Literature DB >> 23169068

Single- versus multilevel fusion for single-level degenerative spondylolisthesis and multilevel lumbar stenosis: four-year results of the spine patient outcomes research trial.

Yossi Smorgick1, Daniel K Park, Kevin C Baker, Jon D Lurie, Tor D Tosteson, Wenyan Zhao, Harry N Herkowitz, Jeffrey S Fischgrund, James N Weinstein.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A subanalysis study.
OBJECTIVE: To compare surgical outcomes and complications of multilevel decompression and single-level fusion with multilevel decompression and multilevel fusion for patients with multilevel lumbar stenosis and single-level degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: In patients with DS who are treated surgically, decompression and fusion provide a better clinical outcome than decompression alone. Surgical treatment for multilevel lumbar stenosis and DS typically includes decompression and fusion of the spondylolisthesis segment and decompression with or without fusion for the other stenotic segments. To date, no study has compared the results of these 2 surgical options for single-level DS with multilevel stenosis.
METHODS: The results from a multicenter randomized and observational study, the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial comparing multilevel decompression and single-level fusion and multilevel decompression and multilevel fusion for spinal stenosis with spondylolisthesis, were analyzed. The primary outcome measures were the bodily pain and physical function scales of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form General Health Survey (SF-36) and the modified Oswestry Disability Index at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years postoperatively. Secondary analysis consisted of stenosis bothersomeness index, low back pain bothersomeness, leg pain, patient satisfaction, and self-rated progress.
RESULTS: Overall, 207 patients were enrolled for the study, 130 had multlilevel decompression with 1 level fusion and 77 patients had multilevel decompression and multilevel fusion. For all primary and secondary outcome measures, there were no statistically significant differences in surgical outcomes between the 2 surgical techniques. However, operative time and intraoperative blood loss were significantly higher in the multilevel fusion group.
CONCLUSION: Decompression and single-level fusion and decompression and multilevel fusion provide similar outcomes in patients with multilevel lumbar stenosis and single-level DS.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23169068      PMCID: PMC3757550          DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31827db30f

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


  20 in total

1.  Degenerative spondylolisthesis. Predisposing factors.

Authors:  N J Rosenberg
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1975-06       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  The outcome of decompressive laminectomy for degenerative lumbar stenosis.

Authors:  J N Katz; S J Lipson; M G Larson; J M McInnes; A H Fossel; M H Liang
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1991-07       Impact factor: 5.284

3.  Degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  J Cauchoix; M Benoist; V Chassaing
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1976 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. A prospective study comparing decompression with decompression and intertransverse process arthrodesis.

Authors:  H N Herkowitz; L T Kurz
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1991-07       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Effects of short anterior lumbar interbody fusion on biomechanics of neighboring unfused segments.

Authors:  D H Chow; K D Luk; J H Evans; J C Leong
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1996-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Postdecompression lumbar instability.

Authors:  E Hopp; P M Tsou
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1988-02       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  The effects of immobilization of long segments of the spine on the adjacent and distal facet force and lumbosacral motion.

Authors:  H Nagata; M J Schendel; E E Transfeldt; J L Lewis
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 8.  Management of degenerative disc disease above an L5-S1 segment requiring arthrodesis.

Authors:  H N Herkowitz; D J Abraham; T J Albert
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1999-06-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  1997 Volvo Award winner in clinical studies. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis: a prospective, randomized study comparing decompressive laminectomy and arthrodesis with and without spinal instrumentation.

Authors:  J S Fischgrund; M Mackay; H N Herkowitz; R Brower; D M Montgomery; L T Kurz
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1997-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Bone regrowth after surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  F Postacchini; G Cinotti
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1992-11
View more
  21 in total

Review 1.  "One and a half" minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: single level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with adjacent segment unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression for spondylolisthesis with bisegmental stenosis.

Authors:  Christoph Wipplinger; Carolin Melcher; R Nick Hernandez; Sara Lener; Rodrigo Navarro-Ramirez; Sertac Kirnaz; Franziska Anna Schmidt; Eliana Kim; Roger Härtl
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-12

2.  An Anesthesia, Surgery, and Harvest Method for the Evaluation of Transpedicular Screws Using an In Vivo Porcine Lumbar Spine Model.

Authors:  Young Jae Moon; Jong-Kil Kim; Hong-Geun Oh; Ji-Hun Kang; Gun-Joo Park; Kwang-Bok Lee
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 1.355

3.  Pelvic retroversion is the key protective mechanism of L4-5 degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Hui Liu; Sibei Li; Zhaomin Zheng; Jiranru Wang; Huafeng Wang; Xiang Li
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-06-05       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  The outcome of decompression alone for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Sarfraz Ahmad; Abdulkader Hamad; Amit Bhalla; Sarah Turner; Birender Balain; David Jaffray
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-06-07       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Clinical results and limitations of indirect decompression in spinal stenosis with laterally implanted interbody cages: results from a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Gregory M Malham; Rhiannon M Parker; Ben Goss; Carl M Blecher
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-02-14       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Sagittal spinopelvic alignment in 654 degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Emmanuelle Ferrero; Mourad Ould-Slimane; Olivier Gille; Pierre Guigui
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-02-05       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Double-level degenerative spondylolisthesis: what is different in the sagittal plane?

Authors:  Emmanuelle Ferrero; Anne-Laure Simon; Baptiste Magrino; Mourad Ould-Slimane; Pierre Guigui
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-01-27       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  A prospective randomised controlled trial to assess the efficacy of dynamic stabilisation of the lumbar spine with the Wallis ligament.

Authors:  Gavin David John Marsh; Shah Mahir; Antonio Leyte
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-07-30       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Suprapedicular Foraminal Endoscopic Approach to Lumbar Lateral Recess Decompression Surgery to Treat Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

Authors:  Ya-Peng Wang; Wei Zhang; Bao-Li Li; Ya-Peng Sun; Wen-Yuan Ding; Yong Shen
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2016-11-28

10.  Characteristics and clinical aspects of patients with spinal cord injury undergoing surgery.

Authors:  João Simão de Melo-Neto; Lara Eduarda Leite Vidotto; Fabiana de Campos Gomes; Dionei Freitas de Morais; Waldir Antonio Tognola
Journal:  Rev Bras Ortop       Date:  2016-12-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.