Literature DB >> 11189928

A long-term (4- to 12-year) follow-up study of surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.

M Cornefjord1, G Byröd, H Brisby, B Rydevik.   

Abstract

Limited data are available about the long-term outcome of surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis, and there is a wide variation in reported success rates. There is also a controversy regarding differences in long-term outcome between patients undergoing decompressive surgery alone and those undergoing both decompression and fusion. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical outcome and possible complications of decompressive surgery, with special reference to possible differences between patients undergoing fusion, with or without instrumentation, and those undergoing decompression alone. All 124 patients undergoing first-time surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis between 1982 and 1991 at our department were included, and their medical records were reviewed retrospectively. Ninety-six of the patients were available for follow-up and were re-examined by an independent investigator and assessed with a questionnaire after a mean follow-up period of 7.1 (range 4.0-12.2) years. Sixty-five percent of all the patients at the follow-up were subjectively satisfied. Eighty-eight percent of the patients reported constant or daily leg pain preoperatively compared to 43% at follow-up. Constant or daily low back pain was reported by 83% of the patients preoperatively compared to 45% at follow-up. Improvement in walking capacity was found in most patients, and only 4% of the patients who had a preoperatively documented maximum walking distance reported a decreased walking capacity. Twenty-four (25%) of all patients used analgesics daily at the time of follow-up, 34 patients (35%) occasionally and 38 patients (40%) never. The patients with fusions, instrumented or non-instrumented, did not differ significantly from the unfused patients regarding any of the above-mentioned parameters. The results of the study showed that most patients demonstrated a considerable improvement in walking capacity at follow-up. This improvement was significant (P < 0.001) and of clinical importance. A significant improvement regarding both low back pain and leg pain was found postoperatively compared to preoperatively (P < 0.001). There were no statistical differences, judged by all the evaluated parameters, regarding the clinical outcome between patients who were fused and those who were not. Neither were any significant differences found between instrumented fusions compared to uninstrumented fusions. In accordance with most other long-term follow-up studies, about two-thirds (65%) of the patients claimed a satisfactory result at follow-up.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11189928      PMCID: PMC3611425          DOI: 10.1007/s005860000161

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  9 in total

Review 1.  Effect of fusion following decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Lin Liang; Wei-Min Jiang; Xue-Feng Li; Heng Wang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med       Date:  2015-09-15

2.  Spinal stenosis re-operation rate in Sweden is 11% at 10 years--a national analysis of 9,664 operations.

Authors:  Karl-Ake Jansson; Gunnar Németh; F Granath; P Blomqvist
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-03-08       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  [Spinal surgery in the elderly: does age have an influence on the complication rate?].

Authors:  R Sobottke; G Csécsei; T Kaulhausen; S Delank; J Franklin; E Aghayev; T Zweig; P Eysel
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Decompressive surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: long-term results.

Authors:  Ioannis D Gelalis; Kosmas S Stafilas; Anastasios V Korompilias; Konstantinos C Zacharis; Alexandros E Beris; Theodoros A Xenakis
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2005-11-25       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Long-term results of surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Pär Slätis; Antti Malmivaara; Markku Heliövaara; Päivi Sainio; Arto Herno; Jyrki Kankare; Seppo Seitsalo; Kaj Tallroth; Veli Turunen; Paul Knekt; Heikki Hurri
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-01-15       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Five-year outcome of surgical decompression of the lumbar spine without fusion.

Authors:  Anne F Mannion; R Denzler; J Dvorak; D Grob
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-07-31       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Predictors of improvement in quality of life and pain relief in lumbar spinal stenosis relative to patient age: a study based on the Spine Tango registry.

Authors:  Rolf Sobottke; Christian Herren; Jan Siewe; Anne F Mannion; Christoph Röder; Emin Aghayev
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-07-03       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  The outcome of spinal decompression surgery 5 years on.

Authors:  N K Anjarwalla; L C Brown; A H McGregor
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-05-23       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Comparison of Effects of PELD and Fenestration in the Treatment of Geriatric Lumbar Lateral Recess Stenosis.

Authors:  Zhendong Lv; Linyu Jin; Kun Wang; Zhi Chen; Fengning Li; Yuhui Zhang; Lifeng Lao; Chun Zhou; Xinfeng Li; Hongxing Shen
Journal:  Clin Interv Aging       Date:  2019-12-16       Impact factor: 4.458

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.