Literature DB >> 25840041

The influence of preoperative spinal sagittal balance on clinical outcomes after microendoscopic laminotomy in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis.

Sho Dohzono1, Hiromitsu Toyoda1, Tomiya Matsumoto2, Akinobu Suzuki1, Hidetomi Terai1, Hiroaki Nakamura1.   

Abstract

OBJECT: More information about the association between preoperative anterior translation of the C-7 plumb line and clinical outcomes after decompression surgery in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSS) would help resolve problems for patients with sagittal imbalance. The authors evaluated whether preoperative sagittal alignment of the spine affects low-back pain and clinical outcomes after microendoscopic laminotomy.
METHODS: This study was a retrospective review of prospectively collected surgical data. The study comprised 88 patients with LSS (47 men and 41 women) who ranged in age from 39 to 86 years (mean age 68.7 years). All patients had undergone microendoscopic laminotomy at Osaka City University Graduate School of Medicine from May 2008 through October 2012. The minimum duration of clinical and radiological follow-up was 6 months. All patients were evaluated by Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores for low-back pain, leg pain, and leg numbness before and after surgery. The distance between the C-7 plumb line and the posterior corner of the sacrum (sagittal vertical axis [SVA]) was measured on lateral standing radiographs of the entire spine obtained before surgery. Radiological factors and clinical outcomes were compared between patients with a preoperative SVA ≥ 50 mm (forward-bending trunk [F] group) and patients with a preoperative SVA < 50 mm (control [C] group). A total of 35 patients were allocated to the F group (19 male and 16 female) and 53 to the C group (28 male and 25 female).
RESULTS: The mean SVA was 81.0 mm for patients in the F group and 22.0 mm for those in the C group. At final follow-up evaluation, no significant differences between the groups were found for the JOA score improvement ratio (73.3% vs 77.1%) or the VAS score for leg numbness (23.6 vs 24.0 mm); the VAS score for low-back pain was significantly higher for those in the F group (21.1 mm) than for those in the C group (11.0 mm); and the VAS score for leg pain tended to be higher for those in the F group (18.9 ± 29.1 mm) than for those in the C group (9.4 ± 16.0 mm).
CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative alignment of the spine in the sagittal plane did not affect JOA scores after microendoscopic laminotomy in patients with LSS. However, low-back pain was worse for patients with preoperative anterior translation of the C-7 plumb line than for those without.

Entities:  

Keywords:  C-7 plumb line; JOA = Japanese Orthopaedic Association; LSS = lumbar spinal canal stenosis; SVA = sagittal vertical axis; VAS = visual analog scale; low-back pain; microendoscopic lumbar decompression; sagittal vertical axis

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25840041     DOI: 10.3171/2014.11.SPINE14452

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine        ISSN: 1547-5646


  8 in total

1.  Relationships between Paraspinal Muscle and Spinopelvic Sagittal Balance in Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

Authors:  Wei Wang; Zhuoran Sun; Weishi Li; Zhongqiang Chen
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2022-04-27       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 2.  Focal disorders of the spine with compensatory deformities: how to define them.

Authors:  Andrea Redaelli; Pedro Berjano; Max Aebi
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-01-30       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Correlation between clinical outcomes and spinopelvic parameters in patients with lumbar stenosis undergoing decompression surgery.

Authors:  Maria Adriano Costa; Pedro Santos Silva; Rui Vaz; Paulo Pereira
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2020-10-26       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  PEEK versus Silicon Interspinous Spacer for Reduction of Supradjacent Segment Degeneration following Decompression and Short-Segment Instrumentation for Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

Authors:  Panagiotis Korovessis; Vasileios Syrimpeis; Vasileios Tsekouras; Konstantinos Vardakastanis; Peter Fennema
Journal:  Adv Orthop       Date:  2018-08-08

5.  Effects of Concomitant Decompression Adjacent to a Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Segment on Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes: Comparative Analysis 5 Years After Surgery.

Authors:  Tomiya Matsumoto; Shinya Okuda; Yukitaka Nagamoto; Tsuyoshi Sugiura; Yoshifumi Takahashi; Motoki Iwasaki
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2018-10-08

6.  Indications for prophylactic lumbar decompression at the L3/4 level in patients with L4/5 responsible lumbar spinal canal stenosis.

Authors:  Toru Asari; Shuichi Aburakawa; Gentaro Kumagai; Sunao Tanaka; Yasuyuki Ishibashi
Journal:  Spine Surg Relat Res       Date:  2017-11-27

7.  Impact of Sarcopenia on Clinical Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression Surgery.

Authors:  Hiromitsu Toyoda; Masatoshi Hoshino; Shoichiro Ohyama; Hidetomi Terai; Akinobu Suzuki; Kentaro Yamada; Shinji Takahashi; Kazunori Hayashi; Koji Tamai; Yusuke Hori; Hiroaki Nakamura
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Improvement of Lower Back Pain in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis After Decompression Surgery and Factors That Predict Residual Lower Back Pain.

Authors:  Takahiro Kitagawa; Yoji Ogura; Yoshiomi Kobayashi; Yoshiyuki Takahashi; Yoshiro Yonezawa; Kodai Yoshida; Yohei Takahashi; Akimasa Yasuda; Yoshio Shinozaki; Jun Ogawa
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-02-17
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.