What is the clinical significance of a 7 mm retrolisthesis (retrograde displacement of the vertebral body) at the L5/S1 (lumbar 5/sacral 1) level?

Clinical Significance of 7 mm Retrolisthesis at L5/S1

A 7 mm retrolisthesis at L5/S1 represents a clinically significant finding that warrants careful evaluation, though its impact depends heavily on associated pathology and symptoms rather than the displacement measurement alone.

Understanding the Measurement and Context

• Retrolisthesis of 7 mm at L5/S1 represents approximately 20-25% posterior displacement (assuming average L5 vertebral body width of 30-35 mm), which exceeds the 8% threshold used in research to define clinically relevant retrolisthesis 1
• The prevalence of retrolisthesis at L5/S1 in patients with disc herniation is approximately 23%, making it a relatively common finding in symptomatic populations 1
• Retrolisthesis alone does not predict baseline pain severity or functional impairment when disc herniation is present, as symptoms from the herniation typically overshadow any contribution from the retrolisthesis 1

Clinical Implications for Symptomatic Patients

Impact on Surgical Outcomes

• Patients with retrolisthesis who undergo L5/S1 discectomy demonstrate significantly worse outcomes for bodily pain and physical function over 4 years compared to those without retrolisthesis, though disability indices (ODI) and sciatica bothersomeness scores show no significant differences 2
• The presence of retrolisthesis does not increase operative time, blood loss, length of stay, complication rates, or risk of recurrent disc herniation after discectomy 2
• The contribution of pain or dysfunction from retrolisthesis may become more evident after removal of disc herniation, suggesting the displacement itself has clinical relevance once the dominant pain generator is addressed 2

Association with Degenerative Changes

• Retrolisthesis at L5/S1 shows no increased association with degenerative disc disease, posterior degenerative changes (facet arthropathy, ligamentum flavum hypertrophy), or vertebral endplate changes (Modic changes) 1
• Patients with retrolisthesis are more likely to be receiving workers' compensation, though this may reflect injury mechanisms rather than severity 1
• Age, smoking status, and insurance status correlate more strongly with degenerative changes than with retrolisthesis itself 1

Surgical Considerations and Instability Assessment

When Fusion May Be Indicated

• Retrolisthesis of 7 mm suggests potential instability, particularly if associated with spondylolisthesis, extensive decompression requirements, or documented dynamic instability on flexion-extension films 3
• Fusion is specifically recommended when extensive decompression might create iatrogenic instability or when documented instability exists 3
• For isolated retrolisthesis without stenosis, spondylolisthesis, or instability, decompression alone may be sufficient if surgical intervention is required 3, 4

Traumatic Retrolisthesis Distinction

• Traumatic retrolisthesis represents a completely different clinical entity requiring urgent surgical decompression and stabilization, as these injuries are highly unstable and may cause acute nerve root injury 5, 6
• Degenerative retrolisthesis (as in most L5/S1 cases) follows a chronic course and does not require the same urgent intervention as traumatic cases 5

Conservative Management Approach

Initial Treatment Strategy

• Comprehensive conservative management for at least 6 weeks to 3 months is required before considering surgical intervention, including formal physical therapy, anti-inflammatory medications, and potentially epidural steroid injections 3, 4
• The presence of retrolisthesis alone does not alter conservative management protocols unless associated with progressive neurological deficits or cauda equina syndrome 4

Imaging and Diagnostic Workup

• MRI is the mainstay for evaluating retrolisthesis and associated pathology, providing superior definition of disc degeneration, neural compression, and soft tissue changes 7
• Flexion-extension radiographs should be obtained to assess for dynamic instability if fusion is being considered 3
• Discography is not recommended as a stand-alone test for treatment decisions, as fusion based on discography alone is not reliably associated with clinical success 7

Critical Pitfalls to Avoid

• Do not assume retrolisthesis magnitude directly correlates with symptom severity—associated pathology (disc herniation, stenosis, nerve compression) typically drives clinical presentation 1
• Avoid premature surgical intervention without adequate conservative management trial, as Level II evidence supports intensive rehabilitation programs showing equivalent outcomes to fusion for chronic low back pain without stenosis or instability 3
• Do not routinely add fusion to decompression procedures for isolated disc herniation with retrolisthesis—there is no convincing evidence to support routine fusion at primary disc excision without significant instability 3
• Recognize that postoperative outcomes may be somewhat worse in patients with retrolisthesis, which should factor into preoperative counseling and surgical decision-making 2

Summary of Clinical Significance

The 7 mm retrolisthesis at L5/S1 is radiographically significant but clinically meaningful only in the context of associated pathology, symptoms, and response to conservative treatment. It does not independently predict baseline pain or function but may influence postoperative outcomes after discectomy. Surgical decision-making should focus on documented instability, stenosis requiring decompression, or failure of comprehensive conservative management rather than the retrolisthesis measurement alone 3, 1, 2.