Prevalence and Risk Factors of Degenerative Spondylolisthesis and Retrolisthesis in the Thoracolumbar and Lumbar Spine - An EOS Study Using Updated Radiographic Parameters.

Study Design: Single centre, cross-sectional study.
Objectives: The objective is to report the prevalence of spondylolisthesis and retrolisthesis, analyse both conditions in terms of the affected levels and severity, as well as identify their risk factors.
Methods: A review of clinical data and radiographic images of consecutive spine patients seen in outpatient clinics over a 1-month period is performed. Images are obtained using the EOS® technology under standardised protocol, and radiographic measurements were performed by 2 independent, blinded spine surgeons. The prevalence of both conditions were shown and categorised based on the spinal level involvement and severity. Associated risk factors were identified.
Results: A total of 256 subjects (46.1% males) with 2304 discs from T9/10 to L5/S1 were studied. Their mean age was 52.2(± 18.7) years. The overall prevalence of spondylolisthesis and retrolisthesis was 25.9% and 17.1% respectively. Spondylolisthesis occurs frequently at L4/5(16.3%), and retrolisthesis at L3/4(6.8%). Majority of the patients with spondylolisthesis had a Grade I slip (84.3%), while those with retrolisthesis had a Grade I slip. The presence of spondylolisthesis was found associated with increased age ( P < .001), female gender (OR: 2.310; P = .005), predominantly sitting occupations (OR:2.421; P = .008), higher American Society of Anaesthesiology grades ( P = .001), and lower limb radiculopathy (OR: 2.175; P = .007). Patients with spondylolisthesis had larger Pelvic Incidence ( P < .001), Pelvic Tilt ( P < .001) and Knee alignment angle ( P = .011), but smaller Thoracolumbar junctional angle ( P = .008), Spinocoxa angle ( P = .007). Retrolisthesis was associated with a larger Thoracolumbar junctional angle ( P =.039).
Conclusion: This is the first study that details the prevalence of spondylolisthesis and retrolisthesis simultaneously, using the EOS technology and updated sagittal radiographic parameters. It allows better understanding of both conditions, their mutual relationship, and associated clinical and radiographic risk factors.
Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.