Asian Spine J Search

CLOSE


Asian Spine J > Volume 19(5); 2025 > Article
Teruya, Okuwaki, Gamada, Funayama, and Tatsumura: Preoperative pars defect length predicts bone union after direct repair for lumbar spondylolysis using the modified smiley face rod technique: a retrospective cohort study

Abstract

Study Design

A retrospective cohort study.

Purpose

To determine whether the preoperative pars defect length predicts bone union following the modified smiley face rod (mSFR) technique for lumbar spondylolysis and to identify a threshold for clinical decision-making.

Overview of Literature

Lumbar spondylolysis is a common cause of low back pain in young athletes, often leading to pseudarthrosis that requires surgical intervention. Various techniques, including mSFR, address pseudarthrosis; however, the effect of preoperative pars defect length on bone union remains unclear.

Methods

This study analyzed 75 pars defects in 38 patients treated with mSFR between 2014 and 2022. Pre- and postoperative pars defect lengths were measured using computed tomography (CT). Patients were categorized into bone union and nonunion groups based on CT findings up to 24 months postoperatively. Group comparisons of defect lengths were performed using the Mann-Whitney U test. Logistic regression was used to examine the association between preoperative defect length and nonunion. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to identify the optimal threshold for preoperative defect length.

Results

Bone union was achieved in 65 of 75 defects (87%). The preoperative pars defect length was significantly shorter in the bone union group than in the nonunion group (3.0 mm vs. 5.6 mm, p<0.001). A strong correlation was observed between pre- and postoperative pars defect lengths (Spearman’s rho=0.76). Logistic regression analysis revealed a significant association between a longer preoperative defect and nonunion (odds ratio, 1.89; 95% confidence interval, 1.29–2.72; p=0.001). ROC analysis revealed a cut-off value of 3.8 mm (sensitivity, 89%; specificity, 75%; area under the curve=0.86).

Conclusions

Bone union following the mSFR technique may be influenced by the pars defect length, with larger preoperative defects potentially hindering bone union. The technique is most effective when the preoperative defect length is ≤3.8 mm.

GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT

Introduction

Lumbar spondylolysis is a stress fracture that primarily affects the pars interarticularis in growing athletes due to repetitive mechanical stress on the lumbar spine [1]. Its prevalence is estimated at 3%–7% in the general pediatric population, increasing to 13%–47% in pediatric patients presenting with low back pain [2,3]. Notably, nearly half of all cases of low back pain lasting more than 2 weeks in athletes under 18 years of age are attributed to lumbar spondylolysis [4].
While conservative management achieves bone union rates of 55.8%–94.0% [58], some patients develop pseudarthrosis, for which surgical treatment is recommended when persistent pain interferes with daily life or sports activities [9].
The smiley face rod (SFR) technique is a direct repair method for lumbar spondylolysis that preserves the mobile segment and is associated with high rates of bone union [10]. The modified SFR (mSFR) technique, introduced by Tatsumura et al. [11], involves positioning the screws more ventrally to effectively compress the pars defect. Preoperative atrophy and sclerotic pars defects are associated with unfavorable postoperative bone union outcomes [1214]. In patients with larger preoperative pars defects, applying effective compression and bone grafting can be challenging, potentially leading to poorer surgical outcomes. However, evidence regarding how the size of the pars defect influences postoperative bone union remains limited, and detailed measurements are unclear.
In this study, we investigated whether the length of the pars defect is a critical factor for postoperative bone union. Using the mSFR technique, which applies direct compression to the pars defect, we measured the pars defect length pre- and postoperatively. By analyzing these measurements, we aimed to clarify the relationship between changes in the pars defect length and bone union rates, as well as to identify the factors contributing to successful surgical outcomes, such as improved bone healing and pain reduction.

Materials and Methods

Study design

This single center, retrospective, longitudinal study included 48 consecutive patients who underwent mSFR for the surgical repair of lumbar spondylolysis pseudarthrosis, which is recognized as the terminal stage of lumbar spondylolysis, between October 2014 and December 2022.

Ethical statement

We conducted this study in compliance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Mito Kyodo General Hospital (approval number: 22–11), and written informed consent was obtained from all participants and their legal guardians.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Patients were eligible if they experienced persistent low back pain with or without neurological symptoms in the lower limbs. Lumbar spondylolysis was diagnosed using radiography, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Pseudarthrosis was diagnosed based on the absence of bone marrow edema on MRI in combination with a bone defect on CT. Patients who experienced persistent pain despite at least 3 months of conservative treatment, including medication and physical therapy, and those unable to return to competitive sports were included in the study. Patients were excluded if they were unable to complete the follow-up, presented with recurrence, or had a history of spinal surgery.

Collected data

Patient background data at admission included age, sex, presence or absence of spina bifida occulta, intervertebral disc degeneration at the lower intervertebral level in lumbar spondylolysis (Pfirrmann classification [15]), spondylolisthesis severity (Meyerding grade [16]), and duration of conservative treatment. Postoperative clinical outcomes included achievement of bone union or nonunion, operation time, length of hospital stay, and time of radiological bone union evaluation. Imaging findings included pre-, and postoperative pars defect length, and the difference in pars defect length pre- and postoperatively.
In this study, “bone union” was defined as the presence of continuity in at least two of the three planes (sagittal, coronal, and axial) on postoperative CT. Nonunion was defined as the absence of continuity at 24 months. If the bone union was confirmed within 24 months, further CT scans were not performed.
For each par defect, pre- and postoperative lengths of the pars defect, as well as the difference between them (Δpars defect length), were evaluated. The measurements were conducted according to a previous study [14]. CT scans were reconstructed to identify the central position of the pars interarticularis in the axial plane. The length of the pars defect was measured on sagittal images passing through this position (Fig. 1). Postoperative measurements were performed using the same method. All measurements were performed independently by two orthopedic surgeons.

Surgical technique and postoperative rehabilitation

The mSFR technique was performed using the bilateral Wiltse approach with 3–4 cm lateral incisions [11]. Pedicle screws were placed at the lateral edge of the pedicle, and a U-shaped rod was inserted subcutaneously through the interspinous ligament to preserve the supraspinous ligament. Autologous iliac crest bone was then used for additional bone grafting in the space of the decorticated pars cleft (Fig. 2). All surgeries were performed by a single surgeon (M.T.), and there were no significant differences in surgical techniques between the groups. Rehabilitation began on the second postoperative day with standing and walking training using semi-rigid braces. Passive and active lower limb exercises were initiated immediately, and isometric trunk exercises and hamstring stretching were introduced after one month. Lower limb strengthening exercises, including static movements and electrical stimulation, were incorporated later. Spinal flexion and extension were avoided, and braces were worn for three months. Activities such as jogging and axial rotation were gradually introduced thereafter.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS ver. 29.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Continuous variables are expressed as the mean±standard deviation. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for continuous variables, and the chi-square test was used for categorical variables. Spearman’s correlation was used to assess the relationship between pre- and postoperative pars defect length. Univariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the preoperative factors that were significantly associated with bone union. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and area under the curve (AUC) values were used to evaluate the predictive value of pars defect length for bone union. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.

Results

Patient characteristics

Of the 48 patients, 38 were retained for the final analysis after excluding seven who were lost to follow-up, one with recurrence, and two with previous spinal surgeries (Fig. 3). The mean age of the patients was 17.8±6.4 years, consisting of 26 males and 12 females. Among them, 37 had bilateral defects, and one had a unilateral defect, resulting in a total of 75 defects. The majority of the defects were located at L5, accounting for 73 defects.

Postoperative clinical outcomes

Bone union rates by the patient

Among the 38 patients, 30 achieved bone union on all evaluated sides, and eight had incomplete union on one or both sides, resulting in a per-patient bone union rate of 78.9%. For patients with unilateral defects, only the affected side was assessed, those with bilateral defects were evaluated for each side separately. No significant differences in background characteristics, such as age or sex, were observed between patients who achieved bone union and those who did not (Table 1).

Bone union rates by pars defect

When evaluated according to individual pars defects, 65 defects achieved bone union, whereas ten did not, yielding a per-defect bone union rate of 86.7%. Each defect was categorized as either “defects with bone union,” (indicating successful union), or “defects without bone union,” (indicating no observed union).

Comparison and correlation between pre- and postoperative pars defect lengths

The mean preoperative pars defect length for all defects was 3.4±1.9 mm, while the mean postoperative length was 1.5±0.9 mm. Defects that achieved bone union had significantly smaller preoperative lengths compared to those that did not (3.0±1.6 mm vs. 5.6±2.2 mm, p=0.0003). Similarly, the mean postoperative pars defect length was significantly smaller in defects with bone union than in those without (1.4±0.8 mm vs. 2.5±0.9 mm, p=0.0002) (Table 2).
The change in pars defect length (Δ) was also significantly smaller in defects with bone union than in those without (1.6±1.1 mm vs. 3.1±1.5 mm, p=0.003). A strong positive correlation (Spearman’s rho=0.76) was observed between the preoperative and postoperative pars defect lengths (Fig. 4).

Relationship between pars defect length and bone union

Among the preoperative factors, the length of the preoperative pars defect was the only variable significantly associated with bone union status. Logistic regression analysis was conducted using preoperative pars defect length as the explanatory variable and bone union status as the dependent variable (Table 3). The analysis revealed that a longer preoperative pars defect length was significantly associated with nonunion (odds ratio, 1.89; 95% confidence interval, 1.29–2.72; p=0.001). ROC analysis revealed that the preoperative pars defect length was a predictive factor for bone union, with an AUC of 0.86 (Fig. 5). The optimal cut-off value, identified using Youden’s J statistic, was 3.8 mm, yielding a sensitivity of 89% and specificity of 75%.

Discussion

Our results indicated that pre- and postoperative pars defect lengths were significantly shorter in defects that achieved bone union than in those that did not. Additionally, a strong positive correlation (Spearman’s rho=0.76) was observed between the preoperative and postoperative pars defect lengths. Logistic regression analysis confirmed that a longer preoperative pars defect length was significantly associated with nonunion (odds ratio, 1.89). Furthermore, ROC analysis identified a preoperative pars defect length of 3.8 mm as the optimal threshold for predicting bone union.
Since Buck [17] introduced the internal fixation technique in 1970, various methods have been developed for managing lumbar spondylolysis. The Scott technique is limited by low bone union rates [18], whereas the pedicle screw and lamina hook technique offers strong compression and high union rates but requires extensive muscle dissection and is technically demanding [1921]. The SFR technique, introduced in 1999 and refined with a U-shaped rod in 2006 [10,2224], offers effective compression with minimal invasiveness. Our mSFR technique further enhances compression by optimizing rod placement using the Weinstein approach [11], achieving comparable or superior outcomes with reduced invasiveness.
Bone union rates for surgical treatment vary depending on the technique used. Previous studies have reported union rates of 84.2%–90.2% for the pedicle screw and lamina hook technique [14,20,25], whereas our study using the mSFR technique achieved a rate of 86.7%. These findings suggest that the mSFR technique yields outcomes comparable to those of other advanced surgical methods. Importantly, unlike previous studies, our study provides a specific preoperative threshold for the pars defect length (3.8 mm), offering a quantitative parameter for surgical decision-making.
Our findings support the hypothesis that a shorter pars defects are associated with better bone union outcomes. Although early surgical intervention may enhance results, further studies are needed to determine its universal applicability. Surgical timing should also consider individual patient factors and the natural progression of the defect.
The strength of our study lies in its quantitative approach, which identified a specific threshold for the pars defect length that could aid preoperative planning. Through detailed imaging assessments, we provided a framework for identifying patients at a higher risk of nonunion and tailoring surgical strategies accordingly. For patients with longer pars defects, alternative methods, such as iliac bone grafting in larger blocks may be considered to improve outcomes.
This study had some limitations. First, the small sample size and the fact that it was conducted at a single center may affect the generalizability of the findings. However, this study represents a meaningful contribution to the literature on the SFR technique by providing a detailed analysis of the factors that influence postoperative bone union. Second, the method used to measure the pars defect length has not been fully validated to confirm whether it accurately reflects the overall defect morphology. Nonetheless, we adhered to the method established in a previous study to ensure consistency and comparability [14]. Finally, this study did not analyze multiple preoperative CT scans, as minimizing radiation exposure is a standard clinical consideration. Consequently, it was impossible to evaluate changes in the pars defect length over time in patients with pseudarthrosis or to determine whether the cut-off value of 3.8 mm reliably informs surgical timing.

Conclusions

In the treatment of lumbar spondylolysis using the mSFR technique, the bone union may be influenced by the preoperative and postoperative pars defect lengths. Larger preoperative pars defects may limit the effectiveness of intraoperative compression, potentially resulting in residual defects postoperatively, which could adversely affect bone union. Although the postoperative pars defect length affects bone union, it can be reasonably predicted based on the preoperative length. The mSFR technique appears to be most effective when the preoperative pars defect length is ≤3.8 mm.

Key Points

  • The modified smiley face rod (mSFR) technique was effective in treating lumbar spondylolysis.

  • Preoperative pars defect length may influence bone union after mSFR surgery.

  • A preoperative pars defect length of 3.8 mm was identified as the threshold for predicting bone union.

  • Longer preoperative pars defects are associated with a higher risk of nonunion.

Notes

Conflict of Interest

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

Author Contributions

Conception and design: ST. Data acquisition: ST, MT, HG, SO. Analysis of data: ST, SO. Drafting of the manuscript: ST. Critical revision: SO, HG, MT, TF. Obtaining funding: none. Administrative support: MT. Supervision: SO. Final approval of the manuscript: all authors.

Fig. 1
Computed tomography (CT) images illustrating the vertebral morphology and measurement area. (A) Axial CT image shows the vertebral structure, with the solid vertical line indicating the slice plane passing through the center of the pars defect. (B) Sagittal CT image corresponding to the axial slice in (A), with the bidirectional arrow marking the defect in the pars interarticularis. This specific defect was the focus of measurements in this study.
asj-2025-0090f1.jpg
Fig. 2
The modified smiley face rod technique using a bent rod and pedicle screws. Frontal plane (A) and lateral plane (B).
asj-2025-0090f2.jpg
Fig. 3
Flowchart of the patient selection process. The initial cohort consisted of 48 patients. Exclusion criteria included loss to follow-up (n=7), recurrence (n=1), and prior spinal surgeries (n=2). After applying these criteria, 38 patients were included in the study. mSFR, modified smiley face rod.
asj-2025-0090f3.jpg
Fig. 4
Correlation between the preoperative and postoperative pars defect length. The scatter plot shows the correlation between preoperative pars defect length (x-axis) and postoperative pars defect length (y-axis). Circles represent the union group, and stars indicate the non-union group. The dashed line represents linear regression, highlighting a positive trend where larger preoperative defects are associated with larger postoperative defects.
asj-2025-0090f4.jpg
Fig. 5
Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for preoperative pars defect length. The ROC curve illustrates the diagnostic performance of the preoperative pars defect length for predicting outcomes. The solid line represents the ROC curve, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.86. The marked point indicates the optimal cutoff, corresponding to a preoperative pars defect length of 3.8 mm.
asj-2025-0090f5.jpg
asj-2025-0090f6.jpg
Table 1
Comparison of patient characteristics and clinical data between the complete and incomplete union groups
Characteristic Complete union (n=30) Incomplete union (n=8) p-value
Age (yr) 17.9±6.8 17.9±4.3 0.311
Sex (male) 21 (70) 6 (75) 1.0
Spina bifida occulta 12 (40) 2 (25) 1.0
Pfirrman classification 0.745
 1 10 (33) 2 (25)
 2 7 (23) 1 (13)
 3 9 (30) 4 (50)
 4 4 (13) 1 (13)
Meyerding grade (%) 0.872
 0 22 (73) 5 (63)
 1 8 (27) 3 (38)
Duration of conservative treatment (mo) 10.2±7.6 17.6±13.3 0.288
Operative time (min) 171.4±29.6 184.5±23.8 0.179
Length of hospital stay (day) 8.9±1.5 8.4±1.7 0.444

Values are presented as mean±standard deviation or number (%). Patients classified in the “Complete union” group achieved bone union on both sides for bilateral defects, while those in the “Incomplete union” group had incomplete bone union on one or both sides for bilateral defects.

Table 2
Comparison of pars defect length measurements between defects with and without bone union
Variable Defects with bone union (n=65) Defects without bone union (n=10) p-value
Level 1.0
 L4 2 0
 L5 63 10
Preoperative defect length (mm) 3.0±1.6 5.6±2.2 0.0003*
Postoperative defect length (mm) 1.4±0.8 2.5±0.9 0.0002*
Pre–post difference (mm) 1.6±1.1 3.1±1.5 0.03*

Values are presented as number or mean±standard deviation.

* p<0.05 (Statistically significant).

Table 3
Logistic regression analysis of the factors affecting non-union
Variable Odds ratio (95% CI) p-value
Preoperative pars defect length 1.89 (1.29–2.72) 0.001*

CI, confidence interval.

* p<0.05 (Statistically significant).

References

1. Sairyo K, Goel VK, Masuda A, et al. Biomechanical rationale of endoscopic decompression for lumbar spondylolysis as an effective minimally invasive procedure: a study based on the finite element analysis. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 2005;48:119–22.
crossref pmid
2. Crawford CH 3rd, Ledonio CG, Bess RS, et al. Current evidence regarding the etiology, prevalence, natural history, and prognosis of pediatric lumbar spondylolysis: a report from the Scoliosis Research Society Evidence-Based Medicine Committee. Spine Deform 2015;3:12–29.
crossref pmid
3. Berger RG, Doyle SM. Spondylolysis 2019 update. Curr Opin Pediatr 2019;31:61–8.
crossref pmid
4. Nitta A, Sakai T, Goda Y, et al. Prevalence of symptomatic lumbar spondylolysis in pediatric patients. Orthopedics 2016;39:e434–7.
crossref pmid
5. Sairyo K, Sakai T, Yasui N. Conservative treatment of lumbar spondylolysis in childhood and adolescence: the radiological signs which predict healing. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009;91:206–9.
pmid
6. Sakai T, Tezuka F, Yamashita K, et al. Conservative treatment for bony healing in pediatric lumbar spondylolysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2017;42:E716–20.
crossref pmid
7. Tatsumura M, Gamada H, Okuwaki S, et al. Union evaluation of lumbar spondylolysis using MRI and CT in adolescents treated conservatively. J Orthop Sci 2022;27:317–22.
crossref pmid
8. Gamada H, Tatsumura M, Okuwaki S, Koda M, Yamazaki M. Conservative treatment for lumbar spondylolysis in children of elementary school age. J Clin Neurosci 2021;92:197–202.
crossref pmid
9. Taniguchi Y, Oshima Y, Tanaka S. Lumbar spondylolysis: future perspectives. JMA J 2024;7:541–2.
crossref pmid pmc
10. Gillet P, Petit M. Direct repair of spondylolysis without spondylolisthesis, using a rod-screw construct and bone grafting of the pars defect. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1999;24:1252–6.
crossref pmid
11. Tatsumura M, Okuwaki S, Gamada H, et al. A novel technique for pars defect direct repair with a modified smiley face rod for spondylolysis and isthmic spondylolisthesis. Spine Surg Relat Res 2023;7:396–401.
crossref pmid pmc
12. Fujii K, Katoh S, Sairyo K, Ikata T, Yasui N. Union of defects in the pars interarticularis of the lumbar spine in children and adolescents: the radiological outcome after conservative treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2004;86:225–31.
pmid
13. Okuwaki S, Tatsumura M, Gamada H, et al. Association of pars defect type with clinical outcome after smiley face rod methods for terminal-stage spondylolysis. Spine Surg Relat Res 2023;8:58–65.
crossref pmid pmc
14. Guo X, Li Z, Guo Z, Li W. Factors associated with non-fusion after direct pars repair of lumbar spondylolysis with pedicle screw and lamina hook: a clinical and CT-assessed study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2024;25:152.
crossref pmid pmc pdf
15. Pfirrmann CW, Metzdorf A, Zanetti M, Hodler J, Boos N. Magnetic resonance classification of lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2001;26:1873–8.
crossref pmid
16. Koslosky E, Gendelberg D. Classification in brief: the Meyerding classification system of spondylolisthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2020;478:1125–30.
crossref pmid pmc
17. Buck JE. Direct repair of the defect in spondylolisthesis: preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1970;52:432–7.
pmid
18. Nicol RO, Scott JH. Lytic spondylolysis: repair by wiring. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1986;11:1027–30.
pmid
19. Tokuhashi Y, Matsuzaki H. Repair of defects in spondylolysis by segmental pedicular screw hook fixation: a preliminary report. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1996;21:2041–5.
pmid
20. Mohammed N, Patra DP, Narayan V, et al. A comparison of the techniques of direct pars interarticularis repairs for spondylolysis and low-grade spondylolisthesis: a meta-analysis. Neurosurg Focus 2018;44:E10.
crossref pmid
21. Kakiuchi M. Repair of the defect in spondylolysis: durable fixation with pedicle screws and laminar hooks. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1997;79:818–25.
crossref pmid
22. Yamashita K, Higashino K, Sakai T, et al. The reduction and direct repair of isthmic spondylolisthesis using the smiley face rod method in adolescent athlete: technical note. J Med Invest 2017;64:168–72.
crossref pmid
23. Voisin MR, Witiw CD, Deorajh R, et al. Multilevel spondylolysis repair using the “Smiley Face” technique with 3-dimensional intraoperative spinal navigation. World Neurosurg 2018;109:e609–14.
crossref pmid
24. Ulibarri JA, Anderson PA, Escarcega T, Mann D, Noonan KJ. Biomechanical and clinical evaluation of a novel technique for surgical repair of spondylolysis in adolescents. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006;31:2067–72.
crossref pmid
25. Zayan M, Hussien MA, El Zahlawy H. Pars interarticularis repair using pedicle screws and laminar hooks fixation technique in patients with symptomatic lumbar spondylolysis. SICOT J 2022;8:13.
crossref pmid pmc
TOOLS
Share :
Facebook Twitter Linked In Google+ Line it
METRICS Graph View
  • 0 Crossref
  •   Scopus
  • 1,567 View
  • 55 Download
Related articles in ASJ


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