Health-related quality of life following decompression compared to decompression and fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a Canadian multicentre study

Radiologic and Clinical Evaluation of Posterolateral Versus Transforaminal Interbody Fusion in Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective is to compare foraminal height (FH) and disk height (DH) differences in posterolateral (PLF) and transforaminal interbody fusions (TLIFs) and secondarily correlate these measurements with patient-reported outcomes.

BACKGROUND

The impact FH has on patient outcomes in degenerative lumbar spinal fusion surgery is unknown. Postoperative FH change and how it relates to patient-reported outcomes in posteriorly based procedures has not been well evaluated.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a subset of patients from a prospective cohort from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network was undertaken. Radiographic assessment preoperatively, at 3 months and 1 year, with standing lumbar spine radiographs were completed. FH and DH were recorded at each time interval, differences between groups were compared, and correlations with patient-reported outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

One hundred nine patients were included (23 PLF and 86 TLIF). At 3-month follow-up, the change in FH was greater in the TLIF group (mean difference =2.3; 95% CI: 0.8-3.5, P =0.002). The change in FH remained significantly different at 12 months (mean difference=1.6, 95% CI: 0.2, 3.0 mm, P =0.028). The change in DH was greater in the TLIF group, with a mean difference between groups of 4.1 mm (95% CI: 2.5, 5.7, P <0.001) and 3.6 mm (95% CI: 2.0, 5.3, P <0.001). A positive change in FH correlated with less back pain, less disability, and improved physical function in the TLIF group ( P <0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with PLF lost FH over time. An increased difference in FH at 1 year was associated with improved function and less back pain in the TLIF group.

Decompression alone or decompression with fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis: five-year clinical results from a randomized clinical trial

Aims

We compared decompression alone to decompression with fusion surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis, with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). The aim was to evaluate if five-year outcomes differed between the groups. The two-year results from the same trial revealed no differences.

Methods

The Swedish Spinal Stenosis Study was a multicentre randomized controlled trial with recruitment from September 2006 to February 2012. A total of 247 patients with one- or two-level central lumbar spinal stenosis, stratified by the presence of DS, were randomized to decompression alone or decompression with fusion. The five-year Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were the EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), visual analogue scales for back and leg pain, and patient-reported satisfaction, decreased pain, and increased walking distance. The reoperation rate was recorded.

Results

Five-year follow-up was completed by 213 (95%) of the eligible patients (mean age 67 years; 155 female (67%)). After five years, ODI was similar irrespective of treatment, with a mean of 25 (SD 18) for decompression alone and 28 (SD 22) for decompression with fusion (p = 0.226). Mean EQ-5D was higher for decompression alone than for fusion (0.69 (SD 0.28) vs 0.59 (SD 0.34); p = 0.027). In the no-DS subset, fewer patients reported decreased leg pain after fusion (58%) than with decompression alone (80%) (relative risk (RR) 0.71 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.97). The frequency of subsequent spinal surgery was 24% for decompression with fusion and 22% for decompression alone (RR 1.1 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.8)).

Conclusion

Adding fusion to decompression in spinal stenosis surgery, with or without spondylolisthesis, does not improve the five-year ODI, which is consistent with our two-year report. Three secondary outcomes that did not differ at two years favoured decompression alone at five years. Our results support decompression alone as the preferred method for operating on spinal stenosis.

Evaluation of differences in expression pattern of three isoforms of the transforming growth factor beta in patients with lumbosacral stenosis

The study investigates molecular changes in the lumbosacral (L/S) spine's yellow ligamentum flavum during degenerative stenosis, focusing on the role of transforming growth factor beta 1-3 (TGF-β-1-3). Sixty patients with degenerative stenosis and sixty control participants underwent molecular analysis using real-time quantitative reverse transcription reaction technique (RTqPCR), enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), Western blot, and immunohistochemical analysis (IHC). At the mRNA level, study samples showed reduced expression of TGF-β-1 and TGF-β-3, while TGF-β-2 increased by only 4%. Conversely, at the protein level, the study group exhibited significantly higher concentrations of TGF-β-1, TGF-β-2, and TGF-β-3 compared to controls. On the other hand, at the protein level, a statistically significant higher concentration of TGF-β-1 was observed (2139.33 pg/mL ± 2593.72 pg/mL vs. 252.45 pg/mL ± 83.89 pg/mL; p < 0.0001), TGF-β-2 (3104.34 pg/mL ± 1192.74 pg/mL vs. 258.86 pg/mL ± 82.98 pg/mL; p < 0.0001), TGF-β-3 (512.75 pg/mL ± 107.36 pg/mL vs. 55.06 pg/mL ± 9.83 pg/mL, p < 0.0001) in yellow ligaments obtained from patients of the study group compared to control samples. The study did not establish a significant correlation between TGF-β-1-3 concentrations and pain severity. The findings suggest that molecular therapy aimed at restoring the normal expression pattern of TGF-β-1-3 could be a promising strategy for treating degenerative stenosis of the L/S spine. The study underscores the potential therapeutic significance of addressing molecular changes at the TGF-β isoforms level for better understanding and managing degenerative spinal conditions.

Decision-making Algorithm for the Surgical Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis of L4/L5

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data.

OBJECTIVE

To report the decision-making process for decompression alone (DA) and decompression and fusion (DF) at a tertiary orthopedic center and compare the operative outcomes between both groups.

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists around the optimal operative treatment for DLS, either with DF or DA. Although previous studies tried to establish specific indications, clinical decision-making algorithms are needed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients undergoing spinal surgery for DLS at L4/5 were retrospectively analyzed. A survey of spine surgeons was performed to identify factors influencing surgical decision-making, and their association with the surgical procedure was tested in the clinical data set. We then developed a clinical score based on the statistical analysis and survey results. The predictive capability of the score was tested in the clinical data set with a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. To evaluate the clinical outcome, two years follow-up postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), postoperative low back pain (LBP) (Numeric Analog Scale), and patient satisfaction were compared between the DF and DA groups.

RESULTS

A total of 124 patients were included in the analysis; 66 received DF (53.2%) and 58 DA (46.8%). Both groups showed no significant differences in postoperative ODI, LBP, or satisfaction. The degree of spondylolisthesis, facet joint diastasis and effusion, sagittal disbalance, and severity of LBP were identified as the most important factors for deciding on DA or DF. The area under the curve of the decision-making score was 0.84. At a cutoff of three points indicating DF, the accuracy was 80.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

The two-year follow-up data showed that both groups showed similar improvement in ODI after both procedures, validating the respective decision. The developed score shows excellent predictive capabilities for the decision processes of different spine surgeons at a single tertiary center and highlights relevant clinical and radiographic parameters. Further studies are needed to assess the external applicability of these findings.

Findings from a pilot randomized trial of spinal decompression alone or spinal decompression plus instrumented fusion

Aims

Symptomatic spinal stenosis is a very common problem, and decompression surgery has been shown to be superior to nonoperative treatment in selected patient groups. However, performing an instrumented fusion in addition to decompression may avoid revision and improve outcomes. The aim of the SpInOuT feasibility study was to establish whether a definitive randomized controlled trial (RCT) that accounted for the spectrum of pathology contributing to spinal stenosis, including pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch and mobile spondylolisthesis, could be conducted.

Methods

As part of the SpInOuT-F study, a pilot randomized trial was carried out across five NHS hospitals. Patients were randomized to either spinal decompression alone or spinal decompression plus instrumented fusion. Patient-reported outcome measures were collected at baseline and three months. The intended sample size was 60 patients.

Results

Of the 90 patients screened, 77 passed the initial screening criteria. A total of 27 patients had a PI-LL mismatch and 23 had a dynamic spondylolisthesis. Following secondary inclusion and exclusion criteria, 31 patients were eligible for the study. Six patients were randomized and one underwent surgery during the study period. Given the low number of patients recruited and randomized, it was not possible to assess completion rates, quality of life, imaging, or health economic outcomes as intended.

Conclusion

This study provides a unique insight into the prevalence of dynamic spondylolisthesis and PI-LL mismatch in patients with symptomatic spinal stenosis, and demonstrates that there is a need for a definitive RCT which stratifies for these groups in order to inform surgical decision-making. Nonetheless a definitive study would need further refinement in design and implementation in order to be feasible.

Symptomatic lumbar stenosis due to low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis can effectively be treated with mere decompression

PURPOSE

Adding instrumented spondylodesis to decompression in symptomatic spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis is subject of debate. The presence of spondylolisthesis due to degeneration is an indicator of severe facet joint and intervertebral disc degeneration, and this may fit increased instability of the spine. We aim to establish the incidence of degenerative spondylolisthesis in spinal stenosis surgical candidates and to evaluate the incidence of failure of decompressive surgery without concomitant spondylodesis as initial treatment.

METHODS

Medical files of all operated patients for spinal stenosis between 2007 and 2013 were evaluated. Demographic characteristics, pre-operative radiological characteristics (level of stenosis, presence, and grade of spondylolisthesis), surgical technique, incidence, and indication for reoperation were summarised, as well as the type of reoperation. Patient satisfaction was classified as 'satisfied' or 'unsatisfied' after initial and secondary surgery. The follow-up was 6 to 12 years.

RESULTS

Nine hundred thirty-four patients were included, and 253 (27%) had a spondylolisthesis. Seventeen percent of the spondylolisthesis patients receiving decompression were reoperated versus 12% of the stenosis patients (p=.059). Reoperation in the spondylolisthesis group concerned instrumented spondylodesis in 38 versus 10% in the stenosis group. The satisfaction percentage was comparable in the stenosis and the spondylolisthesis group two months after surgery (80 vs. 74%). Of the 253 spondylolisthesis patients, 1% initially received instrumented spondylodesis and 6% in a second operation.

CONCLUSION

Lumbar stenosis with and without (low-grade) degenerative spondylolisthesis can usually effectively be treated with mere decompression. Instrumented surgery in a second surgical procedure does not lead to less satisfaction with surgical outcomes.

Full-endoscopic foraminotomy in low-grade degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis: a patient-specific tailored approach

PURPOSE

To describe the surgical technique and methodology to successfully plan and execute an endoscopic foraminotomy in patients with isthmic or degenerative spondylolisthesis, according to each patient's unique characteristics.

METHODS

Thirty patients with degenerative or isthmic spondylolisthesis (SL) with radicular symptoms were included from March 2019 to September 2022. Treating physician registered patients' baseline and imaging characteristics, as well as preoperative back pain VAS, leg pain VAS and ODI. Subsequently, authors treated the included patients with an endoscopic foraminotomy according to a "patient-specific" tailored approach.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients (63.33%) had isthmic SL and 11 patients (36.67%) had degenerative SL. 75.86% of the cases had a Meyerding Grade 1 listhesis. One of the transforaminal foraminotomies with lateral recess decompression in degenerative SL had to be aborted because of intense osseous bleeding. Of the remaining 29 patients, one patient experienced recurrence of the sciatica pain that required subsequent reintervention and fusion. No other intraoperative or post-operative complications were observed. None of the patients developed post-operative dysesthesia. In 86.67% of the patients, the foraminotomy was implemented using a transforaminal approach. In the remaining 13.33% of the cases, an interlaminar contralateral approach was used. Lateral recess decompression was performed in half of the cases. Mean follow-up time was 12.69 months, reaching a maximum of 40 months in some patients. Outcome variables such as VAS for leg and back pain, as well as ODI, showed statistically significant reduction since the 3-month follow-up visit.

CONCLUSION

In the presented case series, endoscopic foraminotomy achieved satisfactory outcomes without sacrificing segmental stability. The proposed patient-specific "tailored" approach allowed to successfully design and execute the surgical strategy to perform an endoscopic foraminotomy through transforaminal or interlaminar contralateral approaches.

Comparison of 270-degree percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression under local anesthesia and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in the treatment of geriatric lateral recess stenosis associated with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

PURPOSE

Various lumbar decompression techniques have been used for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). Few studies have compared the clinical efficacy of percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression (PTED) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) in the treatment of lateral recess stenosis associated with DLS (LRS-DLS) in geriatric patients. The objective of the study was to compare the safety and short-term clinical efficacy of 270-degree PTED under local anesthesia and MIS-TLIF in the treatment of LRS-DLS in Chinese geriatric patients over 60 years old.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2017 to August 2019, the data of 90 consecutive geriatric patients with single-level L4-5 LRS-DLS were retrospectively reviewed, including those in the PTED group (n = 44) and MIS-TLIF group (n = 46). The patients were followed up for at least 1 year. Patient demographics and perioperative outcomes were reviewed before and after surgery. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) for leg pain, and modified MacNab criteria were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes. X-ray examinations were performed 1 year after surgery to assess the progression of spondylolisthesis in the PTED group and bone fusion in the MIS-TLIF group.

RESULTS

The mean patient ages in the PTED and MIS-TLIF groups were 70.3 years and 68.6 years, respectively. Both the PTED and MIS-TLIF groups demonstrated significant improvements in the VAS score for leg pain and ODI score, and no significant differences were found between the groups at any time point (P > 0.05). Although the good-to-excellent rate of the modified MacNab criteria in the PTED group was similar to that in the MIS-TLIF group (90.9% vs. 91.3%, P > 0.05), PTED was advantageous in terms of the operative time, estimated blood loss, incision length, drainage time, drainage volume, length of hospital stay, and complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Both PTED and MIS-TLIF led to favorable outcomes in geriatric patients with LRS-DLS. In addition, PTED caused less severe trauma and fewer complications. In terms of perioperative quality-of-life and clinical outcomes, PTED could supplement MIS-TLIF in geriatric patients with LRS-DLS.

High preoperative expectations and postoperative fulfillment of expectations two years after decompression alone and decompression plus fusion for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Fulfillment of expectations is a patient-centered outcome that has not been assessed based on fusion status for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS).

PURPOSE

To compare preoperatively cited expectations and 2-year postoperative fulfillment of expectations between patients undergoing decompression alone (no-fusion) vs. decompression plus fusion (fusion) for LDS.

STUDY DESIGN

Longitudinal cohort.

PATIENT SAMPLE

357 patients.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Postoperative version of Lumbar Spine Surgery Expectations Survey, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), satisfaction with surgery.

METHODS

Preoperatively patients completed the 20-item Expectations Survey measuring amount of 'improvement expected' for symptoms, physical function, and psychosocial well-being (score range 0-100); two years postoperatively patients completed the follow-up Survey measuring 'improvement received'. The proportion of expectations fulfilled was calculated as 'improvement received' divided by 'improvement expected' (<1 some expectations fulfilled, >1 expectations surpassed). Patients also completed the ODI, SF-12 mental health subscale, satisfaction with surgery, and measures of comorbidity and psychosocial status, including social support (i.e. help at home) and prior orthopedic surgery (i.e. hip/knee arthroplasty).

RESULTS

Patients' mean age was 67 years, 61% were women, 82% had single-level LDS, 73% had fusion, and mean follow-up was 26.2 months. Compared to patients with no-fusion, patients with fusion had more pain, spinal instability, use of opioids, disability, and greater preoperative Expectations Survey scores (69 vs 74, p=.008). The proportion of expectations fulfilled postoperatively was high and similar for both groups (.82 vs. .79, p=.40), but more variable for fusion (IQR .32 vs. .40). In multivariable analysis with the proportion as the dependent variable, fulfilled expectations was associated with better mental well-being (coeff=1.1, 95% CI 0.6-1.7, p=.0001) and more social support (coeff=3.3, 95% CI 1.1-5.6, p=.004) and unfulfilled expectations was associated with prior arthroplasty (coeff=-8.6, 95% CI -15.4-(-1.9), p=.01) and subsequent lumbar surgery (coeff=-15.6, 95% CI -25.2-(-6.0), p=.002). Similar associations were found for change in ODI and satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients had high preoperative expectations of surgery with greater expectations for decompression-fusion compared to decompression-alone. Although more variable for the fusion group, both groups had high proportions of expectations fulfilled. This study highlights the spectrum of clinical and psychosocial variables that impacts fulfillment of expectations for both decompression-alone and decompression-fusion for LDS surgery.

Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) clinical practice guidelines on the management of lumbar spinal stenosis, 2021 - Secondary publication

BACKGROUND

The Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) guideline for the management of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) was first published in 2011. Since then, the medical care system for LSS has changed and many new articles regarding the epidemiology and diagnostics of LSS, conservative treatments such as new pharmacotherapy and physical therapy, and surgical treatments including minimally invasive surgery have been published. In addition, various issues need to be examined, such as verification of patient-reported outcome measures, and the economic effect of revised medical management of patients with lumbar spinal disorders. Accordingly, in 2019 the JOA clinical guidelines committee decided to update the guideline and consequently established a formulation committee. The purpose of this study was to describe the formulation we implemented for the revision of the guideline, incorporating the recent advances of evidence-based medicine.

METHODS

The JOA LSS guideline formulation committee revised the previous guideline based on the method for preparing clinical guidelines in Japan proposed by the Medical Information Network Distribution Service in 2017. Background and clinical questions were determined followed by a literature search related to each question. Appropriate articles based on keywords were selected from all the searched literature. Using prepared structured abstracts, systematic reviews and meta-analyses were performed. The strength of evidence and recommendations for each clinical question was decided by the committee members.

RESULTS

Eight background and 15 clinical questions were determined. Answers and explanations were described for the background questions. For each clinical question, the strength of evidence and the recommendation were both decided, and an explanation was provided.

CONCLUSIONS

The 2021 clinical practice guideline for the management of LSS was completed according to the latest evidence-based medicine. We expect that this guideline will be useful for all medical providers as an index in daily medical care, as well as for patients with LSS.

A New Interlaminar/Interspinous and Facet-Joint Stabilization System in Lumbar Degenerative Disk Disease: 2 Years of Results

INTRODUCTION

In lumbar degenerative disk diseases (DDDs), we include a wide range of lumbar pathologies. Lumbar spinal stenosis with or without spondylolisthesis is a common cause of lower-limb pain in elderly patients. The surgical treatment of lumbar DDD consists of the decompression of the neural structures or the decompression and fusion of the involved motion segment. Unfortunately, rigid spinal implants followed by fusion cause increased stresses on the neighboring spinal segments, often leading to adjacent segment degeneration. The aim of this paper is to present a new system for interlaminar/interspinous and facet-joint stabilization and fusion.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

From March 2018 to June 2021, 175 patients with severe lumbar back and/or leg pain were operated on with this device after the failure of conservative treatment for a minimum of 6 months. For this study, we considered 75 available patients with a minimum follow-up time of 24 months. Patients rated their back pain and leg pain on a visual analog scale (VAS) after surgery and at the last follow-up; also, the postoperative consumption of analgesic drugs was investigated. Finally, patients were asked whether they would undergo this kind of surgery again or recommend it. The device is designed to promote a better and more efficient intervertebral fusion: Bone Ingrowth technology allows the system to achieve the best response from the bone tissue.

RESULTS

All procedures were performed without any complications. A reoperation was required in five cases (6.7%) because of implant failure. In one case, a spinous process and unilateral articular process fracture occurred. In four cases, a subcutaneous ISCHIA (one case) or FILICUDI (three cases) pullout was observed. Significant improvements following lumbar surgery were observed when evaluating the postoperative VAS values, analgesic drug consumption levels, and patients' satisfaction ratings. Evident fusion was seen in 58 of 75 patients (77.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our interspinous/interlaminar and facet-joint implant solution, associated with bone grafting, provided vertebral fusion in most stenotic patients with Grade I DS undergoing bilateral microdecompression (BMD) or bilateral decompression via the unilateral approach (BDUA). A higher number of patients and a longer follow-up will certainly be required to completely validate these new devices, but this minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is currently very encouraging and satisfactory.

Decompression alone or decompression with fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized clinical trial with two-year MRI follow-up

AIMS

The aims of this study were first, to determine if adding fusion to a decompression of the lumbar spine for spinal stenosis decreases the rate of radiological restenosis and/or proximal adjacent level stenosis two years after surgery, and second, to evaluate the change in vertebral slip two years after surgery with and without fusion.

METHODS

The Swedish Spinal Stenosis Study (SSSS) was conducted between 2006 and 2012 at five public and two private hospitals. Six centres participated in this two-year MRI follow-up. We randomized 222 patients with central lumbar spinal stenosis at one or two adjacent levels into two groups, decompression alone and decompression with fusion. The presence or absence of a preoperative spondylolisthesis was noted. A new stenosis on two-year MRI was used as the primary outcome, defined as a dural sac cross-sectional area ≤ 75 mm² at the operated level (restenosis) and/or at the level above (proximal adjacent level stenosis).

RESULTS

A total of 211 patients underwent surgery at a mean age of 66 years (69% female): 103 were treated by decompression with fusion and 108 by decompression alone. A two-year MRI was available for 176 (90%) of the eligible patients. A new stenosis at the operated and/or adjacent level occurred more frequently after decompression and fusion than after decompression alone (47% vs 29%; p = 0.020). The difference remained in the subgroup with a preoperative spondylolisthesis, (48% vs 24%; p = 0.020), but did not reach significance for those without (45% vs 35%; p = 0.488). Proximal adjacent level stenosis was more common after fusion than after decompression alone (44% vs 17%; p < 0.001). Restenosis at the operated level was less frequent after fusion than decompression alone (4% vs 14%; p = 0.036). Vertebral slip increased by 1.1 mm after decompression alone, regardless of whether a preoperative spondylolisthesis was present or not.

CONCLUSION

Adding fusion to a decompression increased the rate of new stenosis on two-year MRI, even when a spondylolisthesis was present preoperatively. This supports decompression alone as the preferred method of surgery for spinal stenosis, whether or not a degenerative spondylolisthesis is present preoperatively.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(12):1343-1351.

Decompression alone or decompression and fusion in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

BACKGROUND

Clinically, there are substantive practice variations in surgical management of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. We aimed at evaluating whether decompression alone outcomes for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis are comparable to those of decompression with fusion.

METHODS

In this meta-analysis, the Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to February 16th, 2022. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing decompression alone with decompression and fusion for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis were included in this study. There were no language limitations. Odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to report results in the random-effects model. Main outcomes included Oswestry disability index (ODI), pain, clinical satisfaction, complication and reoperation rates. The study protocol was published in PROSPERO (CRD42022310645).

FINDINGS

Thirty-three studies (6 RCTs and 27 cohort studies) involving 94 953 participants were included. Differences in post-operative ODI between decompression alone and decompression with fusion were not significant. A small difference for back (MD, 0.13; [95% CI, 0.08 to 0.18]; I ²:0.00%) and leg pain (MD, 0.30; [95% CI, 0.09 to 0.51]; I ²:48.35%) was observed on the 3rd post-operative month. The results did not reveal significant differences in leg pain and back pain between decompression alone and fusion groups on the 6th, 12th, and 24th post-operative months. Difference in clinical satisfaction between decompression alone and decompression with fusion were not significant from RCTs (OR, 0.26; [95% CI, 0.03 to 1.92]; I ²:83.27%). Complications (OR, 1.54; [95% CI, 1.16 to 2.05]; I ²:48.88%), operation time (MD, 83.39; [95% CI, 55.93 to 110.85]; I ²:98.75%), intra-operative blood loss (MD, 264.58; [95% CI, 174.99 to 354.16]; I ²:95.61%) and length of hospital stay (MD, 2.85; [95% CI, 1.60 to 4.10]; I ²:99.49%) were higher with fusion.

INTERPRETATION

Clinical effectiveness of decompression alone was comparable to that of decompression with fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Decompression alone is recommended for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

FUNDING

This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81871818), Tangdu Hospital Seed Talent Program (Fei-Long Wei), Natural Science Basic Research Plan in Shaanxi Province of China (No.2019JM-265) and Social Talent Fund of Tangdu Hospital (No.2021SHRC034).

Does fusion status following posterolateral lumbar fusion in the treatment for stable lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis affect the long-term surgical outcomes? A propensity score-weighted analysis of consecutive patients

BACKGROUND

The surgical strategy of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS) is controversial, especially regarding whether or not fusion should be used. Although some reports have indicated that decompression combined with fusion may be better than decompression alone in the treatment of LDS, the effect of fusion status after uninstrumented posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) on the outcomes of patients with stable LDS remains unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the surgical outcomes of uninstrumented PLF for stable LDS and clarify whether radiographic fusion status could affect surgical outcomes.

METHODS

A total of 93 consecutive patients who had undergone single-level uninstrumented PLF for Meyerding grade I LDS without preoperative dynamic instability with a minimum follow-up period of 5 years were retrospectively studied. Patients were divided into two groups: nonunion (52 patients) and union (41 patients). The primary outcomes were the 5-year percent recovery of postoperative Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual analog scale (VAS) scores, and reoperation rate. The outcome scores were compared between the groups using the inverse probability weighting method using propensity scores.

RESULTS

The union and nonunion groups had comparable weighted means of the 5-year postoperative clinical score for the percent recovery of the JOA score (70.2% vs. 71.1%, P = 0.86), ODI (14.5 vs.14.6, P = 0.98), VAS of low back pain (20.3 vs. 18.7 mm, P = 0.72), and VAS of leg pain (24.0 vs. 19.4 mm, P = 0.43). The reoperation rate was 2.4% (one case of adjacent segment pathology) in the union group and 0% in the nonunion group (P = 0.44).

CONCLUSION

The fusion status following uninstrumented PLF had no significant effect on the 5-year postoperative clinical outcomes and reoperation rate in patients with Meyerding grade I LDS without dynamic instability.

Disability, Health-Related Quality of Life and Mortality in Lumbar Spine Fusion Patients-A 5-Year Follow-Up and Comparison With a Population Sample

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective follow-up study.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the effect of lumbar spine fusion (LSF) on disability, health-related quality of life and mortality in a 5-year follow-up, and to compare these results with the general population.

METHODS

523 consecutive LSF operations were included in a prospective follow-up. Disability was assessed by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and HRQoL by the 36-item Short Form (SF-36) questionnaire using the physical and mental summary scores (PCS and MCS). The patients were compared with an age-, sex-, and residential area matched general population cohort.

RESULTS

The preoperative ODI in the patients was 46 (SD 16), and the change at 5 years was -26 (95% CI: -24 to -28), p < 0.001. In the population, ODI (baseline 13, SD 16) remained unchanged. The preoperative PCS in the patients was 27 (SD 7), in the population 45 (SD 11), and the increase in the patients at 5 years was 8 (95% CI: 7 to 9), p < 0.001. The patients did not reach the population in ODI or PCS. The baseline MCS in the patients was 47 (SD 13), and the change at 5 years 4 (95% CI: 3 to 7), p < 0.001. MCS of the females reached the population at 5-year follow-up. When analyzing short and long fusions separately, comparable changes were seen in both subgroups. There was no difference in mortality between the patients (3.4%) and the population (4.8%), hazard ratio (HR) 0.86.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the patients who had undergone LSF benefited from surgery still at 5 years, they never reached the physical level of the population.

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis with Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Treated with Decompression Alone. A Cohort of 346 Patients at a Large Spine Unit. Clinical Outcome, Complications and Subsequent Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To study the clinical outcome, complications and subsequent surgery rate of DA for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with DS.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There is still no consensus regarding the treatment approach for LSS with DS.

METHODS

We performed a retrospectively designed cohort study on prospectively collected data from a single high productive spine surgical center. Results from the Swedish Spine Registry and a local register for complications were used for the analyses. Patients with LSS and DS (>3 mm) who underwent DA during January 2012 to August 2017 were included. Patient reported outcome measures at baseline and 2 years after surgery were analyzed. Complications within 30 days of surgery and all subsequent surgery in the lumbar spine were registered.

RESULTS

We identified and included 346 patients with completed 2-year follow-up registration. At 2-year follow-up there was a significant improvement in all outcome measures. The global assessment success rate for back and leg pain was 68.3% and 67.6% respectively. Forty-one patients had at least 1 intra- or postoperative complication (11.9%). Nine patients (2.6%), underwent subsequent surgery within 2 years of the primary surgery whereof 2 underwent fusion. During the whole period of data collection, that is, as of June 2020, 28 patients had undergone subsequent surgery (8.1%) whereas 8 of them had had 2 surgeries. Fifteen patients underwent fusion.

CONCLUSION

DA provides good clinical outcome at 2-year follow-up in patients with LSS and DS with low rate of intra- and postoperative complications and subsequent surgery. Our data supports the evidence that DA is effective and safe for LSS with DS.Level of Evidence: 3.

Management of degenerative spondylolisthesis: development of appropriate use criteria

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Outcomes of treatment in care of patients with spinal disorders are directly related to patient selection and treatment indications. However, for many disorders, there is absence of consensus for precise indications. With the increasing emphasis on quality and value in spine care, it is essential that treatment recommendations and decisions are optimized.

PURPOSE

The purpose of the North American Spine Society Appropriate Use Criteria was to determine the appropriate (ie reasonable) multidisciplinary treatment recommendations for patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis across a spectrum of more common clinical scenarios.

STUDY DESIGN

A Modified Delphi process was used.

METHODS

The methodology was based on the Appropriate Use Criteria development process established by the Research AND Development Corporation. The topic of degenerative spondylolisthesis was selected by the committee, key modifiers determined, and consensus reached on standard definitions. A literature search and evidence analysis were completed by one work group simultaneously as scenarios were written, reviewed, and finalized by another work group. A separate multidisciplinary rating group was assembled. Based on the literature, provider experience, and group discussion, each scenario was scored on a nine-point scale on two separate occasions, once without discussion and then a second time following discussion based on the initial responses. The median rating for each scenario was then used to determine if indications were rarely appropriate (1 - 3), uncertain (4-6), or appropriate (7-9). Consensus was not mandatory.

RESULTS

There were 131 discrete scenarios. These addressed questions on bone grafting, imaging, mechanical instability, radiculopathy with or without neurological deficits, obesity, and yellow flags consisting of psychosocial and medical comorbidities. For most of these, appropriateness was established for physical therapy, injections, and various forms of surgical intervention. The diagnosis of spondylolisthesis should be determined by an upright x-ray. Scenarios pertaining to bone grafting suggested that patients should quit smoking prior to surgery, and that use of BMP should be reserved for patients who had risk factors for non-union. Across all clinical scenarios, physical therapy (PT) had an adjusted mean of 7.66, epidural steroid injections 5.76, and surgery 4.52. Physical therapy was appropriate in most scenarios, and most appropriate in patients with back pain and no neurological deficits. Epidural steroid injections were most appropriate in patients with radiculopathy. Surgery was generally more appropriate for patients with neurological deficits, higher disability scores, and dynamic spondylolisthesis. Mechanical back pain and presence of yellow flags tended to be less appropriate, and obesity in general had relatively little influence on decision making. Decompression alone was more strongly considered in the presence of static versus dynamic spondylolisthesis. On average, posterior fusion with or without interbody fusion was similarly appropriate, and generally more appropriate than stand-alone interbody fusion which was in turn more appropriate than interspinous spacers.

CONCLUSIONS

Multidisciplinary appropriate treatment criteria were generated based on the Research AND Development methodology. While there were consistent and significant differences between surgeons and non-surgeons, these differences were generally very small. This document provides comprehensive evidence-based recommendations for evaluation and treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis. The document in its entirety will be found on the North American Spine Society website (https://www.spine.org/Research-Clinical-Care/Quality-Improvement/Appropriate-Use-Criteria).

Variation in surgical treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis in Canada: surgeon assessment of stability and impact on treatment

INTRODUCTION

Controversy exists regarding the optimal surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DS). Not all DS patients are the same, and the degree to which inherent stability may dictate treatment is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the variability in surgical approach relative to surgeon classified stability. The secondary objective was to compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) across different surgical techniques and grades of stability.

METHODS

Patients prospectively enrolled from eleven tertiary care institutions and followed from 2015 to 2019. The surgical technique was at the surgeon's discretion. Surgeons were asked to grade the degree of instability based on the degenerative spondylolisthesis instability classification system (DSIC). DSIC categorizes three different types (I-stable, II-potentially unstable, and III-unstable). One-year changes in PROs were compared between each group. Multivariable regression was used to identify any characteristics that explained variability in treatment.

RESULTS

There were 323 patients enrolled in this study. Surgeons' stability classification versus procedure [decompression alone (D)/decompression and posterolateral fusion (D-PL)/and decompression with posterior/transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (D-PLIF/TLIF)] were as follows: type I (n = 91): D-41%/D-PL-13%/D-PLIF/TLIF-46%; type II (n = 175): D-23%/D-PL-17%/D-PLIF/TLIF-60%; and type III (n = 57):(D-0%/D-PL-14%/D-PLIF/TLIF-86%). Type I patients undergoing D-PL had some improvements in EQ-5D and NRS versus those undergoing D-PLIF/TLIF but otherwise there were no other significant differences between groups. Regression analysis demonstrated advanced age (OR = 1.06, CI 1.02-10.12) and type I (OR = 2.61, CI 1.17-5.81) were associated with receiving decompression surgery alone.

CONCLUSIONS

There exists considerable variation in surgical management of DS in Canada. Given similar PROs in two of the three groups, there is potential to tailor surgical intervention and improve resource utilization.

Dynamic morphometric changes in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: A pilot study of upright magnetic resonance imaging

The objectives of this study were to (a) develop a standing MRI imaging protocol, tolerable to symptomatic patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis (DLS), and (b) to evaluate the morphometric changes observed in DLS patients in both supine and standing postures. Patients with single level, Meyerding grade 1 DLS undergoing surgery at a single institution between November 2015 to May 2017 were consented. Patients were imaged in the supine and standing positions in a 0.5 T vertically open MRI scanner (MROpen, Paramed, Genoa, Italy) with sagittal and axial T2 images. The morphometric parameters measured were: cross-sectional area of the thecal sac (CSA), lateral recess height, disc height, degree of anterolisthesis, disc angle, lumbar lordosis, the presence of facet effusion and restabilization signs. Measures from both postures were compared using paired T-test. Associations of posture with the magnitude of change in the various measurements was determined using Pearson correlation or paired T-test when appropriate. All fourteen patients (mean age 64.4 years) included tolerated standing for the time required for image acquisition. All measurements with the exception of lumbar lordosis and disk height showed a statistically significant difference between the postures (p < 0.05). In the standing position, CSA and lateral recess height were reduced by 28% and 50%, respectively. There was no relationship between the change in CSA of the thecal sac and any measures. Standing images acquired in an upright MRI scanner demonstrated postural changes associated with Meyerding grade 1 DLS and images acquisition was tolerated in all patients.

Impact of surgeon and hospital factors on surgical decision-making for grade 1 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a Quality Outcomes Database analysis

OBJECTIVE

Surgical treatment for degenerative spondylolisthesis has been proven to be clinically challenging and cost-effective. However, there is a range of thresholds that surgeons utilize for incorporating fusion in addition to decompressive laminectomy in these cases. This study investigates these surgeon- and site-specific factors by using the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD).

METHODS

The QOD was queried for all cases that had undergone surgery for grade 1 spondylolisthesis from database inception to February 2019. In addition to patient-specific covariates, surgeon-specific covariates included age, sex, race, years in practice (0-10, 11-20, 21-30, > 30 years), and fellowship training. Site-specific variables included hospital location (rural, suburban, urban), teaching versus nonteaching status, and hospital type (government, nonfederal; private, nonprofit; private, investor owned). Multivariable regression and predictor importance analyses were performed to identify predictors of the treatment performed (decompression alone vs decompression and fusion). The model was clustered by site to account for site-specific heterogeneity in treatment selection.

RESULTS

A total of 12,322 cases were included with 1988 (16.1%) that had undergone decompression alone. On multivariable regression analysis clustered by site, adjusting for patient-level clinical covariates, no surgeon-specific factors were found to be significantly associated with the odds of selecting decompression alone as the surgery performed. However, sites located in suburban areas (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.09-4.84, p = 0.03) were more likely to perform decompression alone (reference = urban). Sites located in rural areas had higher odds of performing decompression alone than hospitals located in urban areas, although the results were not statistically significant (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.59-2.61, p = 0.49). Nonteaching status was independently associated with lower odds of performing decompression alone (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.19-0.97, p = 0.04). Predictor importance analysis revealed that the most important determinants of treatment selection were dominant symptom (Wald χ2 = 34.7, accounting for 13.6% of total χ2) and concurrent diagnosis of disc herniation (Wald χ2 = 31.7, accounting for 12.4% of total χ2). Hospital teaching status was also found to be relatively important (Wald χ2 = 4.2, accounting for 1.6% of total χ2) but less important than other patient-level predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonteaching centers were more likely to perform decompressive laminectomy with supplemental fusion for spondylolisthesis. Suburban hospitals were more likely to perform decompression only. Surgeon characteristics were not found to influence treatment selection after adjustment for clinical covariates. Further large database registry experience from surgeons at high-volume academic centers at which surgically and medically complex patients are treated may provide additional insight into factors associated with treatment preference for degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: factors associated with the decision to fuse

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The indication to perform a fusion and decompression surgery as opposed to decompression alone for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS) remains controversial. A variety of factors are considered when deciding on whether to fuse, including patient demographics, radiographic parameters, and symptom presentation. Likely surgeon preference has an important influence as well.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess factors associated with the decision of a Canadian academic spine surgeon to perform a fusion for LDS.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This study is a retrospective analysis of patients prospectively enrolled in a multicenter Canadian study that was designed to evaluate the assessment and surgical management of LDS.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Inclusion criteria were patients with: radiographic evidence of LDS and neurogenic claudication or radicular pain, undergoing posterior decompression alone or posterior decompression and fusion, performed in one of seven, participating academic centers from 2015 to 2019.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Patient demographics, patient-rated outcome measures (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], numberical rating scale back pain and leg pain, SF-12), and imaging parameters were recorded in the Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network (CSORN) database. Surgeon factors were retrieved by survey of each participating surgeon and then linked to their specific patients within the database.

METHODS

Univariate analysis was used to compare patient characteristics, imaging measures, and surgeon variables between those that had a fusion and those that had decompression alone. Multivariate backward logistic regression was used to identify the best combination of factors associated with the decision to perform a fusion.

RESULTS

This study includes 241 consecutively enrolled patients receiving surgery from 11 surgeons at 7 sites. Patients that had a fusion were younger (65.3±8.3 vs. 68.6±9.7 years, p=.012), had worse ODI scores (45.9±14.7 vs. 40.2±13.5, p=.007), a smaller average disc height (6.1±2.7 vs. 8.0±7.3 mm, p=.005), were more likely to have grade II spondylolisthesis (31% vs. 14%, p=.008), facet distraction (34% vs. 60%, p=.034), and a nonlordotic disc angle (26% vs. 17%, p=.038). The rate of fusion varied by individual surgeon and practice location (p<.001, respectively). Surgeons that were fellowship trained in Canada more frequently fused than those who fellowship trained outside of Canada (76% vs. 57%, p=.027). Surgeons on salary fused more frequently than surgeons remunerated by fee-for-service (80% vs. 64%, p=.004). In the multivariate analysis the clinical factors associated with an increased odds of fusion were decreasing age, decreasing disc height, and increasing ODI score; the radiographic factors were grade II spondylolisthesis and neutral or kyphotic standing disc type; and the surgeon factors were fellowship location, renumeration type and practice region. The odds of having a fusion surgery was more than two times greater for patients with a grade II spondylolisthesis or neutral and/or kyphotic standing disc type (opposed to lordotic standing disc type). Patients whose surgeon completed their fellowship in Canada, or whose surgeon was salaried (opposed to fee-for-service), or whose surgeon practiced in western Canada had twice the odds of having fusion surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The decision to perform a fusion in addition to decompression for LDS is multifactorial. Although patient and radiographic parameters are important in the decision-making process, multiple surgeon factors are associated with the preference of a Canadian spine surgeon to perform a fusion for LDS. Future work is necessary to decrease treatment variability between surgeons and help facilitate the implementation of evidence-based decision making.

The necessity or not of the addition of fusion to decompression for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis patients: A PRISMA compliant meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The new emerging application of decompression combined with fusion comes with a concern of cost performance, however, it is a lack of big data support. We aimed to evaluate the necessity or not of the addition of fusion for decompression in patients with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis.

METHODS

Potential studies were selected from PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, and gray relevant studies were manually searched. We set the searching time spanning from the creating date of electronic engines to August 2020. STATA version 11.0 was exerted to process the pooled data.

RESULTS

Six RCTs were included in this study. A total of 650 patients were divided into 275 in the decompression group and 375 in the fusion group. No statistic differences were found in the visual analog scales (VAS) score for low back pain (weighted mean difference [WMD], -0.045; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.259-1.169; P = .942) and leg pain (WMD, 0.075; 95% CI, -1.201-1.35; P = .908), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score (WMD, 1.489; 95% CI, -7.232-10.211; P = .738), European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) score (WMD, 0.03; 95% CI, -0.05-0.12; P = .43), Odom classification (OR, 0.353; 95% CI 0.113-1.099; P = .072), postoperative complications (OR, 0.437; 95% CI, 0.065-2.949; P = .395), secondary operation (OR, 2.541; 95% CI 0.897-7.198; P = .079), and postoperative degenerative spondylolisthesis (OR = 8.59, P = .27). Subgroup analysis of VAS score on low back pain (OR = 0.77, 95% CI, 0.36-1.65; P = .50) was demonstrated as no significant difference as well.

CONCLUSION

The overall efficacy of the decompression combined with fusion is not revealed to be superior to decompression alone. At the same time, more evidence-based performance is needed to supplement this opinion.

Linical efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in elderly patients: a retrospective study

Background

Although percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD) is increasingly being used to treat lumbar degenerative disease, the treatment of elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) involves considerable uncertainty. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of PELD for the treatment of LSS in elderly patients aged 65 years or older.

Methods

In this retrospective review, 136 patients aged 65 years or older who underwent PELD to treat LSS were evaluated. The patients were divided into two groups, group A (ages 65–74) and group B (age ≥ 75), and perioperative data were analyzed. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and MacNab classification were used to evaluate postoperative clinical efficacy.

Results

All patients successfully underwent the operation with satisfactory treatment outcomes. Compared to preoperative scores, the self-reported scores or pain while performing daily activities were significantly improved in both treatment groups (P < 0.05). No statistically significant between-group differences were observed in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative bed rest, and postoperative hospital stay (P > 0.05). The overall postoperative complication rate was similar between the two groups. Moreover, no statistically significant differences in VAS-back pain scores, VAS-leg pain scores, JOA scores, and MacNab classification were found between the groups at the 3-month and 1.5-year follow-up examinations (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

PELD is safe and effective for the treatment of LSS in elderly patients. Age is not a contraindication for decompressive lumbar spine surgery. PELD has advantages such as reduced trauma, fewer anesthesia-related complications, and a fast postoperative recovery. Elderly patients should be considered good candidates for lumbar decompression surgery using minimally invasive techniques.

Comparative Effectiveness of Microdecompression Alone vs Decompression Plus Instrumented Fusion in Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

IMPORTANCE

Conflicting evidence and large practice variation are present in the surgical treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis. More than 90% of surgical procedures in the United States include instrumented fusion compared with 50% or less in other countries.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the effectiveness of microdecompression alone is noninferior to decompression with instrumented fusion in a real-world setting.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This multicenter comparative effectiveness study with a noninferiority design assessed prospective data from the Norwegian Registry for Spine Surgery. From September 19, 2007, to December 21, 2015, 1376 patients at 35 Norwegian orthopedic and neurosurgical departments underwent surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis without scoliosis. After excluding patients undergoing laminectomy alone, fusion without instrumentation, or surgery in more than 2 levels and those with a former operation at the index level, 794 patients were included in the analyses, regardless of missing or incomplete follow-up data, before propensity score matching. Data were analyzed from March 20 to October 30, 2018.

EXPOSURES

Microdecompression alone or decompression with instrumented fusion.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

A reduction from baseline of 30% or greater in the Oswestry Disability Index at 12-month follow-up.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 570 patients (413 female [72%]; mean [SD] age, 64.7 [9.5] years) were included for comparison, with 285 undergoing microdecompression (mean [SD] age, 64.6 [9.8] years; 205 female [72%]) and 285 undergoing decompression with instrumented fusion (mean [SD] age, 64.8 [9.2] years; 208 female [73%]). The proportion of each type of procedure varied between departments. However, changes in outcome scores varied within patients but not between departments. The proportion of patients with improvement in the Oswestry Disability Index of at least 30% was 150 of 219 (68%) in the microdecompression group and 155 of 215 (72%) in the instrumentation group. The 95% CI (-12% to 5%) for the difference of -4% was above the predefined margin of noninferiority (-15%). Microdecompression alone was associated with shorter operation time (mean [SD], 89 [44] vs 180 [65] minutes; P < .001) and shorter hospital stay (mean [SD], 2.5 [2.4] vs 6.4 [3.0] days; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis, the clinical effectiveness of microdecompression alone was noninferior to that of decompression with instrumented fusion. Microdecompression alone was also associated with shorter durations of surgery and hospital stay, supporting the suggestion that the less invasive procedure should be considered for most patients.

Percutaneous Transforaminal Endoscopic Decompression for Geriatric Patients with Central Spinal Stenosis and Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: A Novel Surgical Technique and Clinical Outcomes

Purpose

Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression (PTED) is an ultra-minimally invasive surgical option for patients that does not involve the same amount of destabilizing facet joint removal as a traditional laminectomy. The objective of this study was to describe the procedure of PTED under local anesthesia for geriatric patients with central spinal stenosis and degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (CSS-DLS).

Materials and Methods

From January 2016 to December 2018, 30 consecutive geriatric patients who underwent surgery for single-level CSS-DLS were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were followed for at least 12 months (12–24 months). The visual analog scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores and modified MacNab criteria were used to evaluate the clinical results.

Results

The mean age was 73.1±6.0 years. Follow-up ranged from 12 to 36 months. The mean±SD values of the preoperative VAS for leg pain and ODI were 7.4±1.0 and 67.2±8.4, respectively. The values improved to 2.2±1.1 and 19.9±8.1 at 12 months postoperatively. The outcomes of the modified MacNab criteria showed that 93.3% of patients obtained a good-to-excellent rate. The percent slippage of spondylolisthesis before surgery (13.8±2.5%) and at the end of follow-up (14.0±2.5%) was not significantly different.

Conclusion

PTED under local anesthesia could be a useful supplement to traditional decompression in geriatric patients with CSS-DLS.

Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis in the elderly

OBJECTIVES

Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression (PTED) under local anesthesia is rarely performed for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) because of the limited field of vision, inherent instability, etc. The objective of this study was to describe the procedure of the PTED technique and to demonstrate the early clinical outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2017 to January 2019, 40 consecutive patients aged 60 and older were diagnosed with LSS with DLS in our institution and underwent PTED. All patient were followed up to 1 year postoperatively. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and modified MacNab criteria.

RESULTS

The mean age was 70.2 ± 7.1 years. Follow-up ranged from 12 to 24 months. The mean ± SD values of the preoperative VAS leg pain and ODI scores were 7.5 ± 1.1 and 67.3 ± 9.3, respectively. The scores improved to 2.2 ± 1.1 and 20.7 ± 8.1 at 12 months postoperatively. The outcomes of the modified MacNab criteria showed that 87.5 % of patients obtained a good-to-excellent rate. The percent slippage of spondylolisthesis before surgery (10.8 ± 2.6 %) and at the end of follow-up (11.0 ± 2.4 %) was not significantly different. One patient had a dural tear and intracranial hypertension, and one patient had tibialis anterior weakness.

CONCLUSION

PTED under local anesthesia could be an effective treatment method for LSS with DLS in elderly patients. However, potential complications still require further evaluation.

Results of Decompression Alone in Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Minimum 5-Year Follow-up

Background

Surgical treatment consisting of decompression and fusion is generally known to produce good clinical results for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis. However, the clinical outcome of decompression alone, without fusion, remains unclear, and long-term follow-up results are scarce. This study aimed to retrospectively analyze the 5-year clinical results of decompression only in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Methods

Among the patients diagnosed as having lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis, 36 patients who underwent decompression without fusion and were followed up for minimum 5 years were included in this study. The average follow-up period was 7.2 years, and the mean age of patients was 63.2 years. Visual analog scale (VAS) score and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were investigated pre- and postoperatively, and also radiologic displacement and instability were measured. In addition, patients who needed fusion or redecompression at the decompression site postoperatively were also investigated.

Results

VAS score and ODI improved from an average of 7.8 points and 57 points preoperatively, respectively, to 1.4 points and 19 points at 5 years postoperatively, respectively. The degree of radiologic displacement increased from an average of 5.1 mm preoperatively to 6.4 mm at the final follow-up. Radiological instability was detected in five patients. Two patients (9.5%) required fusion.

Conclusions

The long-term follow-up results revealed that satisfactory clinical outcomes were obtained with decompression alone, without fusion, for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Are degenerative spondylolisthesis and further slippage postoperatively really issues in spinal stenosis surgery?

Background and aims Opinions diverge concerning the prognostic importance of preoperative degenerative spondylolisthesis in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, as well as the significance of further slippage post-operatively following decompression alone. However, a slip is only one among several factors related to the topic, e.g. duration and intensity of back and leg pain, pre-operative walking ability, number of levels operated and not least the experience of the surgeon. Our aim was to take all of the above-mentioned factors into consideration when analysing the patients' clinical outcome, reported as Change in back pain, Change in leg pain, Overall satisfaction and Change in walking ability, with special emphasis on the possible importance of pre- and/or post-operative degenerative spondylolisthesis. Methods We studied 200 consecutive patients, mean follow-up time 81 months (range 62-108). Before treatment and on the follow-up occasion all patients answered the SF-36 questionnaire and assessed their back and leg pain on a visual analogue scale (VAS). At follow-up the patients were asked about possible changes in back and leg pain (completely free, much better, somewhat better, unchanged, somewhat worse, much worse) and whether they were; satisfied with the outcome, in doubt or not satisfied. Before treatment and at follow-up the presence or not of degenerative spondylolisthesis was determined in the lateral view on a plain X-ray or MRI. By use of a microsurgical technique decompression was achieved in all patients by bilateral laminotomy not sparing the midline ligaments, irrespective of a degenerative spondylolisthesis or not. Eight surgeons with different surgical experience performed the operations. Four separate multivariate analyses were conducted, one for each clinical outcome. The Lasso method was used for variable selection and multiple imputation was applied to handle missing values. Results At follow-up 78.5% of the patients were completely satisfied with the outcome. Minimal clinical important difference (MCID) was achieved for 69% of the patients. Before surgery 28 patients were able to walk more than 1 km compared to 111 at follow-up. The reoperation rate at 6.8 years was 12% further decompressions and 2.5% fusions at the index level. Post-operative slippage was equally common in patients with and without a preoperative slip (around 30%). There were no notable differences in outcome in patients with and without a preoperative slip and no effect of further slippage at the index or another level post-operatively. Nor could the statistical analysis show any of the other covariates (age, gender, duration and intensity of back and leg pain, pre-operative walking ability or number of levels operated) to be of statistically significant importance for predicting the outcome. In the univariate statistical analysis differences were found between the patients of individual surgeons regarding satisfaction, pain improvement, and reoperation rates in favour of surgical experience, which were, however, not statistically significant in the multivariate analysis. Conclusions None of the covariates, including pre-operative spondylolisthesis and further slippage post-operatively, were statistically significant for predicting the clinical outcome. Implication Our results provide no evidence for adding fusion to the decompression.

In Degenerative Spondylolisthesis, Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression Leads to Less Reoperations at 5 Years When Compared to Posterior Decompression With Instrumented Fusion: A Propensity-matched Retrospective Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Multicenter retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare reoperation rates at 5-year follow-up of unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) versus posterior decompression with instrumented fusion (Fusion) for patients with low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) in a multicenter database.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Controversy exists regarding whether fusion should be used to augment decompression surgery in patients with LSS with DS. For years, the standard has been fusion with standard laminectomy to prevent postoperative instability. However, this strategy is not supported by Level 1 evidence. Instability and reoperations may be reduced or prevented using less invasive decompression techniques.

METHODS

We identified 164 patients with DS and LSS who underwent ULBD between January 2007 and December 2011 in a multicenter database. These patients were propensity score-matched on age, sex, race, and smoking status with patients who underwent Fusion (n = 437). Each patient required a minimum of 5-year follow-up. The primary outcome was 5-year reoperation. Secondary outcome measures included postoperative complication rates, blood loss during surgery, and length of stay. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds ratio of the 5-year reoperation rate between the two surgical groups.

RESULTS

The reoperation rate at 5-year follow-up was 10.4% in the ULBD group and 17.2% in the Fusion group. ULBD reoperations were more frequent at the index surgical level; Fusion reoperations were more common at an adjacent level. The two types of operations had similar postoperative complication rates, and both groups tended to have fusion reoperations.

CONCLUSION

For patients with stable DS and LSS, ULBD is a viable, durable option compared to fusion with decreased blood loss and length stay, as well as a lower reoperation rate at 5-year follow-up. Further prospective studies are required to determine the optimal clinical scenario for ULBD in the setting of DS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

The Effect of Older Age on the Perioperative Outcomes of Spinal Fusion Surgery in Patients With Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease With Spondylolisthesis: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) is often treated with lumbar spinal fusion (LSF). However, there is concern that the morbidity of LSF may be prohibitively high in older adults.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of advanced age on the safety of LSF for DS.

METHODS

Patients who underwent LSF for DS were retrospectively identified from National Surgical Quality Improvement Program datasets for 2011 to 2015 using Current Procedural Terminology codes. Data on demographic characteristics, comorbidities, surgical factors, and 30-d morbidity and mortality were collected. Propensity score matching (nearest neighbor) was performed with age (&lt;70 vs ≥70 yr) as the dependent variable and sex, type of fusion procedure, number of levels fused, diabetes, smoking, hypertension, and chronic steroid use as covariates. Outcomes were compared between age &lt;70 and ≥70 groups.

RESULTS

The study cohort consisted of 2238 patients (n = 1119, age &lt;70; n = 1119, age ≥70). The 2 age groups were balanced for key covariates including sex, race, diabetes, hypertension, CHF, smoking, chronic steroid use, type of fusion, and number of levels. Rates of all complications were similar between younger and older age groups, except urinary tract infection, which was more frequent among the ≥70 age group (OR 2.32, P = .009). Further, patients in the older age group were more likely to be discharged to a rehabilitation (OR 2.94, P &lt; .001) or skilled care (OR 3.66, P &lt; .001) facility, rather than directly home (OR 0.25, P &lt; .001).

CONCLUSION

LSF may be performed safely in older adults with DS. Our results suggest older age alone should not exclude a patient from undergoing lumbar fusion for DS.

Decreased estimated blood loss in lateral trans-psoas versus anterior approach to lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis

Background

The goal of the current study was to compare the perioperative and post-operative outcomes of eXtreme lateral trans-psoas approach (XLIF) versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) for single level degenerative spondylolisthesis. The ideal approach for degenerative spondylolisthesis remains controversial.

Methods

Consecutive patients undergoing single level XLIF (n=21) or ALIF (n=54) for L4-5 degenerative spondylolisthesis between 2008-2012 from a single academic center were retrospectively reviewed. Groups were compared for peri-operative data (estimated blood loss, operative time, adjunct procedures or additional implants), radiographic measurements (L1-S1 cobb angle, disc height, fusion grade, subsidence), 30-day complications (infection, DVT/PE, weakness/paresthesia, etc.), and patient reported outcomes (leg and back Numerical Rating Scale, and Oswestry Disability Index).

Results

Estimated blood loss was significantly lower for XLIF [median 100; interquartile range (IQR), 50-100 mL] than for ALIF (median 250; IQR, 150-400 mL; P<0.001), including after adjusting for significantly higher rates of posterior decompression in the ALIF group. There were no significant differences in rates of complications within 30 days, radiographic outcomes, or in re-operation rates. Both groups experienced significant pain relief post-operatively.

Conclusions

The lateral trans-psoas approach is associated with diminished blood loss compared to the anterior approach in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis. We were unable to detect differences in radiographic outcomes, complication rates, or patient reported outcomes. Continued efforts to directly compare approaches for specific indications will minimize complications and improve outcomes. Further studies will continue to define indications for lateral versus anterior approach to lumbar spine for degenerative spondylolisthesis.

Decompression Versus Fusion for Grade I Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Meta-Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis of evidence level I to IV studies.

OBJECTIVE

To compare decompression alone versus decompression plus fusion in the treatment of grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS).

METHODS

Following established guidelines, we systematically reviewed 3 electronic databases to assess studies evaluating patients with grade I DS. We stratified all patients into 2 cohorts; the first cohort underwent a decompression-type surgery, and the second cohort underwent decompression plus fusion. We noted clinical outcomes, complications, reoperations, and surgical details such as blood loss. Descriptive statistics and random-effects models were used to determine the specified outcome metrics with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

In both cohorts, the pain (legs and lower back) significantly decreased and the physical component of the Short Form 36 showed better patient clinical outcomes. The decompression cohort had a 5.8% complication rate (95% CI = 1.7-2.1), and the decompression plus fusion cohort had an 8.3% complication rate (95% CI = 5.5-11.6). The reoperation rate was higher in the decompression-only cohort (8.5%; 95% CI = 2.9-17.0) compared with the decompression plus fusion cohort (4.9%; 95% CI = 2.5-7.9).

CONCLUSIONS

There does not appear to be any advantage of one procedure over the other. Patients undergoing decompression alone tended to be older with a higher percentage of leg pain, whereas patients additionally undergoing fusion tended to be younger with more lower back pain. The decompression-only cohort had fewer complications but a higher revision rate.

High Sacral Endplate Inclination Vector Forces Are Associated with Pars Fracture-Mediated Lumbosacral Spondylolisthesis

OBJECTIVE

Lumbar spondylolisthesis can be related to facet arthropathy and disc degeneration or to a fracture of the pars interarticularis, but the mechanistic underpinnings of spondylolisthesis remain unclear. We posit that high sacral slope and body weight increase sacral inclination vector forces, which leads to pars fractures and exacerbates risk for spondylolisthesis.

METHODS

To investigate this hypothesis, we measured the sacral slope, body weight, and S1 endplate vector forces for patients who underwent L5-S1 fusion for grade I spondylolisthesis. Patients were stratified based on presence of pars fractures versus facet arthropathy, and statistical analyses were performed to determine whether high sacral endplate inclination vector force is associated with pars fracture-mediated spondylolisthesis.

RESULTS

We identified 131 patients who had L5-S1 fusion for spondylolisthesis. The mean age was 56 years, and 57% were female. The body weight of patients ranged from 45.4 to 141.9 kg with an average of 83.8 kg; 32 patients had single-level L5-S1 spondylolisthesis secondary to bilateral L5 pars interarticularis fractures, whereas 99 patients had L5-S1 spondylolisthesis due to facet arthropathy. Patients with pars fractures had steeper sacral slopes (43.2 ± 10.1°) compared with those without pars fractures (36.8 ± 8.1°) (P = 0.0007, odds ratio 2.71). Despite having no significant differences in weight (82.7 ± 17.2 vs. 87.3 ± 17.2 kg, P = 0.189), patients with pars fractures had 49% greater sacral inclination vector forces compared with those without pars fractures (586 ± 158 N vs. 394 ± 90 N, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that high sacral endplate inclination vector force is a risk factor for developing pars fracture-mediated spondylolisthesis.

Motion Analysis in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis With Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Feasibility Study of the 3DCT Technique Comparing Laminectomy Versus Bilateral Laminotomy

STUDY DESIGN

This was a randomized radiologic biomechanical pilot study in vivo.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study was to evaluate if 3-dimensional computed tomography is a feasible tool in motion analyses of the lumbar spine and to study if preservation of segmental midline structures offers less postoperative instability compared with central decompression in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The role of segmental instability after decompression is controversial. Validated techniques for biomechanical evaluation of segmental motion in human live subjects are lacking.

METHODS

In total, 23 patients (mean age, 68 y) with typical symptoms and magnetic resonance imaging findings of spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis (>3 mm) in 1 or 2 adjacent lumbar levels from L3 to L5 were included. They were randomized to either laminectomy (LE) or bilateral laminotomy (LT) (preservation of the midline structures). Documentation of segmental motion was made preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively with CT in provoked flexion and extension. Analyses of movements were performed with validated software. The accuracy for this method is 0.6 mm in translation and 1 degree in rotation. Patient-reported outcome measures were collected from the Swespine register preoperatively and 2-year postoperatively.

RESULTS

The mean preoperative values for 3D rotation and translation were 6.2 degrees and 1.8 mm. The mean increase in 3D rotation 6 months after surgery was 0.25 degrees after LT and 0.7 degrees after LE (P=0.79) while the mean increase in 3D translation was 0.15 mm after LT and 1.1 mm after LE (P=0.42). Both surgeries demonstrated significant improvement in patient-reported outcome measures 2 years postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

The 3D computed tomography technique proved to be a feasible tool in the evaluation of segmental motion in this group of older patients. There was negligible increase in segmental motion after decompressive surgery. LE with removal of the midline structures did not create a greater instability compared with when these structures were preserved.

Minimally invasive spinal decompression for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis and stenosis maintains stability and may avoid the need for fusion

Aims

The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of microendoscopic laminotomy in patients with lumbar stenosis and concurrent degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS), and to determine the effect of this procedure on spinal stability.

Patients and Methods

A total of 304 consecutive patients with single-level lumbar DS with concomitant stenosis underwent microendoscopic laminotomy without fusion between January 2004 and December 2010. Patients were divided into two groups, those with and without advanced DS based on the degree of spondylolisthesis and dynamic instability. A total of 242 patients met the inclusion criteria. There were 101 men and 141 women. Their mean age was 68.1 years (46 to 85). Outcome was assessed using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association and Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire scores, a visual analogue score for pain and the Short Form Health-36 score. The radiographic outcome was assessed by measuring the slip and the disc height. The clinical and radiographic parameters were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 4.6 years (3 to 7.5).

Results

There were no significant differences in the preoperative measurements between the group and no significant differences between the clinical parameters at the final follow-up. The mean percentage slip was 17.1% preoperatively and 17.7% at the final follow-up (p = 0.35). Progressive instability was noted in 13 patients (8.2%) with DS and 6 patients (7.0%) with advanced DS, respectively (p = 0.81). There was radiological evidence of restabilization of the spine in 30 patients (35%) with preoperative instability. The success rate of microendoscopic laminotomy was good/excellent in 166 (69%), fair in 49 (20%) and poor in 27 patients (11%) in both groups.

Conclusion

Microendoscopic laminotomy is an effective form of surgical treatment for patients with DS and stenosis. Preservation of the stabilizing structures using this technique prevents postoperative instability. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:499-506.

Decompression with or without concomitant fusion in lumbar stenosis due to degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The primary objective of this systematic review is to compare the outcome after decompression with and without concomitant instrumented fusion in patients with lumbar stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. Does adding fusion to simple decompression lead to better results?

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Cochrane, Web of Science, CINAHL and Academic Search Premier were searched. All studies comparing outcome of decompression alone to decompression with concomitant-instrumented fusion in patients suffering from symptomatic lumbar stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis were included. Risk of bias was assessed using an adapted version of the Cowley checklist.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included in the analysis involving 3119 patients in total. In the majority of studies, including two RCTs, clinical outcome of both patient groups was comparable regarding most clinical outcome measures.

CONCLUSION

Currently there is not enough evidence that adding instrumented fusion to a decompression leads to superior outcomes compared to decompression only in patients with lumbar stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. The most important clinical outcome measures, including the ODI, show comparable results. Therefore, the least invasive and least costly procedure, being decompression alone, is preferred in patients with low-grade spondylolisthesis with predominant leg pain. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Lumbar Fusion for Degenerative Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Due to uncertain evidence, lumbar fusion for degenerative indications is associated with the greatest measured practice variation of any surgical procedure.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the current evidence on the comparative safety and efficacy of lumbar fusion, decompression-alone, or nonoperative care for degenerative indications.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (up to June 30, 2016). Comparative studies reporting validated measures of safety or efficacy were included. Treatment effects were calculated through DerSimonian and Laird random effects models.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 65 studies (19 randomized controlled trials, 16 prospective cohort studies, 15 retrospective cohort studies, and 15 registries) enrolling a total of 302 620 patients. Disability, pain, and patient satisfaction following fusion, decompression-alone, or nonoperative care were dependent on surgical indications and study methodology. Relative to decompression-alone, the risk of reoperation following fusion was increased for spinal stenosis (relative risk [RR] 1.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.28) and decreased for spondylolisthesis (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.68-0.83). Among patients with spinal stenosis, complications were more frequent following fusion (RR 1.87, 95% CI 1.18-2.96). Mortality was not significantly associated with any treatment modality.

CONCLUSION

Positive clinical change was greatest in patients undergoing fusion for spondylolisthesis while complications and the risk of reoperation limited the benefit of fusion for spinal stenosis. The relative safety and efficacy of fusion for chronic low back pain suggests careful patient selection is required (PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews number, CRD42015020153).

Decompression Alone Versus Decompression and Fusion for Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness and safety of decompression alone (D group) with decompression and fusion (DF group) for patients who were diagnosed with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS).

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for relevant studies that compared decompression alone with decompression and fusion for LDS. Then, data extraction and quality assessment were conducted, and the extracted data were analyzed by using RevMan 5.3. We used the random effects model for studies that had heterogeneity between them, and for those without heterogeneity, the fixed model was used.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials and 14 nonrandomized controlled studies involving 77,994 patients were included for this meta-analysis. Although the DF group was associated with a higher postoperative change score on a visual analog scale compared with the D group in terms of back (P = 0.02) and leg (P = 0.04), they failed to reach the minimum clinically important difference. Moreover, no significant differences were found in Oswestry Disability Index, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, Short-Form 36 physical and mental component summaries score, and patients' satisfaction (P > 0.05) between treatment groups. Complication rate and reoperation rate (P > 0.05) were similar in both groups. Data analysis also showed that the DF group was associated with longer operation time (P < 0.00001), more intraoperative blood loss (P < 0.00001), and longer length of hospital stay (P < 0.00001).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with LDS, decompression and fusion surgery did not yield better clinical outcomes than decompression alone surgery. Also, the complication rate and reoperation rate were comparable between treatment groups. However, patients who had undergone decompression alone had shorter operation time, less intraoperative blood loss, and shorter hospital stay.

Decompression plus fusion versus decompression alone for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical effectiveness of decompression plus fusion and decompression alone for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis, a systematic review and meta-analysis of all available evidence was performed.

METHODS

A search of the literature was conducted on PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Collaboration Library. Relevant studies comparing decompression plus fusion and decompression alone were selected according to eligibility criteria. Predefined endpoints were extracted and meta-analyzed from the identified studies.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials and 13 observational studies were eligible. The pooled data revealed that fusion was associated with significantly higher rates of satisfaction and lower leg pain scores when compared with decompression alone. However, fusion significantly increased the intraoperative blood loss, operative time and hospital stay. Both techniques had similar ODI, back pain scores, complication rate, and reoperation rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available evidence, decompression plus fusion maybe be better than decompression alone in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis. Fusion had advantages of improvement of clinical satisfaction, as well as reduction of postoperative leg pain, with similar complication rate to decompression alone.

Commentary on: Laminectomy plus fusion versus laminectomy alone for lumbar spondylolisthesis by Ghogawala Z, Dziura J, Butler WE, Dai F, Terrin N, Magge SN, et al. NEJM 2016;374 (15):1424-34

Background:

How does an article involving only 66 patients randomized into two spinal surgical groups get into the New England Journal of Medicine? Nevertheless, this one did. The article by Ghogawala et al. entitled Laminectomy plus fusion versus laminectomy alone for lumbar spondylolisthesis, compared the efficacy/outcomes of pedicle/screw/rod instrumented posterolateral lumbar fusions vs. decompressions alone for treating lumbar stenosis with grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS).

Methods:

They designed a randomized controlled study involving only 66 patients between the ages of 50–80 (average age: 67) with lumbar stenosis and stable DS (3–14 mm). Outcomes were measured utilizing the physical measures from the Short Form 36 (SF-36) up to 4 postoperative years, and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) upt to 2 postoperative years. Data were available for 86% of patients at 2, but only for 68% of the patients at 4 postoperative years.

Results:

At 2 postoperative years, SF-36 scores were higher for the instrumented patients (28 patients) vs. decompressed (29 patients) patients. However, the scores were comparable for both groups using the ODI at 4 years. SF-36 scores, however, remained higher for the 19 remaining instrumented patients. Additionally, reoperation rates were 14% for fusions and a staggering 34% for decompressions alone.

Conclusions:

The authors concluded; laminectomy with fusion offered a “slightly greater but clinically meaningful improvement in overall physical health-related quality of life vs. laminectomy alone.” Rather, it should have read there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups and an insufficient number of patients were included in the study at all stages.

Is There a Role for Decompression Alone for Treating Symptomatic Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis?: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

A posterior decompression with an instrumented fusion is one of the most common surgical procedures performed for treating symptomatic spinal stenosis associated with degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). However, some patients may benefit from a decompression alone, avoiding complications related to instrumentation and fusion.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the characteristics of patients with symptomatic DS who may be successfully treated with an isolated decompression.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic literature review of studies including patients who underwent decompression without instrumentation for treatment of DS.

METHODS

A systematic review of the Medline database was performed. Retrospective and prospective studies of patients with DS who underwent a decompression were included, as well as studies comparing decompression with instrumented decompression. All the articles were classified according to their level of evidence.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies met all inclusion and exclusion criteria. We identified several characteristics that may be associated with a less favorable outcome after a decompression alone: a facet angle >50 degrees, a disk space of >6.5 mm, presence of low back pain rather than lower extremity symptoms, presence of hypermobility in the listhetic level on dynamic radiographs (>1.25 to 2 mm), and resection of the posterior elements. The majority of the studies comparing decompression alone to decompression and instrumented fusion included in our review suggested similar clinical outcomes with both procedures; however, with long-term follow-up, fusion may provide better outcomes. Decompression with a noninstrumented fusion is also a good alternative to improve symptoms in selected patients, potentially decreasing the risk of reoperation compared with an instrumented fusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Satisfactory clinical outcome can be achieved with an isolated decompression in selected patients, avoiding the additional risks and costs of instrumentation and spinal fusion. Noninstrumented fusion is also an interesting alternative to instrumented fusion for well-selected patients to decrease complications related to instrumentation.

What Is the Impact of Center Variability in a Multicenter International Prospective Observational Study on Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip?

BACKGROUND

Little information exists concerning the variability of presentation and differences in treatment methods for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) in children < 18 months. The inherent advantages of prospective multicenter studies are well documented, but data from different centers may differ in terms of important variables such as patient demographics, diagnoses, and treatment or management decisions. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there is a difference in baseline data among the nine centers in five countries affiliated with the International Hip Dysplasia Institute to establish the need to consider the center as a key variable in multicenter studies.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) How do patient demographics differ across participating centers at presentation? (2) How do patient diagnoses (severity and laterality) differ across centers? (3) How do initial treatment approaches differ across participating centers?

METHODS

A multicenter prospective hip dysplasia study database was analyzed from 2010 to April 2015. Patients younger than 6 months of age at diagnosis were included if at least one hip was completely dislocated, whereas patients between 6 and 18 months of age at diagnosis were included with any form of DDH. Participating centers (academic, urban, tertiary care hospitals) span five countries across three continents. Baseline data (patient demographics, diagnosis, swaddling history, baseline International Hip Dysplasia Institute classification, and initial treatment) were compared among all nine centers. A total of 496 patients were enrolled with site enrolment ranging from 10 to 117. The proportion of eligible patients who were enrolled and followed at the nine participating centers was 98%. Patient enrollment rates were similar across all sites, and data collection/completeness for relevant variables at initial presentation was comparable.

RESULTS

In total, 83% of all patients were female (410 of 496), and the median age at presentation was 2.2 months (range, 0-18 months). Breech presentation occurred more often in younger (< 6 months) than in older (6-18 months at diagnosis) patients (30% [96 of 318] versus 9% [15 of 161]; odds ratio [OR], 4.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-7.5; p < 0.001). The Australia site was underrepresented in breech presentation in comparison to the other centers (8% [five of 66] versus 23% [111 of 479]; OR, 0.3, 95% CI, 0.1-0.7; p = 0.034). The largest diagnostic category was < 6 months, dislocated reducible (51% [253 of 496 patients]); however, the Australia and Boston sites had more irreducible dislocations compared with the other sites (ORs, 2.1 and 1.9; 95% CIs, 1.2-3.6 and 1.1-3.4; p = 0.02 and 0.015, respectively). Bilaterality was seen less often in older compared with younger patients (8% [seven of 93] versus 26% [85 of 328]; p < 0.001). The most common diagnostic group was Grade 3 (by International Hip Dysplasia Institute classification), which included 58% (51 of 88) of all classified dislocated hips. Splintage was the primary initial treatment of choice at 80% (395 of 496), but was far more likely in younger compared with older patients (94% [309 of 328] versus 18% [17 of 93]; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

With the lack of strong prognostic indicators for DDH identified to date, the center is an important variable to include as a potential predictor of treatment success or failure.

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of fusion surgery in addition to decompression surgery in patients who have lumbar spinal stenosis, with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis, has not been substantiated in controlled trials.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 247 patients between 50 and 80 years of age who had lumbar spinal stenosis at one or two adjacent vertebral levels to undergo either decompression surgery plus fusion surgery (fusion group) or decompression surgery alone (decompression-alone group). Randomization was stratified according to the presence of preoperative degenerative spondylolisthesis (in 135 patients) or its absence. Outcomes were assessed with the use of patient-reported outcome measures, a 6-minute walk test, and a health economic evaluation. The primary outcome was the score on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI; which ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more severe disability) 2 years after surgery. The primary analysis, which was a per-protocol analysis, did not include the 14 patients who did not receive the assigned treatment and the 5 who were lost to follow-up.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the groups in the mean score on the ODI at 2 years (27 in the fusion group and 24 in the decompression-alone group, P=0.24) or in the results of the 6-minute walk test (397 m in the fusion group and 405 m in the decompression-alone group, P=0.72). Results were similar between patients with and those without spondylolisthesis. Among the patients who had 5 years of follow-up and were eligible for inclusion in the 5-year analysis, there were no significant differences between the groups in clinical outcomes at 5 years. The mean length of hospitalization was 7.4 days in the fusion group and 4.1 days in the decompression-alone group (P<0.001). Operating time was longer, the amount of bleeding was greater, and surgical costs were higher in the fusion group than in the decompression-alone group. During a mean follow-up of 6.5 years, additional lumbar spine surgery was performed in 22% of the patients in the fusion group and in 21% of those in the decompression-alone group.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis, decompression surgery plus fusion surgery did not result in better clinical outcomes at 2 years and 5 years than did decompression surgery alone. (Funded by an Uppsala institutional Avtal om Läkarutbildning och Forskning [Agreement concerning Cooperation on Medical Education and Research] and others; Swedish Spinal Stenosis Study ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01994512.).