Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Acta Neurochirurgica
Published in: Acta Neurochirurgica 7/2015

01-07-2015 | Clinical Article - Spine

Microsurgical decompression for central lumbar spinal stenosis: a single-center observational study

Authors: Charalampis Giannadakis, Lars-Egil Hammersbøen, Casper Feyling, Ole Solheim, Asgeir S. Jakola, Ulf S. Nerland, Øystein P. Nygaard, Tore K. Solberg, Sasha Gulati

Published in: Acta Neurochirurgica | Issue 7/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

To assess outcomes and complications in patients undergoing microsurgical decompression for central lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) without radiologic instability.

Methods

Prospective data for patients operated at the Department of Neurosurgery, St. Olavs University Hospital, Norway, were obtained from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery (NORspine) from 2007 to 2012. The primary outcome was change in Oswestry disability index (ODI) at 1 year. The secondary endpoint was perioperative complications. Complications were graded according to the Ibanez classification system.

Results

For all patients (n = 125), the mean improvement in ODI at 1 year was 16.9 points (95 % CI 13.5–20.2, p < 0.001). Seventy-six (71.7 %) patients achieved a minimal clinically important difference in ODI (defined as ≥8 points improvement). The total number of complications within 3 months of surgery was 22 (17.6 %). There were 14 medical and eight surgical complications, and all were Ibanez grade I or II (mild or moderate) complications. Four (3.2 %) complications occurred while being admitted to the hospital and 18 (14.4 %) occurred within 3 months following hospital discharge. The most common complication was urinary tract infection (n = 11, 8.8 %).

Conclusions

Microsurgical decompression for central LSS in the absence of radiological instability is an effective and safe treatment.
Literature
1.
Alimi M, Hofstetter CP, Pyo SY, Paulo D, Hartl R (2015) Minimally invasive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis in patients with and without preoperative spondylolisthesis: clinical outcome and reoperation rates. J Neurosurg Spine 22:339–352PubMedCrossRef
2.
Amundsen T, Weber H, Nordal HJ, Magnaes B, Abdelnoor M, Lilleas F (2000) Lumbar spinal stenosis: conservative or surgical management?: a prospective 10-year study. Spine 25:1424–1435, discussion 1435–1426PubMedCrossRef
3.
Atlas SJ, Keller RB, Robson D, Deyo RA, Singer DE (2000) Surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis: four-year outcomes from the Maine Lumbar Spine Study. Spine 25:556–562PubMedCrossRef
4.
Atlas SJ, Keller RB, Wu YA, Deyo RA, Singer DE (2005) Long-term outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis: 8 to 10 year results from the Maine Lumbar Spine Study. Spine 30:936–943PubMedCrossRef
5.
Brox JI, Reikeras O, Nygaard O, Sorensen R, Indahl A, Holm I, Keller A, Ingebrigtsen T, Grundnes O, Lange JE, Friis A (2006) Lumbar instrumented fusion compared with cognitive intervention and exercises in patients with chronic back pain after previous surgery for disc herniation: a prospective randomized controlled study. Pain 122:145–155PubMedCrossRef
6.
Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR (1987) A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 40:373–383PubMedCrossRef
7.
Ciol MA, Deyo RA, Howell E, Kreif S (1996) An assessment of surgery for spinal stenosis: time trends, geographic variations, complications, and reoperations. J Am Geriatr Soc 44:285–290PubMedCrossRef
8.
Dekutoski MB, Norvell DC, Dettori JR, Fehlings MG, Chapman JR (2010) Surgeon perceptions and reported complications in spine surgery. Spine 35:S9–S21PubMedCrossRef
9.
Desai A, Ball PA, Bekelis K, Lurie J, Mirza SK, Tosteson TD, Weinstein JN (2011) SPORT: does incidental durotomy affect long-term outcomes in cases of spinal stenosis? Neurosurgery 69:38–44, discussion 44PubMedCrossRef
10.
Desai A, Bekelis K, Ball PA, Lurie J, Mirza SK, Tosteson TD, Zhao W, Weinstein JN (2013) Variation in outcomes across centers after surgery for lumbar stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis in the spine patient outcomes research trial. Spine 38:678–691PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
11.
12.
Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, O’Brien JP (1980) The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy 66:271–273PubMed
13.
Grotle M, Brox JI, Vollestad NK (2003) Cross-cultural adaptation of the Norwegian versions of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Index. J Rehabil Med 35:241–247PubMedCrossRef
14.
15.
Hellum C, Johnsen LG, Storheim K, Nygaard OP, Brox JI, Rossvoll I, Ro M, Sandvik L, Grundnes O, Norwegian Spine Study G (2011) Surgery with disc prosthesis versus rehabilitation in patients with low back pain and degenerative disc: two-year follow-up of randomised study. BMJ 342:d2786PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
16.
Jakola AS, Sorlie A, Gulati S, Nygaard OP, Lydersen S, Solberg T (2010) Clinical outcomes and safety assessment in elderly patients undergoing decompressive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective study. BMC Surg 10:34PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
17.
Knutsson B, Michaelsson K, Sanden B (2013) Obesity is associated with inferior results after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a study of 2633 patients from the Swedish spine register. Spine 38:435–441PubMedCrossRef
18.
Landriel Ibanez FA, Hem S, Ajler P, Vecchi E, Ciraolo C, Baccanelli M, Tramontano R, Knezevich F, Carrizo A (2011) A new classification of complications in neurosurgery. World Neurosurg 75:709–715, discussion 604–711PubMedCrossRef
19.
Malmivaara A, Slatis P, Heliovaara M, Sainio P, Kinnunen H, Kankare J, Dalin-Hirvonen N, Seitsalo S, Herno A, Kortekangas P, Niinimaki T, Ronty H, Tallroth K, Turunen V, Knekt P, Harkanen T, Hurri H, Finnish Lumbar Spinal Research G (2007) Surgical or nonoperative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis? A randomized controlled trial. Spine 32:1–8PubMedCrossRef
20.
McCutcheon BA, Ciacci JD, Marcus LP, Noorbakhsh A, Gonda DD, McCafferty R, Taylor W, Chen CC, Carter BS, Chang DC (2014) 30-day perioperative outcomes in spinal fusion by specialty within the NSQIP database. Spine Sep 8 Epub ahead of print
21.
Mobbs RJ, Li J, Sivabalan P, Raley D, Rao PJ (2014) Outcomes after decompressive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: comparison between minimally invasive unilateral laminectomy for bilateral decompression and open laminectomy: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 21:179–186PubMedCrossRef
22.
Nerland US, Jakola AS, Solheim O, Weber C, Rao V, Lonne G, Solberg TK, Salvesen O, Carlsen SM, Nygaard OP, Gulati S (2015) Minimally invasive decompression versus open laminectomy for central stenosis of the lumbar spine: pragmatic comparative effectiveness study. BMJ 350:h1603PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
23.
Nota SP, Braun Y, Ring D, Schwab JH (2014) Incidence of surgical site infection after spine surgery: what is the impact of the definition of infection? Clin Orthop Relat Res 473:1612–1619CrossRef
24.
25.
Pearson A, Lurie J, Tosteson T, Zhao W, Abdu W, Weinstein JN (2012) Who should have surgery for spinal stenosis? Treatment effect predictors in SPORT. Spine 37:1791–1802PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
26.
Rolston JD, Han SJ, Lau CY, Berger MS, Parsa AT (2014) Frequency and predictors of complications in neurological surgery: national trends from 2006 to 2011. J Neurosurg 120:736–745PubMedCrossRef
27.
Rosen DS, O’Toole JE, Eichholz KM, Hrubes M, Huo D, Sandhu FA, Fessler RG (2007) Minimally invasive lumbar spinal decompression in the elderly: outcomes of 50 patients aged 75 years and older. Neurosurgery 60:503–509, discussion 509–510PubMed
28.
Schizas C, Theumann N, Burn A, Tansey R, Wardlaw D, Smith FW, Kulik G (2010) Qualitative grading of severity of lumbar spinal stenosis based on the morphology of the dural sac on magnetic resonance images. Spine 35:1919–1924PubMedCrossRef
29.
Smith ZA, Fessler RG (2012) Paradigm changes in spine surgery: evolution of minimally invasive techniques. Nat Rev Neurol 8:443–450PubMedCrossRef
30.
Solberg TK, Olsen JA, Ingebrigtsen T, Hofoss D, Nygaard OP (2005) Health-related quality of life assessment by the EuroQol-5D can provide cost-utility data in the field of low-back surgery. Eur Spine J 14:1000–1007PubMedCrossRef
31.
Solberg TK, Sorlie A, Sjaavik K, Nygaard OP, Ingebrigtsen T (2011) Would loss to follow-up bias the outcome evaluation of patients operated for degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine? Acta Orthop 82:56–63PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
32.
Thome C, Zevgaridis D, Leheta O, Bazner H, Pockler-Schoniger C, Wohrle J, Schmiedek P (2005) Outcome after less-invasive decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized comparison of unilateral laminotomy, bilateral laminotomy, and laminectomy. J Neurosurg Spine 3:129–141PubMedCrossRef
33.
Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, Tosteson AN, Blood E, Hanscom B, Herkowitz H, Cammisa F, Albert T, Boden SD, Hilibrand A, Goldberg H, Berven S, An H, Investigators S (2008) Surgical versus nonsurgical therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis. N Engl J Med 358:794–810PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
34.
Whitmore RG, Stephen JH, Vernick C, Campbell PG, Yadla S, Ghobrial GM, Maltenfort MG, Ratliff JK (2014) ASA grade and Charlson comorbidity index of spinal surgery patients: correlation with complications and societal costs. Spine J 14:31–38PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Microsurgical decompression for central lumbar spinal stenosis: a single-center observational study
Authors
Charalampis Giannadakis
Lars-Egil Hammersbøen
Casper Feyling
Ole Solheim
Asgeir S. Jakola
Ulf S. Nerland
Øystein P. Nygaard
Tore K. Solberg
Sasha Gulati
Publication date
01-07-2015
Publisher
Springer Vienna
Published in
Acta Neurochirurgica / Issue 7/2015
Print ISSN: 0001-6268
Electronic ISSN: 0942-0940
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-015-2450-4

Other articles of this Issue 7/2015

Acta Neurochirurgica 7/2015 Go to the issue

Case Report - Brain Tumors

Primary pineal malignant melanoma with B-Raf V600E mutation: a case report and brief review of the literature

Letter to the editor - Editorial

Side errors in neurosurgery and human factors training

Case Report - Vascular

Acute subdural hematoma caused by a ruptured cavernous internal carotid artery giant aneurysm following abducens nerve palsy: case report and review of the literature

Clinical Article - Vascular

Oculomotor nerve palsy induced by internal carotid artery aneurysm: prognostic factors for recovery

How I Do it - Neurosurgical Techniques

Removal of large hydatid cysts with balloon-assisted modification of Dowling’s method: technical report

Clinical Article - Vascular

Moyamoya disease concurrent with Graves’ disease treated by direct bypass: clinical features and treatment strategies