Treatment Of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Research Articles

Decompression versus decompression plus fusion for treating degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) is a complex clinical syndrome that leads to spinal compression. Decompression with fusion has been the most commonly used surgical procedure for treating DLSS symptoms for many years. However, the exact role of fusion and its effectiveness in DLSS therapy has recently been debated. The main purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of decompression alone and decompression plus fusion in the treatment of DLSS with or without spondylolisthesis. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the therapeutic effects of decompression for DLSS with or without the combination of fusion. A literature search in five relevant databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Cochrane Library was performed from the inception of the database to March 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the comparison between decompression and decompression plus fusion for DLSS were included. A total of seven studies, 894 patients were analyzed in this meta-analysis. Among these, 443 patients were included in the decompression plus fusion group while 451 patients were included in the decompression alone group. Pooled analysis showed that the combination of decompression with fusion had no superior benefits to decompression alone in terms of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score in the first 2 years and long-term follow-up after surgery, also no significant difference in the improvement of back and leg pain was found between two groups. Adding fusion to decompression was associated with a longer operation time, higher complication rate, more blood loss, and extended hospital stay. Furthermore, there was no difference in reoperation rates and patients' satisfaction between the two groups at the last follow-up. Decompression plus fusion may not be associated with a better clinical outcome in ODI scores and back or leg pain improvement but with a longer duration of operation time, extended hospital stay, and more blood loss.

Oblique lumbar interbody fusion combined with stress end plate augmentation and anterolateral screw fixation for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with osteoporosis: a matched-pair case-controlled study

BACKGROUND CONTEXTOblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) has been proven to be effective in treating degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS). Whether OLIF is suitable for treating patients with DLSS with osteoporosis (OP) is still controversial. Bone cement augmentation is widely used to enhance the internal fixation strength of osteoporotic spines. However, the effectiveness of OLIF combined with bone cement stress end plate augmentation (SEA) and anterolateral screw fixation (AF) for DLSS with OP have not confirmed yet. PURPOSETo evaluate the clinical, radiological, and functional outcomes of OLIF-AF versus OLIF-AF-SEA in the treatment of DLSS with OP. STUDY DESIGNRetrospective case-control study. PATIENT SAMPLEA total of 60 patients with OP managed for DLSS at L4–L5. OUTCOME MEASURESVisual analog scale (VAS) score of the lower back and leg, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), disk height (DH), lumbar lordosis (LL), segmental lordosis (SL), cage subsidence and fusion rate. METHODSThe study was performed as a retrospective matched-pair case‒controlled study. Patients with OP managed for DLSS at L4–L5 between October 2017 and June 2020 and completed at least 2 years of follow-up were included, which were 30 patients treated by OLIF-AF and 30 patients undergoing OLIF-AF-SEA. The demographics and radiographic data, fusion status and functional outcomes were therefore compared to evaluate the efficacy of the two approaches. RESULTSPain and disability improved similarly in both groups at the 24-month follow-up. However, the SEA group had lower pain and functional disability at 3 months postoperatively (p<.05). The mean postoperative disc height decrease (△DH) was significantly lower in the SEA group than in the control group (1.17±0.81 mm vs 2.89±2.03 mm; p<.001). There was no significant difference in lumbar lordosis (LL) or segmental lordosis (SL) between the groups preoperatively and 1 day postoperatively. However, a statistically significant difference was observed in SL and LL between the groups at 24 months postoperatively (p<.05). CS was observed in 4 cases (13.33%) in the SEA group and 17 cases (56.67%) in the control group (p<.001). A nonsignificant difference was observed in the fusion rate between the SEA and control groups (p=.347) at 24 months postoperatively. CONCLUSIONSThis study revealed that OLIF-AF-SEA was safe and effective in the treatment of DLSS with OP. Compared with OLIF-AF, OLIF-AF-SEA results in a minor postoperative disc height decrease, a lower rate of CS, better sagittal balance, and no adverse effect on interbody fusion.

RESEARCH PROGRESS OF INTERSPINOUS DISTRACTION DEVICES FOR TREATMENT OF DEGENERATIVE LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS

To review the research status in respect of interspinous distraction devices (IDD) in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS). Recent original articles related to IDD in the treatment of DLSS were retrieved extensively, and the effectiveness was analyzed and summarized. Its short-term effectiveness was superior to that of conservative treatment, no significant difference was found when compared with decompression or fusion alone. Its complication rate was higher than that of decompression or fusion alone, although complication dose not significantly affect treatment results, it still will increase the medical care cost of patients. IDD is appropriate for patients who have failed to nonoperative treatment measures and can not tolerate open surgery, but the long-term effectiveness and durability of IDD need further research.