Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society

The Korean Neurosurgical Society (대한신경외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Comparison of the Clinical Outcomes of Decompression Alone and Fusion in Elderly Patients with Two-Level or More Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

  • Son, Seong (Department of Neurosurgery, Gachon University Gil Medical Center) ;
  • Kim, Woo Kyung (Department of Neurosurgery, Gachon University Gil Medical Center) ;
  • Lee, Sang Gu (Department of Neurosurgery, Gachon University Gil Medical Center) ;
  • Park, Chan Woo (Department of Neurosurgery, Gachon University Gil Medical Center) ;
  • Lee, Keun (Department of Neurosurgery, Gachon University Gil Medical Center)
  • Received : 2012.08.20
  • Accepted : 2013.01.15
  • Published : 2013.01.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective : We compared the results of two surgical techniques by retrospective study of 60 elderly patients (65 years or older) who underwent either decompression alone or fusion for the treatment of two-level or more lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods : During the period of 2003 and 2008, two-level or more decompression alone or fusion was performed for lumbar spinal stenosis by three surgeons at our institution. Patients were allocated to two groups by surgical modality, namely, to a decompression group (31 patients) or a fusion group (29 patients). Overall mean age was 71.1 years (range, 65-84) and mean follow-up was 5.5 years (range, 3-9). A retrospective review of clinical, radiological, and surgical data was conducted. Results : No significant difference between the two groups was found with respect to age, follow-up period, surgical levels, or preoperative condition. At the last follow-up, correction of lumbar lordotic angle (determined radiologically) was better in the fusion group. However, clinical outcomes including visual analogue scale, Oswestry Disability Index, and the Odom's criteria were not significantly different in the two groups. On the other hand, surgical outcomes, such as, operation time, estimated blood loss, and surgical complications were significantly better in the decompression alone group. Conclusion : Our findings suggest that decompressive laminectomy alone achieves good outcomes in patients with two-level or more lumbar spinal stenosis, associated with an advanced age, poor general condition, or osteoporosis.

Keywords

References

  1. Aiki H, Ohwada O, Kobayashi H, Hayakawa M, Kawaguchi S, Takebayashi T, et al. : Adjacent segment stenosis after lumbar fusion requiring second operation. J Orthop Sci 10 : 490-495, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-005-0919-3
  2. Aota Y, Kumano K, Hirabayashi S : Postfusion instability at the adjacent segments after rigid pedicle screw fixation for degenerative lumbar spinal disorders. J Spinal Disord 8 : 464-473, 1995
  3. Arnoldi CC, Brodsky AE, Cauchoix J, Crock HV, Dommisse GF, Edgar MA, et al. : Lumbar spinal stenosis and nerve root entrapment syndromes. Definition and classification. Clin Orthop Relat Res : 4-5, 1976
  4. Bastian L, Lange U, Knop C, Tusch G, Blauth M : Evaluation of the mobility of adjacent segments after posterior thoracolumbar fixation : a biomechanical study. Eur Spine J 10 : 295-300, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1007/s005860100278
  5. Fredman B, Arinzon Z, Zohar E, Shabat S, Jedeikin R, Fidelman ZG, et al. : Observations on the safety and efficacy of surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis in geriatric patients. Eur Spine J 11 : 571-574, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-002-0409-7
  6. Ghiselli G, Wang JC, Bhatia NN, Hsu WK, Dawson EG : Adjacent segment degeneration in the lumbar spine. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86A : 1497-1503, 2004
  7. Gunzburg R, Szpalski M : The conservative surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly. Eur Spine J 12 Suppl 2 : S176-S180, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-003-0611-2
  8. Haynes SR, Lawler PG : An assessment of the consistency of ASA physical status classification allocation. Anaesthesia 50 : 195-199, 1995 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2044.1995.tb04554.x
  9. Jang IT, Lee SW, Atienza PM, You JS : Decompressive surgery alone for lumbar spianl stenosis in eldery patients. Korean J Spine 5 : 83-88, 2008
  10. Kanayama M, Hashimoto T, Shigenobu K, Harada M, Oha F, Ohkoshi Y, et al. : Adjacent-segment morbidity after Graf ligamentoplasty compared with posterolateral lumbar fusion. J Neurosurg 95 : 5-10, 2001
  11. Kim DW, Kim SB, Kim YS, Ko Y, Oh SH, Oh SJ : Surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in geriatric population : is it risky? J Korean Neurosurg Soc 38 : 107-110, 2005
  12. Kim SW, Lee SM, Shin H : Surgical outcomes after simple ligamentectomy without fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis. Korean J Spine 2 : 350-357, 2005
  13. Kumar MN, Jacquot F, Hall H : Long-term follow-up of functional outcomes and radiographic changes at adjacent levels following lumbar spine fusion for degenerative disc disease. Eur Spine J 10 : 309-313, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1007/s005860000207
  14. Lee CK : Accelerated degeneration of the segment adjacent to a lumbar fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 13 : 375-377, 1988 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-198803000-00029
  15. Lehmann TR, Spratt KF, Tozzi JE, Weinstein JN, Reinarz SJ, el-Khoury GY, et al. : Long-term follow-up of lower lumbar fusion patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 12 : 97-104, 1987 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-198703000-00004
  16. Loupasis GA, Stamos K, Katonis PG, Sapkas G, Korres DS, Hartofilakidis G : Seven- to 20-year outcome of lumbar discectomy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 24 : 2313-2317, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199911150-00005
  17. Paik JY, Yoon SM, Yoo CJ : A comparison of clinical outcomes between decompressive laminectomy alone and with arthrodesis in lumbar single level spinal stenosis. Korean J Spine 7 : 17-23, 2010
  18. Palmer S, Turner R, Palmer R : Bilateral decompressive surgery in lumbar spinal stenosis associated with spondylolisthesis : unilateral approach and use of a microscope and tubular retractor system. Neuroand surg Focus 13 : E4, 2002
  19. Ragab AA, Fye MA, Bohlman HH : Surgery of the lumbar spine for spinal stenosis in 118 patients 70 years of age or older. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28 : 348-353, 2003
  20. Rosen DS, O'Toole JE, Eichholz KM, Hrubes M, Huo D, Sandhu FA, et al. : Minimally invasive lumbar spinal decompression in the elderly : outcomes of 50 patients aged 75 years and older. Neurosurgery 60 : 503-509; discussion 509-510, 2007 https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000255332.87909.58
  21. Schlegel JD, Smith JA, Schleusener RL : Lumbar motion segment pathology adjacent to thoracolumbar, lumbar, and lumbosacral fusions. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 21 : 970-981, 1996 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199604150-00013
  22. Son BG, Choi ES, Jung ES, Shin JH, Kim MJ, Chi YC : Clinical comparison between decompression and lumbar interbody fusion with instrumentation for lumbar lateral zone stenosis. Korean J Spine 1 : 88-93, 2004
  23. White AA III, Panjabi MM : Physical properties and functional mechanics of the spine in White AA III, Panjabi MM (eds) : Clinical biomechanics of the spine. Philadelphia : JB Lippincott, 1978, pp1-60
  24. Yamashita K, Ohzono K, Hiroshima K : Five-year outcomes of surgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis : a prospective observational study of symptom severity at standard intervals after surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31 : 1484-1490, 2006 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000219940.26390.26

Cited by

  1. Analysis of Factors Contributing to Postoperative Spinal Instability after Lumbar Decompression for Spinal Stenosis vol.10, pp.3, 2013, https://doi.org/10.14245/kjs.2013.10.3.149
  2. Biomechanical analysis of an interspinous fusion device as a stand-alone and as supplemental fixation to posterior expandable interbody cages in the lumbar spine : Laboratory investigation vol.20, pp.2, 2013, https://doi.org/10.3171/2013.10.spine13612
  3. Stand-alone interspinous spacer versus decompressive laminectomy for treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis vol.12, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1586/17434440.2015.1100071
  4. Microsurgical unilateral laminotomy for decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: long-term results and predictive factors vol.158, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-016-2804-6
  5. Posterior Decompression and Fusion: Whole-Spine Functional and Clinical Outcomes vol.11, pp.8, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0160213
  6. SURGICAL TREATMENT OF ELDERLY AND SENILE PATIENTS WITH DEGENERATIVE CENTRAL LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS vol.15, pp.3, 2013, https://doi.org/10.14531/ss2018.3.73-84
  7. Which functional outcome parameters correlate better with elderly patients' satisfaction after non-fusion lumbar spine surgery? vol.63, pp.4, 2013, https://doi.org/10.23736/s0390-5616.17.03977-7
  8. Multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis treated with Dynesys stabilization versus lumbar fusion in elderly patients: a retrospective study with a minimum of 5 years’ follow-up vol.139, pp.10, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-019-03234-3