Literature DB >> 24292345

Spinal canal morphology and clinical outcomes of microsurgical bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach for lumbar spinal canal stenosis.

Won-Seok Choi1, Chang Hyun Oh, Gyu Yeul Ji, Sung Chan Shin, Jang-Bo Lee, Dong-Hyuk Park, Tai-Hyoung Cho.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Microsurgical bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach for lumbar spinal stenosis is a less invasive technique compared to conventional laminectomy. Although many technical reports have demonstrated acceptable overall surgical outcomes for this approach, no studies have attempted to clarify the clinical outcomes thereof in regard to anatomical variance of the spinal canal. This study was conducted to analyze the clinical outcomes of microsurgical bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach according to spinal canal morphology in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.
METHODS: Between January 2008 and December 2009, 144 patients with single-level spinal lumbar stenosis underwent microsurgical bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach by a single surgeon. Patients were categorized into three groups according to spinal canal shape: round (n = 42), oval (n = 36), and trefoil (n = 66), and clinical parameters were assessed both before and after surgery with 2-3 years of follow-up.
RESULTS: Mean visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) decreased after surgery, respectively, from 8.1 and 59.8 % to 2.1 and 19.1 % in the round shaped spinal canal group, from 7.2 and 47.1 % to 2.2 and 15.1 % in the oval shaped spinal canal group, and from 6.8 and 53.6 % to 3.6 and 33.3 % in the trefoil shaped spinal canal group. In all groups, VAS and ODI scores significantly improved postoperatively (p < 0.01), although less improved VAS and ODI scores were observed in the trefoil shaped spinal canal group (p < 0.01). The overall patient satisfaction rate was 66.7 %; however, statistically significant lower satisfaction rates were reported in the trefoil shaped spinal canal group (p < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Microsurgical bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach may be a good modality for treating round or oval shape spinal canal stenosis, but is not recommended for trefoil-shaped-stenosis. The current authors recommend performing the bilateral decompression technique in cases of trefoil-shaped-spinal canal stenosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24292345     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-013-3116-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  32 in total

1.  Perioperative complications of posterior lumbar decompression and arthrodesis in older adults.

Authors:  Leah Y Carreon; Rolando M Puno; John R Dimar; Steven D Glassman; John R Johnson
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  Bilateral decompression of multilevel lumbar spinal stenosis through a unilateral approach.

Authors:  Katsuhiko Haba; Masato Ikeda; Mariko Soma; Tetsumori Yamashima
Journal:  J Clin Neurosci       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 1.961

3.  Mechanical function of the human lumbar interspinous and supraspinous ligaments.

Authors:  R J Hindle; M J Pearcy; A Cross
Journal:  J Biomed Eng       Date:  1990-07

4.  The ASA Physical Status Classification: inter-observer consistency. American Society of Anesthesiologists.

Authors:  P H K Mak; R C H Campbell; M G Irwin
Journal:  Anaesth Intensive Care       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 1.669

5.  Relief of lumbar canal stenosis using multilevel subarticular fenestrations as an alternative to wide laminectomy: preliminary report.

Authors:  S Young; R Veerapen; S A O'Laoire
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  1988-11       Impact factor: 4.654

6.  Microdecompression for lumbar spinal canal stenosis.

Authors:  B K Weiner; M Walker; R S Brower; J A McCulloch
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1999-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Unilateral fenestration in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  D C Mackay; E F Wheelwright
Journal:  Br J Neurosurg       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 1.596

8.  A comparison of unilateral laminectomy with bilateral decompression and fusion surgery in the treatment of grade I lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Jin Hoon Park; Seung-Jae Hyun; Sung Woo Roh; Seung Chul Rhim
Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 2.216

9.  Postoperative outcome after modified unilateral-approach microendoscopic midline decompression for degenerative spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Mitsuru Yagi; Eijiro Okada; Ken Ninomiya; Michiya Kihara
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2009-04

10.  Clinical Outcomes and Radiologic Changes After Microsurgical Bilateral Decompression by a Unilateral Approach in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Grade I Degenerative Spondylolisthesis With a Minimum 3-Year Follow-Up.

Authors:  Jun-Won Jang; Jin-Hun Park; Seung-Jae Hyun; Seung-Chul Rhim
Journal:  Clin Spine Surg       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.876

View more
  10 in total

1.  Unilateral tubular approach for bilateral laminotomy: effect on ipsilateral and contralateral buttock and leg pain.

Authors:  Marjan Alimi; Christoph P Hofstetter; Jose M Torres-Campa; Rodrigo Navarro-Ramirez; Guang-Ting Cong; Innocent Njoku; Roger Härtl
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  [Operative treatment of degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine].

Authors:  M Czabanka; C Thomé; F Ringel; B Meyer; S-O Eicker; V Rohde; M Stoffel; P Vajkoczy
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 1.214

3.  Successful Criteria for Indirect Decompression With Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Authors:  Wicharn Yingsakmongkol; Khanathip Jitpakdee; Stephen Kerr; Worawat Limthongkul; Vit Kotheeranurak; Weerasak Singhatanadgige
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2022-08-10

4.  Comparison of bilateral versus unilateral decompression incision of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in two-level degenerative lumbar diseases.

Authors:  Yongzhao Zhao; Yanjie Zhu; Hailong Zhang; Chuanfeng Wang; Shisheng He; Guangfei Gu
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-05-13       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  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

6.  Clinical and Radiological Comparison between Ipsilateral and Contralateral Side Canal Decompression Using an Unilateral Laminotomy Approach.

Authors:  Woong Bae Park; Jae Taek Hong; Sang Won Lee; Jae Hoon Sung; Seung Ho Yang; Il Sub Kim
Journal:  Korean J Spine       Date:  2016-06-30

7.  Percutaneous endoscopic decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: Protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jianjun Liu; Hongwei Zhang; Xiaogang Zhang; Tao He; Xiyun Zhao; Zhipeng Wang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 1.817

8.  Lumbar Interspinous Process Fixation and Fusion with Stand-Alone Interlaminar Lumbar Instrumented Fusion Implant in Patients with Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Undergoing Decompression for Spinal Stenosis.

Authors:  Franco Postacchini; Roberto Postacchini; Pier Paolo Maria Menchetti; Pasquale Sessa; Michela Paolino; Gianluca Cinotti
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2016-02-16

9.  Navigated minimally invasive unilateral laminotomy with crossover for intraoperative prediction of outcome in degenerative lumbar stenosis.

Authors:  Salvatore Massimiliano Cardali; Fabio Cacciola; Giovanni Raffa; Alfredo Conti; Maria Caffo; Antonino Germanò
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2018 Apr-Jun

10.  Efficacy and safety of percutaneous endoscopic decompression via transforaminal and interlaminar approaches for lumbar spine stenosis: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yuan Zhen Li; Hong Wei Zhang; Xiao Gang Zhang; Hui Zhang; Li Pan; Xi Yun Zhao; Xue Qian Ning; Zhi Peng Wang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 1.889

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.