Back Pain Visual Analog Scale Scores Research Articles

Biportal Endoscopic Approach for Lumbar Degenerative Disease in the Ambulatory Outpatient vs Inpatient Setting: A Comparative Study.

Biportal spinal endoscopy is increasingly utilized for lumbar disc herniations and lumbar stenosis. The objective was to investigate the safety and effectiveness of the technique in the outpatient vs inpatient setting. This is a comparative study of consecutive patients who underwent biportal spinal endoscopy by a single surgeon at a single institution. Demographics, surgical complications, and patient-reported outcomes were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. Statistics were calculated among treatment groups using unpaired t test and χ 2 analysis where appropriate. Statistical significance was determined as P < 0.05. Eighty-four patients were included, 58 (69.0%) as outpatient, 26 (31.0%) as inpatient. Mean follow-up was 7.5 months. Statistically significant differences in age, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, and Charleston Comorbidity Index scores were reported between cohorts, with younger and healthier patients undergoing outpatient surgery (P < 0.0001). Outpatients were more likely to have discectomies while inpatients were more likely to have decompressions for stenosis. No significant differences in postoperative complications were found between groups.Both cohorts demonstrated significant improvement in visual analog scale (VAS) back and leg pain scores and Oswestry Disability Index scores (P < 0.001). Outpatients had significantly lower postoperative VAS back pain (P = 0.001) and Oswestry Disability Index scores (P = 0.004) at 5-8 weeks compared with inpatients, but there was no significant difference for VAS leg pain scores at all time points between the cohorts. Early results demonstrate that biportal spinal endoscopy can safely and effectively be performed in both inpatient and outpatient settings. Outpatient biportal spinal endoscopy can be performed successfully in well selected patients, which may reduce the financial burden of spine surgery to the U.S. healthcare system.

Changes in Transversus Abdominis Muscle Thickness, Low Back Pain, and Standing Balance after Foam Roller Exercise in Female Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare transversus abdominis muscle thickness and exercise performance before and after foam roller exercise (FRex).Methods: This was a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Twenty-four adult female subjects were randomly divided into two groups: (1) an intervention group that underwent FRex, and (2) a control group that remained in the supine position for the same period. Transversus abdominis muscle thickness, modified Star Excursion Balance Test (mSEBT) score, and degree of back pain experienced during daily work were measured before and after the intervention in each group using a visual analog scale (VAS), and a within-group comparison was conducted for each value. The amount of change before and after the intervention was calculated, and the correlation between each measurement item was examined.Results: Pre-intervention and post-intervention comparisons in the intervention group revealed significantly greater values for transversus abdominis lower fiber thickness and mSEBT scores, and significantly lower values for low back pain after the intervention. A moderate negative correlation was found between changes in lower back pain VAS scores and changes in transversus abdominis lower fiber thickness and mSEBT scores. Moreover, a moderate positive correlation was noted between changes in the transversus abdominis lower fiber thickness and mSEBT scores.Conclusions: These results suggest that FRex may be beneficial for preventing low back pain and improving balance.

Clinical outcome of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression in treatment of elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a matched retrospective study.

This retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar decompression (PELD) in elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). A matched retrospective study. The research was conducted in Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Capital Medical University, China. This study included patients treated with PELD for LSS from September 2016 to September 2020. Patients with LSS aged ≥ 80years were screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria as the study group, and then the same number of patients with LSS aged 50-80years were matched according to gender, stenosis type, and surgical segment as the control group. Preoperative patient status was assessed using the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification score. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, modified Macnab criteria, radiological parameters and complication rates. A total of 624 LSS patients met the screening criteria between September 2016 and September 2020, with 47 LSS patients ≥ 80years old serving as the study group. Forty-seven LSS patients aged 50-80years were matched to the study group according to gender, stenosis type, and stenosis segment. The CCI score (1.77 ± 1.67) and ASA classification (2.62 ± 0.74) of the study group were significantly higher than the CCI score (0.66 ± 0.96) and ASA classification (1.28 ± 0.54) of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant. Compared with preoperative data, postoperative ODI, leg pain VAS scores and back pain VAS scores were significantly improved in both groups (p < 0.05). However, no significant difference was found between two groups in preoperative and postoperative ODI, leg pain VAS scores and back pain VAS scores (p > 0.05). The operation time and postoperative hospital stay in control group were significantly lower than those in study (p < 0.05), but there was no significant difference in blood loss between the two groups (p > 0.05). Besides, overall radiological parameters were comparable in elder and younger patients (p > 0.05), and disc height (DH), lumbar lordosis and segmental lordosis decreased after twoyear follow-up in both groups (p < 0.05). In addition, complication rates were similar between the two groups (p > 0.05), and no serious complications and deaths were found. Single-centre retrospective design, non-randomized sample, small sample size. Although elderly LSS patients (≥ 80years old) are less fit and have more comorbidities, satisfactory outcomes can be achieved with PELD, comparable to those of LSS patients < 80years old, and without increased complications.

Complications and radiographic changes after implantation of interspinous process devices: average eight-year follow-up

PurposeThis study aims to evaluate complications, clinical outcomes, and radiographic results following Coflex implantation.MethodsWe retrospectively studied 66 patients who had decompressive surgery combined with Coflex implantation to treat lumbar spinal stenosis. All imaging data were collected and examined for imaging changes. Clinical outcomes, included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), back and leg visual analog scale (VAS) scores, were evaluated before surgery, six months after surgery and at the last follow-up. The number of complications occurring after five years of follow-up was counted. All reoperation cases were meticulously recorded.Results66 patients were followed up for 5–14 years. The VAS and ODI scores were significantly improved compared with baseline. Heterotopic Ossification (HO) was detectable in 59 (89.4%). 26 (39.4%) patients had osteolysis at the contact site of Coflex with the spinous process. Coflex loosening was detected in 39 (60%) patients. Spinous process anastomosis was found in 34 (51.5%) patients. There was a statistically significant difference in the VAS score of back pain between patients with and without spinous process anastomosis. Nine cases of lumbar spinal restenosis were observed, and prosthesis fracture was observed in one case.ConclusionOur study identified various imaging changes after Coflex implantation, and majority of them did not affect clinical outcomes. The majority of patients had HO, but osteolysis and Coflex loosening were relatively rare. The VAS score for back pain of these patients was higher if they have spinous process anastomosis. After five-year follow-up, we found lumbar spinal restenosis and prosthesis fracture cases.

Combination of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy and platelet-rich plasma hydrogel injection for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation

ObjectiveTo determine the safety and efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) combined with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) hydrogel injection in patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH).MethodsA total of 98 consecutive patients with LDH who underwent either PELD combined with PRP hydrogel injection or PELD alone were reviewed. This retrospective study was performed between January 2019 and January 2021. Clinical outcomes were compared in the visual analog scale (VAS) for low back pain and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, and Macnab criteria. Intervertebral disc height on MRI was measured, and the Pfirrmann grade classification was used pre-operatively and post-operatively.ResultsNo severe adverse events were reported during an 18-month follow-up period. VAS scores for back pain were decreased at 1 month, 3 months, and 18 months in the treatment group than that in the control group. JOA score and ODI in the treatment group at 3-month and 18-month follow-up was lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05). The excellent and good rate of the Macnab criteria was 92.0% (46/50) in the treatment group and 89.6% (43/48) in the control group (P > 0.05). The comparison of Pfirrmann grading and disc height at 18-month follow-up showed significant difference in two groups (P < 0.05). The recurrence of LDH in the treatment group was lower than that in the control group (P < 0.05).ConclusionsWe suggest that PELD combined with PRP hydrogel injection to treat patients with LDH is a safe and promising method. PRP injection was beneficial for disc remodelling after PELD.

Effectiveness analysis of posterolateral approach lumbar interbody fusion assisted by one-hole split endoscope for L4, 5 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

To compare the effectiveness of posterolateral approach lumbar interbody fusion assisted by one-hole split endoscope (OSE) and traditional posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in the treatment of L4, 5 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). The clinical data of 58 patients with DLS who met the selection criteria admitted between February 2020 and March 2022 were retrospectively analyzed, of which 26 were treated with OSE-assisted posterolateral approach lumbar interbody fusion (OSE group) and 32 were treated with PLIF (PLIF group). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of gender, age, body mass index, Meyerding grade, lower limb symptom side, decompression side, stenosis type, and preoperative low back pain visual analogue scale (VAS) score, leg pain VAS score, Oswestry disability index (ODI), and the height of the anterior and posterior margins of the intervertebral space (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and complications were compared between the two groups. The low back pain and leg pain VAS scores and ODI before operation, at 1 month, 6 months after operation, and last follow-up, the height of anterior and posterior margins of the intervertebral space before operation, at 6 months after operation, and last follow-up, the modified MacNab criteria at last follow-up after operation were used to evaluate the effectiveness; and the Bridwell method at last follow-up was used to evaluate the interbody fusion. Both groups successfully completed the operation. Compared with the PLIF group, the OSE group showed a decrease in intraoperative blood loss and postoperative hospital stay, but an increase in operation time, with significant differences (P<0.05). In the OSE group, no complication such as nerve root injury and thecal sac tear occurred; in the PLIF group, there were 1 case of thecal sac tear and 1 case of epidural hematoma, which were cured after conservative management. Both groups of patients were followed up 13-20 months with an average of 15.5 months. There was no complication such as loosening, sinking, or displacement of the fusion cage. The low back pain and leg pain VAS scores, ODI, and the height of anterior and posterior margins of the intervertebral space at each time point after operation in both groups were significantly improved when compared with those before operation (P<0.05). Except for the VAS score of lower back pain in the OSE group being significantly better than that in the PLIF group at 1 month after operation (P<0.05), there was no significant difference in all indicators between the two groups at all other time points (P>0.05). At last follow-up, both groups achieved bone fusion, and there was no significant difference in Bridwell interbody fusion and modified MacNab standard evaluation between the two groups (P>0.05). OSE-assisted posterolateral approach lumbar interbody fusion for L4, 5 DLS, although the operation time is relatively long, but the postoperative hospitalization stay is short, the complications are few, the operation is safe and effective, and the early effectiveness is satisfactory.

Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: Does Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Lead to Better Clinical and Radiological Outcomes than Redo-Discectomy?

randomized, prospective, and level I clinical study. To compare the clinical outcomes and radiological findings of revision discectomy alone versus revision discectomy with fusion as surgical treatment for recurrent lumbar disc herniation (RDH). RDH is a common complication following a primary discectomy. The optimal surgical procedure for RDH is still debated. Sixty patients with RDH were randomly divided into two equal groups: the first group underwent revision discectomy alone and the second underwent revision discectomy with fusion. The primary outcomes evaluated were Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for low back and limb pains, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), disc height indexes, foraminal height index, and disc height subsidence. Secondary outcomes included operative time, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and complications. Revision discectomy with fusion showed superior pain relief and improved functional outcomes, including better VAS scores for both back and leg pain and ODI at 24-month follow-up. Additionally, it restored the stability of the spine better with lower disc height subsidence without significant complications. However, these advantages came at the cost of increased blood loss and longer operative time and hospital stays. Revision discectomy with fusion is recommended for RDH; however, the choice of the procedure should be made caseby- case basis, considering many factors related to the patient and surgical facilities.

Is Full-Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Superior to Open Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Single-Level Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis? A Retrospective Study.

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.

Spinal Cord Stimulation for Parkinson’s Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Pain and Motor Outcomes

Background: Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been investigated as a potential therapeutic option for managing refractory symptoms in patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD). Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of SCS in PD. Method: A comprehensive literature search was conducted on PubMed and Web of Science to identify SCS studies reporting Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale-III (UPDRS-III) or Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score changes in PD cohorts with at least 3 patients and a follow-up period of at least 1 month. Treatment effect was measured as the mean change in outcome scores and analyzed using an inverse variance random-effects model. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and funnel plots. Results: A total of 11 studies comprising 76 patients were included. Nine studies involving 72 patients reported an estimated decrease of 4.43 points (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.11; 6.75, p < 0.01) in UPDRS-III score, equivalent to a 14% reduction. The axial subscores in 48 patients decreased by 2.35 points (95% CI: 1.26; 3.45, p < 0.01, 20% reduction). The pooled effect size of five studies on back and leg pain VAS scores was calculated as 4.38 (95% CI: 2.67; 6.09, p < 0.001), equivalent to a 59% reduction. Conclusions: Our analysis suggests that SCS may provide significant motor and pain benefits for patients with PD, although the results should be interpreted with caution due to several potential limitations including study heterogeneity, open-label designs, small sample sizes, and the possibility of publication bias. Further research using larger sample sizes and placebo-/sham-controlled designs is needed to confirm effectiveness.

Comparison of Fusion, Subsidence, and Clinical Results Between 3D-Printed Porous Titanium Cage and Polyetheretherketone Cage in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Minimum of 2 Years Follow-Up

The occurrence of early osteointegration and reduced modulus of elasticity have been proved with 3-dimensinally (3D) printed porous titanium (3DP-titanium) cages used for posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). The present study was conducted to demonstrate the fusion rate, subsidence, and clinical outcomes for the 3DP-titanium cage in PLIF and to compare its results with those of the polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage. A total of 150 patients who underwent 1-2-level PLIF and were followed up for >2 years were retrospectively reviewed. The fusion rates, subsidence, segmental lordosis, visual analog scale (VAS) score for back pain, VAS score for leg pain, and Oswestry disability index were assessed. A higher 1-year (3DP-titanium, 86.9%; PEEK, 67.7%; P= 0.002) and 2-year (3DP-titanium, 92.9%; PEEK, 82.3%; P= 0.037) fusion rate could be achieved with 3DP-titanium cages for PLIF than with PEEK cages. The amount of subsidence (3DP-titanium, 1.4 ± 1.6 mm; PEEK, 1.9 ± 1.8 mm; P= 0.092) and incidence of significant subsidence (3DP-titanium, 17.9%; PEEK, 23.4%; P= 0.389) was not significantly different between the 2 materials. Furthermore, the VAS score for back pain and leg pain and Oswestry disability index were not significantly different between the 2 groups. On logistic regression analysis, cage material (P= 0.027) showed a significant association with fusion, and the number of levels fused (P= 0.012) was associated with subsidence. The 3DP-titanium cage resulted in a higher fusion rate than the PEEK cage when used for PLIF. The subsidence rate did not differ significantly between the 2 cage materials. Therefore, the 3DP-titanium cage can be safely used for PLIF, considering its stable construct.

Improvement in predominant back pain following minimally invasive decompression for spinal stenosis.

The objective of this study was to assess the outcomes of patients with predominant back pain (pBP) undergoing minimally invasive decompression surgery compared with patients with nonpredominant back pain (npBP). This was a retrospective cohort study. Patients were divided into two groups based on the presenting complaint: 1) pBP, defined as visual analog scale (VAS) back pain score > VAS leg pain score; and 2) npBP. Changes in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were compared at the early (< 6 months) and late (≥ 6 months) postoperative time points. Outcomes measures were: 1) PROMs (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], VAS back and leg pain scores, 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey Physical Component Score [SF-12 PCS], and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function [PROMIS PF]), and 2) minimal clinically important difference (MCID) achievement rate and time. For the late MCID achievement point, a second analysis was conducted restricting VAS back and leg pain scores only to patients with preoperative scores ≥ 5. Three hundred ninety patients were included (126 with pBP and 264 with npBP). There were no differences in patient demographics and operated levels. There were no differences in preoperative ODI, SF-12 PCS, and PROMIS PF scores. The pBP cohort had a significantly greater preoperative VAS back pain score than the npBP cohort, whereas the npBP cohort had a significantly greater preoperative VAS leg pain score than the pBP cohort. There were no differences in the absolute values or changes in ODI, VAS back pain, SF-12 PCS, and PROMIS PF scores at any time point. There was a significant difference in the early VAS leg pain scores (greater in npBP) that disappeared by the late postoperative time point. There was no difference in the MCID achievement rate in the ODI, SF-12 PCS, or PROMIS PF scores. By the late postoperative time point, 51.2% and 55.3% achieved an MCID on the ODI, 58.1% and 62.7% on the SF-12 PCS, 60% and 67.6% on the PROMIS PF, 81.1% and 73.2% on VAS back pain scores for those with preoperative scores ≥ 5, and 72% and 83.6% on VAS leg pain scores for those with preoperative scores ≥ 5 for the pBP and npBP cohorts, respectively. Additionally, there were no differences in time to MCID achievement for any PROMs. The pBP and npBP cohorts showed similar improvement in PROMs and MCID achievement rates. This result shows that minimally invasive laminectomy is equally effective for patients presenting with pBP or npBP.

Comparison of minimally invasive decompression alone versus minimally invasive short-segment fusion in the setting of adult degenerative lumbar scoliosis: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Patients with degenerative lumbar scoliosis (DLS) and neurogenic pain may be candidates for decompression alone or short-segment fusion. In this study, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) decompression (MIS-D) and MIS short-segment fusion (MIS-SF) in patients with DLS were compared in a propensity score-matched analysis. The propensity score was calculated using 13 variables: sex, age, BMI, Charlson Comorbidity Index, smoking status, leg pain, back pain, grade 1 spondylolisthesis, lateral spondylolisthesis, multilevel spondylolisthesis, lumbar Cobb angle, pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis, and pelvic tilt in a logistic regression model. One-to-one matching was performed to compare perioperative morbidity and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for patients was calculated based on cutoffs of percentage change from baseline: 42.4% for Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 25.0% for visual analog scale (VAS) low-back pain, and 55.6% for VAS leg pain. A total of 113 patients were included in the propensity score calculation, resulting in 31 matched pairs. Perioperative morbidity was significantly reduced for the MIS-D group, including shorter operative duration (91 vs 204 minutes, p < 0.0001), decreased blood loss (22 vs 116 mL, p = 0.0005), and reduced length of stay (2.6 vs 5.1 days, p = 0.0004). Discharge status (home vs rehabilitation), complications, and reoperation rates were similar. Preoperative PROMs were similar, but after 3 months, improvement was significantly higher for the MIS-SF group in the VAS back pain score (-3.4 vs -1.2, p = 0.044) and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) Mental Component Summary (MCS) score (+10.3 vs +1.9, p = 0.009), and after 1 year the MIS-SF group continued to have significantly greater improvement in the VAS back pain score (-3.9 vs -1.2, p = 0.026), ODI score (-23.1 vs -7.4, p = 0.037), 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey MCS score (+6.5 vs -6.5, p = 0.0374), and VR-12 MCS score (+7.6 vs -5.1, p = 0.047). MCID did not differ significantly between the matched groups for VAS back pain, VAS leg pain, or ODI scores (p = 0.38, 0.055, and 0.072, respectively). Patients with DLS undergoing surgery had similar rates of significant improvement after both MIS-D and MIS-SF. For matched patients, tradeoffs were seen for reduced perioperative morbidity for MIS-D versus greater magnitudes of improvement in back pain, disability, and mental health for patients 1 year after MIS-SF. However, rates of MCID were similar, and the small sample size among the matched patients may be subject to patient outliers, limiting generalizability of these results.

Analysis of the Efficacy of Percutaneous Endoscopic Interlaminar Discectomy for Lumbar Disc Herniation with Different Types/Grades of Modic Changes.

Percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID), one of the main techniques of spinal endoscopy, has achieved excellent results in treating lumbar disc herniation (LDH). However, its efficacy has not been systematically described in patients with LDH accompanied by Modic changes (MC). The purpose of this study was to observe the clinical efficacy of PEID treatment of LDH accompanied by MC. A total of 207 patients who underwent PEID surgery for LDH were selected. According to the existence and type of MC on preoperative lumbar magnetic resonance images (MRI), they were divided into normal group (no MC, n=117), M1 group (MC I, n=23), and M2 group (MC II, n=67). According to the severity of MC, they were divided into MA group (grade A, n=45) and MBC group (grade B and C, n=45). The visual analog scale (VAS) score, Oswestry disability index (ODI) score, Disc height index (DHI), Lumbar lordosis angle (LL) and modified Macnab criteria were used to assess clinical outcomes. Postoperative back pain and leg pain VAS scores and ODI scores were significantly improved in all groups compared with preoperative scores. Patients with MC showed a deterioration in postoperative back pain VAS scores and ODI scores as time went by, and postoperative DHI decreased significantly compared with preoperative. Postoperative LL did not change significantly in each group. There was no significant difference in complications, recurrence rate and excellent rate between the groups. Whether accompanied by MC or not, the efficacy of PEID for LDH was significant. However, postoperative back pain and functional status of patients with MC tend to deteriorate as time went by, especially those with type I or severe MC.

Clinical Efficacy of Interlaminar and Transforaminal Spinal Endoscopy in the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

To compare the application effect of interlaminar technique (ILT) and transforaminal technique (TFT) spinal endoscopies in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) treatment. The data of 46 patients aged 65 years or older diagnosed with LSS between January 2019 and March 2021 were retrospectively reviewed in this study. They underwent ILT (21 patients) or TFT (25 patients) spinal endoscopy surgery, and outcomes were analyzed utilizing the visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and Japanese orthopedic association (JOA) scale. Lumbar stability was also evaluated using the change in dynamic position X-ray of the spine. We also built three-dimensional(3D) finiteelementof ILT and TFT spine models and compared them with the stability of the intact spine. The ILT group had a longer operation time than the TFT group, and patients in ILT and TFT groups had comparable VAS scores for back pain. However, the TFT group had higher VAS scores for leg pain than the ILT group 3, 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The JOA and ODI scores of the 2 groups improved after surgery, and there were statistical differences between the 2 groups at 6 and 12 months follow-up, which proved that functional recovery was better in ILT group. The pre- and postoperative change in dynamic position X-ray of the spine proved that ILT and TFT would not destroy the spine's stability. 3Dfiniteelement lumbar spine model analysis also demonstratedthis point. Both ILT and TFT can provide good clinical outcomes; compared with TFT, the ILT approach provided more thorough decompression and was more suitable for treating LSS.

Clinical Results of 10-mm Endoscopic Minimally Invasive Interlaminar Decompression in the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis with Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis and Simple Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

The number of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with degenerative lumbar scoliosis (DLS) is gradually increasing as the population ages. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of 10-mm endoscopic minimally invasive interlaminar decompression for LSS with DLS and simple LSS. The clinical data of 175 consecutive elderly patients with LSS were retrospectively analyzed. They were divided into LSS group and LSS with DLS group based on whether they were accompanied by DLS. Patient demographics, perioperative indicators, and clinical outcomes were recorded. Lumbar spine stability was assessed by imaging data. Meanwhile, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, and the modified Macnab criteria were used to assess clinical outcomes. There were 129 patients in the LSS group and 46 patients in the LSS with DLS group. Both groups had similar VAS and ODI scores preoperatively, and both were significantly lower postoperatively (P < 0.05). However, patients combined with DLS showed higher VAS scores for low back pain at 3 months and 1 year postoperatively (P < 0.05). In addition, postoperative LL and PI-LL were significantly improved in both groups (P < 0.05). However, patients in LSS with DLS group showed higher PT, PI and PI-LL before and after surgery. According to the modified Macnab criteria, the excellent and good rates were 92.25% and 89.13% in the LSS group and LSS with DLS group at the last follow-up, respectively. 10-mm endoscopic minimally invasive interlaminar decompression for LSS with or without DLS has shown satisfactory clinical outcomes. However, patients with DLS may have higher residual low back pain after surgery.

Comparison of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative diseases: a retrospective observational study

BackgroundMinimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) and endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-LIF) are both minimally invasive interbody fusion procedures for lumbar degenerative diseases. In this study, we attempted to compare the clinical efficacy and postoperative outcomes of MIS-TLIF and Endo-LIF for lumbar degenerative diseases.MethodsThe study cohort comprised 99 patients with lumbar degenerative diseases treated by MIS-TLIF or Endo-LIF from January 2019 to July 2021. The clinical outcomes (visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and MacNab criteria) preoperatively, 1 month postoperatively, 3 months postoperatively, and 1 year postoperatively were compared between the two groups.ResultsThere were no significant differences between the two groups in sex, age, disease duration, affected spine segment, and complications (P > 0.05). The operation time was significantly longer in the Endo-LIF group than the MIS-TLIF group (155.25 ± 12.57 vs. 123.14 ± 14.50 min; P < 0.05). However, the Endo-LIF group had a significantly smaller blood loss volume (61.79 ± 10.09 vs. 259.97 ± 14.63 ml) and shorter hospital stay (5.46 ± 1.11 vs. 7.06 ± 1.42 days) than the MIS-TLIF group. In both groups, the ODI and VAS scores for lower back pain and leg pain were significantly lower at each postoperative timepoint than preoperatively (P < 0.05). Although there were no significant differences between the two groups in the ODI and VAS scores for lower back pain and leg pain (P > 0.05), the VAS for lower back pain was lower in the Endo-LIF group than the MIS-TLIF group at each postoperative timepoint. The MacNab criteria showed that the improvement rate was 92.2% in the MIS-TLIF group and 91.7% in the Endo-LIF group, with no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05).ConclusionsThere were no significant differences in short-term surgical outcomes between the MIS-TLIF and Endo-LIF groups. Compared with the MIS-TLIF group, the Endo-LIF group incurred less damage to surrounding tissues, experienced less intraoperative blood loss, and had less lower back pain, which is more conducive to recovery.

Safety and Efficacy of Cortical Bone Trajectory Screw Fixation Combined with Facet Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Disease.

The mainstream lumbar fusion surgeries have various shortcomings, such as complex operation, much invasion, and loss of lumbar function. How to minimize the surgical injury and to achieve better therapeutic effects has become the goal pursued by spine surgeons. This study introduces a cortical bone trajectory (CBT) screw fixation combined with facet fusion (FF), evaluates its safety and efficacy, and explores its advantages, in order to provide a reference for treatment of patients with single-level lumbar stenosis or grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis. We retrospectively analyzed the clinical, radiological, and operative data of 167 patients with single-level lumbar stenosis or grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis who underwent FF or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) from January 2013 to September 2019 in the spine surgery department of the Second Hospital of Shandong University. Patients were divided into four groups according to surgical method: group CBT-FF, CBT screw combined with FF; group PS-FF, pedicle screw (PS) combined with FF; group CBT-TLIF, CBT screw combined with TLIF; and group PS-TLIF, PS combined with TLIF. The operation time, estimated intraoperative blood loss, complications after surgery, visual analog scale (VAS), and Oswestry disability index (ODI) of the four groups were compared. The fusion was evaluated by anteroposterior and lateral X-ray, CT scan, and three-dimensional reconstruction. Twelve months after surgery, the fusion rate of four groups had no significantly statistical differences (p = 0.914). VAS and ODI scores were lower after surgery than before. Low back pain VAS scores 1 week after surgery in group CBT-FF and group CBT-TLIF were significantly lower than those in group PS-FF and group PS-TLIF (pCF/PF = 0.001, pCF/PT = 0.000, pPF/CT = 0.049, pCT/PT = 0.000). Low back pain VAS score 3 months after surgery was significantly lower in group CBT-FF than group PS-FF and group PS-TLIF (pCF/PF = 0.045, pCF/PT = 0.008). ODI score 1 week after surgery was significantly lower in group CBT-FF than group PS-FF, group CBT-TLIF, and group PS-TLIF (pCF/PF = 0.000, pCF/CT = 0.005, pCF/PT = 0.000, pCT/PT = 0.015). ODI score 3 months after surgery was significantly lower in group CBT-FF than group PS-FF, group CBT-TLIF, and group PS-TLIF (pCF/PF = 0.001, pCF/CT = 0.002, pCF/PT = 0.000). Incidence of complications did not significantly differ among the groups. CBT screw fixation combined with FF is a safe and efficacious procedure for patients with single-level lumbar stenosis or grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis. This minimally invasive approach of lumbar fusion can be simply and easily performed. Patients who undergo CBT screw fixation combined with FF recovered faster than TLIF.

Efficacy of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome in Elderly Patients: A Retrospective Study.

Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) refers to a condition where symptoms such as low back pain, leg pain, and numbness persist or recur after lumbar surgery; it has been reported to occur in 10%-40% of patients who have undergone lumbar surgery. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been reported useful for low back and leg pain due to FBSS. In this study, we studied the efficacy and safety of SCS for FBSS in older adults. Among FBSS patients who underwent an SCS trial between November 2017 and December 2020, those with at least 50% pain reduction during the trial phase who requested spinal cord stimulator implantation underwent implantation of a stimulator under local anesthesia. The patients were divided into two groups: patients aged <75 years (<75-year-old group) and patients aged ≥75 years (≥75-year-old group). The male/female ratio, symptom duration, operative duration, visual analog scale (VAS) scores before and after one year of surgery, responder rate (RR), complications one year after surgery, and stimulator removal rate were analyzed. There were 27 cases in the <75-year-old group and 46 in the ≥75-year-old group, with no significant differences in male/female ratio, duration of pain, or operative time between the two groups. VAS scores for low back pain, leg pain, and overall pain one year after surgery were improved significantly from respective preoperative scores in both groups (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in low back pain VAS, leg pain VAS, overall pain VAS, RR, complications one year after surgery, or stimulator removal rate between the two groups. SCS reduced pain effectively in both <75-year-old and ≥75-year-old groups with no differences in complications. Therefore, spinal cord stimulator implantation was considered a viable option for FBSS treatment in older adults because it can be performed under local anesthesia and is associated with a low incidence of complications.

Clinical and Radiographic Comparison of Oblique Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Patients with L4/5 grade-1 Degenerative Spondylolisthesis.

To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in patients with grade-1 L4/5 degenerative spondylolisthesis. Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the comparative analysis included consecutive patients with grade-1 degenerative spondylolisthesis who underwent oblique LIF (OLIF, n= 36) or minimally invasive transforaminal LIF (MI-TLIF, n=45) at the Department of Spine Surgery, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital from January 2016 to August 2017. Patient satisfaction Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), radiographic outcomes including anterior/posterior disc heights (ADH/PDH), foraminal height (FH), foraminal width (FW), cage subsidence, cage retropulsion, and fusion rate were assessed during a 2-year follow-up. Continuous data are presented as mean ± standard deviation and were compared between groups using the independent sample t-test. Categorical data are presented as n (%) and were compared between groups using the Pearson chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test. Repetitive measurement and analysis of variance was employed in the analysis of ODI, back pain VAS score, and leg pain VAS score. Statistical significance was defined as p< 0.05. The OLIF and MI-TLIF groups comprised 36 patients (age, 52.1 ± 7.2 years; 27 women) and 45 patients (age, 48.4 ± 14.4 years; 24 women), respectively. Satisfaction rates at 2 years post procedure exceeded 90% in both groups. The OLIF group had less intraoperative blood loss (140 ± 36 vs 233 ± 62 mL), lower back pain VAS score (2.42 ± 0.81 vs 3.38 ± 0.47), and ODI score (20.47 ± 2.53 vs 27.31 ± 3.71) at 3 months follow-up (with trends toward lower values at 2 years follow-up), but higher leg pain VAS scores at all postoperative time points than the MI-TLIF group (all p < 0.001). ADH, PDH, FD, and FW improved in both groups post-surgery. At the 2 year follow-up, the OLIF group had a higher rate of Bridwell grade-I fusion (100% vs 88.9%, p=0.046) and lower incidences of cage subsidence (8.33% vs 46.67%, p < 0.001) and retropulsion (0% vs 6.67%, p=0.046) than the MI-TLIF group. In patients with grade-I spondylolisthesis, OLIF was associated with lower blood loss and greater improvements in VAS for back pain and ODI and radiologic outcomes than MI-TLIF. The OLIF is more suitable for these patients with low back pain as the main symptoms are accompanied by mild or no leg symptoms before operation.

Comparison of full-endoscopic and tubular-based microscopic decompression in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized controlled trial.

We aimed to demonstrate non-inferiority in terms of functional outcomes in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis who underwent full-endoscopic decompression compared with tubular-based microscopic decompression. This prospective, randomized controlled, non-inferiority trial included 60 patients with single-level lumbar spinal stenosis who required decompression surgery. The patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the full-endoscopic group (FE group) or the tubular-based microscopic group (TM group). Based on intention-to-treat analysis, the primary outcome was the Oswestry Disability Index score at 24 months postoperative. The secondary outcomes included the visual analog scale (VAS) score for back and leg pain, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) score, walking time, and patient satisfaction rate according to the modified MacNab criteria. Surgery-related outcomes were also analyzed. Of the total patients, 92% (n = 55) completed a 24-month follow-up. The primary outcomes were comparable between the two groups (p = 0.748). However, the FE group showed a statistically significant improvement in the mean VAS score for back pain at day 1 and at 6, 12, and 24months after surgery (p < 0.05). No significant difference was observed in the VAS score for leg pain, EQ-5D score, or walking time (p > 0.05). Regarding the modified MacNab criteria, 86.7% of patients in the FE group and 83.3% in the TM group had excellent or good results at 24months after surgery (p = 0.261). Despite the similar results in surgery-related outcomes, including operative time, radiation exposure, revision rate, and complication rate, between the two groups (p > 0.05), less blood loss and shorter length of hospital stay were observed in the FE group (p ≤ 0.001 and 0.011, respectively). This study suggests that full-endoscopic decompression is an alternative treatment for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis because it provides non-inferior clinical efficacy and safety compared with tubular-based microscopic surgery. In addition, it offers advantages in terms of less invasive surgery. Trial registration number (TRN): TCTR20191217001.