Literature DB >> 18082461

Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: an evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.

William C Watters1, Jamie Baisden, Thomas J Gilbert, Scott Kreiner, Daniel K Resnick, Christopher M Bono, Gary Ghiselli, Michael H Heggeness, Daniel J Mazanec, Conor O'Neill, Charles A Reitman, William O Shaffer, Jeffrey T Summers, John F Toton.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The objective of the North American Spine Society (NASS) evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) is to provide evidence-based recommendations to address key clinical questions surrounding the diagnosis and treatment of DLSS. The guideline is intended to reflect contemporary treatment concepts for symptomatic DLSS as reflected in the highest quality clinical literature available on this subject as of April 2006. The goals of the guideline recommendations are to assist in delivering optimum, efficacious treatment, and functional recovery from this spinal disorder.
PURPOSE: To provide an evidence-based tool that assists practitioners in improving the quality and efficiency of care delivered to patients with DLSS. STUDY DESIGN/
SETTING: Evidence-based clinical guideline.
METHODS: This report is from the Spinal Stenosis Work Group of the NASS Clinical Guidelines Committee. The work group comprised medical, diagnostic, interventional, and surgical spinal care specialists, all of whom were trained in the principles of evidence-based analysis. In the development of this guideline, the work group arrived at a consensus definition of a working diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis by use of a modification of the nominal group technique. Each member of the group formatted a series of clinical questions to be addressed by the group and the final list of questions agreed on by the group is the subject of this report. A literature search addressing each question and using a specific literature search protocol was performed on English language references found in MEDLINE, EMBASE (Drugs and Pharmacology), and four additional, evidence-based, databases. The relevant literature to answer each clinical question was then independently rated by at least two reviewers using the NASS-adopted standardized levels of evidence. An evidentiary table was created for each of the questions. Any discrepancies in evidence levels among the initial raters were resolved by at least two additional members' review of the reference and independent rating. Final grades of recommendation for the answer to each clinical question were arrived at in face-to-face meetings among members of the work group using the NASS-adopted standardized grades of recommendation. When Levels I to IV evidence was insufficient to support a recommendation to answer a specific clinical question, expert consensus was arrived at by the work group through the modified nominal group technique and is clearly identified as such in the guideline.
RESULTS: Eighteen clinical questions were asked, addressing issues of prognosis, diagnosis, and treatment of DLSS. The answers to these 18 clinical questions are summarized in this document along with their respective levels of evidence and grades of recommendation in support of these answers.
CONCLUSIONS: A clinical guideline for DLSS has been created using the techniques of evidence-based medicine and using the best available evidence as a tool to aid both practitioners and patients involved with the care of this disease. The entire guideline document including the evidentiary tables, suggestions for future research, and all references is available electronically at the NASS Web site (www.spine.org) and will remain updated on a timely schedule.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18082461     DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2007.10.033

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine J        ISSN: 1529-9430            Impact factor:   4.166


  44 in total

1.  The nerve root sedimentation sign for differential diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective, consecutive cohort study.

Authors:  Liangming Zhang; Ruiqiang Chen; Bin Liu; Wei Zhang; Yeqing Zhu; Limin Rong
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-02-13       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Diagnosis of a 64-year-old patient presenting with suspected lumbar spinal stenosis: an evidence-based case report.

Authors:  Peter C Emary
Journal:  J Can Chiropr Assoc       Date:  2015-03

3.  Chiropractic treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Kent Stuber; Sandy Sajko; Kevyn Kristmanson
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2009-06

4.  Factors influencing the surgical decision for the treatment of degenerative lumbar stenosis in a preference-based shared decision-making process.

Authors:  Ho-Joong Kim; Jae-Young Park; Kyoung-Tak Kang; Bong-Soon Chang; Choon-Ki Lee; Jin S Yeom
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-07-01       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 5.  Microscopy-assisted interspinous tubular approach for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  José-Antonio Soriano-Sánchez; Javier Quillo-Olvera; Sergio Soriano-Solis; Miroslava-Elizabeth Soriano-Lopez; Claudia-Angélica Covarrubias-Rosas; Javier Quillo-Reséndiz; Carlos-Francisco Gutiérrez-Partida; Manuel Rodríguez-García
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2017-03

Review 6.  A Narrative Review of Lumbar Fusion Surgery With Relevance to Chiropractic Practice.

Authors:  Clinton J Daniels; Pamela J Wakefield; Glenn A Bub; James D Toombs
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2016-10-18

7.  Comparative observational study of surgical outcomes of lumbar foraminal stenosis using minimally invasive microsurgical extraforaminal decompression alone versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Ho-Joong Kim; Jin-Hwa Jeong; Hyeon-Guk Cho; Bong-Soon Chang; Choon-Ki Lee; Jin S Yeom
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-09-25       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 8.  Comparative review of vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty.

Authors:  Fernando Ruiz Santiago; Alicia Santiago Chinchilla; Luis Guzmán Álvarez; Antonio Luis Pérez Abela; Maria Del Mar Castellano García; Miguel Pajares López
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2014-06-28

9.  Radiographic assessment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: is MRI superior to CT?

Authors:  Khalid Alsaleh; Derek Ho; M Patricia Rosas-Arellano; Tanya Charyk Stewart; Kevin Roger Gurr; Christopher Stewart Bailey
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-09-23       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Risk factors and incidence for peripheral arterial disease in patients with typical lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Min-Hee Han; Dong-Hyun Lee; Ki-Su Park; Young-Seok Lee; Kyoung-Tae Kim; Joo-Kyung Sung; Hyung-Kee Kim; Dae-Chul Cho
Journal:  Korean J Spine       Date:  2014-09-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.