Literature DB >> 27128388

Surgical Versus Nonsurgical Treatment for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

Fabio Zaina1, Christy Tomkins-Lane2, Eugene Carragee3, Stefano Negrini4.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A systematic review.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of different types of surgery compared with different types of nonsurgical interventions in adults with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: LSS is a debilitating condition associated with degeneration of the spine with aging. People with LSS experience a range of symptoms, including back pain, leg pain, numbness and tingling in the legs, and reduced physical function. Main treatment options are surgery, physical therapy, exercise, braces, and injections into the spine.
METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, five other databases, and two trials registries up to February 2015, reference lists, and conference proceedings related to treatment of the spine. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared surgical versus nonoperative treatments in participants with LSS.Outcomes included quality of life, disability, function, pain, complication rates, and side effects.
RESULTS: From the 12,966 citations screened, we included five RCTs (643 participants).Three studies compared spine surgery versus various types of nonsurgical treatment. It is difficult to draw conclusions from these studies because nonsurgical treatments were inadequately described. One study that compared surgery versus bracing and exercise found no differences in pain. Another study compared surgery versus spinal injections and found better physical function with injections, and better pain relief with surgery at six weeks. Still another trial compared surgery with an implanted device versus nonsurgical care. This study reported favorable outcomes of surgery for symptoms and physical function.
CONCLUSION: We cannot conclude on the basis of this review whether surgical or nonsurgical treatment is better for individuals with LSS. Nevertheless, we can report on the high rate of effects reported in three of five surgical groups, ranging from 10% to 24%. No side effects were reported for any of the conservative treatment options. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27128388     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001635

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


  18 in total

1.  Facet Arthrodesis with the FFX Device: One-Year Results from a Prospective Multicenter Study.

Authors:  Robin Srour; Yassine Gdoura; Mariette Delaitre; Jihad Mortada; Mustapha Ali Benali; Fabrice Millot; Daniel Hritcu; Alexandre Timofeev; FranÇois Sellal
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-12-29

Review 2.  Factors associated with the reporting quality of low back pain systematic review abstracts in physical therapy: a methodological study.

Authors:  Dafne Port Nascimento; Gabrielle Zoldan Gonzalez; Amanda Costa Araujo; Anne Moseley; Christopher Maher; Leonardo Oliveira Pena Costa
Journal:  Braz J Phys Ther       Date:  2020-11-11       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 3.  Diagnosis and management of low-back pain in primary care.

Authors:  Adrian Traeger; Rachelle Buchbinder; Ian Harris; Chris Maher
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2017-11-13       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  Comparative study between full-endoscopic laminectomy and microendoscopic laminectomy for the treatment of lumbar spinal canal stenosis.

Authors:  Hiroki Iwai; Hirohiko Inanami; Hisashi Koga
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-06

5.  True Differences in Poor Outcome Risks Between Revision and Primary Lumbar Spine Surgeries.

Authors:  Chad E Cook; Alessandra N Garcia; Christine Park; Oren Gottfried
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2021-03-04

6.  Comparative Study of Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression versus Decompressive Laminectomy with Posterolateral Transpedicular Fixation for the Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Canal Stenosis.

Authors:  Ahmed Reda Aldahshory; Hazem Mashaly; Shafik Tahseen El Molla; Ibrahim Abdelmohsen Ismaiel; Khaled Saoud
Journal:  Asian J Neurosurg       Date:  2020-05-29

7.  The physical and psychological impact of neurogenic claudication: the patients' perspectives.

Authors:  Carlo Ammendolia; Michael Schneider; Kelly Williams; Susan Zickmund; Megan Hamm; Kent Stuber; Christy Tomkins-Lane; Y Raja Rampersaud
Journal:  J Can Chiropr Assoc       Date:  2017-03

8.  Decompression and Interlaminar Stabilization for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Cohort Study and Two-Dimensional Operative Video.

Authors:  Olivia E Gilbert; Sarah E Lawhon; Twila L Gaston; Jared M Robichaux; Gabriel Claudiu Tender
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2022-04-05       Impact factor: 2.948

9.  Comparison of two types of exercises in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Wenzhi Mu; Yong Shang; Zhuomao Mo; Shujie Tang
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2018 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.088

10.  Understanding the mechanisms of a combined physical and psychological intervention for people with neurogenic claudication: protocol for a causal mediation analysis of the BOOST trial.

Authors:  Christine Comer; Hopin Lee; Esther Williamson; Sarah Lamb
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-09-02       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.