Literature DB >> 1807528

Lumbar spinal stenosis: results of surgical treatment.

L D Herron1, C Mangelsdorf.   

Abstract

One hundred forty patients with surgically treated lumbar stenosis were evaluated. There were 70 men and 70 women with an average age of 63 years. The average duration of preoperative leg pain and/or claudication symptoms was 16 months. The average follow-up time was 42 months (range, 12-116 months). Average leg pain improvement was 82%, and average back pain improvement was 71%. Thirteen patients (9%) had no leg improvement, 15 (11%) between 25-74% improvement, and 112 (80%), 75% or greater improvement. Ninety-four patients (67%) had 75% or greater back pain improvement, 29 patients (21%) between 25-74% back pain improvement, and 17 patients (12%) no back pain improvement. Factors significantly correlated with poorer outcome included female sex, the presence of compensation or litigation factors, no relief of symptoms from prior surgical procedures, a diagnostic nerve root block preoperatively, and an objective postoperative sensory deficit.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1807528

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Spinal Disord        ISSN: 0895-0385


  18 in total

Review 1.  The conservative surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly.

Authors:  Robert Gunzburg; Marek Szpalski
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2003-09-05       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Bilateral decompression using a unilateral pedicle construct for lumbar stenosis.

Authors:  Lu Mao; Jie Zhao; Ke-Rong Dai; Li Hua; Xiao-Jiang Sun
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-12-12       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  A new grading system of lumbar central canal stenosis on MRI: an easy and reliable method.

Authors:  Guen Young Lee; Young Lee Guen; Joon Woo Lee; Woo Lee Joon; Hee Seok Choi; Seok Choi Hee; Kyoung-Jin Oh; Oh Kyoung-Jin; Heung Sik Kang; Sik Kang Heung
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2011-02-01       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  The effect of duration of symptoms on standard outcome measures in the surgical treatment of spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Leslie C L Ng; Suhayl Tafazal; Philip Sell
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2006-02-22       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  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

6.  Decompression with or without concomitant fusion in lumbar stenosis due to degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review.

Authors:  M L Dijkerman; G M Overdevest; W A Moojen; C L A Vleggeert-Lankamp
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-02-05       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Calcitonin treatment in lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, cross-over study with one-year follow-up.

Authors:  A Eskola; T Pohjolainen; H Alaranta; J Soini; K Tallroth; P Slätis
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 4.333

8.  Comparison of surgical procedures for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a meta-analysis of the literature from 1975 to 1995.

Authors:  O Niggemeyer; J M Strauss; K P Schulitz
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Spinal Stenosis: Factors That Influence Patients' Decision to Undergo Surgery.

Authors:  Karin Roszell; Danielle Sandella; Andrew J Haig; Karen S J Yamakawa
Journal:  Clin Spine Surg       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 1.876

10.  Guidelines for the identification of barriers to rehabilitation of back injuries.

Authors:  G McIntosh; T Melles; H Hall
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  1995-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.