Literature DB >> 11249153

Decompressive surgery for typical lumbar spinal stenosis.

K K Hansraj1, F P Cammisa, P F O'Leary, H C Crockett, C I Fras, M S Cohen, F J Dorey.   

Abstract

Between 1991 and 1992, 103 consecutive patients (average age, 65 years) underwent decompressive surgery for treatment of typical lumbar spinal stenosis. Clinical results at 1-year followup revealed that four patients had revision surgery. At 2- to 5-years followup, there were no additional revision surgeries. Two patients underwent revision surgery for a deep infection, and two underwent revision surgery for a superficial infection. Outcome results showed that 77 patients completed the questionnaire, 15 were lost to followup and 11 died. Postoperative results showed that 64 of 77 patients had no or mild pain, 72 of 77 patients stated that they were satisfied or somewhat satisfied with their overall results of surgery, and 73 of 77 were satisfied with pain relief. Younger patients had greater improvement in function and a greater reduction in severity scores. However, satisfaction was similar in both groups. Survivorship results (failure was revision surgery) showed at the end of 4 years, a patient had a 95% chance of not having revision surgery. Statistically, there was no association between outcome and cofactors such as scoliosis, spondylolisthesis, number of levels decompressed, discectomy, or smoking. Satisfaction rates for older patients were similar to patients younger than 65 years although physical function scores and severity scores were less.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11249153     DOI: 10.1097/00003086-200103000-00003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  13 in total

1.  Anterior shear strength of the porcine lumbar spine after laminectomy and partial facetectomy.

Authors:  Guido B van Solinge; Albert J van der Veen; Jaap H van Dieën; Idsart Kingma; Barend J van Royen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-06-27       Impact factor: 3.134

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

3.  Insertion loads of the X STOP interspinous process distraction system designed to treat neurogenic intermittent claudication.

Authors:  Vikram Talwar; Derek P Lindsey; Amy Fredrick; Ken Y Hsu; James F Zucherman; Scott A Yerby
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-05-31       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Patient-based outcomes for the operative treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Samo K Fokter; Scott A Yerby
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-12-21       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  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

6.  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

7.  An Anatomic Study Examining Lumbar Pars Interarticularis Distance and Spinal Canal Width in Relation to Lumbar Decompressive Surgery.

Authors:  Innocent U Njoku; Joshua Young-Ki Park; Mohammed A Munim; Amelia Clarke; Christina W Cheng
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2022-06-20

8.  A prospective randomized multi-center study for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with the X STOP interspinous implant: 1-year results.

Authors:  J F Zucherman; K Y Hsu; C A Hartjen; T F Mehalic; D A Implicito; M J Martin; D R Johnson; G A Skidmore; P P Vessa; J W Dwyer; S Puccio; J C Cauthen; R M Ozuna
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2003-12-19       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Which factors prognosticate spinal instability following lumbar laminectomy?

Authors:  Arno Bisschop; Barend J van Royen; Margriet G Mullender; Cornelis P L Paul; Idsart Kingma; Timothy U Jiya; Albert J van der Veen; Jaap H van Dieën
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-03-17       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 10.  Reoperations Following Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis.

Authors:  Shakti A Goel; Hitesh N Modi
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2018 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.251

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.