Visual Analog Scale Leg Scores Research Articles

Percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy for high-grade migrated lumbar disc herniation: clinical efficacy and safety assessment.

This study aimed to assess the clinical effectiveness and safety of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID) in the management of high-grade migrated Lumbar disc herniation (LDH). A total of 328 patients who underwent PEID for high-grade migrated LDH between May 2020 and January 2023 in our hospital were selected. Patients were categorized into high-grade migrated group and low-grade migrated group according to preoperative MRI findings. The preoperative and postoperative evaluations of clinical outcomes, such as Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for lower backs and legs, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and modified MacNab criteria for surgical success, were compared between groups. No statistically significant differences were found in hospitalization time, surgery time, intraoperative hemorrhage, number of intraoperative fluoroscopies, or incision length between the two groups. The lower back and leg VAS scores and ODI exhibited a statistically significant decrease in both groups across all postoperative time intervals. However, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant. Postoperative nerve root stimulation symptoms were reported in two and three cases in the high-grade migrated group and low-grade migrated group, respectively. One patient in the high-grade migrated group underwent reoperation due to re-herniation at the same segment. There was no significant difference in the rate of excellent-good cases between the two groups, with an overall rate of 94.7%. In treating high-grade migrated disc herniation, PEID offers advantages such as reduced trauma, small incision, quicker recovery and satisfactory clinical safety and efficacy.

Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Decompression with Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression for Lumbar Degenerative Diseases: A Meta-Analysis

Unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression (UBED) offers the advantages of minimal tissue damage, operational flexibility, and clear visualization, positioning it as an innovative and minimally invasive endoscopic technique. Nevertheless, the clinical evidence supporting the use of UBED in the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases is limited and conflicting. As of October 1, 2023, a comprehensive search was conducted across databases including Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to identify all published studies on minimally invasive UBED for the treatment of degenerative lumbar diseases. Data pertaining to patient demographics, fluoroscopy time, operative duration, intraoperative hemorrhage, hospitalization length, visual analog scale (VAS) score for back and leg pain, MacNab criteria, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and complication rates were extracted. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was utilized to assess the quality. Twelve articles were included, involving 816 patients. The back VAS score (95% confidence interval [CI]:-0.09-0.07, P= 0.75), MacNab criteria (95% CI: 0.52-2.3, P= 0.82), fluoroscopy time (95% CI:-7.03 to -0.4, P= 0.08), and the incidence of complications (95% CI: 0.5-1.73, P= 0.82) were not significantly different, while the leg VAS score (95% CI: 0.01-0.18, P= 0.03), ODI score (95% CI:-1.03 to -0.09, P= 0.02), operation time (95% CI: 5.76-20.62, P= 0.0005), hospitalization length (95% CI: 0.41-2.76, P= 0.008), and intraoperative hemorrhage (95% CI: 21.92-72.44, P= 0.0003) were significantly different. UBED offers superiority in ODI, flexibility, and visual field clarity. Conversely, percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression presents advantages in terms of operation duration, blood loss, hospitalization length, and leg VAS score. These factors should be thoroughly considered when selecting a surgical approach.

Comparing Quality of Life: Discectomy Surgery versus Epidural Corticosteroid Injection for Lumbar Disc Herniation

BackgroundSelecting an efficient treatment for patients with radiculopathy caused by lumbar disc herniation (LDH) unresponsive to conservative management remains a challenging task under investigation, yielding varying results. This study aims to compare the outcomes of the two most prevalent invasive treatments. MethodsIn this retrospective longitudinal study, we enrolled patients with confirmed refractory symptomatic LDH who sought treatment at Valiasr Hospital and underwent either discectomy surgery or epidural steroid injection (ESI) between 2019 and 2022. The outcome measures included pain intensity using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and quality of life (QoL) using the SF-36 questionnaire. ResultsA total of 202 individuals (112 in the discectomy group and 90 in the ESI group) consisting of 90 males and 112 females, with a mean age of 50.9 ± 13.5 years, underwent analysis. In the univariate analysis, QoL scores were significantly higher in the discectomy group (57.4 ± 2.4) compared to the ESI group (44.2 ± 2.4) (p <0.01). Furthermore, the surgery group exhibited a significantly greater reduction in the Leg VAS score after treatment compared to the ESI group (mean difference: -2.59, 95% confidence interval (CI): -3.45 to -1.70, p <0.01). After adjusting for the most important confounding variables using multiple linear regression analysis, the association between surgery and higher QoL scores remained statistically significant (Unstandardized Coefficients B= 7.65, 95% CI: 0.55, 14.76, p = 0.03). ConclusionsOur findings indicate that discectomy surgery has a more pronounced effect on patient outcomes and is a preferable treatment option for LDH patients.

Does the use of tranexamic acid intraoperatively reduce postoperative blood loss and complications following biportal endoscopic lumbosacral decompression?

Biportal endoscopic spine surgery is an effective minimally invasive technique for treating common lumbar pathologies. We aim to evaluate the impact of intraoperative tranexamic acid (TXA) use on postoperative blood loss in biportal endoscopic decompression surgery. Patients undergoing biportal endoscopic lumbar discectomies and decompressions either by same day surgery or overnight stay at a single institution beginning in October 2021 were prospectively enrolled. This study was non-randomized, non-blinded with the first cohort of consecutive patients receiving 1 g of intravenous TXA intra-operatively before closure and the second cohort of consecutive patients receiving no TXA. Exclusion criteria included any revision surgery, any surgery for the diagnosis of spinal instability, infection, tumor, or trauma, any contraindication for TXA. Eighty-four patients were included in the study, with 45 (54%) receiving TXA and 39 (46%) not receiving TXA. Median follow-up was 168 days [interquartile range (IQR), 85-368 days]. There were no differences in patient or surgical characteristics between cohorts. Estimated blood loss (EBL) was similar (P=0.20), while post-operative drain output was significantly lower in the TXA cohort (P=0.0028). Single level discectomies had significantly less drain output as compared to 2 level unilateral laminotomy, bilateral decompression (ULBD) cases (P<0.005). Post-operative complications were similar, with low rates of wound complication (1.2%) and transient postoperative weakness (2.4%, P>0.99 for both). Oswestry disability index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) back and VAS leg scores decreased significantly; the absolute decrease in scores did not differ between groups (P=0.71, 0.22, 0.86, respectively). Systemic intraoperative TXA administration is associated with a significant decrease in post-operative blood loss in biportal spinal endoscopy, with no impact on the improvement in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) or rate of post-operative complications. Single level biportal discectomies had significantly less postoperative drainage with TXA and may not need drains postoperatively. Larger, randomized studies are necessary to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TXA use in biportal spinal endoscopy.

The Impact of Posterior Intervertebral Osteophytes on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After L5-S1 Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Retrospective cohort study. (1) To develop a reliable grading system to assess the severity of posterior intervertebral osteophytes and (2) to investigate the impact of posterior intervertebral osteophytes on clinical outcomes after L5-S1 decompression and fusion through anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and minimally-invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). There is limited evidence regarding the clinical implications of posterior lumbar vertebral body osteophytes for ALIF and MIS-TLIF surgeries and there are no established grading systems that define the severity of these posterior lumbar intervertebral osteophytes. A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing L5-S1 ALIF or MIS-TLIF was performed. Preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcome measures of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and leg Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at 2-week, 6-week, 12-week, and 6-month follow-up time points were assessed. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for ODI of 14.9 and VAS leg of 2.8 were utilized. Osteophyte grade was based on the ratio of osteophyte length to foraminal width. "High-grade" osteophytes were defined as a maximal osteophyte length >50% of the total foraminal width. A total of 70 consecutive patients (32 ALIF and 38 MIS-TLIF) were included in the study. There were no significant differences between the two cohorts in patient-reported outcome measures or achievement of MCID for Leg VAS or ODI preoperatively or at any follow-ups. On multivariate analysis, neither the surgical approach nor the presence of high-grade foraminal osteophytes was associated with leg VAS or ODI scores at any follow-up time point. In addition, neither the surgical approach nor the presence of high-grade foraminal osteophytes was associated with the achievement of MCID for leg VAS or ODI at 6 months. ALIF and MIS-TLIF are both valid options for treating degenerative spine conditions and lumbar radiculopathy, even in the presence of high-grade osteophytes that significantly occupy the intervertebral foramen. 3.

Preoperative risk factors for nonsatisfaction after lumbar interbody fusion

IntroductionLow back pain (LBP) is a common cause of impaired quality of life and disability and studies regarding surgical management of patients with LBP show a high variation in patient-reported success rate. Research questionTo find valuable preoperative clinical risk factors and variables associated with a non-satisfactory patient-reported outcome following surgery. Materials and methodsThe Danish surgical spine database (DaneSpine) was used to collect eight years of pre- and postoperative data on patients undergoing single-level fusions with either posterior- (PLIF) or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusions (TLIF). The primary outcome was patient nonsatisfaction. We collected data on European Quality of Life–5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score, pain intensity, duration of back pain, previous discectomy, and expectations regarding return to work after surgery at 2-year follow-up. ResultsThe cohort included 453 patients of which 19% reported treatment nonsatisfaction. The nonsatisfaction group demonstrated higher preoperative VAS scores for back pain (75 ± 19 vs. 68 ± 21, p = 0.006) and leg pain (65 ± 25 vs. 58 ± 28, p = 0.004). The preoperative EQ-5D score was significantly lower in the nonsatisfaction group (0.203 + 0.262 vs. 0.291 ± 0.312, p = 0.016). There was no statistical significance between patient nonsatisfaction and preoperative ODI score, age, body mass index, duration of back pain or expectations regarding return to work after surgery. Discussion and conclusionLow preoperative EQ-5D scores and high VAS leg and back pain scores were statistically significant with patient nonsatisfaction following surgery and may prove to be valuable tools in the preoperative screening and alignment of patient expectations.

Conventional versus tubular microdiscectomy for lumbar disc herniation: A prospective randomized study

Abstract Background: Microdiscectomy is a commonly performed surgical technique used to treat lumbar disc prolapse. A minimally invasive alternative called tubular discectomy is hypothesized to cause less tissue damage and result in a faster recovery compared to conventional discectomy. Previous studies have found similar pain resolution outcomes between two techniques, but they were underpowered and lacked data on differences in recovery time. Our study aims to compare functional outcomes, and assess differences in recovery time and perioperative complications between the two procedures. Materials and Methods: This prospective randomized study included 63 patients, divided into two groups. The preoperative evaluation was done by clinical examination and documenting Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores. Intra- and postoperative complications were also noted. Postoperative follow-up assessment was done at regular intervals up to 2 years. Results: Both groups showed a significant decrease in ODI, VAS leg and back scores following surgery, which continued to decline throughout the follow-up period. However, there was no significant difference in outcomes between the two treatment groups at each postoperative follow-up. There were also no significant differences in blood loss or intra- and postoperative complications. Patients who underwent tubular microdiscectomy had a significantly shorter hospital stay compared to conventional microdiscectomy. Conclusion: Both conventional and tubular microdiscectomy are effective means of treating disc herniation. While patients who underwent tubular microdiscectomy had a shorter hospital stay, the modest clinical benefits do not necessarily warrant the transition to a minimally invasive approach given the learning curve associated with the technique.

Percutaneous Radiofrequency Disc Decompression: A Study of 27 Patients.

Percutaneous radiofrequency nucleoplasty is a true minimally invasive technique for treatment for radiculopathy caused by contained disc protrusions. This minimally invasive procedure uses controlled thermoablation for reducing the intervertebral disc and decompressing the lumbar nerve root. Material and Methods: Our study is a prospective analysis of 27 patients aged from 30 to 64 years with lumbar disc protrusion who were treated with percutaneous radiofrequency disc decompression (PRFD) between May 2018 and May 2019. Clinical follow-up was reported at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. The outcomes were assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS) and MacNab score. Of the 27 patients, 14 were female and 13 were male. Their mean age was 53 ± 2 years. In all 27 patients, percutaneous radiofrequency nucleotomy was performed. An excellent outcome as reflected by MacNab score was observed in 17 patients (63%), a good outcome in 8 patients (29.7%), and a poor outcome in 2 patients (7.3%). Prior to treatment, the average back and leg VAS scores were 7.95 and 7.82, respectively. At sixth month follow-up, the back and leg VAS scores were reduced to 3.17 and 3.04, respectively. Patients with a poor outcome developed early recurrent disc prolapse and required endoscopic discectomy. PRFD is a safe and effective treatment of contained disc protrusion. PRFD is a good alternative to surgery. These procedures significantly increase quality of life in patients with lumbar radiculopathy.

The Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Technique for Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Early Surgical Results

Objective: Minimally invasive (MI) surgery for the treatment of spinal stenosis is currently a topic of substantial interest. One such technique is the unilateral biportal endoscopic (UBE) method, becoming popular among spine surgeons as a MI alternative to decompressive lumbar laminectomy without fusion. The purpose of this study was to present a description of the surgical technique and early clinical and radiological outcomes following the author's adoption of the UBE surgical technique for decompression of spinal stenosis.Methods: Between 2019 and 2021, surgery was performed on 47 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Clinical and radiological data were retrospectively analyzed through electronic medical records and imaging software reviews. Questionnaires and radiologic images were prospectively collected at scheduled times. The surgical technique used two corridors: one for endoscopic viewing and the other for handling surgical instruments during the procedure. Clinical outcomes were measured using the visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), while radiological outcomes were evaluated using X-rays to assess instability. Outcomes after UBE surgery were evaluated in terms of changes in clinical and radiological parameters from the baseline. A mixed-effects model with random effects for patients and surgical levels was used to test for differences in repeatedly measured clinical and radiological parameters.Results: During the early postoperative period, there were few complications, and all patients had a smooth recovery. Patients reported minimal postoperative wound discomfort. Back and leg VAS scores improved significantly in the early postoperative period (at 3, 6, and 12 months) compared to the baseline preoperative scores (p&lt;0.001). The ODI also showed significant improvement post-operatively (p&lt;0.001). The X-ray parameters were well maintained and did not show any progression of instability during the follow-up period.Conclusion: UBE surgery is a safe and effective MI technique for treating lumbar stenosis, with good early results and few complications during the early learning curve period.

Time to achievement of minimum clinically important difference after lumbar decompression.

The objective of this study is to examine factors associated with delayed time to achieve minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in patients undergoing lumbar decompression (LD) for the Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) back, and VAS leg pain. Patients undergoing LD with preoperative and postoperative ODI, VAS back, and VAS leg scores were retrospectively reviewed from April 2016 to January 2021. MCID values from previously established studies were utilized to determine MCID achievement. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis determined the time to achieve MCID. Hazard ratios from multivariable Cox regression were utilized to determine the preoperative factors predictive of MCID achievement. Three-hundred and forty-three patients were identified undergoing LD. Overall MCID achievement rates were 67.4% for ODI, 67.1% for VAS back, and 65.0% for VAS leg. The mean time in weeks for MCID achievement was 22.52 ± 30.48 for ODI, 18.90 ± 27.43 for VAS back, and 20.96 ± 29.81 for VAS leg. Multivariable Cox regression revealed active smoker status, preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), ODI, VAS Back, and VAS Leg (HR 1.03-2.14) as predictors of early MCID achievement, whereas an American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) classification of 2, Black ethnicity, workers' compensation, private insurance, and diagnosis of foraminal stenosis were predictors of late MCID achievement (HR 0.34-0.58). Most patients undergoing LD achieved MCID within 6months of surgery. Significant factors for early MCID achievement were active smoking status and baseline PROs. Significant factors for late MCID achievement were ASA = 2, Black ethnicity, type of insurance, and foraminal stenosis diagnosis. These factors may be considered by surgeons in setting patient expectations.

Validation of smartphone app-based digital patient reported outcomes in full-endoscopic spine surgery.

Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are important tools to assess patient function, pain, disability, and quality of life. We aim to study the efficiency and validity of digital PROMs collection using a smartphone app compared to traditional paper PROMs. Patients undergoing evaluation for full-endoscopic spine surgery were recruited from the outpatient clinic at Harborview Medical Center. Visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and EQ5-5D PROMs were administered on paper and through a smartphone app called SpineHealthie. Compliance rates were collected, and PROM results were assessed for correlation between paper and digital methods. 123 patients were enrolled. 57.7% of patients completed paper PROMs, 82.9% completed digital PROMs, and 48.8% completed both. Of the patients that completed both, Spearman's correlation was greatest for VAS leg, ODI, and EQ5 index scores. Correlation was weaker for VAS back pain, neck pain, and upper extremity pain. Patients tended to report lower disability and higher quality of life on the digital PROM compared to the paper PROM. The SpineHealthie app effectively and accurately collects PROMs digitally, showing strong concordance with traditional paper PROMs. We conclude that digital PROMs constitute a promising strategy for monitoring patients after spine surgery over time.

Epidural Versus Local Anesthesia for Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Systematic Review. To examine the impact of anesthesia type on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and complications after percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD). A significant advantage of PELD involves the option to use alternative sedation to general anesthesia (GA). Two options include local anesthesia (LA) and epidural anesthesia (EA). While EA is more involved, it may yield improved pain control and surgical results compared with LA. However, few studies have directly examined outcomes for PELD after LA versus EA, and it remains unknown which technique results in superior outcomes. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases examining PELD performed with LA or EA from inception to August 16, 2021 were conducted. All studies reported greater than 6 months of follow-up in addition to PRO data. PROs, including visual analog scale (VAS)-leg/back, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores were collected. Complications, recurrent disk herniation, durotomy, and reoperation rates, as well as surgical data, were recorded. All outcomes were compared between pooled studies examining LA or EA. Fifty-six studies consisting of 4465 patients (366 EA, 4099 LA) were included. Overall complication rate, durotomy rate, length of stay, recurrent disk herniation, and reoperation rates were similar between groups. VAS back/leg and ODI scores were all significantly improved at the first and last follow-up appointments in the LA group. VAS leg and ODI scores were significantly improved at the first and last follow-up appointments in the EA group, but VAS back was not. EA can be a safe and feasible alternative to LA, potentially minimizing patient discomfort during PELD. Conclusions are limited by a high level of study bias and heterogeneity. Further investigation is necessary to determine if PELD under EA may have greater short-term PRO benefits compared with LA.

Compensatory classification in spine sagittal malalignment with lumbar degeneration

ObjectiveTo generate a compensatory classification to evaluate sagittal spinal malalignment with lumbar degeneration.MethodsWe included 162 patients with low back pain who underwent full-length spinal radiography in our hospital from August 2019 to October 2021. Using full-length spine X-rays, we measured pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), pelvic incidence (PI), thoracic kyphosis (TK), lumbar lordosis (LL), C7 slope (C7S), thoracolumbar kyphosis (TLK), and C7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA). We also recorded the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS). Patients were divided into four groups based on the SRS-Schwab classification and four other groups based on the compensatory classification.ResultsODI correlated with age, SS, LL, TK, C7-SVA, SRS-Schwab classification, and compensatory classification. Lumbar VAS score correlated with LL, TK, C7-SVA, SRS-Schwab classification, and compensatory classification. Leg VAS score only correlated with LL. Hidden imbalance and imbalance with compensation had more significant PT and larger TK than balance patients. The symptoms of the four compensatory classification groups gradually worsened.ConclusionThe spinal-pelvic sagittal balance in patients with lumbar degeneration based on pelvic and thoracic compensation can reflect spinal balance and symptoms. This parameter might help evaluate spine sagittal alignment in elderly patients with lumbar degeneration.

Can lumbar paraspinal muscle/fat ratio and spinopelvic parameters predict short-term outcomes after decompressive surgeries in lumbar disc herniation and lumbar spinal stenosis?

We aimed to investigate whether the lumbar paraspinal muscle/fat ratio influences the outcomes of patients who had simple decompressive surgeries for lumbar disc herniation (LDH) or lumbar spinal stenosis. We also wanted to see if the spinopelvic parameters change with surgery and whether this change influences the outcomes. This was a prospective study on patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (20 patients) and LDH (20 patients) who underwent simple discectomy or decompressive surgery between November 2021 and May 2022. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index, and Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score were performed before and 3 months after surgery. Spinopelvic parameters were measured on whole spine radiographs before and 3 months after surgery. On axial magnetic resonance images, paraspinal muscle volume and muscle/fat ratios were calculated. All data were statistically analyzed with SPSS program. There was a significant improvement in VAS, Oswestry, and JOA scores after surgery. We observed that more preoperative paraspinal muscle mass was positively correlated with lumbar lordosis (LL) and negatively correlated with sagittal vertical axis (SVA), VAS leg scores, and Oswestry scores. Furthermore, we observed a positive correlation between preoperative SVA and VAS leg scores. Despite limited number of patients, and shorter follow-ups, this prospective study demonstrates a correlation among the lumbar paraspinal muscle/fat ratio, preoperative/postoperative spinopelvic parameters, and surgical outcomes. Increased paraspinal muscle ratio was correlated with lower SVA values and increased LL; lower VAS leg scores; higher Oswestry scores which reflects better surgical outcomes.

Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic surgery combined with mini-incision OLIF and anterolateral screws rod fixation vs. MIS-TLIF for surgical treatment of single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis.

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) has been used to treat lumbar spine spondylolisthesis. However, it usually needs posterior pedicle screws fixation for biomechanical stability and possible posterior direct decompression for relieving neurologic symptoms. We use percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic surgery (PTES) combined with mini-incision OLIF and anterolateral screws rod fixation for surgical treatment of lumbar spondylolisthesis. The purpose of study is to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of this method compared with minimally invasive surgery-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF). From July 2016 to May 2018, 65 patients of lumbar spondylolisthesis (L2-4) with neurologic symptoms were treated using PTES combined with mini-incision OLIF and anterolateral screws rod fixation (31 cases, group A) or MIS-TLIF (34 cases, group B) in this study. Operative duration, blood loss, incision length, fluoroscopy frequency, and hospital stay are compared. Preoperative and postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores of back and legs, Oswestry disability index (ODI), intervertebral space height, lumbar lordotic angle, operative segmental lordotic angle, and complications are recorded. The fusion status is assessed according to Bridwell's fusion grades. The VAS score of back and leg pain and ODI significantly dropped after surgery in both groups (p < 0.001). There was no statistical difference of back and leg VAS score and ODI between two groups except that back VAS scores in group A were significantly lower than that of group B immediately after surgery (p = 0.000). Group A had significantly more intervertebral space height and operative segmental lordotic angle than group B postoperatively (p = 0.022, p = 0.002). Twenty-three segments (74.2%) were grade I and 8 segments (25.8%) were grade II in group A; 20 segments (58.8%) were grade I and 14 segments (41.2%) were grade II in group B at a 2-year follow-up (p = 0.194). No difference was observed in the complication rate between the two groups (6.5% vs. 5.9%, p = 0.924). The long-term clinical efficacy and complication rates of both groups are comparable. PTES combined with mini-incision OLIF and anterolateral screws rod fixation is a good choice of minimally invasive surgery for lumbar spondylolisthesis, which hardly destroys the paraspinal muscles and bone structures.

Short-Segment versus Long-Segment Spinal Fusion Constructs for the Treatment of Adult Degenerative Scoliosis: A Comparison of Clinical Outcomes

To compare clinical outcomes of patients diagnosed with degenerative scoliosis undergoing short-segment versus long-segment spinal fusion. A retrospective cohort study was conducted of patients with degenerative thoracolumbar scoliosis undergoing elective spinal fusion at a single academic medical center. Cohorts were divided into short-segment (<3) or long-segment (≥3) groups. A total of 197 patients (122 short, 75 long) were included. Patients undergoing short-segment fusion more frequently presented with radiculopathy (P < 0.001) and had greater baseline visual analog scale (VAS) leg scores (P < 0.001). Patients with long-segment fusions had longer hospital length of stay (short, 3.82 ± 2.98 vs. long, 7.40 ± 6.85 days; P < 0.001), lower home discharge rates (short, 80.3% vs. long, 51.8; P= 0.003), higher revision surgery rates (short, 10.77% vs. long, 25.3%; P= 0.012), and greater percentage curve correction (short, 37.3% ± 25.9% vs. long, 45.1% ± 23.9%; P= 0.048). No significant differences were noted in postoperative complication rates (short, 1.64% vs. long, 5.33%; P= 0.143). At 1 year, patients with long fusions had worse ΔOswestry Disability Index (ODI) (P= 0.024), ΔVAS leg score (P= 0.002), and VAS leg minimum clinically important difference % (P= 0.003). Multivariate regression found that short-segment fusions were associated with greater improvements in ODI (P= 0.029), Physical Component Summary-12 (P= 0.024), and VAS leg score at 1 year (P= 0.002). Patients undergoing short-segment fusions more frequently presented with radiculopathy and had higher preoperative VAS leg scores compared with those receiving long constructs. Short-construct fusions in appropriately selected patients may provide satisfactory improvements in patient-reported outcome measures, particularly ΔODI and ΔVAS leg score, and mitigate hospital length of stay, revision surgery rates, and nonhome discharge.

Comparison of Three Common Intervertebral Disc Discectomies in the Treatment of Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Based on Multiple Data.

Due to recent developments and the wide application of percutaneous transforaminal discectomy (PTED), we herein compare it with microendoscopic discectomy (MED) and traditional open surgery (OD) through surgical indicators and postoperative outcomes to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of minimally invasive surgery PTED. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in line with PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO2018: CRD42018094890). We searched four English and two Chinese databases from the date of their establishment to May 2022. Randomized controlled trials and case-control studies of PTED versus MED or PTED versus OD in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation were retrieved. A total of 33 studies with 6467 cases were included. When comparing MED with PTED, the latter had less intraoperative blood loss, smaller incision, shorter postoperative bed times, shorter hospitalization times, better postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) for low back pain, and postoperative dysfunction index (Oswestry Disability Index, ODI) and higher recurrence rates and revision rates. However, operation times, postoperative VAS leg scores and complications, and successful operation rates were similar in both groups. Comparison of PTED with OD revealed in the former less intraoperative blood loss and smaller incision, shorter postoperative bed times, shorter hospitalization times, shorter operation times, and higher recurrence rates and revision rates. Nonetheless, comprehensive postoperative VAS scores, VAS leg pain scores, VAS low back pain, ODI and incidence of complications, and successful operation rates were similar between the two groups. The therapeutic effect and safety of PTED, MED and OD in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation were comparable. PTED had obvious advantages in that it is minimally invasive, with rapid recovery after surgery, but its recurrence rates and revision rates were higher than MED and OD. Therefore, it is not possible to blindly consider replacing MED and OD with PTED.

The Effect of the Severity of Preoperative Leg Pain on Patient-Reported Outcomes, Minimum Clinically Important Difference Achievement, and Patient Satisfaction After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

To compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), satisfaction, and minimum clinically important difference (MCID) achievement after minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in patients stratified by preoperative leg pain. Patients undergoing MIS-TLIF were collected through retrospective review of a prospectively maintained single-surgeon database. PROMs administered preoperatively/postoperatively included Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), visual analog scale (VAS) back/leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and 12-Item Short Form (SF-12) Physical/Mental Component Score (PCS/MCS). Patients were grouped based on preoperative VAS leg scores: VAS leg ≤7 or VAS leg >7. Inferential statistics were used to compare PROMs, MCID achievement rates, and postoperative satisfaction between groups. A total of 562 patients were eligible (168 VAS leg score ≤7; 394 VAS leg score >7). Significant differences between cohorts in postoperative mean PROMs were noted for PROMIS-PF at 6 weeks/2 years, SF-12 PCS at 6 weeks/2 years, SF-12 MCS at 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months/1 year, VAS back score at 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months, VAS leg score at 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months/2 years and ODI at all postoperative time points (P < 0.045, all). In the VAS leg score >7 cohort, a greater proportion achieving MCID for VAS leg score at all postoperative time points and ODI at 12 weeks (P < 0.010, all). Postoperative satisfaction was greater in VAS back score ≤7 cohort for VAS leg score at 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months/2 years, VAS back score at 12 weeks/2 years, and ODI at 6 weeks/12 weeks/6 months/2 years (P < 0.046, all). Patients with severe preoperative leg pain showed worse postoperative PROM scores and patient satisfaction for disability and back/leg pain. MCID achievement rates across cohorts were similar. Patients with severe leg pain may have expectations for surgical benefits incongruent with their postoperative outcomes, and physicians may seek to manage the preoperative expectations of their patients to reflect likely outcomes after MIS-TLIF.

P142. Single center, randomized controlled trial of intravenous vs oral acetaminophen administration in perioperative care of 1 and 2 level LLIFs with instrumented posterior lumbar fusion: a comparative effectiveness study

P142. Single center, randomized controlled trial of intravenous vs oral acetaminophen administration in perioperative care of 1 and 2 level LLIFs with instrumented posterior lumbar fusion: a comparative effectiveness study

120. The clinical and operative impact of lumbar epidural steroid injections prior to spine surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis

<h3>BACKGROUND CONTEXT</h3> Lumbar spinal stenosis is a common finding in the adult population. Lumbar epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are often used in management of this condition, with conflicting evidence regarding their efficacy. Previous research has suggested a negative impact of ESIs on the operative times and postoperative outcomes when ESIs are administered preoperatively prior to spine surgery in this population. Our retrospective study was performed to gain greater insight into the impact of preoperative ESIs on postoperative outcomes following spine surgery in management of lumbar stenosis. <h3>PURPOSE</h3> Our objective is to determine how preoperative ESIs impact postoperative outcomes following spine surgery in management of lumbar stenosis. <h3>STUDY DESIGN/SETTING</h3> Retrospective cohort involving patients who underwent surgical management of lumbar stenosis. Data for patients with preoperative ESI was compared to those without preoperative ESI administration. <h3>PATIENT SAMPLE</h3> Patient data for this retrospective cohort was retrieved solely from a patient database of a medical institution in north Texas, US. Patients were included in the study if they underwent surgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis between January 2016 and December 2020. The inclusion criteria required an active diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis. Patients who received an ESI within three months prior to the spine surgery were included in the "ESI" group, while those who did not receive a lumbar ESI within three months prior to the spine surgery were included in the "Non-ESI" group. <h3>OUTCOME MEASURES</h3> Primary outcome measures were ODI (Oswestry Disability Index) back, NDI (Neck Disability Index) back, VAS (Visual Analog Scale) leg pain, VAS back pain, PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) pain, PROMIS pain interference, PROMIS satisfaction, PROMIS physical function at time of spine surgery (baseline) and at three months after surgery. <h3>METHODS</h3> This study was conducted at a medical institution in north Texas, US, utilizing the institution's spine center database. The institutional review board approved the standardized protocol. This study included a retrospective cohort. All results were collated on a Microsoft Excel file as retrieved from a patient registry of a medical institution in north Texas based on exclusion and inclusion criteria above. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS software, with t-test and ANOVA used to determine significance. P-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. <h3>RESULTS</h3> Patients receiving an ESI in the preoperative period had shorter operative times (ESI 157 minutes vs Non-ESI 187 minutes, p=.10) during spine surgery than did patients in the Non-ESI group. Both ESI and Non-ESI groups showed significant improvements in VAS leg, VAS back, ODI and PROMIS pain scores at three months after surgery, with the ESI group showing a significantly larger improvement compared to the Non-ESI group in PROMIS pain scores. <h3>CONCLUSIONS</h3> Regardless of preoperative ESI administration, this study demonstrated improvement in pain and disability scores in the postoperative period following surgical management of lumbar stenosis. Patients who received ESI in the preoperative course had shorter operative times and greater improvements in PROMIS pain scores in the postoperative course compared to those who did not receive ESI. <h3>FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS</h3> This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.