Only walking matters—assessment following lumbar stenosis decompression

Physical and Psychological Factors Associated With Walking Capacity in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis With Neurogenic Claudication: A Systematic Scoping Review

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current state of scientific knowledge regarding physical and psychological factors associated with walking capacity in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with neurogenic claudication.

Design: Systematic scoping review.

Literature Search: We searched CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), MEDLINE, Cochrane, PsycINFO, and SPORTDiscus databases.

Study Selection Criteria: Cohorts and cross-sectional studies reporting on associations between physical or psychological factors and impaired walking capacity in patients with symptomatic LSS were included.

Data Synthesis: Data were synthetized to identify associations between physical or psychological factors and either walking capacity, gait pattern characteristics, or functional tasks.

Results: Twenty-four studies were included. Walking capacity was significantly correlated with several pain outcomes, disability, estimated walking distance, and cross-sectional area of the lumbar spine. Gait pattern characteristics such as speed and stride were strongly and positively correlated with disability outcomes. Functional tasks were significantly correlated with lower back and upper limb disability, lower limb endurance strength, ranges of motion, and speed. Associations with psychological factors were mostly conflicting except for the Rasch-based Depression Screener and the Pain Anxiety Symptom Scale (PASS-20) questionnaire that were associated with a decreased performance in functional tasks.

Conclusion: Physical and psychological factors that are associated with walking capacity in patients with symptomatic LSS were identified. However, many associations reported between physical or psychological factors and walking capacity were conflicting, even more so when correlated with walking capacity specifically.

Pre-operative prognostic factors for walking capacity after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) reduces walking and quality of life. It is the main indication for spinal surgery in older people yet 40% report walking disability post-operatively. Identifying the prognostic factors of post-operative walking capacity could aid clinical decision-making, guide rehabilitation and optimise health outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesise the evidence for pre-operative mutable and immutable prognostic factors for post-operative walking in adults with LSS.

DESIGN

Systematic review with narrative synthesis.

METHODS

Electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, OpenGrey) were searched for observational studies, evaluating factors associated with walking after surgery in adults receiving surgery for LSS from database inception to January 2020. Two reviewers independently evaluated studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed risk of bias (Quality in Prognosis Studies). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation method was used to determine level of evidence for each factor.

RESULTS

5526 studies were screened for eligibility. Thirty-four studies (20 cohorts, 9,973 participants, 26 high, 2 moderate, 6 low risk of bias) were included. Forty variables (12 mutable) were identified. There was moderate quality of evidence that pre-operative walking capacity was positively associated with post-operative walking capacity. The presence of spondylolisthesis and the severity of stenosis were not associated with post-operative walking capacity. All other factors investigated had low/very low level of evidence.

CONCLUSION

Greater pre-operative walking is associated with greater post-operative walking capacity but not spondylolisthesis or severity of stenosis. Few studies have investigated mutable prognostic factors that could be potentially targeted to optimise surgical outcomes.

PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF VERTEBRAL CANAL DECOMPRESSION BY SPINOUS PROCESS SPLITTING

ABSTRACT Objective Considering that the technique of spinous process splitting has been advocated as a less invasive treatment of lumbar stenosis, the objective of this study was to evaluate the preliminary results of this technique in the surgical treatment of lumbar canal stenosis. Methods Twenty patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis who underwent surgical treatment for lumbar canal decompression with the spinous process splitting technique were assessed in the preoperative period and on postoperative days 1, 7 and 30 for VAS for lower back and lower limbs pain and radiographic evaluation of the operated segment. Results The mean visual analogue scale score for lumbar pain in the preoperative assessment was 4.2 ± 3.37 and 0.85 ± 0.88, 1.05 ± 1.19 and 1.15 ± 1.04 after 1, 7 and 30 postoperative days, respectively. The mean VAS score for lower limb pain was 8 ± 1.72 preoperatively, and 0.7 ± 1.13, 0.85 ± 1.04, and 1.05 ± 1 after 1, 7, and 30 postoperative days, respectively. There were no radiographic signs of instability of the vertebral segment operated in the radiographic evaluation. Conclusions Decompression of the lumbar canal through the spinous process splitting technique in patients with lumbar canal stenosis had good immediate and short-term results in relation to low back and lower limbs pain. Level of evidence IV; Therapeutic Study.

Level of Evidence for Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness of Physical Capacity Tasks Designed to Assess Functioning in Patients With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review Using the COSMIN Standards

BACKGROUND

Physical capacity tasks (ie, observer-administered outcome measures that comprise a standardized activity) are useful for assessing functioning in patients with low back pain.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to systematically review the level of evidence for the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of physical capacity tasks.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and relevant reference lists were used as data sources.

STUDY SELECTION

Two authors independently selected articles addressing the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of physical capacity tasks, and a third author resolved discrepancies.

DATA EXTRACTION AND QUALITY ASSESSMENT

One author performed data extraction, and a second author independently checked the data extraction for accuracy. Two authors independently assessed the methodological quality with the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) 4-point checklist, and a third author resolved discrepancies.

DATA SYNTHESIS AND ANALYSIS

Data synthesis was performed by all authors to determine the level of evidence per measurement property per physical capacity task. The 5-repetition sit-to-stand, 5-minute walk, 50-ft (∼15.3-m) walk, Progressive Isoinertial Lifting Evaluation, and Timed "Up & Go" tasks displayed moderate to strong evidence for positive ratings of both reliability and construct validity. The 1-minute stair-climbing, 5-repetition sit-to-stand, shuttle walking, and Timed "Up & Go" tasks showed limited evidence for positive ratings of responsiveness.

LIMITATIONS

The COSMIN 4-point checklist was originally developed for patient-reported outcome measures and not physical capacity tasks.

CONCLUSIONS

The 5-repetition sit-to-stand, 50-ft walk, 5-minute walk, Progressive Isoinertial Lifting Evaluation, Timed "Up & Go," and 1-minute stair-climbing tasks are promising tests for the measurement of functioning in patients with chronic low back pain. However, more research on the measurement error and responsiveness of these tasks is needed to be able to fully recommend them as outcome measures in research and clinical practice.

Prospective, randomized, multicenter study with 2-year follow-up to compare the performance of decompression with and without interlaminar stabilization

OBJECTIVE

Surgical decompression is extremely effective in relieving pain and symptoms due to lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Decompression with interlaminar stabilization (D+ILS) is as effective as decompression with posterolateral fusion for stenosis, as shown in a major US FDA pivotal trial. This study reports a multicenter, randomized controlled trial in which D+ILS was compared with decompression alone (DA) for treatment of moderate to severe LSS.

METHODS

Under approved institutional ethics review, 230 patients (1:1 ratio) randomized to either DA or D+ILS (coflex, Paradigm Spine) were treated at 7 sites in Germany. Patients had moderate to severe LSS at 1 or 2 adjacent segments from L-3 to L-5. Outcomes were evaluated up to 2 years postoperatively, including Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, the presence of secondary surgery or lumbar injections, neurological status, and the presence of device- or procedure-related severe adverse events. The composite clinical success (CCS) was defined as combining all 4 of these outcomes, a success definition validated in a US FDA pivotal trial. Additional secondary end points included visual analog scale (VAS) scores, Zürich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) scores, narcotic usage, walking tolerance, and radiographs.

RESULTS

The overall follow-up rate was 91% at 2 years. There were no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes at 24 months (p > 0.05). The CCS was superior for the D+ILS arm (p = 0.017). The risk of secondary intervention was 1.75 times higher among patients in the DA group than among those in the D+ILS group (p = 0.055). The DA arm had 228% more lumbar injections (4.5% for D+ILS vs 14.8% for DA; p = 0.0065) than the D+ILS one. Patients who underwent DA had a numerically higher rate of narcotic use at every time point postsurgically (16.7% for D+ILS vs 23% for DA at 24 months). Walking Distance Test results were statistically significantly different from baseline; the D+ILS group had > 2 times the improvement of the DA. The patients who underwent D+ILS had > 5 times the improvement from baseline compared with only 2 times the improvement from baseline for the DA group. Foraminal height and disc height were largely maintained in patients who underwent D+ILS, whereas patients treated with DA showed a significant decrease at 24 months postoperatively (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed no significant difference in the individual patient-reported outcomes (e.g., ODI, VAS, ZCQ) between the treatments when viewed in isolation. The CCS (survivorship, ODI success, absence of neurological deterioration or device- or procedure-related severe adverse events) is statistically superior for ILS. Microsurgical D+ILS increases walking distance, decreases compensatory pain management, and maintains radiographic foraminal height, extending the durability and sustainability of a decompression procedure.

Clinical trial registration no.: NCT01316211 (clinicaltrials.gov)

Clinical and psychological outcome after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: A prospective observational study with analysis of prognostic factors

BACKGROUND

The identification of psychological risk factors is important for the selection of patients before spinal surgery. Moreover, the effect of surgical decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) on psychological outcome is not previously well analyzed.

AIM OF PAPER

to investigate clinical and psychological outcome after surgery for LSS and the effect of depressive symptoms and anxiety on the clinical outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 25 patients with symptomatic LSS underwent decompressive surgery with or without spinal stabilization were prospectively enrolled in this observational surgery. The Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R) was used to assess global psychological distress with a summary score termed Global Severity Index (GSI) and single psychological disorders including depression (DEP) and anxiety (ANX). The clinical outcome of surgery was evaluated with the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analogue scale (VAS) pain assessment.

RESULTS

Compared with baseline, there was a statistically significant improvement in VAS, ODI and GSI after surgery (p<0.05) in all patients. Univariate analysis revealed that patients with high GSI and anxiety and depression scores had significantly higher ODI and VAS scores in the follow-up with a bad outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery for spinal stenosis was effective to treat pain and disability. In this prospective study baseline global psychological distress, depression and anxiety were associated with poorer clinical outcome.