Literature DB >> 8738384

The effect of prior back surgery on surgical outcome in patients operated on for lumbar spinal stenosis. A matched-pair study.

A Herno1, O Airaksinen, T Saari, T Sihvonen, M Luukkonen.   

Abstract

It has been widely observed that the outcome after repeat lumbar surgery is rarely comparable to that of primary surgery. In particular, the results of repeat surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) have not been favourable. We used a matched-pair format in an attempt to decrease the confounding factors so as to determine as exactly as possible the effect of prior back surgery on the LSS patients' surgical outcome. The matching criteria were sex, age, myelographic findings, major symptom, and duration of symptoms. From one group of 251 patients without prior back surgery (SO patients) and another of fifty-three patients with one preceding back operation (RS patients), forty-one similar matched patients pairs (one SO and one RS-patient) were formed. There were 8 female and 33 male pairs. The mean age of the SO patients was 51.6 and of the RS patient 51.4 years, and the mean follow-up time was 4.6 and 4.4 years. The assessment of outcome was based on a subjective disability questionnaire. The SO patients fared significantly better than the RS patients (32.1 versus 41.3, P = 0.026). A short time interval between operations in the RS patients had a worsening effect on outcome, but this trend was not significant. We concluded that one preceding back operation had a worsening effect on the outcome of patients operated on for LSS. As a whole, the results of RS patients were unfavourable. The proper time for achieving good surgical results in LSS patients is the initial operation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8738384     DOI: 10.1007/bf01420296

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Neurochir (Wien)        ISSN: 0001-6268            Impact factor:   2.216


  26 in total

1.  The significance of residual stenosis after decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  P Jalovaara; S Lähde; E Iikko; T Niinimäki; J Puranen; R V Lindholm
Journal:  Ann Chir Gynaecol       Date:  1989

2.  Computed tomography of the postoperative intervertebral disc and lumbar spinal canal: serial long-term investigation in 19 patients after successful operation for lumbar disc herniation.

Authors:  R Heilbronner; H Fankhauser; P Schnyder; N de Tribolet
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  1991-07       Impact factor: 4.654

3.  Repeat lumbar surgery. A review of patients with failure from previous lumbar surgery treated by spinal canal exploration and lumbar spinal fusion.

Authors:  T R Lehmann; H S LaRocca
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1981 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Computed tomography and myelography of the postoperative lumbar spine.

Authors:  J D Meyer; R E Latchaw; H M Roppolo; K Ghoshhajra; Z L Deeb
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  1982 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.825

5.  Redecompression and fusion in failed back syndrome patients.

Authors:  J Biondi; B J Greenberg
Journal:  J Spinal Disord       Date:  1990-12

6.  Revision surgery for failed back surgery syndrome.

Authors:  S S Kim; C B Michelsen
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Surgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  R J Nasca
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Computed tomography after laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis. Patients' pain patterns, walking capacity, and subjective disability had no correlation with computed tomography findings.

Authors:  A Herno; O Airaksinen; T Saari
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1994-09-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 9.  Neurologic complications and lumbar laminectomy. A standardized approach to the multiply-operated lumbar spine.

Authors:  S E Carroll; S W Wiesel
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1992-11       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Failed back surgery syndrome: 5-year follow-up in 102 patients undergoing repeated operation.

Authors:  R B North; J N Campbell; C S James; M K Conover-Walker; H Wang; S Piantadosi; J D Rybock; D M Long
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 4.654

View more
  3 in total

1.  Is the sedimentation sign associated with spinal stenosis surgical treatment effect in SPORT?

Authors:  Rachel A Moses; Wenyan Zhao; Lukas P Staub; Markus Melloh; Thomas Barz; Jon D Lurie
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2015-02-01       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Postoperative rehabilitation does not improve functional outcome in lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective study with 2-year postoperative follow-up.

Authors:  Timo J Aalto; Ville Leinonen; Arto Herno; Markku Alen; Heikki Kröger; Veli Turunen; Sakari Savolainen; Tapani Saari; Olavi Airaksinen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-04-27       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Clinical outcomes and safety assessment in elderly patients undergoing decompressive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective study.

Authors:  Asgeir S Jakola; Andreas Sørlie; Sasha Gulati; Oystein P Nygaard; Stian Lydersen; Tore Solberg
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2010-11-22       Impact factor: 2.102

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.