Posterolateral fusion combined with posterior decompression shows superiority in the treatment of severe lumbar spinal stenosis without lumbar disc protrusion or prolapse: a retrospective cohort study

Local Prophylactic Teicoplanin Effect on Spinal Fusion Surgery: A Comparative Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

 Surgical site infection (SSI) is one of the most severe complications of spinal fusion surgery that lead to increased morbidity and mortality rates. Prophylactic antibiotic usage is one of the methods that reduce the possibility of SSI in this procedure. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of local subfascial teicoplanin usage on radiologic and functional outcomes and compare it to the effect of vancomycin on surgical outcomes in patients who underwent decompression with posterior instrumentation (DPI) for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

METHODS

 Medical charts of patients with LSS who received DPI and met the study criteria were divided into three groups: the teicoplanin group included patients who underwent DPI with local teicoplanin before closure, the vancomycin group included patients who underwent DPI with local vancomycin, and the control group included patients who underwent DPI without any local prophylactic antibiotics.

RESULTS

 A total of 101 patients were included in the study. No significant differences were found among groups regarding demographics, follow-up, and clinical and functional outcomes. No significant differences were observed among groups regarding postoperative improvements in SF-36-MCS, SF-36-PCS, Oswestry Disability Index, and Visual Analog Scale (VAS; p > 0.05). In the teicoplanin and vancomycin groups, the SSI rate was lower than that in the control group (2/35, 1/34, and 5/32, respectively, p = 0.136) without statistical significance; however, the postoperative fusion volume was significantly higher in the teicoplanin group when compared to the other groups (3.35 ± 1.08, 2.68 ± 1.17, and 2.65 ± 1.28 cm3, respectively, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

 Although its cost is relatively higher, teicoplanin was a good alternative to vancomycin in preventing SSIs with a higher fusion rate, but no superiority was observed regarding other outcomes.

Unilateral Modified Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Combined With Contralateral Lamina Fenestration Treating Severe Lumbarspinal Stenosis: A Retrospective Clinical Study

Study design: Retrospective study. Objectives: The traditional PLIF is routinely utilized in severe lumbar spinal stenosis to relief the nerve compression. Nevertheless, the removal of posterior tension-band structure and the denervation and atrophy of the paraspinal muscle affect the clinical efficacy. Therefore, unilateral modified PLIF combined with contralateral fenestration was performed to overcome above-mentioned drawbacks. Methods: 32 modified PLIF and 33 traditional PLIF cases were retrospectively included. Operation time, length of stay (LOS) and blood loss were recorded. VAS of low back pain and leg pain, ODI and Sf-36 score including physical function and body pain were assessed. Fusion rate, lumbar lordosis (LL), intervertebral angle (IVA) and intervertebral height index (IHI) were evaluated radiologically. Results: Modified group possessed less blood loss, shorter operation time and less LOS. Compared with traditional group, the VAS of back pain was lower at 6 months postoperatively (P < .05) and the ODI score was lower at 3 months postoperatively (P < .05) in modified group. Modified group exhibited better physical function 3 months postoperatively and lower body pain 6 months postoperatively in Sf-36 score (P < .05). No statistic difference in LL, IVA, IHI and fusion rate were observed between both groups. Conclusions: Our modified PLIF combining with contralateral fenestration procedure exhibited particular advantages in comparison to traditional PLIF. The preservation of posterior tension-band structure facilitates to less low back pain, low complication rate and early functional recovery.

Clinical efficacy and imaging outcomes of unilateral biportal endoscopy with unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression in the treatment of severe lumbar spinal stenosis

Objective

To investigate the clinical efficacy and imaging outcomes of unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) with unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) in the treatment of severe lumbar spinal stenosis (SLSS).

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 50 patients with SLSS treated with UBE-ULBD from October 2018 to March 2021. Visual analog scale (VAS) for back and legs pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), modified Macnab criteria, complications, hospital stay, preoperative and postoperative dural sac cross-sectional area (DSCA) and Schizas grade, mean angle of facetectomy and osseous lateral recess decompression rate were examined.

Results

The mean follow-up period was 10.7 months. The mean hospital stay was 2.76 ± 1.02 days. At the final follow-up, VAS for back pain and legs pain decreased from 7.22 ± 0.95 to 1.26 ± 0.44 and from 7.88 ± 0.69 to 1.18 ± 0.39, respectively; ODI decreased from 69.88 ± 6.32% to 14.96 ± 2.75%. According to the modified Macnab criteria, the results were excellent in 24 (48%), good in 22 (44%), and fair in 4 (8%). Excellent or good results (a satisfactory outcome) were obtained in 92% of the patients. There were 2 cases of complications of dural sac tear. The postoperative DSCA was significantly enlarged compared with that before surgery, from 44.74 ± 9.85 to 126.86 ± 14.81 mm². According to Schizas grade, the stenosis grade changes from preoperative grade C in 16 cases, grade D in 34 cases, to postoperative grade A in 40 cases, and grade B in 10 cases. The mean angle of facetectomy of the ipsilateral facet joint was 70.87 ± 5.68 ∘ , contralateral was 65.07 ± 4.98 ∘ . The decompression rate was 70.81 ± 4.43% (ipsilateral side) and 71.22 ± 3.68% (contralateral).

Conclusions

UBE-ULBD has a good clinical effect in the treatment of SLSS, and has achieved satisfactory results in spinal canal enlargement, undercutting of facet joints, and decompression effect. It is a safe and effective surgical for SLSS.

Immune cell infiltration and the genes associated with ligamentum flavum hypertrophy: Identification and validation

Ligamentum flavum hypertrophy (LFH) is a common cause of spinal stenosis. The aim of the current study was to identify the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in LFH and the molecular mechanisms underlying the development of and immune responses to LFH. The gene expression omnibus (GEO) database was used to obtain the GSE113212 dataset, and the DEGs were derived from microarray data. To identify critical genes and signaling pathways, gene ontology enrichment, Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) enrichment, and protein-protein interaction (PPI) network analyses were performed, followed by immune cell infiltration and Friends analyses using the retrieved datasets. The results were validated using quantitative real-time PCR. The 1530 DEGs identified comprised 971 upregulated and 559 downregulated genes. KEGG analysis revealed that DEGs were mostly enriched in the PI3K-Akt signaling pathway, while PPI network analysis identified tumor necrosis factor, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-10, epidermal growth factor receptor, and leptin as important nodes, which was validated by qPCR and IHC in human LFH tissues in vitro. A significant positive correlation was found between key LFH immune-related DEGs and several immune cell types, including T and B cells. The findings of the present study might lead to novel therapeutic targets and clinical approaches, as they provide insights into the molecular mechanisms of LFH.

Effectiveness and safety of decompression alone versus decompression plus fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

There have been lingering controversies reported decompression and plus fusion. And the relative safety of fusion in addition to standard decompression remains unclear. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of decompression alone or combined with fusion in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS).

Methods

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched the databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for relevant literature from their inception to 28th December 2021. We identified the eligible studies based on the PICOS principles, populations (LSS with DS), interventions (decompression alone), controls (decompression combined with fusion), outcomes [overall reoperation rate, complications, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), operative time, the amount of blood lost, length of stay (LOS), and visual analog scales (VAS)], study design (cohort studies). Quality assessment for individual study was performed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS).

Results

In all, 12 articles involving a total of 14,693 patients were finally included in the study, the majority of patients underwent decompression alone (DA group: n=11,598) and the rest underwent decompression associated with fusion (FU group: n=3,095). The quality of most of the included studies was regarded as high quality. The results indicated that the FU group had a higher rate of complication [relative risk (RR): 1.770, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.485 to 2.110], longer operative time [weighted mean difference (WMD): 51.037, 95% CI: 13.743 to 88.330], and increased blood loss (WMD: 258.354, 95% CI: 150.468 to 366.239) than the DA group (all P<0.05), with no significant differences for overall reoperation rate (RR: 0.879, 95% CI: 0.432 to 1.786), ODI (WMD: −2.569, 95% CI: −6.548 to 1.409), LOS (WMD: 3.838, 95% CI: −2.172 to 9.848), and VAS found between the two groups (P>0.05).

Conclusions

In patients with LSS + DS, the effectiveness and safety of decompression alone may be superior to decompression plus fusion in terms of complication rate, operative time, and the amount of bleeding. However, more high-quality literature is needed in the future to confirm the best treatment choice for patients with LSS + DS.

Comparison of decompression, decompression plus fusion, and decompression plus stabilization: a long-term follow-up of a prospective, randomized study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Lumbar canal stenosis due to degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis is one of the most common indications for lumbar spinal surgery. However, from a long-term perspective, it is still unclear which of these procedures should be performed: decompression, decompression plus fusion, or decompression plus stabilization.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to present the long-term results of a randomized controlled trial of surgery for degenerative spondylolisthesis.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This is a long-term follow-up of a previously reported randomized controlled trial.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Patients aged ≤75 years with single L4/5 level lumbar canal stenosis caused by degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis were enrolled at two hospitals from May 1, 2003, to April 30, 2012; the final follow-up was on May 20, 2021.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The following data were collected: modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score for lower back pain, leg pain, and numbness, and scores from eight Short-Form 36 (SF-36) subscales preoperatively, 1 year postoperatively, 5 years postoperatively, and at the final follow-up.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to undergo decompression alone, decompression plus fusion, or decompression plus stabilization. The primary outcome measure was the change in VAS for lower back pain with secondary outcomes including the modified JOA score, VAS for leg pain, VAS for leg numbness, eight SF-36 subscale scores, and occurrence of reoperation at the last follow-up.

RESULTS

Among 85 patients who were randomized, 66 responded to the current survey. The mean follow-up period was 12.3 years. The VAS score for low back pain improvement was not significantly different between the decompression and fusion groups at the mean follow-up of 12.3 years. Of the 12 secondary outcomes, 8 showed no significant difference between decompression and fusion, 12 showed no significant difference between decompression and stabilization, and 10 showed no significant difference between fusion and stabilization.

CONCLUSIONS

Although additional instrumentation surgery did not significantly improve low back pain at the mean follow-up of 12.3 years compared with decompression alone, fusion surgery provided clinically meaningful improvements in patient-reported vitality, social functioning, role limitations due to personal or emotional problems, and mental health compared with decompression alone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN000028114.

Intraoperative neuromonitoring during surgery for lumbar stenosis

The indications for neuromonitoring during lumbar stenosis surgery are defined by the risks associated with patient positioning, the approach, decompression of neural elements, deformity correction, and instrument implantation. The routine use of EMG and SEP alone during lumbar stenosis surgery is no longer supported by the literature. Lateral approach neuromonitoring with EMG only is also suspect. Lumbar stenosis patients often present with multiple co-morbidities which put them at risk during routine pre-surgical positioning. Frequently encountered morbid obesity and/or diabetes mellitus may play a role in monitorable and preventable brachial plexopathy after "superman" positioning or femoral neuropathy from groin pressure after prone positioning, for example. Deformity correction in lumbar stenosis surgery often demands advanced implementation of multiple neuromonitoring modalities: EMG, SEP, and MEP. Because the bulbocavernosus reflex detects the function of the conus medullaris and sacral somato afferent/efferent fibers of the cauda equina, it may also be recorded. The recommendation to record pedicle screw thresholds has become more nuanced as surgeon dependence on 3D imaging, navigation, and robotics has increased. Neuromonitoring in lumbar stenosis surgery has been subject mainly to uncontrolled case series; prospective cohort trials are also needed.

Construct validity and responsiveness of commonly used patient reported outcome instruments in decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis

BACKGROUND

Validity and responsiveness of Oswestry disability index (ODI), Roland Morris disability questionnaires (RMDQ), Short Form-12 Physical Component Score (SF-12 PCS) and Short Form-12 Mental Component Score (SF-12 MCS) in patients undergoing open decompression for lumbar canal stenosis has not been previously reported.

METHODS

Outcome assessment was prospectively evaluated using the ODI, RMDQ, SF-12 PCS and SF-12 MCS pre-intervention and at average follow-up of three months post-intervention. Pearson correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the association between change in values of ODI, RMDQ, SF-12 PCS and SF-12 MCS. Distribution based methods (Effect size [ES], standardised response mean [SRM]) and anchor based method (Area under the curve [AUC] of receiver operating curve [ROC]) were used to determine responsiveness. AUC value ≥ 0.70 is considered as adequate level of responsiveness and the outcome instrument with the largest AUC is considered to be the most responsive outcome instrument.

RESULTS

This study included 77 participants. Responsiveness was assessed at a mean follow-up of 12 weeks postoperatively. There was significant strong correlation between ODI and RMDQ (r = 0.65, p < 0.0001). The ES of ODI, RMDQ, SF-12 PCS and SF-12 MCS were 1.54, 1.48, 1.85 and 0.51 respectively. The SRM of RMDQ, ODI, SF-12 PCS and SF-12 MCS were 1.22, 1.17, 1.0 and 0.47 respectively. AUC of ODI, RMDQ, SF-12 PCS and SF-12 MCS were 0.83-0.88, 0.82 to 0.86, 0.78 to 0.81 and 0.69 to 0.70 respectively.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended to use either ODI or RMDQ as region specific patient reported outcome instrument and SF-12 PCS as a health related quality of life outcome instrument to evaluate outcome after decompressive laminectomy for lumbar canal stenosis.