Minimal Clinically Important Difference in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures with the Transforaminal Endoscopic Decompression for Lateral Recess and Foraminal Stenosis

New Perspectives on Risk Assessment and Anticoagulation in Elective Spine Surgery Patients: The Impact of Ultra-Minimally Invasive Endoscopic Surgery Techniques on Patients with Cardiac Disease

The advent of ultra-minimally invasive endoscopic spine surgery, characterized by significantly reduced surgery times, minimal blood loss, and minimal tissue trauma, has precipitated a paradigm shift in the preoperative management of patients with cardiac disease undergoing elective spine procedures. This perspective article explores how these advancements have influenced the requirements for preoperative cardiac workups and the protocols surrounding the cessation of anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapies. Traditionally, extensive cardiac evaluations and the need to stop anticoagulation and antiplatelet agents have posed challenges, increasing the risk of cardiac events and delaying surgical interventions. However, the reduced invasiveness of endoscopic spine surgery presents a safer profile for patients with cardiac comorbidities, potentially minimizing the necessity for rigorous cardiac clearance and allowing for more flexible anticoagulation management. This perspective article synthesizes current research and clinical practices to provide a comprehensive overview of these evolving protocols. It also discusses the implications of these changes for patient safety, surgical outcomes, and overall healthcare efficiency. Finally, the article suggests directions for future research, emphasizing the need for updated guidelines that reflect the reduced perioperative risk associated with these innovative surgical techniques. This discussion is pivotal for primary care physicians, surgeons, cardiologists, and the broader medical community in optimizing care for this high-risk patient population.

Does obesity and varying body mass index affect the clinical outcomes and safety of biportal endoscopic lumbar decompression? A comparative cohort study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic spine surgery has recently grown in popularity due to the potential benefits of reduced pain and faster recovery time as compared to open surgery. Biportal spinal endoscopy has been successfully applied to lumbar disc herniations and lumbar spinal stenosis. Obesity is associated with increased risk of complications in spine surgery. Few prior studies have investigated the impact of obesity and associated medical comorbidities with biportal spinal endoscopy.

METHODS

This study was a prospectively collected, retrospectively analyzed comparative cohort design. Patients were divided into cohorts of normal body weight (Bone Mass Index (BMI)18.0-24.9), overweight (BMI 25.0-29.9) and obese (BMI > 30.0) as defined by the World Health Organization (WHO). Patients underwent biportal spinal endoscopy by a single surgeon at a single institution for treatment of lumbar disc herniations and lumbar spinal stenosis. Demographic data, surgical complications, and patient-reported outcomes were analyzed. Statistics were calculated amongst treatment groups using analysis of variance and chi square where appropriate. Statistical significance was determined as p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Eighty-four patients were followed. 26 (30.1%) were normal BMI, 35 (41.7%) were overweight and 23 (27.4%) were obese. Patients with increasing BMI had correspondingly greater American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) scores. There were no significant differences in VAS Back, VAS Leg, and ODI scores, or postoperative complications among the cohorts. There were no cases of surgical site infections in the cohort. All cohorts demonstrated significant improvement up to 1 year postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that obesity is not a risk factor for increased perioperative complications with biportal spinal endoscopy and has similar clinical outcomes and safety profile as compared to patients with normal BMI. Biportal spinal endoscopy is a promising alternative to traditional techniques to treat common lumbar pathology.

Does the Severity of Foraminal Stenosis Impact Outcomes of Lumbar Decompression Surgery?

OBJECTIVE

To establish the relationship between the magnitude of foraminal stenosis and 1) improvement in patient-reported outcomes, 2) improvement in motor function after lumbar decompression surgery, and 3) difference in surgical outcomes.

METHODS

Patients who underwent one-level posterior lumbar decompression for radiculopathy were retrospectively identified. Patient demographics and surgical characteristics were collected through a query search and manual chart review of the electronic medical records. Foraminal stenosis was determined on magnetic resonance imaging and graded using Lee et al.'s validated methodology as none, mild, moderate, or severe. Surgical outcomes, motor function, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were compared based on the amount of stenosis (mild vs. moderate vs. severe). Bivariant and multivariant analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Severe stenosis demonstrated more 90-day readmissions (0.00% vs. 0.00% vs. 8.57%, respectively, P = 0.019), though this effect did not remain significant on multivariate analysis (P = 0.068). There was no association between stenosis severity and the degree of functional impairment or PROMs preoperatively. Patients with moderate or severe preoperative foraminal stenosis showed improvement in all PROMs after surgery (P < 0.05) except the mental component of the Short Form 12 survey. Notably, central stenosis grade was insignificantly different between groups (P = 0.358). Multivariable logistic regression analysis did not identify any significant independent predictors of surgical outcomes or changes in PROMs.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated that regardless of foraminal stenosis severity preoperatively, patients have a similar improvement in PROMs, surgical outcomes, and restoration of motor function after lumbar decompression surgery for radiculopathy.

Reoperations After Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Decompression for Treating Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Incidence and Predictors

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

The main purpose of the present study was to report the incidence and identify predictors of reoperation in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) treated with percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal decompression (PETD).

METHODS

This study retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients with LSS who underwent PETD at our center between January 2016 and July 2020. The incidence of reoperations was calculated. We then designed a surgical period-matched case-control study to identify predictors among demographic data, clinical baseline data, and imaging parameters.

RESULTS

This study identified 496 eligible patients. 33 (6.7%) patients underwent reoperation with a mean follow-up of 3 years, consisting 22 (4.4%) at the index level and 11 (2.2%) at the adjacent levels. There were significant differences in age and age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index (AACCI) between the two groups, with younger age (P = .004) and lower AACCI (P = .019) in reoperation group. Age was identified as the sole independent predictor (P = .006). The duration of symptoms ≥12 months (P = .034) and the presence of heart problems (P = .012) were recognized as specific predictors among patients younger than 65 years.

CONCLUSIONS

In a mean follow-up of 3 years, the incidence of reoperation in LSS treated with PETD was 6.7%. A younger age was the independent predictor for reoperation. Younger patients with the duration of symptoms ≥12 months or without heart problems were more likely to undergo a second operation. Prospective randomized controlled trials are required to confirm these findings.

Values derived from patient reported outcomes in spine surgery: a systematic review of the minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptom state

PURPOSE

While patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) define value in spine surgery, several values such as minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) help guide the interpretation of PROMs and identify thresholds of clinical significance. Significant variation exists in reported values and their calculation, so the primary objective of this study was to systematically review the spine surgery literature for metrics of clinical significance derived from PROMs.

METHODS

We conducted a query of PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus databases from inception to January 1, 2023, for studies that derived quantitative metrics (e.g., SCB, MCID, PASS) from PROMs in the setting of spine surgery with minimum 1-year follow-up. Details regarding the specific PROMs were collected including which PROM was measured, whether anchor- or distribution-based methods were utilized, the specific calculations, and the recommended value for a given PROM based on all evaluated calculations.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies of 21,780 patients were included. The most commonly evaluated PROM-derived value was the MCID (n = 28), followed by PASS (n = 6) and SCB (n = 4). Twenty-one studies only utilized anchor-based calculations, 15 utilized both anchor-based and distribution-based methods, and one only utilized distribution-based calculations. The most commonly evaluated legacy PROMs were the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (N = 11, MCID range 4-20) and visual analog scale back pain (N = 5, MCID range 0.5-4.6). All 10 studies that derived SCB or PASS utilized the receiver operating characteristic methods. Among the six studies deriving a PASS value, four only evaluated ODI, identifying PASS ranging from 5 to 22.

CONCLUSION

While calculated measures of clinical significance such as MCID, PASS, and SCB exist, significant heterogeneity exists in the current literature. Current shortcomings include a wide variability of reported value thresholds across the literature, and limited applicability to more heterogenous patient populations than the targeted cohorts included in published investigations. Continued investigations that apply these methods to heterogenous, large-scale populations can help increase generalizability and validity of these measures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Full-endoscopic trans-pars interarticularis approach for far lateral lumbar discectomy

PURPOSE

Surgical management of far lateral disc herniations remains challenging. Current transforaminal full-endoscopic approaches require non-visualized docking in the Kambin's triangle and have been associated with significant risk of inadvertent nerve injury. We develop a full-endoscopic approach based on reliable bony landmarks allowing for visualization of the exiting nerve root prior to the far lateral discectomy.

METHODS

The surgical details of a full-endoscopic trans-pars interarticularis approach for far lateral discectomy are described. These descriptions include high quality intraoperative images and important surgical pearls. A small patient cohort is presented to demonstrate feasibility and safety of the procedure.

RESULTS

We demonstrate the feasibility of this approach in 14 patients with a mean age of 59.5 ± 14.7 years. At a mean follow up of 21.9 ± 6.8 months, improvement of the visual analogue scale (VAS) for leg pain was 4.3 ± 1.0 resulting in minimally clinically important difference in 78.6% of the patients. The mean improvement in VAS for the back pain was 2.6 ± 0.8 and for Oswestry disability index (ODI) was 20.6 ± 5.3. Nuances of the trans-pars surgical techniques are presented in a patient with a right-sided L4-5 far lateral disc herniation. Preoperative imaging studies, steps of the surgical progression, and intraoperative views are described in detail.

CONCLUSION

Using the pars interarticularis as the bony target area allows for safe visualized access to the extraforaminal compartment of the exiting nerve root. This novel surgical technique has the potential benefit of decreasing inadvertent neural injury and subsequent postoperative dysesthesias.

Morphometric change in intervertebral foramen after percutaneous endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy: an in vivo radiographic study based on three-dimensional foramen reconstruction

PURPOSE

This study aimed to perform in vivo three-dimensional (3D) quantitative measurements of morphometric changes in the foramen in patients with lumbar foraminal stenosis (LFS) undergoing percutaneous endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy (PELF) and investigate the relationship between anatomical changes in the foramen and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients with LFS treated with PELF between January 2016 and September 2020 at our centre. Clinical outcomes were evaluated. Foraminal volume (FV) and foraminal minimal area (FMA) were calculated using a novel vertebral and foramen segmentation method. A comparison of the anatomical parameters of the foramen were conducted between the satisfied and unsatisfied groups divided based on the modified MacNab criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 26 eligible patients with a mean follow-up of 3.6 years were enrolled. A significant increase was found in overall FV (71.5%) from 1.436 ± 0.396 to 2.464 ± 0.719 cm3 (P < 0.001) and FMA (109.5%) from 0.849 ± 0.207 to 1.780 ± 0.524 cm2. All clinical outcomes were significantly improved (P < 0.001) after PELF. No significant difference was found in changes in neither FV nor FMA between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Clinical results and foraminal dimensions improved significantly after PELF, indicating that PELF was a prominent technique suitable for LFS because of the direct decompression at impingement structures. No relationship was found between morphometric changes and clinical outcomes, revealing that full-scale endoscopic decompression is necessary and adequate for LFS, and unsatisfactory outcomes are less likely to result from decompression procedure.

Correlation Between Postoperative Imaging Parameters and Clinical Outcomes of Percutaneous Endoscopic Transforaminal Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Foraminal and Lateral Recess Stenosis

Objective

To investigate the correlation between postoperative imaging parameters and clinical outcomes in patients with foraminal stenosis (FS) and lateral recess stenosis (LRS) who underwent percutaneous endoscopic transforaminal decompression (PETD).

Methods

The study included 104 eligible patients who underwent PETD, and the mean follow-up time was 2.4 years (range 2.2-3.6 years). Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, and the modified MacNab criteria were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes. The related parameters of the FS and LRS based on computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging were measured before and after surgery. Correlations between the imaging parameters and clinical outcomes were investigated.

Results

The proportion of excellent and good results following MacNab evaluation was 82.6%. In the treatment of LRS, VAS-back, VAS-leg, and ODI at the 2-year follow-up were negatively correlated with postoperative facet joint length based on computed tomography. In the treatment of FS, the above clinical results were positively correlated with the variation of foraminal width and nerve root-facet distance before and after surgery based on magnetic resonance imaging.

Conclusion

PETD can achieve good clinical outcomes in the treatment of patients with LRS or FS. Postoperative facet joint length was negatively correlated with clinical outcomes of LRS patients. In FS patients, the variation in foraminal width and nerve root-facet distance before and after surgery were positively correlated with their clinical outcomes. These findings may help surgeons optimize treatment strategies and selection of surgical candidates.

Bibliographic Study and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes of Full-Endoscopic Spine Surgery for Painful Lumbar Spine Conditions

BACKGROUND

Full-endoscopic spine surgery (FESS) indications already cover degenerative, infectious, and neoplastic diseases. This study aimed to use a bibliometric search and meta-analysis of the highest-quality studies in the last 20 years to determine the quantity and quality of FESS research, geographic distribution, and the outcomes for lumbar conditions.

METHODS

Articles on FESS published from 2000 to 2022 were screened and assessed through Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus. Also, databases were searched for longitudinal studies to pool in a meta-analysis of patients undergoing FESS for lumbar conditions. After stratifying the risk of bias and having collected the studies of the highest quality, we included the proportion of patients with a satisfactory outcome and intraoperative and postoperative adverse events after the analysis of lumbar spine conditions.

RESULTS

A total of 728 articles were identified by the bibliographic search. Between 2000 and 2021, the published articles increased 21-fold. Most were from China (70.15%), followed by South Korea (19.5%). Most were retrospective (68.3%) and regarding treatment of lumbar disease (86.4%). Fifty studies, including 34,828 patients, were pooled in the meta-analysis. More than 85% of patients experienced satisfactory improvement in each of different lumbar conditions. Major adverse events were <2%; recurrence and postoperative dysesthesia rates were within those reported for open or mini-invasive procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

This study may fill research gaps on FESS and lead to adequately designed studies. Our meta-analysis showed that FESS for lumbar diseases is a procedure with satisfactory outcomes and low rates of adverse events.

SPINE: High heterogeneity and no significant differences in clinical outcomes of endoscopic foraminotomy vs fusion for lumbar foraminal stenosis: a meta-analysis

Objective

This study aimed to systematically review the literature for comparative and non-comparative studies reporting on clinical outcomes of patients with lumbar foraminal stenosis treated by either endoscopic foraminotomy or fusion.

Methods

In adherence with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a literature search was done on January 17, 2022, using Medline and Embase. Clinical studies were eligible if they reported outcomes following fusion or endoscopic foraminotomy, in patients with primary lumbar foraminal stenosis. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts to determine eligibility; performed data extraction; and assessed the quality of eligible studies according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) checklist.

Results

The search returned 827 records; 266 were duplicates, 538 were excluded after title/abstract/full-text screening, and 23 were eligible, with 16 case series reporting on endoscopic foraminotomy, 7 case series reporting on fusion, and no comparative studies. The JBI checklist indicated that 21 studies scored ≥4 points. When comparing endoscopic foraminotomy to fusion, pooled data revealed reduced operative time (69 vs 119 min, P < 0.01) but similar Oswestry disability index (19 vs 20, P = 0.67), lower back pain (2 vs 2, P = 0.11), leg pain (2 vs 2, P = 0.15), complication rates (10% vs 5%, P = 0.22), and reoperation rates (5% vs 0%, P = 0.16). The proportions of patients with good/excellent MacNab criteria were similar for endoscopic foraminotomy and fusion (82-91% vs 85-91%).

Conclusions

There were high heterogeneity and no significant differences in clinical outcomes, complication rates, and reoperation rates between endoscopic foraminotomy and fusion for the treatment of lumbar foraminal stenosis; although endoscopic foraminotomy has reduced operative time.

Identification of the Magna Radicular Artery Entry Foramen and Adamkiewicz System: Patient Selection for Open versus Full-Endoscopic Thoracic Spinal Decompression Surgery

BACKGROUND

Casually cauterizing the radicular magna during routine thoracic discectomy may have dire consequences.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective observational cohort study on patients scheduled for decompression of symptomatic thoracic herniated discs and spinal stenosis who underwent a preoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA) to assess the surgical risks by anatomically defining the foraminal entry level of the magna radicularis artery into the thoracic spinal cord and its relationship to the surgical level.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients aged 58.53 ± 19.57, ranging from 31 to 89 years, with an average follow-up of 30.13 ± 13.42 months, were enrolled in this observational cohort study. The mean preoperative VAS for axial back pain was VAS of 8.53 ± 2.06 and reduced to a postoperative VAS of 1.60 ± 0.92 (p < 0.0001) at the final follow-up. The Adamkiewicz was most frequently found at T10/11 (15.4%), T11/12 (23.1%), and T9/10 (30.8%). There were eight patients where the painful pathology was found far from the AKA foraminal entry-level (type 1), three patients with near location (type 2), and another four patients needing decompression at the foraminal (type 3) entry-level. In five of the fifteen patients, the magna radicularis entered the spinal canal on the ventral surface of the exiting nerve root through the neuroforamen at the surgical level requiring a change of surgical strategy to prevent injury to this important contributor to the spinal cord's blood supply.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors recommend stratifying patients according to the proximity of the magna radicularis artery to the compressive pathology with CTA to assess the surgical risk with targeted thoracic discectomy methods.

A Proposed Personalized Spine Care Protocol (SpineScreen) to Treat Visualized Pain Generators: An Illustrative Study Comparing Clinical Outcomes and Postoperative Reoperations between Targeted Endoscopic Lumbar Decompression Surgery, Minimally Invasive TLIF and Open Laminectomy

Background: Endoscopically visualized spine surgery has become an essential tool that aids in identifying and treating anatomical spine pathologies that are not well demonstrated by traditional advanced imaging, including MRI. These pathologies may be visualized during endoscopic lumbar decompression (ELD) and categorized into primary pain generators (PPG). Identifying these PPGs provides crucial information for a successful outcome with ELD and forms the basis for our proposed personalized spine care protocol (SpineScreen). Methods: a prospective study of 412 patients from 7 endoscopic practices consisting of 207 (50.2%) males and 205 (49.8%) females with an average age of 63.67 years and an average follow-up of 69.27 months was performed to compare the durability of targeted ELD based on validated primary pain generators versus image-based open lumbar laminectomy, and minimally invasive lumbar transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) using Kaplan-Meier median survival calculations. The serial time was determined as the interval between index surgery and when patients were censored for additional interventional and surgical treatments for low back-related symptoms. A control group was recruited from patients referred for a surgical consultation but declined interventional and surgical treatment and continued on medical care. Control group patients were censored when they crossed over into any surgical or interventional treatment group. Results: of the 412 study patients, 206 underwent ELD (50.0%), 61 laminectomy (14.8%), and 78 (18.9%) TLIF. There were 67 patients in the control group (16.3% of 412 patients). The most common surgical levels were L4/5 (41.3%), L5/S1 (25.0%), and L4-S1 (16.3%). At two-year f/u, excellent and good Macnab outcomes were reported by 346 of the 412 study patients (84.0%). The VAS leg pain score reduction was 4.250 ± 1.691 (p < 0.001). No other treatment during the available follow-up was required in 60.7% (125/206) of the ELD, 39.9% (31/78) of the TLIF, and 19.7% (12/61 of the laminectomy patients. In control patients, only 15 of the 67 (22.4%) control patients continued with conservative care until final follow-up, all of which had fair and poor functional Macnab outcomes. In patients with Excellent Macnab outcomes, the median durability was 62 months in ELD, 43 in TLIF, and 31 months in laminectomy patients (p < 0.001). The overall survival time in control patients was eight months with a standard error of 0.942, a lower boundary of 6.154, and an upper boundary of 9.846 months. In patients with excellent Macnab outcomes, the median durability was 62 months in ELD, 43 in TLIF, and 31 months in laminectomy patients versus control patients at seven months (p < 0.001). The most common new-onset symptom for censoring was dysesthesia ELD (9.4%; 20/206), axial back pain in TLIF (25.6%;20/78), and recurrent pain in laminectomy (65.6%; 40/61) patients (p < 0.001). Transforaminal epidural steroid injections were tried in 11.7% (24/206) of ELD, 23.1% (18/78) of TLIF, and 36.1% (22/61) of the laminectomy patients. The secondary fusion rate among ELD patients was 8.8% (18/206). Among TLIF patients, the most common additional treatments were revision fusion (19.2%; 15/78) and multilevel rhizotomy (10.3%; 8/78). Common follow-up procedures in laminectomy patients included revision laminectomy (16.4%; 10/61), revision ELD (11.5%; 7/61), and multilevel rhizotomy (11.5%; 7/61). Control patients crossed over into ELD (13.4%), TLIF (13.4%), laminectomy (10.4%) and interventional treatment (40.3%) arms at high rates. Most control patients treated with spinal injections (55.5%) had excellent and good functional outcomes versus 40.7% with fair and poor (3.7%), respectively. The control patients (93.3%) who remained in medical management without surgery or interventional care (14/67) had the worst functional outcomes and were rated as fair and poor. Conclusions: clinical outcomes were more favorable with lumbar surgeries than with non-surgical control groups. Of the control patients, the crossover rate into interventional and surgical care was 40.3% and 37.2%, respectively. There are longer symptom-free intervals after targeted ELD than with TLIF or laminectomy. Additional intervention and surgical treatments are more often needed to manage new-onset postoperative symptoms in TLIF- and laminectomy compared to ELD patients. Few ELD patients will require fusion in the future. Considering the rising cost of surgical spine care, we offer SpineScreen as a simplified and less costly alternative to traditional image-based care models by focusing on primary pain generators rather than image-based criteria derived from the preoperative lumbar MRI scan.

Differential Agnostic Effect Size Analysis of Lumbar Stenosis Surgeries

STUDY DESIGN

A meta-analysis of 89 randomized prospective, prospective, and retrospective studies on spinal endoscopic surgery outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to provide familiar Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) back, and VAS leg effect size (ES) data following endoscopic decompression for sciatica-type back and leg pain due to lumbar herniated disc, foraminal, or lateral recess spinal stenosis.

BACKGROUND

Higher-grade objective clinical outcome ES data are more suitable than lower-grade clinical evidence, including cross-sectional retrospective study outcomes or expert opinion to underpin the ongoing debate on whether or not to replace some of the traditional open and with other forms of minimally invasive spinal decompression surgeries such as the endoscopic technique.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2019 identified 89 eligible studies on lumbar endoscopic decompression surgery enrolling 23,290 patient samples using the ODI and VAS for back and leg pain used for the ES calculation.

RESULTS

There was an overall mean overall reduction of ODI of 46.25 (SD 6.10), VAS back decrease of 3.29 (SD 0.65), and VAS leg reduction of 5.77 (SD 0.66), respectively. Reference tables of familiar ODI, VAS back, and VAS leg show no significant impact of study design, follow-up, or patients' age on ES observed with these outcome instruments. There was no correlation of ES with long-term follow-up (P = 0.091). Spinal endoscopy produced an overall ODI ES of 0.92 extrapolated from 81 studies totaling 12,710 patient samples. Provided study comparisons to tubular retractor microdiscectomy and open laminectomy showed an ODI ES of 0.9 (2895 patients pooled from 16 studies) and 0.93 (1188 patients pooled from 5 studies). The corresponding VAS leg ES were 0.92 (12,631 endoscopy patients pooled from 81 studies), 0.92 (2348 microdiscectomy patients pooled from 15 studies), and 0.89 (1188 open laminectomy patients pooled from 5 studies).

CONCLUSION

Successful clinical outcomes can be achieved with various lumbar surgeries. ESs with endoscopic spinal surgery are on par with those found with open laminectomy and microsurgical decompression.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This article is a meta-analysis on the benefit overlap between lumbar endoscopy, microsurgical decompression, laminectomy, and lumbar decompression fusion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2

Minimal clinically important difference in patients who underwent decompression alone for lumbar degenerative disease

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) represents the smallest change in an outcome measure recognized as clinically meaningful to a patient after receiving a clinical intervention. Most studies that discussed the MCIDs for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) included mixed pathologies or procedures despite that the MCID value should be different depending on the intervention. Moreover, despite the efficacy of adopting percentage-change improvement for the MCID threshold, there are limited reports and discussions in the field of lumbar surgery.

PURPOSE

The aim of the present study was to elucidate the MCIDs for the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQOL 5-dimension 3-level (EQ-5D-3L), physical component summary (PCS) of the Short Form of the Medical Outcomes Study, and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) in patients with degenerative LSS treated with decompression surgery without fusion.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

A multicenter retrospective cohort study was performed.

PATIENT SAMPLE

A total of 422 patients who underwent decompression surgery for LSS and answered a complete set of questionnaires were included in the study. Patients who underwent endoscopic or revision surgery were excluded.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Preoperative and 1-year postoperative scores of each health-related quality of life questionnaires (HRQOLs) and patient satisfaction questionnaire response METHODS: The patient satisfaction question was used as an anchor, and the cutoff values were estimated based on absolute point improvement from baseline using a receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and the "mean change" method for MCIDs. The MCID values for percentage-change in HRQOLs were also calculated using ROC curve analysis. The three cutoff values for each HRQOL were validated using the Youden index for determining the most robust MCIDs.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 356 (84.4%) were at least "somewhat satisfied" with the treatment results. The two cutoff values of absolute point-change in each HRQOL, which were estimated by two different anchor-based methods, were similar. The area under the curve of the ROC curve for percentage-change tended to be higher than that for absolute point-change. Moreover, the Youden index of the percentage-change in each HRQOL was higher than that of the absolute point-change calculated by either the "mean change" method or the ROC curve analysis. Based on these results, it was proposed that MCID was 42.4% for percentage-change in ODI, 22.0% for EQ-5D-3L, 13.7% for PCS, 25.0% for NRS (low back pain), 55.6% for NRS (leg pain), 22.2% for NRS (leg numbness).

CONCLUSIONS

The MCIDs of HRQOLs were calculated in patients with LSS treated with decompression surgery without concomitant fusion procedure. The MCID cutoffs based on percentage-change from baseline were more effective than those of absolute point-change.

Remodeling Pattern of Spinal Canal after Full Endoscopic Uniportal Lumbar Endoscopic Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression: One Year Repetitive MRI and Clinical Follow-Up Evaluation

Objective: There is limited literature on repetitive postoperative MRI and clinical evaluation after Uniportal Lumbar Endoscopic Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression. Methods: Clinical visual analog scale, Oswestry Disability Index, McNab’s criteria evaluation and MRI evaluation of the axial cut spinal canal area of the upper end plate, mid disc and lower end plate were performed for patients who underwent single-level Uniportal Lumbar Endoscopic Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression. From the evaluation of the axial cut MRI, four types of patterns of remodeling were identified: type A: continuous expanded spinal canal, type B: restenosis with delayed expansion, type C: progressive expansion and type D: restenosis. Result: A total of 126 patients with single-level Uniportal Lumbar Endoscopic Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression were recruited with a minimum follow-up of 26 months. Thirty-six type A, fifty type B, thirty type C and ten type D patterns of spinal canal remodeling were observed. All four types of patterns of remodeling had statistically significant improvement in VAS at final follow-up compared to the preoperative state with type A (5.59 ± 1.58), B (5.58 ± 1.71), C (5.58 ± 1.71) and D (5.27 ± 1.68), p < 0.05. ODI was significantly improved at final follow-up with type A (49.19 ± 10.51), B (50.00 ± 11.29), C (45.60 ± 10.58) and D (45.60 ± 10.58), p < 0.05. A significant MRI axial cut increment of the spinal canal area was found at the upper endplate at postoperative day one and one year with type A (39.16 ± 22.73; 28.00 ± 42.57) mm2, B (47.42 ± 18.77; 42.38 ± 19.29) mm2, C (51.45 ± 18.16; 49.49 ± 18.41) mm2 and D (49.10 ± 23.05; 38.18 ± 18.94) mm2, respectively, p < 0.05. Similar significant increment was found at the mid-disc at postoperative day one, 6 months and one year with type A (55.16 ± 27.51; 37.23 ± 25.88; 44.86 ± 25.73) mm2, B (72.83 ± 23.87; 49.79 ± 21.93; 62.94 ± 24.43) mm2, C (66.85 ± 34.48; 54.92 ± 30.70; 64.33 ± 31.82) mm2 and D (71.65 ± 16.87; 41.55 ± 12.92; 49.83 ± 13.31) mm2 and the lower endplate at postoperative day one and one year with type A (49.89 ± 34.50; 41.04 ± 28.56) mm2, B (63.63 ± 23.70; 54.72 ± 24.29) mm2, C (58.50 ± 24.27; 55.32 ± 22.49) mm2 and D (81.43 ± 16.81; 58.40 ± 18.05) mm2 at postoperative day one and one year, respectively, p < 0.05. Conclusions: After full endoscopic lumbar decompression, despite achieving sufficient decompression immediately postoperatively, varying severity of asymptomatic restenosis was found in postoperative six months MRI without clinical significance. Further remodeling with a varying degree of increment of the spinal canal area occurs at postoperative one year with overall good clinical outcomes.

Research Tendency in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis over the Past Decade: A Bibliometric Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this bibliometric analysis was to identify trends and hot topics in research on lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) over the past decade, for helping researchers explore new directions for future research in that area.

METHODS

All research articles on LSS, written in English and indexed in the Web of Science database (WoS) between 2010 and 2020, were used. The visualization of network and in-depth bibliometric analysis including the number of publications, countries, institutions, journals, authors, cited references, and key words was carried out with the help of CiteSpace.

RESULTS

A total of 4033 papers (3577 original articles and 476 reviews) were identified and included in the study. The most productive year was in 2019. The Spine was the journal that published the highest number of articles and received the most citations. The most productive country and institutions in this field were the United States and Seoul National University, respectively. Kim HJ was the most prolific author, and Deyo RA ranked the first in the cited authors. The most cited article was published in 2010 by Deyo et al. and described the complications and charges index for LSS. From the coword cluster analysis, there were 3 frontiers in lumbar spinal stenosis: intervention, outcomes, and pathogenesis.

CONCLUSIONS

We have summarized the literature on LSS in the past decade including publication information, country, institution, authors, and journal. Research on minimally invasive surgery, outcomes, and gene therapies in LSS will be hot topics in the future.

Is Decompression and Partial Discectomy Advantageous Over Decompression Alone in Microendoscopic Decompression Of Monosegmental Unilateral Lumbar Recess Stenosis?

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic techniques are well accepted as surgical technique for decompression of lumbar lateral recess stenosis (LRS). It is uncertain if there is a difference in clinical outcome for decompression alone (DA) or decompression with partial discectomy (DPD) for the treatment of LRS.

METHODS

All files of patients who underwent an endoscopic procedure for lumbar LRS were identified from a prospectively collected database. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging and endoscopic video were analyzed with special focus on the technique of nerve root decompression. Clinical outcome was assessed via a personal examination, a standardized questionnaire including the numeric rating scale (NRS) for leg and back pain, the Oswestry disability index (ODI), and the modified MacNab criteria to assess functional outcome and clinical success.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients were identified of which 57 attended for evaluation (86.4%). DA was performed in 15 (26.3%) patients and DPD in 42 patients (73.7%). The mean follow-up was 45.0 months (range: 16-82 months). Fifty-two patients reported to be free of leg pain (91.1%), 42 patients had no noticeable back pain (73.7%), 49 patients had full muscle strength (85.9%), and 48 patients had no sensory disturbance (84.2%). The mean NRS for leg pain was 1, the mean NRS for back pain was 2, mean ODI was 16% (range: 0%-60%). Clinical success was noted in 49 patients (85.9%) and it was significantly higher for patients following DPD (P = .024). The overall repeat procedure rate was 12% with reoperation rate at the index segment in 10.5% of cases. There were no significant differences with respect to leg and back pain, ODI, and reoperation between both groups.

CONCLUSION

Microendoscopic DPD of LRS achieves a 92% clinical success rate which is significantly higher compared to 67% clinical success achieved by DA. There was no significant difference for the rate of reoperation, leg and back pain, and ODI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.