Literature DB >> 16302638

Lumbar spinous process-splitting laminectomy for lumbar canal stenosis. Technical note.

Kota Watanabe1, Toshihiko Hosoya, Tateru Shiraishi, Morio Matsumoto, Kazuhiro Chiba, Yoshiaki Toyama.   

Abstract

In conventional laminectomy for lumbar canal stenosis (LCS), intraoperative damage of posterior supporting structures can lead to irreversible atrophy of paraspinal muscles. In 2001, the authors developed a new procedure for lumbar laminectomy, the lumbar spinous process-splitting laminectomy (LSPSL). In this new procedure, the spinous process is split longitudinally in the middle and then divided at its base from the posterior arch, leaving the bilateral paraspinal muscles attached to the lateral aspects. Ample working space for laminectomy is obtained by retracting the split spinous process laterally together with its attached paraspinal muscles. After successfully decompressing nerve tissues, each half of the split spinous process is reapproximated using a strong suture. Thus, the supra- and interspinous ligaments are preserved, as is the spinous process, and damage to the paraspinal muscles is minimal. Eighteen patients with LCS underwent surgery in which this new technique was used. Twenty patients in whom conventional laminectomy was undertaken were chosen as controls. At 2 years, the clinical outcomes (as determined using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association [JOA] scores and recovery rate) and the rate of measured magnetic resonance imaging-documented paravertebral muscle atrophy were evaluated and compared between the two groups. The mean JOA score recovery rates were 67.6 and 59.2%, respectively, for patients treated with LSPSL and conventional laminectomy; the mean rates of paravertebral muscle atrophy were 5.3 and 23.9%, respectively (p = 0.0005). Preservation of posterior supporting structures and satisfactory recovery rate after 2 years indicated that this technique can be a useful alternative to conventional decompression surgery for lumbar canal stenosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16302638     DOI: 10.3171/spi.2005.3.5.0405

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine        ISSN: 1547-5646


  38 in total

1.  [Dynamic posterior stabilization with the cosmic system].

Authors:  Archibald von Strempel
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 1.154

2.  Lumbar spinous process split decompression.

Authors:  Ajoy Prasad Shetty; Rishi Mugesh Kanna; Ashwin Avadhani; S Rajasekaran
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Clinical and Radiological Outcomes after Microscopic Bilateral Decompression via a Unilateral Approach for Degenerative Lumbar Disease: Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up.

Authors:  Sho Dohzono; Hiromitsu Toyoda; Akira Matsumura; Hidetomi Terai; Akinobu Suzuki; Hiroaki Nakamura
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2017-04-12

Review 4.  Minimally invasive spine surgery: systematic review.

Authors:  Péter Banczerowski; Gábor Czigléczki; Zoltán Papp; Róbert Veres; Harry Zvi Rappaport; János Vajda
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2014-09-10       Impact factor: 3.042

5.  Outcomes after decompression surgery without fusion for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and substantial low back pain.

Authors:  Soichiro Masuda; Yusuke Kanba; Jun Kawai; Noboru Ikeda
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-08-31       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Comparative study of two spinous process (SP) osteotomy techniques for posterior decompression surgery in lumbar spinal stenosis: SP base versus splitting osteotomy.

Authors:  Gun Woo Lee; Myun-Whan Ahn
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-02-21       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Clinical significance of cerebrospinal fluid nitric oxide concentrations in degenerative cervical and lumbar diseases.

Authors:  Hiroshi Denda; Shinji Kimura; Akiyoshi Yamazaki; Noboru Hosaka; Yuichi Takano; Kenji Imura; Yoichi Yajiri; Naoto Endo
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-12-29       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Interspinous endoscopic lumbar decompression: technical note.

Authors:  Paul Houle; Albert E Telfeian; Ralf Wagner; Junseok Bae
Journal:  AME Case Rep       Date:  2019-10-16

9.  Spinous process-splitting open pedicle screw fusion provides favorable results in patients with low back discomfort and pain compared to conventional open pedicle screw fixation over 1 year after surgery.

Authors:  Eiji Mori; Seiji Okada; Takayoshi Ueta; Yugue Itaru; Takeshi Maeda; Osamu Kawano; Keiichiro Shiba
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-01-12       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Spinous Process splitting Laminectomy: Clinical outcome and Radiological analysis of extent of decompression.

Authors:  Seungcheol Lee; Umesh Srikantha
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2015-06-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.