Comparison of transforaminal endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy (TELF) in patients with degenerative scoliosis and patients with normal alignment

Cross-sectional study. To evaluate the response behavior of EuroQOL-5D (EQ-5D) compared with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and back and leg pain scores. Recent changes in policies have highlighted the need for demonstration of both quality and cost effectiveness. In an effort to meet these requirements, surgeons are collecting health-related quality of life and utility data. Unfortunately, the burden of extensive data collection on both physician and patient is considerable. The EQ-5D is a commonly used, easily administered, brief utility measure that can provide both clinical and utility data. The EQ-5D has not yet been validated in spine patients in comparison with established outcome measures. EQ-5D, ODI, back and leg pain (0-10) scores were collected as part of standard clinical practice. Spearman rank correlations between the ODI, back and leg pain scores, and the EQ-5D were determined. A subanalysis to determine dimension-specific effects was done. Data were categorized by level of low back disability and level of back and leg pain. Data from 8385 patients (5046 females, 3339 males), mean age 52 (range, 18-96) were analyzed. There was a strong correlation between EQ-5D and ODI (r = -0.776) and between EQ-5D and back pain (r = -0.648); and moderate correlation between EQ-5D and leg pain scores (r = -0.538). Increasing disability, as measured by ODI, lead to lower EQ-5D scores, with similar response behavior for both back and leg pain scores. All correlations were statistically significant at P < 0.0001. The EQ-5D correlated well with established spine outcome measures, including ODI, and back and leg pain scores. EQ-5D correlated best with ODI scores. Correlation with back pain was stronger than leg pain, but all correlations were relatively strong. The EQ-5D can serve spine surgeons as an effective measure of clinical outcome and health utility for economic analysis.

BackgroundRisk factors for unfavorable surgical outcomes are dependent on the definitions of the unfavorable surgical outcomes. The aims of this study were to compare risk factors for each unfavorable surgical outcome according to two different definitions of “unfavorable” surgical outcomes after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) as well as compare the clinical course from the preoperative period to 3 years postoperatively between cases with favorable and unfavorable outcomes according to the two different definitions.MethodsOverall, 295 patients who underwent spine surgery for LSS and a follow-up evaluation at 3 years postoperatively were enrolled and divided into favorable and unfavorable groups, based on two different definitions for unfavorable surgical outcomes, as evaluated at 12 months postoperatively: the patient-reported outcome (PRO) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) methods. In the PRO method, patients with a postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score > 22 were considered as having an “unfavorable” outcome, whereas in the MCID method, those with a postoperative ODI score that changed < 12.8 points from the preoperative value were classified as having an “unfavorable” outcome. As a primary outcome, risk factors for unfavorable surgical outcomes according to each definition were investigated at 12 months postoperatively.ResultsIn the PRO method, female sex (P = 0.011; odds ratio (OR): 2.340), elementary school attainment (vs. university attainment; P = 0.035; OR: 2.875), and higher preoperative ODI score (P = 0.028; OR: 2.340) were associated with higher odds for an unfavorable surgical outcome. In the MCID method, a higher preoperative ODI score was associated with higher odds (P < 0.001; OR: 0.920) of a favorable surgical outcome. In the PRO method, the favorable outcome group demonstrated significantly lower visual analog scale for back and leg pain and lower ODI scores than the unfavorable outcome group at 3 years postoperatively, whereas in the MCID method, clinical outcomes were not different between the two groups at 3 years postoperatively.ConclusionA higher preoperative ODI score may be a risk factor for postoperative ODI > 22 after surgery for LSS. It may also be associated with higher odds for improvements in the ODI score of > 12.8.

Micro-tubular decompression in extreme lumbar spinal stenosis is challenging because it is technically difficult to achieve adequate decompression. Whether the results of micro-tubular decompression related to pain, function, and complications in lumbar spinal stenosis of the extreme and non-extreme varieties are different has not yet been conclusively established. Are there differences between patients with extreme stenosis and non-extreme stenosis in terms of (1) VAS back or leg pain, (2) Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), or (3) complications when they were treated with spinal decompression using a tubular retractor system? Between January 2007 and January 2017, one surgeon performed 325 single-level lumbar micro-tubular decompressions without fusion. Of those, 43% (140 of 325) had extreme stenosis (defined as the absence of cerebrospinal fluid signal and a grey homogeneous dural sac with unrecognizable rootlets and posterior epidural fat in T2 weighted axial MRI image) and the rest had non-extreme stenosis. During this time, we used tubular retractors for these procedures in patients with simple lumbar spinal stenosis who had persistent symptoms despite conservative treatment for neurogenic claudication. No alternate form of decompression was performed in the study period. Patients with complex lumbar spinal stenosis associated with a deformity or instability who were treated with instrumented fusion were excluded. A total of 14% (20 of 140) patients in the extreme stenosis group and 15% (28 of 185) patients in the non-extreme stenosis group were lost to follow-up before 2 years; the remaining 120 patients with extreme stenosis and 157 patients with non-extreme stenosis were analyzed at a mean follow-up of 33 ± 5 months in this retrospective, comparative study. The groups were not different at baseline in terms of preoperative VAS score for back pain, age, gender, BMI or the percentage who had diabetes or who smoked. However, patients with extreme stenosis had higher preoperative ODI scores and higher preoperative VAS score for leg pain compared with the non-extreme group. There was a higher proportion of men in the non-extreme stenosis group (56% [104 of 185] versus 50% [71 of 140]; p = 0.324). Study endpoints were VAS score for leg and back pain, ODI, and complications, all of which were ascertained by chart review. With the numbers available, we could detect with 80% power at p < 0.05 a difference of 0.93 cm of 10 cm on a 10-cm VAS scale for VAS leg pain; a difference of 1.00 cm of 10 cm on a 10-cm VAS scale for VAS back pain and a difference of 2.12 cm of 100 cm on a 100-cm ODI scale. In terms of pain, both groups improved after surgery, but there was no between-group difference in terms of the VAS scores at the most recent follow-up. VAS back pain improved from a mean of 3 ± 1 to 2 ± 1 in the extreme stenosis group and from 3 ± 1 to 1 ± 1 in the non-extreme stenosis group (p = 0.904); VAS leg pain improved from 7 ± 1 to 1 ± 1 versus 6 ± 1 to 1 ± 1, respectively (p = 0.537). ODI scores likewise improved in both groups, with no between-group difference in the ODI scores at latest follow-up (66 ± 7 to 19 ± 2 in the extreme stenosis group versus 59 ± 5 to 19 ± 2 in the non-extreme stenosis group (p = 0.237). Complications in the group with extreme stenosis occurred in six patients (incidental dural tears in two patients, urinary retention in three patients, and Syndrome of Inappropriate Anti Diuretic Hormone secretion (SIADH) in one patient); complications in the non-extreme stenosis occurred in two patients (incidental dural tears in two patients). The results in terms of improvement in VAS for leg and back pain and ODI scores were not different between patients with extreme and non-extreme stenosis. Micro-tubular decompression can be thus considered an alternative for patients with extreme stenosis. Future studies, ideally multicentre, comparative trials, are needed to confirm our preliminary results. III, therapeutic study.

Back pain improves significantly following discectomy for lumbar disc herniation

Hand grip strength can predict clinical outcomes and risk of falls after decompression and instrumented posterolateral fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis

OBJECT Back and leg pain are the primary outcomes of adult spinal deformity (ASD) and predict patients' seeking of surgical management. The authors sought to characterize changes in back and leg pain after operative or nonoperative management of ASD. Outcomes were assessed according to pain severity, type of surgical procedure, Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-Schwab spine deformity class, and patient satisfaction. METHODS This study retrospectively reviewed data in a prospective multicenter database of ASD patients. Inclusion criteria were the following: age > 18 years and presence of spinal deformity as defined by a scoliosis Cobb angle ≥ 20°, sagittal vertical axis length ≥ 5 cm, pelvic tilt angle ≥ 25°, or thoracic kyphosis angle ≥ 60°. Patients were grouped into nonoperated and operated subcohorts and by the type of surgical procedure, spine SRS-Schwab deformity class, preoperative pain severity, and patient satisfaction. Numerical rating scale (NRS) scores of back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, physical component summary (PCS) scores of the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs), and substantial clinical benefits (SCBs) were assessed. RESULTS Patients in whom ASD had been operatively managed were 6 times more likely to have an improvement in back pain and 3 times more likely to have an improvement in leg pain than patients in whom ASD had been nonoperatively managed. Patients whose ASD had been managed nonoperatively were more likely to have their back or leg pain remain the same or worsen. The incidence of postoperative leg pain was 37.0% at 6 weeks postoperatively and 33.3% at the 2-year follow-up (FU). At the 2-year FU, among patients with any preoperative back or leg pain, 24.3% and 37.8% were free of back and leg pain, respectively, and among patients with severe (NRS scores of 7-10) preoperative back or leg pain, 21.0% and 32.8% were free of back and leg pain, respectively. Decompression resulted in more patients having an improvement in leg pain and their pain scores reaching MCID. Although osteotomies improved back pain, they were associated with a higher incidence of leg pain. Patients whose spine had an SRS-Schwab coronal curve Type N deformity (sagittal malalignment only) were least likely to report improvements in back pain. Patients with a Type L deformity were most likely to report improved back or leg pain and to have reductions in pain severity scores reaching MCID and SCB. Patients with a Type D deformity were least likely to report improved leg pain and were more likely to experience a worsening of leg pain. Preoperative pain severity affected pain improvement over 2 years because patients who had higher preoperative pain severity experienced larger improvements, and their changes in pain severity were more likely to reach MCID/SCB than for those reporting lower preoperative pain. Reductions in back pain contributed to improvements in ODI and PCS scores and to patient satisfaction more than reductions in leg pain did. CONCLUSIONS The authors' results provide a valuable reference for counseling patients preoperatively about what improvements or worsening in back or leg pain they may experience after surgical intervention for ASD.

Few studies have quantified clinical improvement following minimally invasive lumbar decompression based on predominant back pain or leg pain. To quantify improvement in patient-reported outcomes following minimally invasive lumbar decompression and determine the degree of improvement in back pain, leg pain, and disability in patients who present with predominant back pain or predominant leg pain. Patients who underwent primary, one-level minimally invasive lumbar decompression for degenerative pathology were retrospectively reviewed. Comparisons of visual analog scale (VAS) back and leg pain scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, and Short Form-12 (SF-12) mental and physical component scores from pre-operative to 6-week, 12-week, 6-month, and 1-year follow-up. Subgroup analyses were performed for patients with predominant back pain or predominant leg pain. A total of 102 patients were identified. Scores on VAS back and leg pain, ODI, and SF-12 physical component improved from pre-operative to all post-operative time points. After 1year, patients reported a 2.8-point (47%) reduction in back pain and a 4-point (61.1%) reduction in leg pain scores; 52 patients with predominant back pain and 50 patients with predominant leg pain reported reductions in pain throughout the year following surgery. In both the back and leg pain cohorts, patients experienced reductions in ODI during the first 6months and throughout 1-year follow-up, respectively. The majority of patients achieved minimum clinically important difference, regardless of predominant symptom. Patients reported improvements in back and leg pain following minimally invasive lumbar decompression regardless of predominant presenting symptom; however, patients with predominant leg pain may experience greater improvement than those with predominant back pain.

Lumbar epidural injections have been studied as symptomatic treatments for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). However, results about their efficacy have been controversial, and data regarding their use is scarce. Our purpose in this article is to study the efficacy of epidural injections in the management of pain and disability in patients suffering from spinal stenosis, to study the factors which can affect their efficacy, and to discuss whether they could replace surgery or not. A retrospective study between 2021 and 2022 took place in a Pain Clinic located in Notre-Dame des Secours University Hospital-Lebanon. The study was done on 128 patients, of whom 18 were excluded because they underwent laminectomy before taking the transforaminal lumbar epidural injections. Medical records were viewed. Outcome measures were checked before and after epidural injections using the numerical pain scale and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scale. Physical activity was assessed with a physical activity index. Back pain scores (9.46 ± 1.07 vs. 3.91 ± 3.13; P < 0.001), leg pain scores (9.31 ± 1.41 vs. 3.75 ± 3.17; P < 0.001), and ODI scores (27.45 ± 8.97 vs. 9.40 ± 9.42; P < 0.001) decreased after the injection compared to before it. A higher physical activity index was significantly associated with a decrease in back pain, leg pain, and ODI scores after epidural injection. In 57.8% of the patients, epidural injections were sufficient for pain management without the need for surgery. Epidural injections are effective in the management of back and leg pain associated with LSS and in improving patients' disability. Engaging in activities like walking and swimming is associated with better results. In some cases, epidural injections may replace surgery.

Application of Gelatin Sponge Impregnated with a Mixture of 3 Drugs to Intraoperative Nerve Root Block Combined with Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery in the Treatment of Adult Degenerative Scoliosis: A Clinical Observation Including 96 Patients

Unilateral biportal endoscopic discectomy (UBE) and microendoscopic discectomy (MED) are well-established minimally invasive techniques for managing single-segment degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS). However, current evidence from evidence-based medicine remains insufficient to conclusively demonstrate the comparative advantages of these methods. A total of 145 patients diagnosed with single-segment DLSS were enrolled from the spinal surgery department of Xinjiang Bazhou People's Hospital between January 2022 and August 2024. Fourteen patients were lost to follow-up, leaving 131 valid cases. Participants were divided into 2 groups: UBE (n = 70) and MED (n = 61), based on the surgical approach. The study compared the demographic and clinical characteristics of both groups (gender, age, disease duration, height, weight, BMI, and affected segment), perioperative metrics (operation time, blood loss, and hospital stay), and clinical outcomes at various time points (preoperatively, 3 days postoperatively, 1-month postoperatively, 3 months postoperatively, 1-year postoperatively, and 2 years postoperatively), including visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for back and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores, and imaging parameters (preoperative and postoperative disc height and dural sac expansion area). All patients completed follow-up for over 2 years. The UBE group demonstrated significantly shorter operation times, reduced blood loss, and shorter hospital stays compared to the MED group (P < .05). No significant differences in VAS scores for back and leg pain or ODI scores were found between the groups at preoperative and postoperative time points (P > .05). Both groups showed significant improvements in VAS scores for back and leg pain and ODI scores at all postoperative time points relative to preoperative levels (P < .05). No significant differences in dural sac expansion area or disc height (preoperative and postoperative) were noted between the groups (P > .05). Both UBE and MED are effective treatments for single-segment DLSS, achieving substantial spinal canal decompression and improvement in clinical symptoms. UBE, however, offers advantages over MED in terms of shorter surgical time, reduced blood loss, and shorter hospital stays.

In this study, we evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of full-endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for treatment of single-level lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. Fifty-three patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical techniques: Full endoscopic (Endo)-TLIF (n = 25) and TLIF (n = 28). Clinical efficacy was evaluated pre- and postoperatively. The operation time, operative blood loss, postoperative amount of serum creatine phosphokinase (CPK), postoperative drainage volume, postoperative hospital stay time, total cost, and operative complications were also recorded. Compared with the TLIF group, the Endo-TLIF group had similar intraoperative blood loss, less postoperative increased CPK, less postoperative drainage volume, and shorter postoperative hospital stay, but longer operative time and higher total cost. The postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores of back and leg pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores significantly improved compared with the preoperative scores in both two groups; more significant improvement of postoperative VAS scores of back pain and ODI scores were shown in the Endo-TLIF group at the 1-month follow-up (p < 0.05). No difference was found in the intervertebral fusion rate between the two groups. The Endo-TLIF has similar clinical effect compared with the TLIF for the treatment of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. It also has many surgical advantages such as less muscle trauma, less postoperative back pain, and fast functional recovery of the patient. However, steep learning curve, longer operative time, and higher total cost may be the disadvantages that limit this technique. Also, the Endo-TLIF treatment of patients with bilateral lateral recess stenosis is considered a relative contraindication.

P133. Is preoperative resolution of leg pain at rest a predictor for successful indirect decompression in anterior and lateral lumbar interbody fusion?

Obese (Body Mass Index >30) Patients Have Greater Functional Improvement and Reach Equivalent Outcomes at 12 Months Following Decompression Surgery for Symptomatic Lumbar Stenosis.

BackgroundLateral recess stenosis (LRS) is a common degenerative disease in the elderly. Since the rise of comorbidity is associated with increasing age, transforaminal endoscopic lateral recess decompression (TE-LRD) is advocated. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of TE-LRD in patients with LRS via visualized drilled foraminoplasty (VDF) or visualized reamed foraminoplasty (VRF) technique.MethodsA total of 45 and 42 consecutive patients with limp or unilateral radiculopathy symptoms underwent TE-LRD using the VDF and VRF technique, respectively. The radiation exposure and operation time, time to return to work, and complications were compared between two groups. Their clinical outcomes were evaluated with the visual analogue scale (VAS) leg pain score, VAS back pain score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and modified MacNab’s criteria.ResultsThe average values of radiation exposure and operative time in the VDF group were significantly higher than those in the VRF group (P < 0.05). The postoperative VAS and ODI scores in both groups were significantly improved compared with those before the operation (P < 0.05). In addition, the VAS score of the leg pain and ODI score in the VRF group were significantly lower than those in the VDF group at the 1-week follow-up (P < 0.05). The good-to-excellent rates of the VDF group and VRF group were 88.89 and 90.48%, respectively, whereas the complication occurrence rates were 6.67 and 4.76% in the VDF group and VRF group, respectively.ConclusionsTE-LRD performed by using VRF technique can be applied to treat LRS safely and effectively with short radiation exposure and operation time. This technique was comparable to the VDF technique with improved VAS leg pain and ODI scores in the short period after the operation. However, potential complications and risks still need to be considered.

To investigate the clinical results and complication prevention of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the treatment of single-segment severe lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). The clinical data of 112 patients with severe LSS treated with MIS-TLIF between January 2010 and January 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 43 males and 69 females, aged 52-81 years, with an average age of 65.3 years. The disease duration ranged from 4 to 126 months, with an average of 10.5 months. Clinical manifestations: 104 cases of low back pain, 91 cases of nervous intermittent claudication of both lower limbs, 21 cases of unilateral nerve root pain and/or numbness, and 5 cases of cauda equina nerve injury. The 112 cases were all severe central spinal stenosis, including 32 cases with lateral recess stenosis, 20 cases with foramen stenosis, 9 cases with ossification of ligamentum flavum, 38 cases with disc herniation; 14 cases with two complications and 5 cases with three. Stenosis segment: L 3, 4 in 6 cases, L 4, 5 in 89 cases, and L 5, S 1 in 17 cases. Surgical methods included bilateral decompression through bilateral approach (60 cases), bilateral decompression through unilateral approach (15 cases), and unilateral decompression (37 cases). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back pain and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI) score, fusion rate, and surgical complications were recorded. At last follow-up, the lumbar fusion was evaluated by Bridwell method, grades Ⅰ and Ⅱ were expressed as fusion. The operation time was 83-186 minutes (mean, 126.8 minutes), and the intraoperative blood loss was 65-630 mL (mean, 163.1 mL). All the 112 patients were followed up 25-49 months, with an average of 35.1 months. The VAS score of low back pain and leg pain and ODI score at each time point after operation were significantly improved when compared with preoperative scores ( P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the VAS score of low back pain and leg pain and ODI score at the other time points except 1 month after operation ( P<0.05). At last follow-up, 2 cases of cauda equina nerve injury recovered and 3 cases partially recovered. According to Bridwell classification criteria, 58 cases were grade Ⅰ, 47 cases were grade Ⅱ, and 7 cases were grade Ⅲ. The fusion rate was 93.8%. Perioperative complications included 5 cases of incision complications (superficial infection in 3 cases, hematoma formation in 2 cases), 19 cases of internal fixator complications (intraoperative end plate fracture in 8 cases, fusion cage sinking in 11 cases at last follow-up), and 15 cases of neurological complications (dural sac tear in 10 cases, transient neurological symptoms of lower extremities aggravated in 5 cases). MIS-TLIF treatment of single-level severe LSS can achieve good clinical results, while there is a risk of serious complications. Full understanding of the clinical and imaging features of the disease and reasonable and careful operation are helpful to control the occurrence of cauda equina nerve damage.