Literature DB >> 19407677

The influence of preoperative back pain on the outcome of lumbar decompression surgery.

Frank S Kleinstück1, Dieter Grob, Friederike Lattig, Viktor Bartanusz, Francois Porchet, Dezsö Jeszenszky, David O'Riordan, Anne F Mannion.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Prospective study with 12-month follow-up.
OBJECTIVE: To examine how the relative severity of low back pain (LBP) to leg/buttock pain (LP) influences the outcome of decompression surgery for spinal stenosis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Decompression surgery is a common treatment for lumbar spinal canal stenosis, with generally good outcome. However, concomitant LBP at presentation can make it difficult to decide whether decompression alone will result in a good overall outcome.
METHODS: The Spine Society of Europe Spine Tango system was used to acquire the data from 221 patients. Inclusion criteria were lumbar degenerative spinal stenosis, first-time surgery, maximum 3 affected levels, and decompression as the only procedure. Before and 12 months after surgery, patients completed the multidimensional Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI; includes 0-10 LP and LBP scales); at 12 months, global outcome was rated on a Likert-scale and dichotomized into "good" and "poor" groups.
RESULTS: There was a low but significant positive correlation between baseline LP-minus-LBP scores and both improvement in the multidimensional COMI score after 12 months (r = 0.21, P = 0.003) and the score on the 12-month global outcome scale (r = 0.19, P = 0.007). In the good outcome group, mean baseline LP was 2.3 (+/-3.7) points higher than LBP; in the poor group, the corresponding value was 0.8 (+/-3.4) (P = 0.01 between groups). In multivariate regression analyses (controlling for age, gender, comorbidity), baseline LBP intensity was the most significant predictor of the 12-month COMI score, and preoperative LP-minus-LBP score of the global outcome (each P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Overall, greater back pain relative to LP at baseline was associated with a significantly worse outcome after decompression. This finding seems intuitive, but has rarely been quantified in the many predictor studies conducted to date. Consideration of relative LBP and LP scores may assist in clinical decision-making and in establishing realistic patient expectations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19407677     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31819fcf35

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  31 in total

1.  A decade's experience in lumbar spine surgery in Belgium: sickness fund beneficiaries, 2000-2009.

Authors:  Marc Du Bois; Marek Szpalski; Peter Donceel
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-06-03       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Evaluation of Decompression and Interlaminar Stabilization Compared with Decompression and Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: 5-year Follow-up of a Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Michael J Musacchio; Carl Lauryssen; Reginald J Davis; Hyun W Bae; John H Peloza; Richard D Guyer; Jack E Zigler; Donna D Ohnmeiss; Scott Leary
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-01-26

3.  Therapeutic sustainability and durability of coflex interlaminar stabilization after decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: a four year assessment.

Authors:  Hyun W Bae; Carl Lauryssen; Greg Maislin; Scott Leary; Michael J Musacchio
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2015-05-11

4.  ISASS Recommendations/Coverage Criteria for Decompression with Interlaminar Stabilization - Coverage Indications, Limitations, and/or Medical Necessity.

Authors:  Richard Guyer; Michael Musacchio; Frank P Cammisa; Morgan P Lorio
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2016-12-05

5.  Criteria for failure and worsening after surgery for lumbar disc herniation: a multicenter observational study based on data from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery.

Authors:  David A T Werner; Margreth Grotle; Sasha Gulati; Ivar M Austevoll; Greger Lønne; Øystein P Nygaard; Tore K Solberg
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 6.  Do we have the right PROMs for measuring outcomes in lumbar spinal surgery?

Authors:  O M Stokes; A A Cole; L M Breakwell; A J Lloyd; C M Leonard; M Grevitt
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-01-09       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Validity of a single-item measure to assess leg or back pain as the predominant symptom in patients with degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  A F Mannion; U M Mutter; T F Fekete; F Porchet; D Jeszenszky; F S Kleinstück
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-01-30       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  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

9.  Five-year outcome of surgical decompression of the lumbar spine without fusion.

Authors:  Anne F Mannion; R Denzler; J Dvorak; D Grob
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-07-31       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Predominant leg pain is associated with better surgical outcomes in degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis: results from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT).

Authors:  Adam Pearson; Emily Blood; Jon Lurie; William Abdu; Dilip Sengupta; John W Frymoyer; James Weinstein
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2011-02-01       Impact factor: 3.468

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.