Clinical classification of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis based on their leg pain syndrome: its correlation with 2-year surgical outcome

Impact of spinal imbalance and BMI on lumbar spinal canal stenosis determined by a diagnostic support tool: cohort study in community‑living people

INTRODUCTION

The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research (JSSR) developed a diagnostic support tool (score range −2 to 16) for lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSS). It is well known that patients with LSS have a forward-bending posture while walking. We could find only one study which examined sagittal alignment of LSS patients. The objectives of this study were to screen community-living people with LSS, and to investigate the association between LSS and spinal sagittal alignment, range of motion (ROM), and other spinal or physical factors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We enrolled 286 subjects ≥50 years old in the study. We regarded those with a JSSR diagnostic risk score ≥7 as having LSS. We measured and evaluated lateral lumbar radiographs, sagittal parameters, sagittal balance, and spinal mobility as determined with SpinalMouse®, back muscle strength (BMS), and body mass index (BMI). Spinal inclination angle (SIA) was used as an index of sagittal balance.

RESULTS

Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that increased BMI (OR 1.121, p < 0.05) and SIA (OR 1.144, p < 0.05) were important relevant factors for LSS. BMI had significant positive correlations with SIA (r = 0.214), and thoracic and lumbar kyphosis angles (r = 0.283, 0.131), and negative correlations with sacral slope angle (r = −0.166), and lumbar and total spinal ROMs (r = −0.270, −0.166). SIA had significant positive correlations with age (r = 0.334), BMI (r = 0.214) and lumbar kyphosis angle (r = 0.525), and negative correlations with BMS (r = −0.268), and lumbar and total spinal ROMs (r = −0.184, −0.171).

CONCLUSIONS

Increased SIA and BMI might be the most relevant risk factors for LSS.

Walking assessment in people with lumbar spinal stenosis: capacity, performance, and self-report measures

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Ambulation limitation is the hallmark of impairment in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Capacity and performance have been defined as two distinct aspects of disability. Previous literature suggests that a person's walking capacity may not be reflected in their daily walking performance.

PURPOSE

To examine the relationship between survey instruments, tested walking capacity, and daily ambulatory performance in people diagnosed with LSS.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Prospective laboratory and clinical observational study at a tertiary care spine clinic.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Twelve subjects with LSS significant enough to be scheduled for epidural injection.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Questionnaire (including the Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire, Pain Disability Index, Oswestry Disability Index, Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale, and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey), laboratory walk testing (walking capacity), and activity monitors (community ambulation).

METHODS

Subjects filled out functional questionnaires, performed a Self-Paced Walking Test (SPWT) of up to 30 minutes, and wore an Actigraph activity monitor during walking hours for 7 days.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant relationship between walking capacity (SPWT) and community ambulation per day (activity monitors), however, the maximum time of continuous activity during community ambulation had a strong relationship (r=0.63) with the SPWT. Fifteen self-report measures of ambulation were significantly correlated with the SPWT, activity monitor, or both. Of these, 13 (87%) were more highly correlated to the SPWT than the activity monitor. The SPWT had a strong relationship (r>0.60, p<.05) with global function scales but community ambulation did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Walking capacity and walking performance in LSS appear to be different constructs. Survey instruments appear to reflect capacity rather than performance. This dissociation between walking capacity and walking performance has implications for the clinical management and outcomes assessment of people with LSS.

Does this older adult with lower extremity pain have the clinical syndrome of lumbar spinal stenosis?

CONTEXT

The clinical syndrome of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common diagnosis in older adults presenting with lower extremity pain.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the accuracy of the clinical examination for the diagnosis of the clinical syndrome of LSS.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL searches of articles published from January 1966 to September 2010.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies were included if they contained adequate data on the accuracy of the history and physical examination for diagnosing the clinical syndrome of LSS, using a reference standard of expert opinion with radiographic or anatomic confirmation.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently reviewed each study to determine eligibility, extract data, and appraise levels of evidence.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Four studies evaluating 741 patients were identified. Among patients with lower extremity pain, the likelihood of the clinical syndrome of LSS was increased for individuals older than 70 years (likelihood ratio [LR], 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-2.5), and was decreased for those younger than 60 years (LR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.29-0.57). The most useful symptoms for increasing the likelihood of the clinical syndrome of LSS were having no pain when seated (LR, 7.4; 95% CI, 1.9-30), improvement of symptoms when bending forward (LR, 6.4; 95% CI, 4.1-9.9), the presence of bilateral buttock or leg pain (LR, 6.3; 95% CI, 3.1-13), and neurogenic claudication (LR, 3.7; 95% CI, 2.9-4.8). Absence of neurogenic claudication (LR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.17-0.31) decreased the likelihood of the diagnosis. A wide-based gait (LR, 13; 95% CI, 1.9-95) and abnormal Romberg test result (LR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.4-13) increased the likelihood of the clinical syndrome of LSS. A score of 7 or higher on a diagnostic support tool including history and examination findings increased the likelihood of the clinical syndrome of LSS (LR, 3.3; 95% CI, 2.7-4.0), while a score lower than 7 made the diagnosis much less likely (LR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.06-0.16).

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnosis of the clinical syndrome of LSS requires the appropriate clinical picture and radiographic findings. Absence of pain when seated and improvement of symptoms when bending forward are the most useful individual findings. Combinations of findings are most useful for identifying patients who are unlikely to have the diagnosis.

Clinical usefulness of assessing lumbar somatosensory evoked potentials in lumbar spinal stenosis

Object

The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the clinical usefulness of assessing lumbar somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) in central lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

Methods

The latencies of lumbar SSEPs were recorded in 40 patients with central LSS, including 16 men and 24 women. The mean age of the patients was 67.3 ± 7.4 years. The diagnosis was LSS in 23 cases and LSS associated with degenerative spondylolisthesis in 17 cases. The average duration of symptoms was 43.8 ± 51.2 months. Twenty-two cases had bilateral and 18 cases had unilateral leg symptoms. Thirty-seven cases were associated with neurogenic intermittent claudication and the mean walking distance of patients with this condition was 246.8 ± 232.7 m. The mean Japanese Orthopedic Association scale score, as well as the visual analog scale (VAS) scores of low-back pain, leg pain, and numbness, were 16.5 ± 3.5, 6.0 ± 2.5, 6.9 ± 2.1, and 7.8 ± 2.2, respectively. The minimal cross-sectional area of the dural sac on MR imaging was 0.44 ± 0.21 cm2. Thirty-nine cases of cervical spondylotic myelopathy without lumbar and peripheral neuropathy were chosen as the control group.

Results

The latencies of lumbar SSEPs in patients with LSS and in the control group were 23.0 ± 2.0 ms and 21.6 ± 1.9 ms, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between the LSS and control groups (p < 0.05). The latency of lumbar SSEPs was significant correlated with the VAS score of leg numbness (p < 0.05). The latency of lumbar SSEPs in LSS was clearly delayed when the VAS score of leg numbness was ≥ 8 (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Lumbar SSEPs are able to detect neurological deficit in the lumbar area effectively, and they can reflect part of the subjective severity of sensory disturbance (numbness) in LSS. Both lumbar SSEPs and VAS scores of leg numbness may be useful for clinical evaluation in patients with LSS.

The influence of preoperative back pain on the outcome of lumbar decompression surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective study with 12-month follow-up.

OBJECTIVE

To examine how the relative severity of low back pain (LBP) to leg/buttock pain (LP) influences the outcome of decompression surgery for spinal stenosis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Decompression surgery is a common treatment for lumbar spinal canal stenosis, with generally good outcome. However, concomitant LBP at presentation can make it difficult to decide whether decompression alone will result in a good overall outcome.

METHODS

The Spine Society of Europe Spine Tango system was used to acquire the data from 221 patients. Inclusion criteria were lumbar degenerative spinal stenosis, first-time surgery, maximum 3 affected levels, and decompression as the only procedure. Before and 12 months after surgery, patients completed the multidimensional Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI; includes 0-10 LP and LBP scales); at 12 months, global outcome was rated on a Likert-scale and dichotomized into "good" and "poor" groups.

RESULTS

There was a low but significant positive correlation between baseline LP-minus-LBP scores and both improvement in the multidimensional COMI score after 12 months (r = 0.21, P = 0.003) and the score on the 12-month global outcome scale (r = 0.19, P = 0.007). In the good outcome group, mean baseline LP was 2.3 (+/-3.7) points higher than LBP; in the poor group, the corresponding value was 0.8 (+/-3.4) (P = 0.01 between groups). In multivariate regression analyses (controlling for age, gender, comorbidity), baseline LBP intensity was the most significant predictor of the 12-month COMI score, and preoperative LP-minus-LBP score of the global outcome (each P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Overall, greater back pain relative to LP at baseline was associated with a significantly worse outcome after decompression. This finding seems intuitive, but has rarely been quantified in the many predictor studies conducted to date. Consideration of relative LBP and LP scores may assist in clinical decision-making and in establishing realistic patient expectations.

Intraobserver and interobserver reliability of the Landim's Classification System for lumbar spinal stenosis

OBJECTIVE: the Classification proposed by Landim for lumbar spine stenosis could be a method of diagnostic standardization once, on the literature, there are no studies that standardize the use of a classification which allows the comparison of results. It is necessary the evaluation of intra and interobservers' reproducibility for such system as to validate it for this matter. METHODS: pre-operative image exam of lumbosacral column of 11 patients diagnosed with symptomatic lumbar stenosis were selected. The criteria for selection were image exams with good quality and diverse etiologies. The age group ranged from 15 to 87 years and included both sexes. The studied samples were followed at the Ambulatory of Spine Column of the Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology of the Hospital das Clínicas, Universidade de Campinas (Unicamp), city of Campinas, state of São Paulo, Brazil. Twelve spine surgeons classified the 11 sample exams according to Landim's Classification in two different moments with a time interval of 3 weeks. The intra and interobservers' statistical analysis used were the Wilcoxon and the Alpha of Cronbach Tests, respectively. Significant results were considered as P<0.05. RESULTS: the analysis of the addition of the first and second classifications from the 11 cases appraised by 12 spine surgeons with a time interval of 3 weeks, resulted in percentual accordance among intra and interobserver of 65% and 83% for global classification; 80% and 91% for "segment"; 86% and 95% for "type"; 85% and 82% for "area", respectively. The intraobserver reproducibility was 79% and interobserver, 88%. CONCLUSION: the proposed Classification of Landim has an easy applicability and may become a possible mean to standardize information with good levels of reproducibility and confidence intra and interobservers for more consistent future conclusions related to the pathology of lumbar stenosis.

Clinical value of motor evoked potentials with transcranial magnetic stimulation in the assessment of lumbar spinal stenosis

The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical usefulness of assessing motor evoked potentials (MEP) in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Twenty-three LSS patients were enrolled. The preoperative data of MEP latency (MEPLT), clinical symptoms, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores for low back pain, visual analogue scale (VAS) for back pain, leg pain and numbness, walking distance and the minimal cross-sectional area (mCSA) of the dural sac were evaluated. The mean MEPLT was 42.1 +/- 2.8 ms. Fourteen patients had bilateral leg symptoms. The mean walking distance and mCSA were 302.1 +/- 302.8 m and 0.4 +/- 0.2 cm(2), respectively. The mean JOA score and VAS scores for back pain, leg pain and numbness were 15.9 +/- 4.8, 6.0 +/- 2.9, 7.7 +/- 1.9 and 7.3 +/- 3.0, respectively. MEPLT was related to the walking distance, limb symptoms and the VAS for numbness. MEPLT was significantly delayed in patients who showed a walking distance less than 500 m. MEP is useful in LSS assessment. It can reflect the subjective severity of motor disturbance and predict the neurological deficit prior to appearance.