Literature DB >> 16370302

Outcome after less-invasive decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized comparison of unilateral laminotomy, bilateral laminotomy, and laminectomy.

Claudius Thomé1, Dimitris Zevgaridis, Olaf Leheta, Hansjörg Bäzner, Christiane Pöckler-Schöniger, Johannes Wöhrle, Peter Schmiedek.   

Abstract

OBJECT: Recently, limited decompression procedures have been proposed in the treatment of lumbar stenosis. The authors undertook a prospective study to compare the safety and outcome of unilateral and bilateral laminotomy with laminectomy.
METHODS: One hundred twenty consecutive patients with 207 levels of lumbar stenosis without herniated discs or instability were randomized to three treatment groups (bilateral laminotomy [Group 1], unilateral laminotomy [Group 2], and laminectomy [Group 3]). Perioperative parameters and complications were documented. Symptoms and scores, such as visual analog scale (VAS), Roland-Morris Scale, Short Form-36 (SF-36), and patient satisfaction were assessed preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Adequate decompression was achieved in all patients. The overall complication rate was lowest in patients who had undergone bilateral laminotomy (Group 1). The minimum follow up of 12 months was obtained in 94% of patients. Residual pain was lowest in Group 1 (VAS score 2.3 +/- 2.4 and 4 +/- 1 in Group 3; p < 0.05 and 3.6 +/- 2.7 in Group 2; p < 0.05). The Roland-Morris Scale score improved from 17 +/- 4.3 before surgery to 8.1 +/- 7, 8.5 +/- 7.3, and 10.9 +/- 7.5 (Groups 1-3, respectively; p < 0.001 compared with preoperative) corresponding to a dramatic increase in walking distance. Examination of SF-36 scores demonstrated marked improvement, most pronounced in Group 1. The number of repeated operations did not differ among groups. Patient satisfaction was significantly superior in Group 1, with 3, 27, and 26% of patients unsatisfied (in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively; p < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral and unilateral laminotomy allowed adequate and safe decompression of lumbar stenosis, resulted in a highly significant reduction of symptoms and disability, and improved health-related quality of life. Outcome after unilateral laminotomy was comparable with that after laminectomy. In most outcome parameters, bilateral laminotomy was associated with a significant benefit and thus constitutes a promising treatment alternative.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16370302     DOI: 10.3171/spi.2005.3.2.0129

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


  99 in total

1.  Dural lesions in decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: incidence, risk factors and effect on outcome.

Authors:  Fredrik Strömqvist; Bo Jönsson; Björn Strömqvist
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-12-07       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Cost-effectiveness of three treatment strategies for lumbar spinal stenosis: Conservative care, laminectomy, and the Superion interspinous spacer.

Authors:  Scott L Parker; Louise H Anderson; Teresa Nelson; Vikas V Patel
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2015-07-09

3.  [Intraoperative three-dimensional imaging to monitor selective decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis].

Authors:  U M Mauer; U Kunz
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Midterm outcome after unilateral approach for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: 5-year prospective study.

Authors:  Halit Cavuşoğlu; Ramazan Alper Kaya; Osman Nuri Türkmenoglu; Cengiz Tuncer; Ibrahim Colak; Yunus Aydin
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-08-22       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Risk Factors for Reoperation in Patients Treated Surgically for Lumbar Stenosis: A Subanalysis of the 8-year Data From the SPORT Trial.

Authors:  Michael C Gerling; Dante Leven; Peter G Passias; Virginie Lafage; Kristina Bianco; Alexandra Lee; Jon D Lurie; Tor D Tosteson; Wenyan Zhao; Kevin F Spratt; Kristen Radcliff; Thomas J Errico
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: current strategies in diagnosis and treatment.

Authors:  Claudius Thomé; Wolfgang Börm; Frerk Meyer
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2008-05-16       Impact factor: 5.594

7.  Unilateral tubular approach for bilateral laminotomy: effect on ipsilateral and contralateral buttock and leg pain.

Authors:  Marjan Alimi; Christoph P Hofstetter; Jose M Torres-Campa; Rodrigo Navarro-Ramirez; Guang-Ting Cong; Innocent Njoku; Roger Härtl
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Clinical outcomes of microendoscopic decompressive laminotomy for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Jwo-Luen Pao; Wein-Chin Chen; Po-Quang Chen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-02-24       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Treatment results for lumbar epidural lipomatosis: Does fat matter?

Authors:  Simon Heinrich Bayerl; Malte Dinkelbach; Petra Heiden; Vincent Prinz; Tobias Finger; Peter Vajkoczy
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 10.  The contribution of RCTs to quality management and their feasibility in practice.

Authors:  Jens Ivar Brox
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-05-01       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.