Top

Published in:

01-12-2007 | Original Article

Midterm outcome after unilateral approach for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: 5-year prospective study

Authors: Halit Çavuşoğlu, Ramazan Alper Kaya, Osman Nuri Türkmenoglu, Cengiz Tuncer, İbrahim Çolak, Yunus Aydın

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 12/2007

Abstract

The aim of our study is to evaluate the results and effectiveness of bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. We have conducted a prospective study to compare the midterm outcome of unilateral laminotomy with unilateral laminectomy. One hundred patients with 269 levels of lumbar stenosis without instability were randomized to two treatment groups: unilateral laminectomy (Group 1), and laminotomy (Group 2). Clinical outcomes were assessed with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Short Form–36 Health Survey (SF-36). Spinal canal size was measured pre- and postoperatively. The spinal canal was increased to 4–6.1-fold (mean 5.1 ± SD 0.8-fold) the preoperative size in Group 1, and 3.3–5.9-fold (mean 4.7 ± SD 1.1-fold) the preoperative size in Group 2. The mean follow-up time was 5.4 years (range 4–7 years). The ODI scores decreased significantly in both early and late follow-up evaluations and the SF-36 scores demonstrated significant improvement in late follow-up results in our series. Analysis of clinical outcome showed no statistical differences between two groups. For degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis unilateral approaches allowed sufficient and safe decompression of the neural structures and adequate preservation of vertebral stability, resulted in a highly significant reduction of symptoms and disability, and improved health-related quality of life.

Adachi K, Futami T, Ebihara A, Yamaya T, Kasai N, Nakazawa T, et al (2003) Spinal canal enlargement procedure by restorative laminoplasty for the treatment of lumbar canal stenosis. Spine J 3(6):471–478PubMedCrossRef

Adams MA, Hutton WC, Stott JR (1980) The resistance to flexion of the lumbar intervertebral joint. Spine 5(3):245–253PubMedCrossRef

Adams MA, Hutton WC (1983) The mechanical function of the lumbar apophyseal joints. Spine 8(3):327–330PubMedCrossRef

Airaksinen O, Herno A, Kaukanen E, Saari T, Sihvonen T, Suomalainen O (1996) Density of lumbar muscles 4 years after decompressive spinal surgery. Eur Spine J 5(3):193–197PubMedCrossRef

Airaksinen O, Herno A, Turunen V, Saari T, Suomlainen O (1997) Surgical outcome of 438 patients treated surgically for lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 22(19):2278–2282PubMedCrossRef

Aryanpur J, Ducker T (1990) Multilevel lumbar laminotomies: an alternative to laminectomy in the treatment of lumbar stenosis. Neurosurgery 26(3):429–432 discussion 433PubMedCrossRef

Askar Z, Wardlaw D, Choudhary S, Rege A (2003) A ligamentum flavum-preserving approach to the lumbar spinal canal. Spine 28(19):E385–E390PubMedCrossRef

Cammisa FP Jr, Girardi FP, Sangani PK, Parvataneni HK, Cadag S, Sandhu HS (2000) Incidental durotomy in spine surgery. Spine 25(20):2663–2667PubMedCrossRef

Deyo RA, Nachemson A, Mirza SK (2004) Spinal-fusion surgery-the case for restraint. N Engl J Med 350(7):722–726PubMedCrossRef

10.

diPiero CG, Helm GA, Shaffrey CI, Chadduck JB, Henson SL, Malik JM et al (1996) Treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis by extensive unilateral decompression and contralateral autolougs bone fusion: operative technique and results. J Nuerosurg 84(2):166–173

11.

Epstein NE (1998) Decompression in the surgical management of degenerative spondylolisthesis: advantages of a conservative approach in 290 patients. J Spinal Disord 11(2):116–122 discussion 123PubMedCrossRef

12.

Epstein NE, Maldonado VC, Cusick JF (1998) Symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis. Surg Neurol 50(1):3–10PubMedCrossRef

13.

Fox MW, Onofrio BM, Hanssen AD (1996) Clinical outcomes and radiological instability following decompressive lumbar laminectomy for degenerative spinal stenosis: a comparison of patients undergoing concomitant arthrodesis versus decompression alone. J Neurosurg 85(5):793–802PubMed

14.

Goel VK, Fromknecht SJ, Nishiyama K, Weinstein J, Liu YK (1985) The role of the lumbar spinal elements in flexion. Spine 10(6):516–523PubMedCrossRef

15.

Grob D, Humke T, Dvorak J (1995) Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Decompression with and without arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 77(7):1036–1041PubMed

16.

Guiot BH, Khoo LT, Fessler RG (2002) A minimally invasive technique for decompression of the lumbar spine. Spine 27(4):432–438PubMedCrossRef

17.

Haba K, Ikeda M, Soma M, Yamashima T (2005) Bilateral decompression of multilevel lumbar spinal stenosis through a unilateral approach. J Clinical Neurosci 12(2):169–171CrossRef

18.

Herno A, Saari T, Suomalainen O, Airaksinen O (1999) The degree of decompressive relief and its relation to clinical outcome in patients undergoing surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 24(10):1010–1014PubMedCrossRef

19.

Herron LD, Mangelsdorf C (1991) Lumbar spinal stenosis: results of surgical treatment. J Spinal Disord 4(1):26–33PubMed

20.

Hindle RJ, Pearcy MJ, Cross A (1990) Mechanical function of the human lumbar interspinous and supraspinous ligaments. J Biomed Eng 12(4):340–344PubMedCrossRef

21.

Hopp E, Tsou PM (1988) Postdecompression lumbar instability. Clin Orthop Relat Res 227:143–151PubMed

22.

Javid MJ, Hadar EJ (1998) Long-term follow-up review of patients who underwent laminectomy for lumbar stenosis: a prospective study. J Neurosurg 89(1):1–7PubMed

23.

Ji YC, Kim YB, Hwang SN, Park SW, Kwon JT, Min BK (2005) Efficacy of Unilateral Laminectomy for bilateral decompression in elderly lumbar spinal stenosis. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 37:410–415

24.

Johnsson KE, Willner S, Johnsson K (1986) Postoperative instability after decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 11(2):107–110PubMedCrossRef

25.

Kalbarczyk A, Lukes A, Seiler RW (1998) Surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 140(7):637–641CrossRef

26.

Katz JN, Lipson SJ, Larson MG, McInnes JM, Fossel AH, Liang MH (1991) The outcome of decompressive laminectomy for degenerative lumbar stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 73(6):809–816PubMed

27.

Khoo LT, Fessler RG (2002) Microendoscopic decompressive laminotomy for the treatment of lumbar stenosis. Neurosurgery 51(5 Suppl):S146–S154PubMed

28.

Kleeman TJ, Hiscoe AC, Berg EE (2000) Patient outcomes after minimally destabilizing lumbar stenosis decompression: the “Port-Hole” technique. Spine 25(7):865–870PubMedCrossRef

29.

Lin PM (1982) Internal decompression for multiple levels of lumbar spinal stenosis: a technical note. Neurosurgery 11(4):546–549PubMedCrossRef

30.

Lipson SJ (2004) Spinal-fusion surgery-advances and concerns. N Engl J Med 350(7):643–644PubMedCrossRef

31.

Mackay DC, Wheelwright EF (1998) Unilateral fenestration in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Br J Neurosurg 12(6):556–558PubMedCrossRef

32.

Mariconda M, Fava R, Gatto A, Longo C, Milano C (2002) Unilateral laminectomy for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective comparative study with conservatively treated patients. J Spinal Disord Tech 15(1):39–46PubMed

33.

Mayer TG, Vanharanta H, Gatchel RJ, Mooney V, Barnes D, Judge L, et al (1989) Comparison of CT scan muscle measurements and isokinetic trunk strength in postoperative patients. Spine 14(1):33–6PubMedCrossRef

34.

McCulloch JA (1991) Microsurgical spinal laminotomies in the adult spine: principles and practice. J.W. Frymoyer (ed) Raven Press, New York

35.

Nakai O, Ookawa A, Yamaura I (1991) Long-term roentgenographic and functional changes in patients who were treated with wide fenestration for central lumbar stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 73(8):1184–1191PubMed

36.

Palmer S, Turner R, Palmer R (2002) Bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis involving a unilateral approach with microscope and tubular retractor system. J Neurosurg 97(2 Suppl):213–217PubMed

37.

Pinar R (2005) Reliability and construct validity of the SF-36 in Turkish cancer patients. Qual Life Res 14(1):259–264PubMedCrossRef

38.

Prestar FJ (1982) Morphology and function of the interspinal ligaments and the supraspinal ligament of the lumbar portion of the spine. Morphol Med 2:53–58PubMed

39.

Postacchini F, Cinotti G, Perugia D, Gumina S (1993) The surgical treatment of central lumbar stenosis. Multiple laminotomy compared with total laminectomy. J Bone Joint Surg Br 75(3):386–392PubMed

40.

See DH, Kraft GH (1975) Electromyography in paraspinal muscles following surgery for root compression. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 56(2):80–83PubMed

41.

Sengupta DK, Herkowitz HN (2003) Lumbar spinal stenosis. Treatment strategies and indications for surgery. Orthop Clin North Am 34(2):281–295PubMedCrossRef

42.

Sihvonen T, Herno A, Paljarva L, Airaksinen O, Patanen J, Tapaninaho A (1993) Local denervation atrophy of paraspinal muscles in postoperative failed back syndrome. Spine 18(5):575–581PubMedCrossRef

43.

Silvers HR, Lewis PJ, Asch HL (1993) Decompressive lumbar laminectomy for spinal stenosis. J Neurosurg 78(5):695–701PubMedCrossRef

44.

Spetzger U, Bertalanffy H, Naujokat C, von Keyserlingk DG, Gilsbach JM (1997) Unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis. Part I: Anatomical and surgical considerations. Acta Neurochir 139(5):392–396CrossRef

45.

Spetzger U, Bertalanffy H, Reinges MH, Gilsbach JM (1997) Unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis. Part II: Clinical experiences. Acta Neurochir 139(5):397–403CrossRef

46.

Thomas NW, Rea GL, Pikul BK, Mervis LJ, Irsik R, McGregor JM (1997) Quantitative outcome and radiographic comparisons between laminectomy and laminotomy in the treatment of acquired lumbar stenosis. Neurosurgery 41(3):567–574 discussion 574–75PubMedCrossRef

47.

Thome C, Zevgaridis D, Leheta O, Bazner H, Pockler-Schoniger C, Wohrle J et al (2005) Outcome after less-invasive decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized comparison of unilateral laminotomy, bilateral laminotomy, and laminectomy. J Neurosurg Spine 3(2):129–141PubMed

48.

Tsai RY, Yang RS, Bray RS Jr (1998) Microscopic laminotomies for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord 11(5):389–394PubMedCrossRef

49.

Tuite GF, Stern JD, Doran SE, Papadopoulos SM, McGillicuddy JE, Oyedijo DI et al (1994) Outcome after laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: Part I: Clinical correlations. J Neurosurg 81(5):699–706PubMed

50.

Tuite GF, Doran SE, Stern JD, McGillicuddy JE, Papadopoulos SM, Lundquist CA et al (1994) Outcome after laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis. Part II: Radiographic changes and clinical correlations. J Neurosurg 81(5):707–715PubMed

51.

Turner JA, Ersek M, Herron L, Deyo R (1992) Surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Attempted meta-analysis of the literature. Spine 17(1):1–8PubMedCrossRef

52.

Wang JC, Bohlman HH, Riew KD (1998) Dural tears secondary to operations on the lumbar spine. Management and results after a two-year-minimum follow-up of eighty-eight patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 80(12):1728–1732PubMed

53.

Weiner BK, Walker M, Brower RS, McCulloch JA (1999) Microdecompression for lumbar spinal canal stenosis. Spine 24(21):2268–2272PubMedCrossRef

54.

White AA, Panjabi MM (1990) Clinical biomechanics of the spine, 2nd edn. JB Lippincott, Philadelphia

55.

Yakut E, Duger T, Oksuz C, Yorukan S, Ureten K, Turan D, et al (2004) Validation of the Turkish version of the Oswestry Disability Index for patients with low back pain. Spine 29(5):581–585 discussion 585PubMedCrossRef

56.

Yone K, Sakou T (1999) Usefulness of Posner’s definition of spinal instability for selection of surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord 12(1):40–44PubMedCrossRef

57.

Young S, Veerapen R, O’Laoire SA (1988) Relief of lumbar canal stenosis using multilevel subarticular fenestrations as an alternative to wide laminectomy: preliminary report. Neurosurgery 23(5):628–633PubMedCrossRef

Title: Midterm outcome after unilateral approach for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: 5-year prospective study
Authors: Halit Çavuşoğlu
Ramazan Alper Kaya
Osman Nuri Türkmenoglu
Cengiz Tuncer
İbrahim Çolak
Yunus Aydın
Publication date: 01-12-2007
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: European Spine Journal / Issue 12/2007
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-007-0471-2

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Midterm outcome after unilateral approach for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: 5-year prospective study

Abstract

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 12/2007

Structural property distribution of the cervical endplate and the correlation with CT measured subchondral bone density

An in vitro tissue model to study the effect of age on nucleus pulposus cells

Effect of Hydroxyapatite porous characteristics on healing outcomes in rabbit posterolateral spinal fusion model

The GRAMMER European Spine Journal Award 2008

Cauda equina syndrome treated by surgical decompression: the influence of timing on surgical outcome

Radiographic measurement of the sagittal plane deformity in patients with osteoporotic spinal fractures evaluation of intrinsic error