STUDY DESIGN: Single-cohort study of patients undergoing revision neural decompression and fusion for same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis. OBJECTIVE: To assess the long-term outcomes of revision surgery using validated patient-reported outcomes measures. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Recurrent lumbar stenosis may occur after lumbar spine surgery, leading to significant discomfort and radicular pain. Although numerous studies have reported clinical outcomes after primary lumbar surgery, there remains a paucity of data on the outcomes after revision surgery for recurrent same-level stenosis. METHODS: Fifty-three patients undergoing revision neural decompression and instrumented fusion for same-level recurrent stenosis-associated back and leg pain were included in this study. Baseline and 2-year visual analog scale for leg pain (LP-VAS), visual analog scale for low back pain (BP-VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Zung self-reported depression score (ZDS), time to narcotic independence, time to return to work, health-state utility [EuroQol (EQ-5D)], and physical and mental quality of life [SF-12 physical and mental component scores (PCS and MCS)] were assessed. RESULTS: Mean±SD duration of time between index surgery and revision surgery was 4.00±4.19 years. A significant improvement from baseline was observed in BP-VAS (9.28±1.01 vs. 5.00±2.94, P=0.001), LP-VAS (9.55±0.93 vs. 3.45±2.95, P=0.001), and ODI (36.02±6.01 vs. 21.75±12.08, P=0.001). Mean±SD SF-12 PCS (7.17±11.22, P=0.001), SF-12 MCS (12.57±13.03, P=0.001), ZDS (12.37±16.80, P=0.001), and EQ-5D (0.42±0.34, P=0.001) were also significantly improved. The mean cumulative 2-year gain in health-utility state was 0.84 QALY. Median (interquartile range) duration of postoperative narcotic use was 6 (1.4-12.2) months and time of missed work was 6 (4.0-10.0) months. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that revision neural decompression and instrumented fusion for recurrent same-level stenosis provides significant improvement in all patient-assessed outcome metrics and should be offered as a viable treatment option.
STUDY DESIGN: Single-cohort study of patients undergoing revision neural decompression and fusion for same-level recurrent lumbar stenosis. OBJECTIVE: To assess the long-term outcomes of revision surgery using validated patient-reported outcomes measures. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Recurrent lumbar stenosis may occur after lumbar spine surgery, leading to significant discomfort and radicular pain. Although numerous studies have reported clinical outcomes after primary lumbar surgery, there remains a paucity of data on the outcomes after revision surgery for recurrent same-level stenosis. METHODS: Fifty-three patients undergoing revision neural decompression and instrumented fusion for same-level recurrent stenosis-associated back and leg pain were included in this study. Baseline and 2-year visual analog scale for leg pain (LP-VAS), visual analog scale for low back pain (BP-VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Zung self-reported depression score (ZDS), time to narcotic independence, time to return to work, health-state utility [EuroQol (EQ-5D)], and physical and mental quality of life [SF-12 physical and mental component scores (PCS and MCS)] were assessed. RESULTS: Mean±SD duration of time between index surgery and revision surgery was 4.00±4.19 years. A significant improvement from baseline was observed in BP-VAS (9.28±1.01 vs. 5.00±2.94, P=0.001), LP-VAS (9.55±0.93 vs. 3.45±2.95, P=0.001), and ODI (36.02±6.01 vs. 21.75±12.08, P=0.001). Mean±SD SF-12 PCS (7.17±11.22, P=0.001), SF-12 MCS (12.57±13.03, P=0.001), ZDS (12.37±16.80, P=0.001), and EQ-5D (0.42±0.34, P=0.001) were also significantly improved. The mean cumulative 2-year gain in health-utility state was 0.84 QALY. Median (interquartile range) duration of postoperative narcotic use was 6 (1.4-12.2) months and time of missed work was 6 (4.0-10.0) months. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that revision neural decompression and instrumented fusion for recurrent same-level stenosis provides significant improvement in all patient-assessed outcome metrics and should be offered as a viable treatment option.
Authors: Anna Ialynytchev; Alan M Sear; Arthur R Williams; Barbara Langland-Orban; Nanhua Zhang Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2016-05-06 Impact factor: 3.134