation exposure from DEXA.
Similar to previous studies [24,25], this study discovered a link between preoperative LBP at rest and FBSS. In contrast to pain with movement, pain at rest has been linked to central sensitization (CS). Therefore, preoperative central hypersensitivity induced by impaired endogenous pain regulation may be another potential risk factor for FBSS, as suggested by many previous studies [26]. Importantly, this hypothesis may explain the predictive value of the preoperative BAI and PCS scores for FBSS. According to previous studies [26,27], neuroplastic changes originating from nociceptive pathways may spread to diverse brain regions and be attributed to the negative psychosocial symptoms (e.g., pain catastrophizing thoughts, anxiety, and depression). These psychosocial symptoms can also enhance forebrain activity, thereby increasing CS and subsequently causing FBSS [28].
Because the mechanism of FBSS is uncertain, the results of this study should be regarded cautiously. The present study demonstrated that low BMD, as quantified by CT-derived HU values, may be linked to FBSS. However, approximately one-fifth of the patients with FBSS presented HU values greater than 106, suggesting that there are other pathogenic mechanisms related to FBSS. Another clinical limitation of this study is that other measurements, such as the cross-sectional area and fatty infiltration of the posterior lumbar muscles, were not analyzed. However, these measurements cannot fully reflect sarcopenia. Furthermore, this study was a retrospective data review from a single center, which may have caused selection bias during patient enrollment and the small sample size. Thus, more significant results (e.g., different pathogenic mechanisms and their roles in FBSS) may be achieved in a future prospective study with more measurements and a larger number of cases.

Conclusions

The findings of this study support the existence of low BMD in patients with FBSS. Importantly, low preoperative BMD may be involved in the pathophysiological process of FBSS and contribute to LBP intensity and pain-related disability in patients with FBSS. Preoperative assessments of CT-derived HU values may provide additional information for identifying patients who may be at risk for developing FBSS, which may be beneficial for the preoperative stratification of patients and the identification of appropriate treatments to prevent this complication.

Key Points

  • Bone mineral density, as quantified by computerized tomography-derived Hounsfield unit (HU) values, may be associated with developing failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) after lumbar fusion surgery.

  • Preoperative HU assessment of lumbar vertebrae may help identify patients at risk for FBSS, aiding in its prevention.

  • Preoperative low back pain intensity at rest and negative psychological symptoms (e.g., pain catastrophizing thoughts and anxiety) may also be linked to FBSS after lumbar fusion surgery.

Notes

Conflict of Interest

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Funding

This work was supported by the Zhejiang Medical and Health Science and Technology Plan Project (2025KY1446) and Shanghai Sailing Program (22YF1405100).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: CQW, ZCJ. Data curation: QLL, XHC, YLM. Methodology: QLL. Project administration: ZCJ, XXL. Writing–original draff: CXJ, QJW. Writing–review & editing: XHC, XXL. Final approval of the manuscript: all authors.

Fig. 1
Computed tomography scans illustrating the method of determining the Hounsfield unit (HU) value with use of an elliptical region of interest area. (A) The left image shows the axial planes of interest area on a sagittal slice of a computed tomography scan of L1–L4 lumbar vertebral body. (B–E) The right images show the elliptical region of interest area on the axial slice of L1–L4 lumbar vertebral body, along with the HU values generated by the imaging software program.
asj-2025-0129f1.jpg
Fig. 2
Design of patient selection. DLDs, degenerative lumbar diseases; TLIF, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion; FBSS, failed back surgery syndrome.
asj-2025-0129f2.jpg
Fig. 3
(A) Postoperative 1-year Numeric Rating Pain Scale (NRS) scores of low back pain (LBP) at rest are positively associated with preoperative Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) scores in failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) patients. (B) Postoperative 1-year NRS scores of LBP at rest are positively associated with average NRS scores of LBP 1–3 days after operation in FBSS patients. (C) Postoperative 1-year NRS scores of LBP with movements are negatively associated with preoperative T scores in FBSS patients. (D) Postoperative 1-year NRS scores of LBP with movements are negatively associated with preoperative computed tomography (CT)-derived Hounsfield unit (HU) values in FBSS patients. (E) Postoperative 1-year Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores are negatively associated with preoperative CT-derived HU values in FBSS patients.
asj-2025-0129f3.jpg
Fig. 4
Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis revealed the cutoff value of preoperative low back pain intensity at rest (A), preoperative Beck Anxiety Inventory scores (B), preoperative Pain Catastrophizing Scale scores (C), and preoperative computed tomography-derived Hounsfield unit values (D), for predicting failed back surgery syndrome after lumbar fusion. CV, cutoff value; AUC, area under the ROC curve.
asj-2025-0129f4.jpg
Table 1
Medical characteristic between the patients with and without FBSS
Characteristic Patients with FBSS Patients without FBSS
No. of subjects 14 101
Age range (yr) 66.0±8.3 61.7±9.9
Body mass index (kg/m2) 22.8±3.7 23.3±3.8
Gender
 Male 6 45
 Female 8 56
Disease duration (mo) 31.1±19.8 25.2±34.2
Main diagnosis
 Lumbar spinal stenosis 7/14 (50.0) 45/101 (44.6)
 Lumbar disc herniation 2/14 (14.3) 13/101 (12.9)
 Lumbar spondylolisthesis 5/14 (35.7) 40/101 (39.6)
 Degenerative lumbar scoliosis 0/14 (0.0) 6/101 (5.9)
Revision surgery 3/14 (21.4) 9/101 (8.9)
No. of surgical segments 2.0±0.9 1.6±0.7
Operative time (min) 162.3±75.7a) 129.3±43.4a)
Intraoperative bleeding (mL) 487.7±174.9a) 366.0±186.4a)

Values are presented as number, mean±standard deviation, or number/total cases (%).

FBSS, failed back surgery syndrome.

a) Statistically significant differences between patients with and without FBSS.

Table 2
Preoperative and postoperative assessments between patients with and without FBSS
Variable Patients with FBSS Patients without FBSS
No. of participants 14 101
Preoperative assessments
 NRS scores at rest 2.0±1.3a) 1.0±1.5a)
 NRS scores with movements 4.9±1.5 4.2±2.1
 ODI (%) 62.7±18.6 49.4±26.3
 BAI scores 8.9±6.0a) 5.4±4.7a)
 BDI scores 6.4±4.8 4.2±4.2
 PCS scores 15.1±6.4a) 9.4±6.1a)
 T scores −1.8±1.3a) −0.8±1.5a)
 HU values 92.2±25.1a) 117.4±33.6a)
Postoperative early assessments
 Average NRS scores at restb) 3.7±0.7a) 3.2±0.7a)
Postoperative 1-year assessments
 NRS scores at rest 3.1±0.8a) 0.1±0.5a)
 NRS scores with movements 4.5±0.9a) 0.9±0.8a)
 ODI scores 71.3±15.2a) 13.1±13.4a)

Values are presented as number of participants or mean±standard deviation.

FBSS, failed back surgery syndrome; NRS, Numeric Rating Pain Scale; ODI, Oswestry Disability Index; BAI, Beck Anxiety Inventory; BDI, Beck Depression Index; PCS, Pain Catastrophizing Scale; HU, Hounsfield unit.

a) Statistically significant differences between patients with and without FBSS.

b) Average pain intensity 1–3 days after operation.

Table 3
Multivariate regression analysis of significant predicting factors of FBSS
Variable B OR (95% CI) p-value
Preoperative NRS at rest −0.914 0.401 (0.197–0.813) 0.011
BAI scores −0.289 0.749 (0.605–0.926) 0.008
PCS scores −0.180 0.835 (0.720–0.968) 0.017
HU values 0.070 1.072 (1.010–1.138) 0.022

FBSS, failed back surgery syndrome; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; NRS, Numeric Rating Pain Scale; BAI, Beck Anxiety Inventory; PCS, Pain Catastrophizing Scale; HU, Hounsfield unit.

Reference

1. Burgstaller JM, Steurer J, Gravestock I, et al. Long-term results after surgical or nonsurgical treatment in patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective multicenter study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2020;45:1030–8.
pmid
2. Harper R, Klineberg E. The evidence-based approach for surgical complications in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Int Orthop 2019;43:975–80.
crossref pmid pdf
3. Chan CW, Peng P. Failed back surgery syndrome. Pain Med 2011;12:577–606.
crossref pmid
4. Christelis N, Simpson B, Russo M, et al. Persistent spinal pain syndrome: a proposal for failed back surgery syndrome and ICD-11. Pain Med 2021;22:807–18.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
5. Daniell JR, Osti OL. Failed back surgery syndrome: a review article. Asian Spine J 2018;12:372–9.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
6. Sun Q, Liu F, Fang J, et al. Strontium ranelate retards disc degradation and improves endplate and bone micro-architecture in ovariectomized rats with lumbar fusion induced: adjacent segment disc degeneration. Bone Rep 2024;20:101744.
crossref pmid pmc
7. Li W, Niu Y, Qiu Z, et al. New evidence on the controversy over the correlation between vertebral osteoporosis and intervertebral disc degeneration: a systematic review of relevant animal studies. Eur Spine J 2024;33:2354–79.
crossref pmid pdf
8. Casazza BA. Diagnosis and treatment of acute low back pain. Am Fam Physician 2012;85:343–50.
pmid
9. Schreiber JJ, Anderson PA, Rosas HG, Buchholz AL, Au AG. Hounsfield units for assessing bone mineral density and strength: a tool for osteoporosis management. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011;93:1057–63.
crossref pmid
10. Yaprak G, Gemici C, Seseogullari OO, Karabag IS, Cini N. CT Derived Hounsfield unit: an easy way to determine osteoporosis and radiation related fracture risk in irradiated patients. Front Oncol 2020;10:742.
crossref pmid pmc
11. Zhang B, Zhou LP, Zhang XL, et al. Which indicator among lumbar vertebral Hounsfield unit, vertebral bone quality, or dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry-measured bone mineral density is more efficacious in predicting thoracolumbar fragility fractures? Neurospine 2023;20:1193–204.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
12. Ahern DP, McDonnell JM, Riffault M, et al. A meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of Hounsfield units on computed topography relative to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in the spine surgery population. Spine J 2021;21:1738–49.
crossref pmid
13. Nie C, Chen K, Chen J, et al. Altered central pain processing assessed by quantitative sensory testing in patients with failed back surgery syndrome. Neurophysiol Clin 2022;52:427–35.
crossref pmid
14. Wang HL, Lu FZ, Jiang JY, Ma X, Xia XL, Wang LX. Minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion via MAST Quadrant retractor versus open surgery: a prospective randomized clinical trial. Chin Med J (Engl) 2011;124:3868–74.
pmid
15. Yuan L, Zhang X, Zeng Y, Chen Z, Li W. Incidence, risk, and outcome of pedicle screw loosening in degenerative lumbar scoliosis patients undergoing long-segment fusion. Global Spine J 2023;13:1064–71.
crossref pmid pdf
16. Li Y, Liu S, He Z, Yu S. Comparison of long-term efficacy of MIS-TLIF intraoperative implants in patients with osteoporosis. Comput Math Methods Med 2022;2022:2565391.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
17. Clynes MA, Gregson CL, Bruyere O, Cooper C, Dennison EM. Osteosarcopenia: where osteoporosis and sarcopenia collide. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2021;60:529–37.
crossref pmid pdf
18. Iwahashi S, Hashida R, Matsuse H, et al. The impact of sarcopenia on low back pain and quality of life in patients with osteoporosis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2022;23:142.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
19. Bowser M, Herberg S, Arounleut P, et al. Effects of the activin A-myostatin-follistatin system on aging bone and muscle progenitor cells. Exp Gerontol 2013;48:290–7.
crossref pmid
20. Oliveira A, Vaz C. The role of sarcopenia in the risk of osteoporotic hip fracture. Clin Rheumatol 2015;34:1673–80.
crossref pmid pdf
21. Panjabi MM. Clinical spinal instability and low back pain. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2003;13:371–9.
crossref pmid
22. Schonnagel L, Zhu J, Camino-Willhuber G, et al. Relationship between lumbar spinal stenosis and axial muscle wasting. Spine J 2024;24:231–8.
crossref pmid
23. Meacham K, Shepherd A, Mohapatra DP, Haroutounian S. Neuropathic pain: central vs. peripheral mechanisms. Curr Pain Headache Rep 2017;21:28.
crossref pmid pdf
24. Weissman-Fogel I, Granovsky Y, Crispel Y, et al. Enhanced presurgical pain temporal summation response predicts post-thoracotomy pain intensity during the acute postoperative phase. J Pain 2009;10:628–36.
crossref pmid
25. Lundblad H, Kreicbergs A, Jansson KA. Prediction of persistent pain after total knee replacement for osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008;90:166–71.
crossref pmid pdf
26. Langevin HM, Sherman KJ. Pathophysiological model for chronic low back pain integrating connective tissue and nervous system mechanisms. Med Hypotheses 2007;68:74–80.
crossref pmid
27. Latremoliere A, Woolf CJ. Central sensitization: a generator of pain hypersensitivity by central neural plasticity. J Pain 2009;10:895–926.
crossref pmid pmc
28. Seminowicz DA, Davis KD. Cortical responses to pain in healthy individuals depends on pain catastrophizing. Pain 2006;120:297–306.
crossref pmid
TOOLS
Share :
Facebook Twitter Linked In Google+ Line it
METRICS Graph View
  • 0 Crossref
  •   Scopus
  • 683 View
  • 20 Download
Related articles in ASJ

Perioperative Factors Associated with Severe Pain in Post-Anesthesia Care Unit after Thoracolumbar Spine Surgery: A Retrospective Case-Control Study2019 June;13(3)



ABOUT
ARTICLE CATEGORY

Browse all articles >

BROWSE ARTICLES
EDITORIAL POLICY
FOR CONTRIBUTORS
Editorial Office
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine
88, Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul 05505, Korea
Tel: +82-2-3010-3530    Fax: +82-2-3010-8555    E-mail: asianspinejournal@gmail.com                
Korean Society of Spine Surgery
82, Gumi-ro 173beon-gil, Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi-do, 13620, Korea
Tel: +82-31-966-3413    Fax: +82-2-831-3414    E-mail: office@spine.or.kr                

Copyright © 2025 by Korean Society of Spine Surgery.

Developed in M2PI

Close layer
prev next