Effectiveness of surgery versus conservative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis: A system review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Pedicle Lengthening Osteotomy for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review of Cadaveric, Computational, and Clinical Outcomes

Study DesignSystematic Review.ObjectiveTo review the available published literature relating to pedicle lengthening osteotomy (PLO) for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), and to compare this technique to existing surgical options.MethodsPubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus were reviewed using the keywords: "pedicle lengthening", "lumbar", and "spinal stenosis." Results were reviewed for relevance and included only if they met inclusion criteria. The SYRCLE checklist was used to assess for sources of bias.ResultsInclusion criteria were biomechanical or clinical studies evaluating PLO for LSS. A total of 56 studies were identified in the Pubmed/MEDLINE database using the above-mentioned search criteria. Additionally, a total of 83 abstracts were reviewed in Embase, and 76 abstracts were reviewed in Scopus. After screening, 7 articles met inclusion criteria.ConclusionsPLO is a percutaneous, minimally invasive technique that has been described for the treatment of LSS. Biomechanical studies demonstrate significant enlargements in spinal canal dimensions and improvements in patient reported outcome measures while maintaining kinematic properties similar to the intact spine. Although overall sample size remains small, available data regarding PLO performed for LSS have shown encouraging early results.

miR-29b-3p Affects the Hypertrophy of Ligamentum Flavum in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and its Mechanism

To explore the effect of miR-29b-3p on fibrosis and hypertrophy of ligamentum flavum (LF) in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and its underlying mechanism. Patients with LSS and lumbar disc herniation (LDH) (control) undergoing posterior lumbar laminectomy were included in this study. Human LF samples were obtained for LF cell isolation, RNA, and protein extraction. Histomorphological analysis of LF was performed using hematoxylin-eosin (HE) staining. After isolation, culture, and transfection of primary LF cells, different transfection groups were constructed: NC-mimic, miR-29b-3p-mimic, NC-inhibitor, and miR-29b-3p-inhibitor. Quantitative real time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) was performed to detect the expression of miR-29b-3p in LF and LF cells. Western blot analysis detected the protein expressions of P16 and CyclinD1. ELISA detected the protein expressions of TGF-β1, Smad2, Smad3, TLR4, Type I collagen, and Type III collagen. Finally, LF cell viability was detected using the Cell Counting Kit-8 (CCK8) assay. The thickness of LF was significantly thicker in the LSS group compared to the LDH group (p < 0.05), accompanied by a higher calcification degree, more fibroblasts, and a larger area of collagen fiber proliferation. miR-29b-3p expression was significantly lower in LSS-derived LF tissues and cells than in LDH-derived tissues and cells (both p < 0.05). Compared to the NC-mimic group, the miR-29b-3p-mimic group exhibited significantly higher miR-29b-3p expression, decreased protein expressions of Type I collagen, Type III collagen, TGF-β1, Smad2, Smad3, TLR4, P16, and CyclinD1, and inhibited LF cell proliferation (all p < 0.05). As expected, the miR-29b-3p-inhibitor group displayed contrasting expression patterns (all p < 0.05). Compared to the phosphate buffer saline (PBS) group, the Trimethylamine-N-Oxide (TMAO) group showed significantly increased expressions of TGF-β1, Smad2, Smad3, TLR4, Type I collagen, Type III collagen, P16, and CyclinD1, as well as enhanced LF cell proliferation (all p < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between the TMAO group and the Ang II group (all p > 0.05). Upregulation of miR-29b-3p expression may play a role in improving LF fibrosis and hypertrophy in LSS by inhibiting P16 expression and suppressing the activation of the TGF-β/Smad signaling pathway. This finding offers new insights into future gene modification therapy for this patient population.

Clinical and Radiological Comparison of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic and Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Discectomy in the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Degenerative Disease

OBJECTIVE

Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBE) is an emerging and minimally invasive surgeryfor lumbar spinal degenerative disease. However, the efficacy, safety and the radiological changes of dural sac and paraspinal muscle of UBE compared with the conventional percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED) remains to be determined. The purpose of the study was to comprehensively compare the clinical efficacy between UBE and PTED in the surgical treatment of lumbar spinal degenerative disease.

METHODS

The clinical and radiological data of patients who underwent single-segment endoscopic surgery for lumbar spinal degenerative disease in our hospital from January 2021 to June 2022 were collected in the retrospective study. The visual analogue score (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI) before and 3, 6, and 12 months postoperative, changes of the cross-sectional area of the dural sac area and paraspinal muscles on axial T2-weighted MRI, operation time, intraoperative complications, MacNab criteria for evaluating efficacy at 12 months postoperatively, and recurrence rate of symptoms within 12 months were compared between patients undergoing PTED and UBE surgeries.

RESULTS

A total of 142 patients were included. Among them 74 patients underwent PTED surgery, and 68 patients underwent UBE surgery. No statistically significant differences were identified between the groups in demographic variables. The average VAS and ODI scores in both groups showed significant improvement during the follow-up but without statistically significant difference between the groups. The average operation time in the PTED group was 74.82 ± 19.49 min shorter than the 81.36 ± 21.37 min in the UBE group, exhibiting no statistically significant difference. Although the incidence of complications and recurrence was lower in the UBE group (4.05% vs. 1.47%, p = 0.354; 4.05% vs. 1.47%, p = 0.354, respectively), these differences did not reach statistical significance. The dural sac area in the PTED group increased byan average of 43.16 ± 14.62 cm2, and it was 68.53 ± 16.42 cm2 in the UBE group. Despite the dural sac area increased in both groups, the UBE group had a statistically significant greater improvement than the PTED group (p = 0.000). The area of the paraspinal muscle in the UBE group was significantly greater postoperatively (34.54 ± 2.75 cm2 vs. 36.22 ± 2.96 cm2, p = 0.001) and significantly less than in the PTED group at 12 months postoperatively (31.17 ± 2.59 cm2 vs. 29.46 ± 3.11 cm2, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Both PTED and UBE surgeries can achieve satisfactory improvement in symptoms and function for patients with lumbar spinal degenerative disease and can be well-maintained as a first-line minimally invasive treatment. However, the UBE technique can achieve a better decompression area to restore the normal shape of the dural sac but may lead to greater paraspinal muscle damage and atrophy.

Healthcare Professionals' Decision-Making Regarding Lumbar Fusion Surgery or Conservative Care for Adults With Severe, Persistent Low Back Pain: An Australian Cross-Sectional Survey Using Case Vignettes

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional Survey.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to describe clinicians' decision-making regarding suitability of patient cases for lumbar fusion surgery or conservative care and the level of equipoise to randomise participants into a randomised controlled trial (RCT).

METHODS

An online survey distributed via Australian professional networks to clinicians involved in low back pain care, collected data on clinical discipline, clinical experience, practice setting and preferred care of five patient case vignettes (ranging in age, pain duration, BMI, imaging findings, neurological signs/symptoms). Clinicians were asked about preferred clinical care and willingness to randomise each case.

RESULTS

Of 101 respondents (31 orthopaedic surgeons, 17 neurosurgeons, 50 allied health professionals (AHPs), 1 pain physician, 1 nurse), 44% worked in public health services only, 36.4% in both public and private, 19.2% in private only. 46.5% had over 20 years clinical experience. Conservative care was preferred for all cases (83.1%-90.9%). Surgeons preferred an anterior approach to lumbar fusion (range 40.6%-68.4%). On average 51.9% (range: 47%-55%) indicated willingness to randomise cases, with orthopaedic (61.5%) and neurosurgeons (64.9%) more willing than AHPs (44.4%). Willingness to randomise was highest in younger cases with shorter pain duration, no neurological symptoms/signs and localised degeneration, and lowest when cases had high BMI, longer pain duration, and inadequate conservative management. Willingness to randomise was higher in those in private (70.3%) vs public health care services (43.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Over half of respondents reported willingness to randomise cases, indicating sufficient clinical equipoise for a future RCT.

Efficacy of endoscopic interlaminar decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective study

This retrospective study evaluated the clinical effectiveness of endoscopic interlaminar decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis in 40 patients treated from February 2020 to January 2022. The procedure was successful in all cases, with only one dural sac injury reported and no other complications. Postoperative Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores improved significantly (P<0.05), and the modified Macnab criteria showed an 87.5% rate of excellent and good outcomes at follow-up. No patients required revision surgery. Overall, the endoscopic interlaminar approach proved to be effective, safe, and supported early recovery.

The 3-Steps Approach for Lumbar Stenosis with Anatomical Insights, Tailored for Young Spine Surgeons

Background/Objectives: Lumbar decompression surgery for degenerative lumbar stenosis is an intervention which addresses a degenerative condition affecting many patients. This article presents a meticulous three-phase surgical approach, derived from our clinical experiences and intertwining anatomical insights, offering a nuanced perspective tailored for the educational needs of young spinal surgeons. Methods: Six hundred and eighty-seven patients who underwent lumbar decompression surgery at a single institution were included in the present study. A retrospective analysis of patient demographics and surgical techniques was performed. All surgeries were performed by a consistent surgical team, emphasizing uniformity in approach. The surgical technique involves a meticulous three-phase process comprising exposure and skeletal visualization; microscopic identification and decompression; and undermining of the spinous process base and contralateral decompression. Results: Presenting results from 530 patients, the study examines demographic characteristics, health profiles, operative details, complications, and clinical assessments. The three-phase approach demonstrates low complication rates, absence of recurrences, and improved clinical outcomes, emphasizing its efficacy. Conclusions: The three-phase surgical approach emerges as a valuable educational tool for both novice and seasoned spinal surgeons. Rooted in anatomical insights, the structured methodology not only caters to the educational needs of young surgeons, but also ensures a standardized and safe procedure. The emphasis on tissue preservation and anatomical points aligns with current trends toward minimally invasive techniques, promising enhanced patient outcomes and satisfaction.

Previous lumbar spine fusion increases the risk of dislocation following total hip arthroplasty in patients with hip-spine syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

With life expectancy on the rise, there has been an increase in patients with concomitant degenerative hip and spine pathology, defined as hip-spine syndrome (HSS). Patients affected by HSS may require both total hip arthroplasty (THA) and lumbar spinal fusion (LSF), although there is a paucity of data regarding how the sequential timing of these procedures may influence clinical outcomes. This study aims to compare complications and spinopelvic parameters in patients with HSS who underwent either LSF first or THA first.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed and Scopus was conducted for randomized and nonrandomized studies investigating complications and spinopelvic parameters in patients with HSS who had undergone THA and LSF. The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool was utilized to assess the risk of bias in included studies. Relevant outcomes were pooled for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eleven articles were included in this study. There was a significantly higher THA dislocation rate in patients who had undergone LSF first compared to those who had THA first (OR: 3.17, 95% CI 1.23-8.15, P = 0.02). No significant difference was found in terms of THA aseptic loosening (OR: 0.86; 95% CI 0.32-2.32, p = 0.77) and revision rate (OR: 1.18, 95% CI: 0.53-2.62) between these two groups. Individuals who received THA only showed a significantly lower risk of hip dislocation (OR: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.08-0.25, P < 0.00001) and THA revision (OR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.14-0.36, P < 0.00001) compared to patients with a previous LSF.

CONCLUSIONS

In HSS patients who underwent both LSF and THA, those who received LSF first displayed an increased risk of hip dislocation after subsequent THA. Additionally, the relative risks of dislocation and revision rate appeared significantly lower in patients who had undergone THA only when compared to THA patients with a history of previous LSF. Due to the impact of LSF on spinopelvic biomechanics, caution must be exercised when performing THA in individuals with instrumented spines.

PROSPERO ID

CRD42023412447.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

LL.

Efficacy of Biportal Endoscopic Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis With Single-Arm Analysis and Comparative Analysis With Microscopic Decompression and Uniportal Endoscopic Decompression

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Biportal endoscopic decompression is a minimally invasive surgical technique for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of biportal endoscopic decompression through both a single-arm analysis and a comparative analysis.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify eligible studies reporting the outcomes of biportal endoscopic decompression for LSS. Single-arm analysis and comparisons with microscopic and uniportal endoscopic decompression were performed. Evaluated outcomes included visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back pain and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, operation time, estimated blood loss, duration of hospital stay, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Single-arm analysis demonstrated significant improvements in VAS back pain, VAS leg pain, and ODI scores after biportal endoscopic decompression at postoperative 1-day to 36-month follow-up (all P < .001), compared with preoperative levels. The pooled mean single-level operation time was 71.44 min, and the pooled mean hospital stay was 3.63 days. The overall adverse event rate was 4.0%, with dural tear being the most common complication (3.0%). Compared with microscopic decompression, biportal endoscopic decompression showed significantly lower VAS back pain at 1-month ( P < .001) and 6-month ( P < .001) follow-up; lower VAS leg pain at 1-month ( P = .045) follow-up; lower ODI scores at 3-month ( P < .001), 12-month ( P = .017), and >12-month ( P = .007) follow-up; lower estimated blood loss ( P = .003); and shorter hospital stay ( P < .001). Adverse event rates did not differ between the techniques. No significant differences were observed between biportal endoscopic and uniportal endoscopic decompression groups for most efficacy and safety outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Biportal endoscopic decompression emerges as a safe and effective alternative for LSS, presenting potential advantages over the microscopic technique and comparable efficacy with the uniportal endoscopic technique.

Prospective Study of the Assessment of Anxiety Symptoms after Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression

Objective  To analyze associations between anxiety and postsurgical clinical outcomes in patients who underwent minimally invasive lumbar decompression surgery in addition to comparing symptoms of anxiety and depression before and after surgery. Methods  This prospective cohort study of patients who underwent minimally invasive lumbar decompression surgery. Clinical outcomes were measured before and 6 months after surgery using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Global Perceived Effect of Change (GPE), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Based on the presurgical anxiety score, patients were categorized into anxious and non-anxious patients, and the outcomes were compared. Results  The patients of both groups obtained similar results concerning the clinical outcomes evaluated. Preoperative HADS scores decreased significantly 6 months after surgery in both anxiety (8.70 ± 3.48 vs. 5.75 ± 3.91) and depression (6.95 ± 3.54 vs. 5.50 ± 2.99). The VAS scale for the back (-2.8 ± 3.64) and legs (-5.5 ± 3.5) showed a reduction in pain. Conclusion  Minimally invasive lumbar decompression surgery promoted clinical and functional improvement, not being affected by preoperative anxiety symptoms. Mental health indicators showed a significant reduction in symptoms 6 months after surgery.

Intervertebral disc degeneration and regenerative medicine

Intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration is a common phenomenon that affects patients with increasing prevalence with increasing age. Both conservative treatments, such as the use of pain medication or physical therapy, and surgical treatments, such as fusion or disc replacement therapies, are offered to patients. Both non‐invasive and invasive treatments have been shown to improve pain and quality of life for patients. This review explores the role of regenerative medicine techniques as a promising therapeutic intervention that can be used before or in combination with conservative therapy and surgery to enhance the treatment process in patients with IVD degeneration or disc pathology. Currently, there are four major modules of regenerative medicine: genetic therapy, platelet‐rich plasma therapy, stem cell transplantation and tissue engineering. Several research studies have shown promising outcomes of stem cell transplantation and tissue engineering when combined with either surgical or conservative treatment, resulting in improved pain outcomes. The additional benefit of regenerative medicine techniques, specifically stem cell transplantation, is the potential for treating the root pathology of degeneration. Regenerative medicine techniques also have the potential to either halt or reverse degeneration as opposed to current standards of care for managing symptoms. There is a plethora of current research highlighting the benefits of regenerative medicine techniques; however, there remains clinical concerns and ethical concerns regarding the use of regenerative therapy techniques such as stem cell transplantation in the context of IVD degeneration.

Exercise treatments for lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and intervention component analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the components used in exercise interventions for people with symptoms of neurogenic claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis and identify components associated with successful interventions.

DATA SOURCES

Eligible papers published up to April 2023 from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and trial registry websites.

REVIEW METHODS

Literature searches were performed by an Information Specialist. We searched for randomised trials evaluating exercise interventions for people with neurogenic claudication symptoms (the primary symptom of lumbar spinal stenosis). Two authors independently performed study selection, data extraction, and quality assessments using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool Version 2 and the TIDieR checklist for intervention reporting. Details of intervention components were extracted, tabulated, and synthesised using an intervention component analysis approach.

RESULTS

We found thirteen trials reporting 23 exercise interventions delivered to 1440 participants. These featured 60 different components. Most exercise interventions included supervision and flexion-based exercises. Balance exercises were rarely included. Exercise components featured more frequently in successful interventions included stretches, strength or trunk muscle exercises, fitness exercises, especially cycling, and psychologically informed approaches. Interpretation is limited by low study numbers and heterogeneity. No conclusions could be drawn about exercise supervision or dose.

DISCUSSION

Exercise interventions for people with neurogenic claudication typically feature multiple components. Common features such as supervision, lumbar flexion, and aerobic fitness exercises and also less common features such as stretches, strengthening exercises, and psychologically informed approaches warrant consideration for inclusion when designing and optimising exercise interventions for people with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Exploring lncRNA Expression Patterns in Patients With Hypertrophied Ligamentum Flavum

OBJECTIVE

Hypertrophy ligamentum flavum (LFH) is a common cause of lumbar spinal stenosis, resulting in significant disability and morbidity. Although long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) have been associated with various biological processes and disorders, their involvement in LFH remains not fully understood.

METHODS

Human ligamentum flavum samples were analyzed using lncRNA sequencing followed by validation through quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. To explore the potential biological functions of differentially expressed lncRNA-associated genes, Gene Ontology (GO) and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway analyses were performed. We also studied the impact of lncRNA PARD3-AS1 on the progression of LFH in vitro.

RESULTS

In the LFH tissues when compared to that in the nonhypertrophic ligamentum flavum (LFN) tissues, a total of 1,091 lncRNAs exhibited differential expression, with 645 upregulated and 446 downregulated. Based on GO analysis, the differentially expressed transcripts primarily participated in metabolic processes, organelles, nuclear lumen, cytoplasm, protein binding, nucleic acid binding, and transcription factor activity. Moreover, KEGG pathway analysis indicated that the differentially expressed lncRNAs were associated with the hippo signaling pathway, nucleotide excision repair, and nuclear factor-kappa B signaling pathway. The expression of PARD3-AS1, RP11-430G17.3, RP1-193H18.3, and H19 was confirmed to be consistent with the sequencing analysis. Inhibition of PARD3-AS1 resulted in the suppression of fibrosis in LFH cells, whereas the overexpression of PARD3-AS1 promoted fibrosis in LFH cells in vitro.

CONCLUSION

This study identified distinct expression patterns of lncRNAs that are linked to LFH, providing insights into its underlying mechanisms and potential prognostic and therapeutic interventions. Notably, PARD3-AS1 appears to play a significant role in the pathophysiology of LFH.

The role of muscle degeneration and spinal balance in the pathophysiology of lumbar spinal stenosis: Study protocol of a translational approach combining in vivo biomechanical experiments with clinical and radiological parameters

OBJECTIVE

To describe a study protocol for investigating the functional association between posture, spinal balance, ambulatory biomechanics, paraspinal muscle fatigue, paraspinal muscle quality and symptoms in patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis (sLSS) before and 1-year after elective surgical intervention.

DESIGN

Single-centre prospective, experimental, multimodal (clinical, biomechanical, radiological) study with three instances of data collection: baseline (study visit 1), 6-month follow-up (remote) and 1-year follow-up (study visit 2). Both study visits include an in vivo experiment aiming to elicit paraspinal muscle fatigue for postural assessment in a non-fatigued and fatigued state.

EXPERIMENTAL PROTOCOL

At baseline and 1-year follow-up, 122 patients with sLSS will be assessed clinically, perform the back-performance scale assessment and complete several patient-reported outcome measure (PROMs) questionnaires regarding overall health, disease-related symptoms and kinesiophobia. Posture and biomechanical parameters (joint kinematics, kinetics, surface electromyography, back curvature) will be recorded using an optoelectronic system and retroreflective markers during different tasks including overground walking and movement assessments before and after a modified Biering-Sørensen test, used to elicit paraspinal muscle fatigue. Measurements of muscle size and quality and the severity of spinal stenosis will be obtained using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and sagittal postural alignment data from EOS radiographies. After each study visit, physical activity level will be assessed during 9 days using a wrist-worn activity monitor. In addition, physical activity level and PROMs will be assessed remotely at 6-month follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The multimodal set of data obtained using the study protocol described in this paper will help to expand our current knowledge on the pathophysiology, biomechanics, and treatment outcome of degenerative sLSS. The results of this study may contribute to defining and/or altering patient treatment norms, surgery indication criteria and post-surgery rehabilitation schedules.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The protocol was approved by the regional ethics committee and has been registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05523388).

Trends of Low Back Pain Research in Older and Working-Age Adults from 1993 to 2023: A Bibliometric Analysis

Although the number of publications focusing on low back pain in older adults (LBP-O) and working-age adults (LBP-W) has been growing for decades, comparative research trends in these two populations, which may help to guide future investigation, have not been rigorously explored. This analysis aimed to describe publication patterns and trends of research targeting LBP-O and LBP-W over the last three decades. Peer-reviewed LBP-O and LBP-W articles published between 1993 and 2023 were retrieved from the Web of Science, which provided the details of annual publication volume, and prominent journals/countries/institutions. The relationship between the annual publication volumes and years was analyzed by Spearman correlation analysis. The hot topics and emerging trends were analyzed by VOSviewer and CiteSpace, respectively. A total of 4217 LBP-O-related and 50,559 LBP-W-related documents were included. The annual publication volumes of LBP-O and LBP-W articles increased over the years (r=0.995 to 0.998, p<0.001). The United States had the highest number of prominent institutions publishing relevant articles. The most prolific journal for LBP-O (5.4%) and LBP-W-related (6.1%) papers is the journal "Spine". Cognitive behavioral therapy, intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration, physiotherapy, physical activity, and walking were the recent hot topics and physical activity was an emerging trend in LBP-O, while surgery and IVD degeneration (also a hot topic) were emerging trends in LBP-W. This study highlights the paucity of LBP-O-related research in the past. The United States and the journal Spine stand out in LBP research. The research trend of physical activity in LBP-O is consistent with the recognized importance of physical activity for older adults in general, and for managing LBP-O in particular. Conversely, the emerging trends of surgery and intervertebral disc degeneration in LBP-W research highlight a focus on the biomedical model of LBP despite LBP being a biopsychosocial condition.

Use of a High-Fidelity Training Simulator for Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression Increases Working Knowledge and Technical Skills Among Orthopedic and Neurosurgical Trainees

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective comparative study.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the educational benefit to surgical trainees of using a high-fidelity simulator to perform minimally invasive (MIS) unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) for lumbar stenosis.

METHODS

Twelve orthopedic and neurologic surgery residents performed three MIS ULBD procedures over 2 weeks on a simulator guided by established AO Spine metrics. Video recording of each surgery was rated by three blinded, independent experts using a global rating scale. The learning curve was evaluated with attention to technical skills, skipped steps, occurrence of errors, and timing. A knowledge gap analysis evaluating participants' current vs desired ability was performed after each trial.

RESULTS

From trial 1 to 3, there was a decrease in average procedural time by 31.7 minutes. The cumulative number of skipped steps and surgical errors decreased from 25 to 6 and 24 to 6, respectively. Overall surgical proficiency improved as indicated by video rating of efficiency and smoothness of surgical maneuvers, most notably with knowledge and handling of instruments. The greatest changes were noted in junior rather than senior residents. Average knowledge gap analysis significantly decreased by 30% from the first to last trial (P = .001), signifying trainees performed closer to their desired technical goal.

CONCLUSION

Procedural metrics for minimally invasive ULBD in combination with a realistic surgical simulator can be used to improve the skills and confidence of trainees. Surgical simulation may offer an important educational complement to traditional methods of skill acquisition and should be explored further with other MIS techniques.

Cooled Radiofrequency Treatment for Radicular Pain Related to Lumbar Disc Herniation

BACKGROUND

Lower back and radicular pain are leading causes of disability and loss of quality of life, especially due to its high prevalence in the general population. Cooled radiofrequency treatment (CRT) has emerged as a novel non-invasive technique for the management of discogenic pain with safe and effective results. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of CRT in the treatment of radicular pain secondary to a lumbar hernia in patients with chronic neuropathic pain after receiving conservative treatment that did not achieve adequate pain management.

METHODS

A prospective study of patients undergoing CRT for the management of discogenic low back pain was carried out. When attending the first evaluation and corroborating the lumbar hernias by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), treatment was offered one month of physiotherapy before CRT. To assess the evolution of the patients, measurements were taken before and after the intervention with the visual analog scale (VAS) and the Oswestry low back pain disability scale (OLBPDS) scores.

RESULTS

A total of 74 patients (mean age: 48.42 ± 14.32 years, 66.11% female) were included, who were undergoing a total of 134 herniated intervertebral lumbar discs. When comparing the initial perception of low back pain and after finding a non-significant partial improvement with one month of physiotherapy treatment, it was observed that the patients who were offered CRT showed an average improvement in discogenic pain of 79.92% (p = <0.0001, 95% CI: -7.010 to -6.379) in 98.64% of cases. This was accompanied by an increase in their functionality of daily living activities, as measured by OLBPDS. No patients presented significant adverse events, and in the only case where the desired pain management was not obtained, the patient's discomfort did not worsen.

CONCLUSIONS

Intradiscal biacuplasty by CRT is a considerable treatment for lumbar radiculopathy. Postoperative results demonstrated its effectiveness and safety in the management of radicular pain without the presence of significant adverse effects.

Spinal Injections: A Narrative Review from a Surgeon's Perspective

Spinal pain is one of most frequent complaints of the general population, which can cause decreased activities of daily living and absence from work. Among numerous therapeutic methods, spinal injection is one of the most effective treatments for spinal pain and is currently widely applied in the clinical field. In this review, spinal injection is discussed from a surgeon's perspective. Recently, although the number of spinal surgeries has been increasing, questions are arising as to whether they are necessary. The failure rate after spinal surgery is high, and its long-term outcome was reported to be similar to spinal injection. Thus, spinal surgeries should be performed conservatively. Spinal injection is largely divided into diagnostic and therapeutic blocks. Using diagnostic blocks, such as the diagnostic selective nerve root block, disc stimulation test, and diagnostic medial branch block (MBB), the precise location causing the pain can be confirmed. For therapeutic blocks, transforaminal nerve root injection, therapeutic MBB, and percutaneous epidural neuroplasty are used. When unbearable spinal pain persists despite therapeutic spinal injections, spinal surgeries can be considered. Spinal injection is usefully used to identify the precise location prior to a patient undergoing injection treatment or surgery and can reduce pain and improve quality of life, and help to avoid spinal surgery. Pain physicians should treat patients with spinal pain by properly utilizing spinal injection.

Does physical therapy impact clinical outcomes after lumbar decompression surgery?

Objectives

The objectives of our study were to (1) determine if physical therapy (PT) impacts patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) after lumbar decompression surgery and (2) determine if PT impacts postsurgical readmissions or reoperations after lumbar decompression surgery.

Methods

Patients >18 years of age who underwent primary one- or two-level lumbar decompression at our institution were identified. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, surgical outcomes (all-cause 90 days readmissions and 90 days surgical readmissions), and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) were compared between the groups. Multivariate linear regression was utilized to determine the individual predictors of 90 days readmissions and PROMs at the 1-year postoperative point. Alpha was set at P < 0.05.

Results

Of the 1003 patients included, 421 attended PT postoperatively. On univariate analysis, PT attendance did not significantly impact 90-day surgical reoperations (P = 0.225). Although bivariate analysis suggests that attendance of PT is associated with worse improvement in physical function (P = 0.041), increased preoperative Visual Analogue Scale leg pain (0 = 0.004), and disability (P = 0.006), as measured by the Oswestry Disability Index, our multivariate analysis, which accounts for confounding variables found there was no difference in PROM improvement and PT was not an independent predictor of 90-day all-cause readmissions (P = 0.06). Instead, Charlson Comorbidity Index (P = 0.025) and discharge to a skilled nursing facility (P = 0.013) independently predicted greater 90-day all-cause readmissions.

Conclusions

Postoperative lumbar decompression PT attendance does not significantly affect clinical improvement, as measured by PROMs or surgical outcomes including all-cause 90 days readmissions and 90-day surgical readmissions.

Impact of Lumbar Surgery on Pharmacological Treatment for Patients with Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis: A Single-Center Retrospective Study

Treatment for lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSCS) is mainly classified into conservative and surgical therapies. Among conservative therapies, pharmacological treatment is commonly prescribed for LSCS. Meanwhile, surgical treatment is the last option for LSCS. This study aimed to examine the impact of lumbar surgery on pharmacological treatment for patients with LSCS. Consecutive patients aged ≥ 40 years who underwent lumbar surgery for LSCS were identified. A total of 142 patients were retrospectively reviewed for preoperative and 6-month and 1-year postoperative LSCS medications. The results showed that the number of LSCS medications significantly decreased after lumbar surgery. The proportion of the patients taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, pregabalin/mirogabalin, opioids, prostaglandin E1 analogs, and neurotropin was significantly decreased after lumbar surgery, but that of the patients taking mecobalamin, acetaminophen, and serotonin-noradrenalin reuptake inhibitors was not significantly changed. Additionally, around 15% of the participants showed an increase in LSCS medications even after lumbar surgery. Multivariable analysis revealed that individuals without improvements in walking ability (RR: 2.7, 95% CI: 1.3-5.9) or social life (RR: 2.3, 95% CI: 1.1-5.0) had a greater risk of a postoperative increase in LSCS medications. The study results may provide physicians with beneficial information on treatment for LSCS.

Management of lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of rehabilitation, surgical, injection, and medication interventions

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) has a substantial impact on mobility, autonomy, and quality of life. Previous reviews have demonstrated inconsistent results and/or have not delineated between specific nonsurgical interventions.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the effectiveness of interventions in the management of LSS.

METHODS

Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or prospective studies, included patients with LSS, assessed the effectiveness of any interventions (rehabilitation, surgical, injection, medication), included at least two intervention groups, and included at least one measure of pain, disability, ambulation assessment, or LSS-specific symptoms. Eighty-five articles met inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses were conducted across outcomes. Effect sizes were calculated using Hedge's g and reported descriptively. Formal grading of evidence was conducted.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis comparing rehabilitation to no treatment/placebo demonstrated significant effects on pain favoring rehabilitation (mean difference, MD -1.63; 95% CI: -2.68, -0.57; I² = 71%; p = .002). All other comparisons to no treatment/placebo revealed nonsignificant findings. The level of evidence ranged from very low to high for rehabilitation and medication versus no treatment/placebo for pain, disability, ambulation ability, and LSS symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the findings of this review are inconclusive regarding superiority of interventions, this accentuates the value of multimodal patient-centered care in the management of patients with LSS.

The role of spinal surgery in the treatment of low back pain

Low back pain (LBP) is common and a leading cause of disability and lost productivity worldwide. Acute LBP is frequently self-resolving, but recurrence is common, and a significant proportion of patients will develop chronic pain. This transition is perpetuated by anatomical, biological, psychological and social factors. Chronic LBP should be managed with a holistic biopsychosocial approach of generally non-surgical measures. Spinal surgery has a role in alleviating radicular pain and disability resulting from neural compression, or where back pain relates to cancer, infection, or gross instability. Spinal surgery for all other forms of back pain is unsupported by clinical data, and the broader evidence base for spinal surgery in the management of LBP is poor and suggests it is ineffective. Emerging areas of interest include selection of a minority of patients who may benefit from surgery based on spinal sagittal alignment and/or nuclear medicine scans, but an evidence base is absent. Spinal surgery for back pain has increased substantially over recent decades, and disproportionately among privately insured patients, thus the contribution of industry and third-party payers to this increase, and their involvement in published research, requires careful consideration.

Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) clinical practice guidelines on the management of lumbar spinal stenosis, 2021 - Secondary publication

BACKGROUND

The Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) guideline for the management of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) was first published in 2011. Since then, the medical care system for LSS has changed and many new articles regarding the epidemiology and diagnostics of LSS, conservative treatments such as new pharmacotherapy and physical therapy, and surgical treatments including minimally invasive surgery have been published. In addition, various issues need to be examined, such as verification of patient-reported outcome measures, and the economic effect of revised medical management of patients with lumbar spinal disorders. Accordingly, in 2019 the JOA clinical guidelines committee decided to update the guideline and consequently established a formulation committee. The purpose of this study was to describe the formulation we implemented for the revision of the guideline, incorporating the recent advances of evidence-based medicine.

METHODS

The JOA LSS guideline formulation committee revised the previous guideline based on the method for preparing clinical guidelines in Japan proposed by the Medical Information Network Distribution Service in 2017. Background and clinical questions were determined followed by a literature search related to each question. Appropriate articles based on keywords were selected from all the searched literature. Using prepared structured abstracts, systematic reviews and meta-analyses were performed. The strength of evidence and recommendations for each clinical question was decided by the committee members.

RESULTS

Eight background and 15 clinical questions were determined. Answers and explanations were described for the background questions. For each clinical question, the strength of evidence and the recommendation were both decided, and an explanation was provided.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2021 clinical practice guideline for the management of LSS was completed according to the latest evidence-based medicine. We expect that this guideline will be useful for all medical providers as an index in daily medical care, as well as for patients with LSS.

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Treatment: Is Surgery Better than Non-Surgical Treatments in Afro-Descendant Populations?

(1) Background: Limited data are available on lumbar spine stenosis management in sub-Saharan African populations and Afro-descendant patients are underrepresented in European and US clinical trials. We aimed to compare the clinical response between decompressive surgery and conservative treatments in a population of self-reported Afro-Caribbean patients with lumbar spine stenosis over a 2-year follow-up period. (2) Methods: Prospective cohort of 137 self-reported Afro Caribbeans with lumbar spine stenosis based on clinical and radiological criteria. Patients were assigned to decompression surgery or to conservative treatments according to their outcome after a first course of steroid epidural injection and their preferences. The primary outcome was evolution of the Oswestry disability index at 3 months (3 M), 12 M, 18 M and 24 M follow-up. (3) Results: Decrease of ODI was significantly more important in the “decompression surgery” arm compared to “conservative treatment” arm at 3 M, 12 M and 18 M: −17.36 vs. 1.03 p < 10−4; −16.38 vs. −1.53 p = 0.0059 and −19.00 vs. −4.52 p = 0.021, respectively. No difference was reported at 24 M. (4) Conclusions: In this first comparative study between surgery and conservative treatments in an exclusively afro-descendant lumbar spine stenosis cohort, we report long term superiority of decompression surgery versus conservative treatments over an 18-month period.

Comparative Effects and Safety of Full-Endoscopic Versus Microscopic Spinal Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis and Statistical Power Analysis of 6 Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis with statistical power analysis aimed to evaluate the difference between full-endoscopic and microscopic spinal decompression in treating spinal stenosis.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure) for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding the comparison of full-endoscopic versus microscopic spinal decompression in treating lumbar spinal stenosis through February 28, 2022. Two independent investigators selected studies, extracted information, and appraised methodological quality. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4 and STATA 14.0, and statistical power analysis was performed using G*Power 3.1.

RESULTS

Six RCTs involving 646 patients met selection criteria. Meta-analysis suggested that, compared with microscopic decompression, full-endoscopic spinal decompression achieved more leg pain improvement (mean difference [MD], -0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.30 to -0.10; p = 0.001), shortened operative time (MD, -12.71; 95% CI, -18.27 to -7.15; p < 0.001), and decreased the incidence of complications (risk ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.22-0.82; p = 0.01), which was supported by a statistical power of 98.57%, 99.97%, and 81.88%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Full-endoscopic spinal decompression is a better treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis, showing more effective leg pain improvement, shorter operative time, and fewer complications than microscopic decompression.

[Lumbar spinal stenosis]

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) represents a frequent degenerative condition, however, striking a clear correlation between typical symptoms and imaging features remains a challenge. Reasons are a high prevalence of radiological LSS in the older population, a considerable percentage of asymptomatic LSS and the existence of differential diagnoses with similar symptomatology. This discrepancy also affects the outcomes - especially of surgically treated patients with LSS. When considering surgical decompression of LSS, the decision with regards to additive instrumentation and/or fusion remains a controversial point of discussion, in particular at the presence of degenerative spondylolisthesis. Recent, well-designed studies, however, clearly point towards a non-inferiority of decompression alone as opposed to the more invasive strategies.

Outcome of Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression for Multisegment Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and the Effect on VAS Scores

Purpose

To investigate the efficacy of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic lumbar decompression (PTED) in the treatment of multisegment lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and its effect on VAS scores.

Methods

126 patients with multisegment LSS admitted between August 2017 and August 2021 were selected and divided into the PTED group and the traditional open surgery group (TOS group) according to the different treatment methods. There were 70 cases in the PTED group, treated with PTED, and 56 cases in the TOS group, treated with traditional open surgery. The clinical outcomes, the preoperative and postoperative pain visual analogue scale (VAS), the Oswestry disability index (ODI), the SF-36 quality of life questionnaire scores, the perioperative indicators (operative time, days in hospital, intraoperative blood loss), the postoperative complications, and imaging data were compared between the two groups.

Results

After the operation, the excellent and good rate in the PTED group (91.43%) was significantly higher than that in the TOS group (75.00%) (P < 0.05). At each time after the operation, the VAS and ODI scores of the two groups were lower than those before the operation, and the VAS scores of the PTED group at 1 day and 3 months after operation were lower than those of the TOS group, and the ODI scores of the PTED group at 3 months after operation were lower than those of the TOS group (P < 0.05). 3 months after the operation, the SF-36 scores in both groups were higher than those before the operation, and those in the PTED group were higher than those in the TOS group (P < 0.05). The operation time and days in hospital in the PTED group were shorter than those in the TOS group, and the intraoperative dominant blood loss and recessive blood loss were less than those in the TOS group (P < 0.05). The total incidence of complications in the PTED group (15.71%) was significantly lower than that in the TOS group (32.14%) (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Both PTED and traditional open surgery are effective in treating patients with multisegmental LSS, and both show positive postoperative changes in all indicators, but the former has more promising near -term results in improving lumbar spine pain, function and quality of life than the latter, and has the advantages of less trauma, less bleeding, and fewer complications.

A meta-analysis of clinical effects of microscopic unilateral laminectomy bilateral decompression (ULBD) versus biportal endoscopic ULBD for lumbar canal stenosis

Osbjective

Several studies have shown that both microscopic unilateral laminotomy bilateral decompression (ULBD) and unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) ULBD are effective for treating lumbar canal stenosis (LCS). However, there are different viewpoints as to which surgical technique is superior. Therefore, this meta-analysis investigated the clinical efficacy and side effects of microscopic ULBD and UBE ULBD for treating LCS.

Methods

To identify relevant studies describing the clinical outcomes and complication rates of microscopic ULBD and UBE ULBD for LCS, several databases were systematically searched in the Internet. The visual analog scale score for back and leg pain and the Oswestry Disability Index were used to assess clinical outcomes. Furthermore, data about perioperative outcomes and complications were documented.

Results

In total, six studies with 450 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The UBE ULBD was found to be superior to microscopic ULBD in terms of efficacy against early postoperative back and leg pain. However, there was no significant difference between the two procedures in terms of final clinical outcomes and complications. In addition, compared with microscopic ULBD, UBE ULBD was associated with a significant reduction in the length of hospital stay and C-reactive protein levels 2 days after surgery.

Conclusion

UBE ULBD and microscopic ULBD for the treatment of LCS were similar in terms of final clinical outcomes and complications. However, UBE ULBD has several advantages over microscopic ULBE, including a shorter hospital stay and faster alleviation of postoperative back and leg pain.

The Concerns and Experiences of Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Regarding Prehabilitation and Recovery After Spine Surgery: A Qualitative Study

Objectives

To improve our understanding of patients' perspectives regarding: (1) the decision-making and prehabilitation before lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) surgery and (2) their postoperative experiences.

Design

Qualitative research with semi-structured interviews.

Setting

General community.

Participants

Individuals who received (N=10) and who did not receive (N=15) prehabilitation before LSS surgery were recruited at the 6-month postoperative follow-up (8 females; average age: 67.7±6.7 years) by purposive sampling. Additionally, 1 participant invited her daughter to accompany her in an interview.

Interventions

Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measures

Concerns and experiences of patients with LSS regarding prehabilitation and recovery after spine surgery.

Results

Thematic analysis was conducted to identify 4 themes inductively: (1) sources of information about LSS surgery; (2) factors affecting the surgical decision-making; (3) attitudes toward prehabilitation; and (4) postoperative recovery. All participants desired to have more preoperative education to inform their surgical decision-making. There were mixed opinions regarding the perceived benefits of prehabilitation because some individuals hesitated to participate in prehabilitation because of their symptoms, or the cost or time of traveling. Many participants expected some or even complete relief of LSS-related symptoms after surgery. However, not all participants experienced the expected postoperative improvements. Some participants only experienced temporary symptomatic relief, while others experienced new postoperative symptoms. Patients generally found that postoperative exercises taught by physiotherapists were useful although their compliance decreased over time.

Conclusions

Our study highlights the need for better preoperative LSS education. Because face-to-face prehabilitation or postoperative rehabilitation may not be feasible for all patients, future studies should explore whether online-based prehabilitation or postoperative rehabilitation may benefit certain patient subgroups.

Genetic variants of interleukin 1B and 6 are associated with clinical outcome of surgically treated lumbar degenerative disc disease

BACKGROUND

Successfully surgically treating degenerative disc diseases can be challenging to the spine surgeons, the long-term outcome relies on both the physical and mental status of the patient before and after treatment. Numerous studies underlined the role of inflammatory cytokines - like interleukin 1B and 6 - in the development of chronic diseases such as failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) and major depressive disorder (MDD) which alter the outcome after spinal surgery. Our aim was to evaluate the associations of IL6 and IL1B gene polymorphisms with the long-term outcome of degenerative lumbar spine surgeries.

METHODS

An international genetical database (GENODISC) was combined with our institute's clinical database to create a large pool with long term follow up data. Altogether 431 patient's data were analysed. Patient reported outcome measures and surgical outcome was investigated in association with IL1B and IL6 SNPs with the help of 'SNPassoc' R genome wide association package.

RESULTS

Interleukin 1B variants analysis confirmed association with improvement of pain after surgery on individual SNP level and on haplotype level, moreover relationship with patient reported outcome and preoperative level of depression was found on individual SNP level. IL6 variants were associated with preoperative depression, somatization and with subsequent surgery.

CONCLUSION

Understanding the complexity of spinal surgery patients' long-term well-being is crucial in effectively treating chronic debilitating somatic diseases and the associated mental illnesses. Further studies should investigate more comprehensively the linkage of chronic physical and mental illnesses focusing on their simultaneous treatment.

Performance of hybrid artificial intelligence in determining candidacy for lumbar stenosis surgery

PURPOSE

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a condition affecting several hundreds of thousands of adults in the United States each year and is associated with significant economic burden. The current decision-making practice to determine surgical candidacy for LSS is often subjective and clinician specific. In this study, we hypothesize that the performance of artificial intelligence (AI) methods could prove comparable in terms of prediction accuracy to that of a panel of spine experts.

METHODS

We propose a novel hybrid AI model which computes the probability of spinal surgical recommendations for LSS, based on patient demographic factors, clinical symptom manifestations, and MRI findings. The hybrid model combines a random forest model trained from medical vignette data reviewed by surgeons, with an expert Bayesian network model built from peer-reviewed literature and the expert opinions of a multidisciplinary team in spinal surgery, rehabilitation medicine, interventional and diagnostic radiology. Sets of 400 and 100 medical vignettes reviewed by surgeons were used for training and testing.

RESULTS

The model demonstrated high predictive accuracy, with a root mean square error (RMSE) between model predictions and ground truth of 0.0964, while the average RMSE between individual doctor's recommendations and ground truth was 0.1940. For dichotomous classification, the AUROC and Cohen's kappa were 0.9266 and 0.6298, while the corresponding average metrics based on individual doctor's recommendations were 0.8412 and 0.5659, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that AI can be used to automate the evaluation of surgical candidacy for LSS with performance comparable to a multidisciplinary panel of physicians.

Analysis of Patient-reported Outcomes Measures Used in Lumbar Fusion Surgery Research for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analyses.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to document the most common Patient-reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) used to assess lumbar fusion surgery outcomes and provide an estimate of the average improvement following surgical treatment.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

As health care institutions place more emphasis on quality of care, accurately quantifying patient perceptions has become a valued tool in measuring outcomes. To this end, greater importance has been placed on the use of PROMs. This is a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomly controlled trials published between 2014 and 2019 assessing surgical treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis.

METHODS

A fixed effect size model was used to calculate mean difference and a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Linear regression was used to calculate average expected improvement, adjusted for preoperative scores.

RESULTS

A total of 4 articles (7 study groups) were found for a total of 444 patients. The 3 most common PROMs were Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (n=7, 100%), Short-Form-12 or Short-Form-36 (SF-12/36) (n=4, 57.1%), and visual analog scale-back pain (n=3, 42.8%). Pooled average improvement was 24.12 (95% CI: 22.49-25.76) for ODI, 21.90 (95% CI: 19.71-24.08) for SF-12/36 mental component score, 22.74 (95% CI: 20.77-24.71) for SF-12/36 physical component score, and 30.87 (95% CI: 43.79-47.97) for visual analog scale-back pain. After adjusting for preoperative scores, patients with the mean preoperative ODI (40.47) would be expected to improve by 22.83 points postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a range of expected improvement for common PROMs used to evaluate degenerative spondylolisthesis with the goal of equipping clinicians with a benchmark value to use when counseling patients regarding surgery. In doing so, it hopes to provide a comparison point by which to judge individual patient improvement.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Efficacy and characteristics of physiotherapy interventions in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To determine the efficacy of physiotherapy approaches used in the treatment of LSS and compare their delivery characteristics.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted using MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, PEDro, CINAHL and Web of Science databases, from inception until March 2021. Inclusion criteria were clinical diagnosis of LSS confirmed through imaging techniques, RCTs written in English comparing physiotherapy interventions among them or versus placebo or usual care without restrictions on treatment and follow-up duration, outcomes related to pain, physical function, disability and quality of life. Two independent reviewers assessed records for eligibility and methodological quality (PEDro scale) and extracted participants' characteristics, interventions details and outcome measures at each timepoint. Pooled or un-pooled findings were reported as mean difference with 95% confidence interval, depending on heterogeneity. Evidence quality was rated using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Twelve studies (944 patients, mean PEDro score 7.6, range 5-9) were included. Three weeks of weight-supported walking improved pain and disability, while 8 weeks of aquatic exercises improved pain and walking tolerance (very low evidence). Six weeks of cycling reduced disability compared to weight-supported walking (low evidence). Six weeks of manual therapy plus exercise was not superior to supervised exercises (low evidence), but improved pain, walking tolerance, disability and quality of life compared to home/group exercises (moderate to very low evidence). Very low evidence supported 2 weeks of electromagnetic fields, whereas TENS (low evidence) and ultrasounds (very low evidence) revealed no effects.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings may assist clinicians in delivering effective physiotherapy interventions in LSS patients.

Efficacy of the Dynesys Hybrid Surgery for Patients with Multi-Segmental Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Objective

The efficacy of hybrid (Dynesys and fusion) surgery and the traditional transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery was compared in patients with multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis.

Methods

A total of 68 patients with multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis subjected to surgery were recruited between January 2013 and October 2020 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Southern University of Science and Technology. The patients were divided into a hybrid group (N = 33) and a TLIF group (N = 35) by surgery. After surgery, follow-up was conducted for 12 months. Between the two groups, the following parameters were compared: general conditions, clinical symptom scores, imaging parameters, and early complications.

Results

A statistically significant difference in the duration of surgery was noted between the two groups. After 12 months of follow-up, the range of motion disappeared in the TLIF group, while 63.53% was preserved in the hybrid group with statistically significant differences. A statistically significant difference was identified in the Oswestry Disability Index one week after surgery. Nonetheless, no statistically significant differences were observed at the 12-month post-surgical follow-up. Pfirrmann grade showed a 3.03% upper adjacent segment degeneration rate in the hybrid group (1/33) at 12-month follow-up and 2.86% (1/35) in the TLIF group. Notably, no early complications (screw loosening and wound infection) were identified in the two groups.

Conclusion

The Dynesys hybrid surgery combined the advantages of two systems of dynamic stabilization and rigid fusion. Besides, hybrid surgery is potentially a novel approach for the treatment of multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis.

A Differential Clinical Benefit Examination of Full Lumbar Endoscopy vs Interspinous Process Spacers in the Treatment of Spinal Stenosis: An Effect Size Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes

STUDY DESIGN

A design-agnostic standardized effect meta-analysis of 48 randomized, prospective, and retrospective studies on clinical outcomes with spinal endoscopic and interspinous process spacer (IPS) surgery.

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to provide reference set of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) effect size data for back and leg pain following endoscopic and IPS decompression for lumbar herniated disc, foraminal, or lateral recess spinal stenosis.

BACKGROUND

Mechanical low back pain following endoscopic transforaminal decompression may be more reliably reduced by simultaneous posterior column stabilization with IPS.

METHODS

A systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1 January 2000 to 2 April 2020, identified 880 eligible endoscopy and 362 IPS studies varying in design and metrics. The authors compared calculated standardized effect sizes (Cohen's d) for extracted ODI, VAS-back, and VAS-leg data.

RESULTS

The pooled standardized effect size combining the ODI, VAS-back, and VAS-leg data for the total sample of 19862 data sets from the 30 endoscopy and 18 IPS was 0.877 (95% CI = 0.857-0.898). When stratified by surgery, the combined effect sizes were 0.877 (95% CI = 0.849-0.905) for endoscopic decompression and 0.863 (95% CI = 0.796-0.930; P = 0.056) for IPS implantation. The ODI effect sizes calculated on 6462 samples with directly visualized endoscopic decompression were 0.917 (95% CI = 0.891-0.943) versus 0.798 (95% CI = 0.713-0.883; P < 0.001) with indirect IPS decompression (P < 0.001). The VAS-back effect sizes calculated on 3672 samples were 0.661 (95% CI = 0.585-0.738) for endoscopy and 0.784 (95% CI: 0.644-0.923; P = 0.187) for IPS. The VAS-leg effect sizes calculated on 7890 samples were 0.885 (95% CI = 0.852-0.917) for endoscopic decompression and 0.851 (95% CI = 0.767-0.935; P = 0.427).

CONCLUSION

Lumbar IPS implantation produces larger reduction in low back pain than spinal endoscopy. On the basis of this meta-analysis, the combination of lumbar transforaminal endoscopy with simultaneous IPS has merits and should be formally investigated in higher grade clinical studies.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Meta-analysis on the added clinical benefit of combining lumbar endoscopic decompression with an interspinous process spacer.

Efficacy and Complications of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

As an emerging minimally invasive endoscopic technique, unilateral biportal endoscopic spinal surgery (UBESS) has the advantages of flexibility, a wide and clear field of view, and less soft tissue damage. However, the clinical evidence is insufficient and controversy exists regarding UBESS for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). In the present meta-analysis, we investigated the clinical efficacy and complications of UBESS for the treatment of LSS.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched through to June 1, 2021 to identify all reported studies on UBESS for LSS. Only English-language studies with original reported data from ≥30 cases were considered for inclusion. The patient demographics, operative time, hospital stay, complications, visual analog scale (VAS) score, Oswestry disability index, and Macnab criteria were extracted. Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane collaboration tool for randomized controlled trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for retrospective studies. A meta-analysis was performed using a random or fixed effect model according to the heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies with 586 patients and 607 operation levels were included. The mean single-level operative time, hospital stay, and follow-up duration were 61.10 minutes, 2.32 days, and 14.7 months, respectively. At the final follow-up visit, the mean VAS score for leg pain had decreased from 7.23 preoperatively to 1.83 postoperatively, the mean VAS score for back pain had decreased from 6.30 to 1.95, and the mean Oswestry disability index had significantly improved from 56.99 to 17.83. The average satisfied outcome (excellent or good using the Macnab criteria) was 86%. The overall complication rate was 5%, and the most common complication was a dural tear, with an incidence of 2%, followed by epidural hematoma with an incidence of 1%. The remaining complications were nerve root injury, inadequate decompression, and postoperative headache.

CONCLUSIONS

From the available clinical results and experience from reported studies, UBESS for LSS is a feasible and effective approach and a worthwhile choice for clinicians. However, the complications associated with the procedure should also be seriously considered.

Non-Surgical Interventions for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Leading To Neurogenic Claudication: A Clinical Practice Guideline

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) causing neurogenic claudication (NC) is increasingly common with an aging population and can be associated with significant symptoms and functional limitations. We developed this guideline to present the evidence and provide clinical recommendations on nonsurgical management of patients with LSS causing NC. Using the GRADE approach, a multidisciplinary guidelines panel based recommendations on evidence from a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews published through June 2019, or expert consensus. The literature monitored up to October 2020. Clinical outcomes evaluated included pain, disability, quality of life, and walking capacity. The target audience for this guideline includes all clinicians, and the target patient population includes adults with LSS (congenital and/or acquired, lateral recess or central canal, with or without low back pain, with or without spondylolisthesis) causing NC. The guidelines panel developed 6 recommendations based on randomized controlled trials and 5 others based on professional consensus, summarized in 3 overarching recommendations: (Grade: statements are all conditional/weak recommendations) Recommendation 1. For patients with LSS causing NC, clinicians and patients may initially select multimodal care nonpharmacological therapies with education, advice and lifestyle changes, behavioral change techniques in conjunction with home exercise, manual therapy, and/or rehabilitation (moderate-quality evidence), traditional acupuncture on a trial basis (very low-quality evidence), and postoperative rehabilitation (supervised program of exercises and/or educational materials encouraging activity) with cognitive-behavioral therapy 12 weeks postsurgery (low-quality evidence). Recommendation 2. In patients LSS causing NC, clinicians and patients may consider a trial of serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors or tricyclic antidepressants. (very low-quality evidence). Recommendation 3. For patients LSS causing NC, we recommend against the use of the following pharmacological therapies: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, methylcobalamin, calcitonin, paracetamol, opioids, muscle relaxants, pregabalin (consensus-based), gabapentin (very low-quality), and epidural steroidal injections (high-quality evidence). PERSPECTIVE: This guideline, on the basis of a systematic review of the evidence on the nonsurgical management of lumbar spine stenosis, provides recommendations developed by a multidisciplinary expert panel. Safe and effective non-surgical management of lumbar spine stenosis should be on the basis of a plan of care tailored to the individual and the type of treatment involved, and multimodal care is recommended in most situations.

Therapeutic Effect of Large Channel Endoscopic Decompression in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Background: Percutaneous endoscopic decompression (PED) is a minimally invasive surgical technique that is now used for not only disc herniation but also lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). However, few studies have reported endoscopic surgery for LSS. Therefore, we conducted this study to evaluate the outcomes and safety of large channel endoscopic decompression. Methods: Forty-one patients diagnosed with LSS who underwent PED surgery were included in the study. The estimated blood loss, operative time, length of hospital stay, hospital costs, reoperations, complications, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score and SF-36 physical-component summary scores were assessed. Preoperative and postoperative continuous data were compared through paired-samples t-tests. The significance level for all analyses was defined as p < 0.05. Results: A total of 41 consecutive patients underwent PED, including 21 (51.2%) males and 20 (48.8%) females. The VAS and ODI scores decreased from preoperatively to postoperatively, but the JOA and SF-36 physical component summary scores significantly increased. The VAS (lumbar) score decreased from 5.05 ± 2.33 to 0.45 ± 0.71 (P = 0.000); the VAS (leg) score decreased from 5.51 ± 2.82 to 0.53 ± 0.72 (P = 0.000); the ODI score decreased from 52.80 ± 20.41 to 4.84 ± 3.98 (P = 0.000), and the JOA score increased from 11.73 ± 4.99 to 25.32 ± 2.12 (P = 0.000). Only 1 patient experienced an intraoperative complication (2.4%; dural tear), and 1 patient required reoperation (2.4%). Conclusions: Surgical treatment for LSS is to sufficiently decompress and minimize the trauma and complications caused by surgery. This study did not reveal any obvious shortcomings of PED and suggested PED is a safe and effective treatment for LSS.

A Novel Anterior Cervical X-Shape-Corpectomy and Fusion for Cervical Spinal Stenosis at C4-C6 Level: A Technical Note

OBJECTIVE

Anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF) is employed in patients with localized cervical spinal stenosis (CSS). However, there are some disadvantages such as subsidence of the titanium mesh cage, slow fusion rates, breakage of the plate and screws, and donor-site complications. For patients with small posterior osteophytes, ossified or hypertrophy of the posterior longitudinal ligaments or ligamentum flavum, the range of decompression from the classic anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) cannot meet the clinical requirements. However, employing ACCF is controversial. Therefore, it is necessary to seek a novel, safe and effective surgery that can combine the strengths of ACDF and ACCF. Our objective was to describe a novel anterior approach cervical surgery and investigate its clinical outcomes on segmental CSS at the C4-C6 levels 6 months postoperatively.

METHODS

A novel anterior cervical X-shape-corpectomy and fusion (ACXF) was performed to correct the CSS.

RESULTS

The patient's neurologic function and myodynamia of the extremities were improved significantly 3 and 6 months after surgery with good bony fusion. Neck pain also was relieved. Immediately postoperative and after 6-month images indicated no significant spinal stenosis. The patient's cervical curvature was improved after surgery without significant implant subsidence or loss of adjacent intervertebral height. There were no postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

ACXF may be a safe and effective procedure for segmental CSS and an alternative for ACCF, as it has a wide operative field of view, sufficient decompression range, excellent transverse vertebral bony fusion, less internal fixation-related complications, and graft subsidence and no donor-site complications.

Osteoporosis increases the likelihood of revision surgery following a long spinal fusion for adult spinal deformity

BACKGROUND

Adult spinal deformity (ASD) can be a debilitating condition that requires surgical intervention. ASD patients often present with osteoporosis, predisposing them to increased rates of instrumentation failure and postoperative fractures, frequent reasons for revision surgery. We hypothesized that the rate and timing of revision surgery are different in osteoporotic and nonosteoporotic patients undergoing long fusions for ASD. To our knowledge, the timing of revision surgeries, in particular, have not previously been explored.

PURPOSE

To determine the rate and timing of revision surgery in osteoporotic and nonosteoporotic patients following a long fusion for ASD.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective comparative study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

ASD patients who underwent a long spinal fusion surgery at two large academic medical centers from 2010 to 2019.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Occurrence of revision surgery.

METHODS

Inclusion criteria were patient age of least 40 years and spinal fusion spanning at least seven levels for ASD. Patient records were reviewed for a diagnosis of osteoporosis as per ICD codes and revision surgery within 2 years of the index procedure. Revision surgery was defined as an unplanned procedure related to the index surgery for the treatment of a spine-related complication. Chi-squared tests comparing demographic data, revision rates, and multiple revisions were conducted. The incidence and prevalence of revision surgeries as a function of time and osteoporotic status were evaluated for significant differences via the Mann-Whitney U and Mantel-Haenszel log rank tests. Finally, a logistic regression analysis was utilized to determine the predictive value of osteoporosis, age, and gender on the likelihood for complications.

RESULTS

Three hundred ninety-nine patients matched the study criteria. In the osteoporotic group, 40.5% of patients underwent a revision surgery compared to 28.0% in the nonosteoporotic group (p=.01). The occurrence of multiple revision surgeries following the index procedure was similar in both groups: 8.4% in osteoporotic patients and 8.6% in nonosteoporotic patients. Age and gender were not statistically correlated with the incidence of revision surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

ASD patients with osteoporosis have an increased risk of undergoing revision for a surgery-related complication within 2 years of the index procedure. These complications included failure of hardware, pseudoarthrosis, proximal junction failure, and infection, among other issues that required surgical intervention. As others have also highlighted the importance of poor bone density on construct failure, our data further underscore the importance of preoperative osteoporosis surveillance. Though intuitive, further study is needed to demonstrate that improving patients' bone density can decrease the incidence of related complications and the need or revision surgery.

Management for lumbar spinal stenosis: A network meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Conventional paired meta-analyses have shown inconsistent results regarding the safety and efficacy of different interventions.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a network meta-analysis (NMA) and systematic review based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacies of different interventions for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and major scientific websites from inception to October 10, 2019, for randomized controlled trials comparing the nine most commonly used interventions for LSS. The main outcomes were disability and pain intensity. The PROSPERO number was CRD42020154247.

RESULTS

First, laminotomy was better in improving patients' short- and long-term dysfunction (probability 49% and 25%, respectively). Second, decompression, decompression plus fusion, endoscopic decompression, interspinous process spacer device implantation, laminectomy, laminotomy and minimally invasive decompression were significantly more efficacious in relieving pain than non-surgical interventions (mean difference in the short-term -21.82, -22.00, -16.68, -17.47, -17.75, -17.61 and -18.86; in the long-term -37.14, -34.04, -34.07, -39.79, -36.14, -32.75 and -39.14, respectively). Third, endoscopic decompression had a lower complication rate (probability 51%). In addition, laminotomy had a lower reoperation rate (probability 45%). Fourth, decompression plus fusion resulted in more blood loss than any other surgical intervention (probability 96%). Finally, endoscopic decompression had the shortest hospitalization time (probability 96%).

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences among the different interventions in improving patient function. Surgical interventions were associated with better pain relief but a higher incidence of complications. Decompression plus fusion is not necessary for patients. In addition, endoscopic decompression as a novel and less invasive surgical approach may be a good choice for LSS patients.

Management for lumbar spinal stenosis: Protocol for a network meta-analysis and systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is caused by structural changes of the spine, which lead to several severe symptoms, including back pain, leg pain, numbness and tingling in the legs, as well as reduced physical function. However, there is little evidence suggesting whether a patient with LSS should be treated with surgery. If surgery is recommended, which type of surgery benefits the patient most? To answer these questions, we will conduct a network meta-analysis and a systematic review to compare surgical and nonsurgical interventions in terms of efficacy as well as safety in adult patients with LSS.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search the PubMed, Cochrane library, and EMBASE databases for articles published prior to October 10, 2019. We will search for randomized controlled trials assessing surgical and nonsurgical interventions for adult patients with degenerative LSS without any language restrictions. The primary outcome measures will be pain and disability. The secondary outcomes will include adverse events (number of events or number of people with each type of adverse event), reoperations, complications, blood loss and operation time. We will obtain the full texts of the potentially relevant studies and independently assess them. The quality of evidence will be evaluated according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. A random-effects network meta-analysis will be performed to analyze all the evidence under the frequentist framework, and the ranking results will be presented. We will generate plots depicting the network geometry using Stata. The network meta-analysis will be performed according to the Bayesian framework. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval is not required. The research will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis secondary to ligamentum flavum hypertrophy using percutaneous endoscopy through interlaminar approach: a retrospective study

Background

This paper is to describe percutaneous endoscopy in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis secondary to ligamentum flavum hypertrophy targeted and to investigate the efficacy and safety of percutaneous endoscopy in the treatment of this kind of lumbar spinal stenosis in elderly patients.

Method

A retrospective analysis of 40 elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis secondary to ligamentum flavum hypertrophy admitted between January 2016 and January 2018 was performed. According to different surgical methods, they were divided into two groups: the control group and the endoscopy group (interlaminar approach), 20 people per group. There were 9 males and 11 females in the control group; the age of patients was 65.65 ± 4.44 years, and the average disease duration was 4.55 ± 1.85 years. Besides, there were 10 males and 10 females in the endoscopy group; the age of patients was 67.30 ± 4.23 years, and the average disease duration was 4.95 ± 2.04 years. Collect and count surgical-related indicators, preoperative and postoperative radiologic findings, incision visual analog scale (VAS), lumbar and leg pain VAS, lumbar Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA), and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores of all patients.

Result

A series of surgical indicators (including the operation time, the quantity of bleeding, and postoperative hospital stay) in the endoscopy group was significantly lower than that in the control group (p < 0.05). The incision VAS score in the endoscopy group was also significantly lower than that in the control group at each time after surgery (p < 0.05). Besides, compared with the control group, in the endoscopy group, the leg pain VAS score and lumbar ODI score after surgery were significantly decreased (p < 0.05). Compared with the control group, in the endoscopy group, the lumbar JOA score was significantly higher (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Percutaneous endoscopic technique is a small trauma, quick recovery, safe, and effective minimally invasive surgery for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis secondary to ligamentum flavum hypertrophy.

Conservative Treatment and Percutaneous Pain Relief Techniques in Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: WFNS Spine Committee Recommendations

BACKGROUND

Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a progressive disease with potentially dangerous consequences that affect quality of life. Despite the detailed literature, natural history is unpredictable. This uncertainty presents a challenge making the correct management decisions, especially in patients with mild to moderate symptoms, regarding conservative or surgical treatment. This article focused on conservative treatment for degenerative LSS.

METHODS

To standardize clinical practice worldwide as much as possible, the World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies Spine Committee held a consensus conference on conservative treatment for degenerative LSS. A team of experts in spinal disorders reviewed the literature on conservative treatment for degenerative LSS from 2008 to 2018 and drafted and voted on a number of statements.

RESULTS

During 2 consensus meetings, 14 statements were voted on. The Committee agreed on the use of physical therapy for up to 3 months in cases with no neurologic symptoms. Initial conservative treatment could be applied without major complications in these cases. In patients with moderate to severe symptoms or with acute radicular deficits, surgical treatment is indicated. The efficacy of epidural injections is still debated, as it shows only limited benefit in patients with degenerative LSS.

CONCLUSIONS

A conservative approach based on therapeutic exercise may be the first choice in patients with LSS except in the presence of significant neurologic deficits. Treatment with instrumental modalities or epidural injections is still debated. Further studies with standardization of outcome measures are needed to reach high-level evidence conclusions.

A Review of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis with Intermittent Neurogenic Claudication: Disease and Diagnosis

Objective

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a degenerative spinal condition affecting nearly 50% of patients presenting with lower back pain. The goal of this review is to present and summarize the current data on how LSS presents in various populations, how it is diagnosed, and current therapeutic strategies. Properly understanding the prevalence, presentation, and treatment options for individuals suffering from LSS is critical to providing patients the best possible care.

Results

The occurrence of LSS is associated with advanced age. In elderly patients, LSS can be challenging to identify due to the wide variety of presentation subtleties and common comorbidities such as degenerative disc disease. Recent developments in imaging techniques can be useful in accurately identifying the precise location of the spinal compression. Treatment options can range from conservative to surgical, with the latter being reserved for when patients have neurological compromise or conservative measures have failed. Once warranted, there are several surgical techniques at the physician’s disposal to best treat each individual case.

Cost-effectiveness and Safety of Interspinous Process Decompression (Superion)

Objective

There are several treatment options for patients suffering from lumbar spinal stenosis, including surgical and conservative care. Interspinous spacer decompression using the Superion device offers a less invasive procedure for patients who fail conservative treatment before traditional decompression surgery. This review assesses the current cost-effectiveness, safety, and performance of lumbar spinal stenosis treatment modalities compared with the Superion interspinous spacer procedure.

Methods

EMBASE and PubMed were searched to find studies reporting on the cost-effectiveness, safety, and performance of conservative treatment, including medicinal treatments, epidural injections, physical therapy, and alternative methods, as well as surgical treatment, including laminectomy, laminectomy with fusion, and interspinous spacer decompression. Results were supplemented with manual searches.

Results

Despite substantial costs, persistent conservative treatment (>12 weeks) of lumbar spinal stenosis showed only minimal improvement in pain and functionality. When conservative treatment fails, surgery is more effective than continuing conservative treatment. Lumbar laminectomy with fusion has considerably greater cost than laminectomy alone, as the length of hospital stay increases, the costs for implants are substantial, and complications increase. Although laminectomy and the Superion have comparable outcomes, the Superion implant is positioned percutaneously. This approach may minimize the direct and indirect costs of outpatient rehabilitation and absenteeism, respectively.

Conclusions

Superion interspinous lumbar decompression is a minimally invasive procedure for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis who have failed conservative treatment. Compared with extending conservative treatment or traditional spinal surgery, interspinous lumbar decompression reduces the direct and indirect costs associated with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Therapeutic Advantages of Frequent Physical Therapy Sessions for Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study of a randomized clinical trial and a prospective study of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to identify the effects of the number of physical therapy (PT) sessions on clinical outcomes of patients with LSS.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Supervised PT for patients with LSS has been reported to lead to better short-term outcomes in terms of disability and leg pain than unsupervised exercise. However, no studies have investigated the relationship between the number of PT sessions and the therapeutic effects in patients with LSS.

METHODS

All patients received exercise therapy for 6 weeks. Included were 43 patients receiving supervised PT twice a week (P2 group), 38 patients receiving supervised PT once a week (P1 group), and 43 patients receiving a home exercise program alone (HE group). Clinical outcomes were measured using the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ), a numerical rating scale (NRS) of back pain and leg pain, the Japanese Orthopedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) at baseline and at 6 weeks.

RESULTS

At 6 weeks, the P2 group showed significant improvements in ZCQ physical function, back and leg pain on the NRS compared with the P1 group (P < 0.05). Compared with the HE group, the P2 group showed significant improvements in ZCQ symptom severity and physical function, back and leg pain on the NRS, and JOABPEQ gait disturbance (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in mean changes after 6 weeks between the P1 and HE groups.

CONCLUSION

Six weeks of supervised PT twice a week resulted in significant short-term improvements in symptom severity, physical function, back and leg pain, and gait disturbance compared with once a week and/or home exercise alone. Patients with LSS should be treated with intensive and supervised exercise programs to obtain maximum benefit of exercise therapy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

The evolution of interlaminar endoscopic spine surgery

Due to the aging population, patients required spinal surgery for degenerative spondylopathy is increasing. With the advent of surgical instruments and techniques, minimally invasive spine surgery is prevalent worldwide. Besides microscopic techniques, endoscopic spine surgery has gotten attention gradually in this surgical field for the past two decades. There are two essential approaches developed currently, including transforaminal and interlaminar approach. These innovative equipment and skills promote the progression of endoscopic surgery from discectomy to decompression of spinal stenosis. Meanwhile, they also opened up the application of endoscopic surgery in a complicated situation. From the perspective of emerging technologies and techniques, the authors will review the evolution and describe the prospects of the interlaminar endoscopic spine surgery (IESS).