Literature DB >> 21224770

Smokers show less improvement than nonsmokers two years after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a study of 4555 patients from the Swedish spine register.

Bengt Sandén1, Peter Försth, Karl Michaëlsson.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A cohort study based on the Swedish Spine Register.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the relation between smoking status and disability after surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Smoking and nicotine have been shown to inhibit lumbar spinal fusion and promote disc degeneration. No association, however, has previously been found between smoking and outcome after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. A large prospective study is therefore needed.
METHODS: All patients with a completed 2-year follow-up in the Swedish Spine Register operated for central lumbar stenosis before October 1, 2006 were included. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between smoking status and outcomes.
RESULTS: Of 4555 patients enrolled, 758 (17%) were current smokers at the time of surgery. Smokers had an inferior health-related Quality of Life at baseline. Nevertheless, adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics, the odds ratio (OR) for a smoker to end up dissatisfied at the 2-year follow-up after surgery was 1.79 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.51-2.12]. Smokers had more regular use of analgesics (OR 1.86; 95% CI 1.55-2.23). Walking ability was less likely to be significantly improved in smokers with an OR of 0.65 (95% CI 0.51-0.82). Smokers had inferior Quality of Life also after taking differences before surgery into account, either when measured with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI; P < 0.001), EuroQol (P < 0.001) or Short Form (36) Health Survey (SF-36) BP and SF-36 PF (P < 0.001). The differences in results between smokers and nonsmokers were evident, irrespective of whether the decompression was done with or without spinal fusion.
CONCLUSION: Smoking is an important predictor for 2-year results after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Smokers had less improvement after surgery than nonsmokers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21224770     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181e92b36

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


  40 in total

1.  Predicting clinical outcome and length of sick leave after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in Sweden: a multi-register evaluation.

Authors:  Hanna Iderberg; Carl Willers; Fredrik Borgström; Rune Hedlund; Olle Hägg; Hans Möller; Ewald Ornstein; Bengt Sandén; Holger Stalberg; Hans Torevall-Larsson; Tycho Tullberg; Peter Fritzell
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Investigating and predicting early lumbar spine surgery outcomes.

Authors:  Saddam F Kanaan; Paul M Arnold; Douglas C Burton; Hung-Wen Yeh; Lindsay Loyd; Neena K Sharma
Journal:  J Allied Health       Date:  2015

3.  The Effect of Tobacco Smoking on Musculoskeletal Health: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ahmad M Al-Bashaireh; Linda G Haddad; Michael Weaver; Debra Lynch Kelly; Xing Chengguo; Saunjoo Yoon
Journal:  J Environ Public Health       Date:  2018-07-11

4.  Effectiveness of surgery for sciatica with disc herniation is not substantially affected by differences in surgical incidences among three countries: results from the Danish, Swedish and Norwegian spine registries.

Authors:  Tobias Lagerbäck; Peter Fritzell; Olle Hägg; Dennis Nordvall; Greger Lønne; Tore K Solberg; Mikkel Ø Andersen; Søren Eiskjær; Martin Gehrchen; Wilco C Jacobs; Miranda L van Hooff; Paul Gerdhem
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-09-29       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 5.  Do Modic changes have an impact on clinical outcome in lumbar spine surgery? A systematic literature review.

Authors:  Aske Foldbjerg Laustsen; Rachid Bech-Azeddine
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-05-13       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Who should have surgery for spinal stenosis? Treatment effect predictors in SPORT.

Authors:  Adam Pearson; Jon Lurie; Tor Tosteson; Wenyan Zhao; William Abdu; James N Weinstein
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Determinants of patient satisfaction after surgery for central spinal stenosis without concomitant spondylolisthesis: a register study of 5100 patients.

Authors:  Freyr Gauti Sigmundsson; Bo Jönsson; Björn Strömqvist
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-03-07       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Modic type I changes and recovery of back pain after lumbar microdiscectomy.

Authors:  Andreas Sørlie; Viggo Moholdt; Kjell Arne Kvistad; Øystein P Nygaard; Tor Ingebrigtsen; Trond Iversen; Roar Kloster; Tore K Solberg
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-07-29       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Factors affecting health-related quality of life one year after lumbar spinal fusion.

Authors:  Kazufumi Miyagishima; Eiki Tsushima; Kazuhiro Ishida; Shigenobu Sato
Journal:  Phys Ther Res       Date:  2017-11-30

Review 10.  The Advent of Spinoplastics: Easing the Growing Global Disease Burden of Spinal Injury.

Authors:  Matthew M Delancy; Aurelia Perdanasari; Matthew J Davis; Amjed Abu-Ghname; Jordan Kaplan; Sebastian J Winocour; Edward M Reece; Alfred Sutrisno Sim
Journal:  Semin Plast Surg       Date:  2021-05-10       Impact factor: 2.314

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.