PDF
ePub
Citation
Print
Abstract
Objectives
To analyze and compare the clinical results of different surgical methods for spinal stenosis, without lumbar instability, in patients over 70 years- old.
Summary of Literature Review
Much controversy exists as to the best operative method for spinal stenosis.
Materials and Methods
Thirty eight patients that had undergone surgical treatment for spinal stenosis, without lumbar spinal instability, with a mean age of 75.1years(70 to 91years) and follow up period was 44 months(24 to 52 months), were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were divided into two groups:∗Group A (n=23): posterior decompression alone ∗Group B (n=15): posterior decompression and posterolateral fusion Clinical outcome and satisfaction were assessed using Bohlman's measurements, on a 10 point pain rating scale, and the clinical outcomes were further analyzed according to the co- morbidity and postoperative complications.
Results
Clinically excellent and good outcomes were achieved in 86.9 and 80.0% in groups A and B, respectively. The 10- points pain scale for low back pain showed improvements in both groups. The co- morbidity did not influence the clinical outcome in either group. There were no serious postoperative complications in either group.
REFERENCES
1). Ragab AA, Fye MA, Bohlman HH. Surgery of the Lumbar Spine for Spinal Stenosis in 118 Patients 70 Years of Age or Older. Spine. 2003; 28(4):348–353.
2). Verbiest H. Spinal stenosis: the concept: Lumbar spinal stenosis. st.Louis: Mosby;p. 1–7. 1992.
3). Epstein JA, Epstein BS, Lavine LS, Carras R, Rosen-thal AD and Sumnar P. Lumbar nerve root compression at the intervertebral foramina caused by arthritis of the posterior facets. J Neurusurg. 1973; 39:362.
4). Kirkaldy-Wilis WH, Paine KWE, Cauchoix J and Mclvor G. Lumbar spinal stenosis, Clin Orthop. 1974; 99:30–52.
5). Schatzker J, Pennal GF. Spinal stenosis, A cause of cauda equina compression. J Bone Joint Surg. 1968; 50-B:606–615.
6). Verbiest H. Result of surgical treatment of idiopathic developmental stenosis of the lumbar vertebra canal. A result of twenty-seven years experience. J Bone Joint Surg. 1977; 59-B:181–192.
7). Katz JN, Lipson SJ, Chang LC, Levine SA, Fossel AH, Liang MH. Seven- to 10-year outcome of decompressive surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine. 1996; 21(1):92–8.
8). Olmarker K, Rydevik B. Single-Versus Double-Level Nerve Root Compression An Experimental Study on the Porcine Cauda Equina With Analysis of Nerve Impulse Conduction Properties. Clin Orthop and Related Research. 35-39:1991.
9). Shin Byung Joon, Shin Young Soo, Kwon Hee, Yim Soo Jae, Kim Dong Soo and Choi Chang Uk. T h e Results of Treatment of Multilevel Spinal Stenosis - Com -plete Level Surgery versus Limited Level Surgery- J Kor Soc Spine Surg. 1996; 3:161–168.
10). Katz JN, Lipson MSJ, Lew RA, et al. Lumbar Laminectomy Alone or With Instrumented or Noninstrumented Arthrodesis in Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Patient Selection, Costs, and Surgical outcomes. Spine. 1997; 22:1123–1131.
11). Simpson JM, Silveri CP, Balderston RA, et al. Th e Results of operations on the lumbar spine in patients who have diabetes mellitus. J Bone Joint Surg. 1993; 75:1823–9.
12). Cinotti G, Postacchini F, Weinstein JN. Lumbar spinal stenosis and diabetes: Outcome of surgical decompression. J Bone Joint Surg. 1994; 76:215–9.
Table 1.
Clinical Outcome Measurement (by Ragab, et al.1))
| Back Pain | Leg Pain | Activity | Medication | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Excellent | Occasional | None | Normal | None |
| Good | Mild | Mild | Normal | NSAID |
| Fair | Moderate | Moderate | Restricted | NSAID |
| Poor | Severe | Severe | Restricted | Narcotics |
Table 2.
American Society of Anesthesiologists Classification of Physical Status
XML Download