Literature DB >> 27683696

Decompression versus decompression and fusion for degenerative lumbar stenosis: analysis of the factors influencing the outcome of back pain and disability.

Pasquale Donnarumma1, Roberto Tarantino1, Lorenzo Nigro1, Marika Rullo2, Domenico Messina, Daniele Diacinti, Roberto Delfini1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study is to evaluate the factors influencing the outcome of back pain and disability in patients operated for lumbar stenosis without instability and deformity using two classical surgical techniques: decompression alone and decompression plus fusion.
METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent lumbar surgery with standard posterior decompression or standard posterior decompression plus pedicle screw fixation for degenerative lumbar stenosis without deformity, spondylolisthesis or instability at our department from June 2010 to January 2014. They were divided into two groups: decompression group (D) and decompression-fusion group (F). We analyzed the following factors: age, gender, levels of stenosis, pre-surgical "micro-instability", and post-surgical "micro-instability".
RESULTS: A total of 174 patients were enrolled in the study. Both Graphic Rating Scale (GRS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were significantly decreased after surgery (P<0.001). Female patients appeared to have lesser improvements from surgery, for both D and F groups. An analysis of variance using the decrease of pain (GRS pre-post) as dependent variable and type of surgery, age, gender and their interaction as factors showed that the main effects of type of surgery and gender were significant. The analysis of variance for the decrease of pain (GRS) and disability (ODI) according to the levels of stenosis showed a significant interaction for GRS scores. Female patients that underwent fixation surgery reported the least improvement in disability. A significant interaction was found on the one-way analysis of variance for the D group without pre-surgical micro-instability using post-surgical micro-instability as factor.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study supports posterior decompression alone as the gold standard option as treatment for lumbar stenosis without instability and deformity. Additional fusion should be considered only to prevent post-surgical instability. The "micro-instability" is a radiological finding that has its clinical surrogate but is not able to guide the choice of the type of surgery. Moreover the significance of "micro-instability" is still unclear. We suggest a prospective study following patients with asymptomatic micro-instability to definitively understand the clinical history.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Lumbar stenosis; degenerative spine; fixation; lumbar micro-instability

Year:  2016        PMID: 27683696      PMCID: PMC5039834          DOI: 10.21037/jss.2016.03.07

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Spine Surg        ISSN: 2414-4630


  11 in total

Review 1.  The Oswestry Disability Index.

Authors:  J C Fairbank; P B Pynsent
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-11-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Five-year follow-up.

Authors:  B M Jolles; F Porchet; N Theumann
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2001-09

3.  Surgical versus nonsurgical therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  James N Weinstein; Tor D Tosteson; Jon D Lurie; Anna N A Tosteson; Emily Blood; Brett Hanscom; Harry Herkowitz; Frank Cammisa; Todd Albert; Scott D Boden; Alan Hilibrand; Harley Goldberg; Sigurd Berven; Howard An
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2008-02-21       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 4.  An evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (update).

Authors:  D Scott Kreiner; William O Shaffer; Jamie L Baisden; Thomas J Gilbert; Jeffrey T Summers; John F Toton; Steven W Hwang; Richard C Mendel; Charles A Reitman
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 4.166

5.  Preoperative pain pattern predicts surgical outcome more than type of surgery in patients with central spinal stenosis without concomitant spondylolisthesis: a register study of 9051 patients.

Authors:  Freyr Gauti Sigmundsson; Bo Jönsson; Björn Strömqvist
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2014-02-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 6.  Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 9: lumbar fusion for stenosis with spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Daniel K Resnick; William C Watters; Alok Sharan; Praveen V Mummaneni; Andrew T Dailey; Jeffrey C Wang; Tanvir F Choudhri; Jason Eck; Zoher Ghogawala; Michael W Groff; Sanjay S Dhall; Michael G Kaiser
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2014-07

7.  Radiologic diagnosis of degenerative lumbar spinal instability.

Authors:  P R Dupuis; K Yong-Hing; J D Cassidy; W H Kirkaldy-Willis
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1985-04       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 8.  Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 10: lumbar fusion for stenosis without spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Daniel K Resnick; William C Watters; Praveen V Mummaneni; Andrew T Dailey; Tanvir F Choudhri; Jason C Eck; Alok Sharan; Michael W Groff; Jeffrey C Wang; Zoher Ghogawala; Sanjay S Dhall; Michael G Kaiser
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2014-07

9.  Hidden spondylolisthesis: unrecognized cause of low back pain? Prospective study about the use of dynamic projections in standing and recumbent position for the individuation of lumbar instability.

Authors:  Alessandro Landi; Fabrizio Gregori; Nicola Marotta; Pasquale Donnarumma; Roberto Delfini
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2015-03-26       Impact factor: 2.804

10.  Risk for adjacent segment and same segment reoperation after surgery for lumbar stenosis: a subgroup analysis of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT).

Authors:  Kris Radcliff; Patrick Curry; Alan Hilibrand; Christopher Kepler; Jon Lurie; Wenyan Zhao; Todd J Albert; James Weinstein
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2013-04-01       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  6 in total

1.  The impact of pelvic balance, physical activity, and fear-avoidance on the outcome after decompression and instrumented fusion for degenerative lumbar stenosis.

Authors:  P Donnarumma; F Presaghi; R Tarantino; M Fragale; M Rullo; R Delfini
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-06-07       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Risk Factors for Failing to Reach a Minimal Clinically Important Difference Following Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression.

Authors:  Elliot D K Cha; Conor P Lynch; Cara E Geoghegan; Caroline N Jadczak; Shruthi Mohan; Kern Singh
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2022-02-17

3.  Epidemiological Relevance of Elevated Preoperative Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Scores on Clinical Improvement Following Lumbar Decompression.

Authors:  James M Parrish; Nathaniel W Jenkins; Elliot D K Cha; Conor P Lynch; Cara E Geoghegan; Caroline N Jadczak; Shruthi Mohan; Kern Singh
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2022-02

4.  Oligosaccharide nanomedicine of alginate sodium improves therapeutic results of posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cages for degenerative lumbar disease in osteoporosis patients by downregulating serum miR-155.

Authors:  Yang Qu; Zhengming Wang; Haohan Zhou; Mingyang Kang; Rongpeng Dong; Jianwu Zhao
Journal:  Int J Nanomedicine       Date:  2017-11-24

Review 5.  Comparison of Decompression Alone Versus Decompression with Fusion for Stenotic Lumbar Spine: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Syed Ijlal Ahmed; Gohar Javed; Syeda Beenish Bareeqa; Ali Shah; Maha Zubair; Rabbia Faisal Avedia; Noor Rahman; Syeda Sana Samar; Kashif Aziz
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2018-08-13

6.  Percutaneous endoscopic unilateral laminotomy and bilateral decompression under 3D real-time image-guided navigation for spinal stenosis in degenerative lumbar kyphoscoliosis patients: an innovative preliminary study.

Authors:  Tsung-Yu Ho; Chung-Wei Lin; Chien-Chun Chang; Hsien-Te Chen; Yen-Jen Chen; Yuan-Shun Lo; Pan-Hsuan Hsiao; Po-Chen Chen; Chih-Sheng Lin; Hsi-Kai Tsou
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-11-10       Impact factor: 2.362

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.