Objective To evaluate the short-term effectiveness of local laminectomy and interlaminar lumbar instrumented fusion (ILIF) through a small incision for lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods Between November 2009 and January 2011, 16 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis were treated by local laminectomy and ILIF through a small incision. Therewere 7 males and 9 females with an average age of 52.8 years (range, 49-67 years). Sixteen patients had lumbar degenerative stenosis with an average disease duration of 4 years and 7 months (range, 2 years-9 years and 4 months). Four cases complicated by lateral recessus stenosis, 3 by lumbar disc herniation. Involved segments included L3, 4 in 2 cases, L4, 5 in 4 cases, L5, S1 in 4 cases, L3, 4 and L4, 5 (double segments) in 2 cases, L4, 5 and L5, S1 (double segments) in 4 cases. The effectiveness was evaluated with the pre- and post-operative Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores, Oswestry Disabil ity Index (ODI). The cross-sectional areas of spinal canal were measured by CT scanning and were compared between pre- and post-operation. Results The average operative time was 47 minutes (range, 35-80 minutes); the average blood loss was 145 mL (range, 120-350 mL); and the average hospital ization days were 7.8 days (range, 4-15 days). Cerebrospinal fluid leakage occurred in 1 case, and healing of incisions by first intention was achieved in the others. The patients were followed up 12-22 months (mean, 14.8 months). CT scanning showed interspinous fusion in 14 cases and possible fusion in 2 cases after operation, with an average fusion time of 4.6 months(range, 3-10 months). The postoperative VAS score, ODI, and cross-sectional area were significantly improved when compared with preoperative values (P lt; 0.05). Conclusion The ILIF can promote fusion between spinous processes, provide spine stabil ization, and protect the spinal cord. The procedure has small incision, simple method of fixation and fusion.
Objective To evaluate the clinical outcomes ofa surgical approach for decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis, which was featured with reconstruction of posterior spinal structures and epidural space by spinous process-splitting, less osteotomy, laminar flap and keeping spinal process, lamina, outer ligmentum flavum intact. Methods From October 2001 to April 2003, 39 patients (19 males and 20 females, aging 36 to 77 years with a mean age of 49.6 years with lumbar stenosis underwent the surgical decompression procedure with reconstruction of posterior canal structures and epidural space. The involved locations were L3,4 to L5S1(5 cases),L4,5 to L5S1(18 cases), L4,5(11 cases) and L5S1(5 cases). The course of disease was 3 months to 16 years (40.4 months on average). The clinical outcomes after 1 year of operation Results All patients were followed up from 18 to 36 months. No intraoperative and postoperative complications were observed and all patients were satisfactory with the surgery. Computerized tomography showed that spinal and nerve root canal were satisfactorily enlarged 1 week postoperatively in all cases. Fusion of lamina and spinous process were detected on CT in 87.2% patients (34/39) 3 months after operation. No patients presented re-stenosis of lumbar spine and all patients presented bony fusion 1 year after surgery. Conclusion The approach of the current study was a reliable and effective method in the management of lumbar stenosis, it preserved thecontinuity of spinal process, interspinous ligaments, lamina and ligmentumn flavum and integrality of posterior spinal structures and epidural space. The integrity of the psoterior spinal structures can prevent the scar formation and improve the stability of lmbar spine postoperatively.
Objective To design the surgical strategy of percutaneous full-endoscopic bilateral decompression via unilateral posterior approach for bilateral lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and to evaluate the effectiveness. Methods The percutaneous full-endoscopic bilateral decompression via unilateral posterior approach for bilateral LSS was designed according to the pathological features of LSS. The technique was used to treat 42 patients with LSS between January 2016 and January 2018. There were 18 males and 24 females with an average age of 61.7 years (range, 46-81 years). The duration of symptoms was 1-20 years, with an average of 9.7 years. The surgical segment at L4, 5 were 27 cases, at L5, S1 were 15 cases. The operation time and perioperative complications were recorded. Lumbar X-ray, CT, and MRI examinations were performed at 1 week, 3 months, and 1 year after operation. Visual analogue scale (VAS) score was used to evaluate the low back pain and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI) was used to evaluate the lumbar function, and single continuous walking distance (SCWD) was used to evaluate lower extremity nerve function. The clinical efficacy was evaluated by MacNab criteria at 1 year after operation. Results All patients underwent surgery successfully. The operation time was 68-141 minutes with an average of 98.2 minutes. All 42 patients were followed up 12-24 months with an average of 18.8 months. There were 2 cases of dural tears during operation, and 1 case of transient dysfunction of the lower limbs of the decompression channel after operation. All of them were cured after corresponding treatment. No serious complications such as death, major bleeding, or irreversible nerve injury occurred during follow-up. No segmental instability was found according to postoperative lumbar hyperextension and flexion X-ray films, and postoperative CT and MRI imaging showed that the stenotic lumbar spinal canal was significantly enlarged, and the compression of the nerve root was sufficient. The VAS score of low back pain and leg pain, ODI score, and SCWD at each time point after operation were significantly improved when compared with those before operation (P<0.05); the indexes were significantly improved over time after operation, and the differences were significantly (P<0.05). The clinical efficacy was evaluated by MacNab standard at 1 year after operation, and the results were excellent in 18 cases, good in 20 cases, fair in 3 cases, and poor in 1 case. The excellent and good rate was 90.5%. Conclusion The percutaneous full-endoscopic bilateral decompression via unilateral posterior approach for LSS is a safe and effective procedure. A well-designed surgical strategy and mastery of its technical points are important guarantees for successful operation and satisfactory results.
To investigate the effectiveness and safety of microendoscopic decompression via unilateral approach for lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods Between May 2006 and June 2009, 79 patients with lumbar stenosis were treated and divided into 2 groups: posterior lamina fenestration decompression (group A, n=37), endoscopic decompression via unilateral approach (group B, n=42). There was no significant difference in age, sex, segment level, and disease duration between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The cl inical outcomes were assessed by using the visual analogue scale (VAS) score and Oswestry Disabil ity Index (ODI). The operation time, blood loss, compl ications were compared between 2 groups. Results Operations were successfully performed in all cases. The operation time, blood loss, and drainage volume were (75.0 ± 25.7) minutes, (140.3 ± 54.8) mL, and (46.5 ± 19.7) mL in group A, were (50.4 ± 18.2) minutes, (80.2 ± 35.7) mL, and (12.7 ± 5.3) mL in group B; there were significant differences between 2 groups (P lt; 0.05). All the wounds healed by first intention. All patients were followed up 12-39 months (mean, 16 months). In group A, 1 patient suffered from intervertebral space infection after operation and recovered after conservative treatment; 4 patients had lumbar instabil ity after operation and recovered after lumbar interbody fusion combined with spine system internal fixation. In group B, 2 patients suffered from spinal dural rupture during operation and recovered after corresponding treatment, and no lumbar instabil ity was found. There was no significant difference in VAS score and ODI between 2 groups at preoperation (P gt; 0.05). Both VAS score and ODI were significantly improved at early stage after operation and last follow-up when compared with preoperation in each group (P lt; 0.05). Comparing with group A, there was significant improvement in VAS score at 24 hours postoperatively and in ODI at 1 month postoperatively in group B (P lt; 0.05), but no significant difference was observed at last follow-up (P gt; 0.05). According to cl inical evaluation of ODI mprovement rate, the excellent and good rate was 89.2% in group A and 92.9% in group B, showing no significant difference (χ2=0.896, P=0.827). Conclusion Comparing with posterior decompression surgery, microendoscopic decompression via unilateral approach is one of effective method to treat lumbar stenosis, with less trauma of fenestration yield and good early outcomes.
ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness between unilateral laminotomy and bilateral decompression (ULBD) with unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) and uniportal interlaminar endoscopy (UIE) in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods A clinical data of 52 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, who met the selection criteria and treated with ULBD between March 2021 and November 2022, was retrospectively analyzed. The patients were allocated into UBE group (23 cases) and UIE group (29 cases) according to the surgical methods. There was no significant difference (P>0.05) in age, gender, body mass index, surgical segment, type of lumbar stenosis, and preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), disc height, and dural sac area between the two groups. Perioperative indexes (incision length, operation time, hospital stay, and surgical complications), clinical indicators (VAS score of low back pain, VAS score of leg pain, and ODI before operation and at 3 days, 1 month, 6 months, and 12 months after operation), and imaging indicators (disc height and dural sac area before operation and at 1, 12 months after operation, and dural sac expansion area) were recorded and compared between the two group. Results All operations in both groups were successfully completed. Compared with the UIE group, the UBE group had shorter operation time and longer incision length, with significant differences (P<0.05). But there was no significant difference in hospital stay and incidence of complications between the two groups (P>0.05). All patients were followed up 12-20 months (mean, 14 months). The VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain and ODI after operation significantly improved when compared with preoperative values (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in the above indicators between different time points after operation (P>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups at different time points (P>0.05). Imaging examination showed that there was no significant difference in disc height between the two groups at different time points after operation (P>0.05). However, the dural sac area and dural sac expansion area were significantly larger in the UBE group than in the UIE group (P<0.05). Conclusion ULBD with UBE and UIE can achieve satisfactory effectiveness in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. But the former has more thorough decompression and better dural sac expansion than the latter.
Objective To investigate the technique and effectiveness of modified laminoplasty for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and to explore the application value of modified laminoplasty in maintaining the stability of the spine by comparing with the conventional laminectomy. Methods Fifty-six patients with LSS were included between June 2012 and July 2013, and they were divided into 2 groups: 27 patients underwent modified laminoplasty in group A, and 29 patients received conventional laminectomy in group B. There was no significant difference in sex, age, disease duration, narrow segment, visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back pain and leg pain, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, and walking tolerance between 2 groups (P > 0.05). The postoperative VAS score of low back pain and leg pain, JOA score, walking tolerance, X-ray film, and CT were used to evaluate the clinical results. Results Dural tear occurred in 2?cases of group A and 1 case of group B and were repaired during operation. All incisions primarily healed without infection. The patients were followed up 24-31 months (mean, 24.7 months) in group A, and 24-37 months (mean, 26.2 months) in group B. The bone healing time was 6-12 months (mean, 9 months) in group A. CT showed healing at the junction of spinous process and vertebral plate in group A at 12 months after operation; new scar in varying degre es was observed in group B. At last follow-up, lumbar spondylolisthesis and instability occurred in 4?and 2 cases of group B respectively, and received re-operation. The change value of slip distance was (0.27±0.23) mm in group A and was (0.83±1.22) mm in group B, showing significant difference (t=-2.405, P=0.023). The postoperative JOA score, VAS score, and walking tolerance were significantly improved when compared with preoperative ones in 2 groups (P < 0.05).?At?last follow-up, group A was better than group B in VAS score of low back pain (P < 0.05), but no significant?difference?was?found in the other indexes between 2 groups (P > 0.05). Conclusion The modified laminoplasty?is better than the conventional laminectomy in relieving low back pain and maintaining the stability of the lumbar spine.
Objective To compare the effectiveness between unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) and endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (Endo-TLIF) in treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis combined with intervertebral disc herniation. Methods A clinical data of 64 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis and intervertebral disc herniation, who were admitted between April 2020 and November 2021 and met the selection criteria, was retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 30 patients were treated with ULIF (ULIF group) and 34 patients with Endo-TLIF (Endo-TLIF group). There was no significant difference in baseline data such as gender, age, disease duration, lesion segment, preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back pain and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), spinal canal area, and intervertebral space height between the two groups (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stays, and postoperative complications were compared between the two groups, as well as the VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain, ODI, and imaging measurement indicators (spinal canal area, intervertebral bone graft area, intervertebral space height, and degree of intervertebral fusion according to modified Brantigan score). Results Compared with the Endo-TLIF group, the ULIF group had shorter operation time, but had more intraoperative blood loss and longer hospital stays, with significant differences (P<0.05). The cerebrospinal fluid leakage occurred in 2 cases of Endo-TLIF group and 1 case of ULIF group, and no other complication occurred. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (P>0.05). All patients in the two groups were followed up 12 months. The VAS scores of lower back pain and leg pain and ODI in the two groups significantly improved when compared with those before operation (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference between different time points after operation (P>0.05). And there was no significant difference between the two groups at each time point after operation (P>0.05). Imaging examination showed that there was no significant difference between the two groups in the change of spinal canal area, the change of intervertebral space height, and intervertebral fusion rate at 6 and 12 months (P>0.05). The intervertebral bone graft area in the ULIF group was significantly larger than that in the Endo-TLIF group (P<0.05). ConclusionFor the patients with lumbar spinal stenosis combined with intervertebral disc herniation, ULIF not only achieves similar effectiveness as Endo-TLIF, but also has advantages such as higher decompression efficiency, flexible surgical instrument operation, more thorough intraoperative intervertebral space management, and shorter operation time.
Objective To discuss the main points of technique and the range of fusion in posterior operation of spinal stenosis associated with lumbar degenerative kyphosis (LDK). Methods The cl inical data were retrospectively analysedfrom 20 cases of spinal stenosis associated with LDK which were performed posterior operation from February 2001 to February 2008. There were 1 male and 19 females, aged 52-81 years old with an average of 64 years old. The course of disease was 6-10 years. All patients had severe low back pain. According to Frankel’s neurologic function classification, there were 18 cases of grade E and 2 cases of grade D before operation. The apex of LDK included L1 in 3 cases, L2 in 10 and L3 in 7. The operational method was decided according to different characteristics of LDK. All patients were divided into three groups. Group 1 included 6 cases of sciatica and intermittent claudication with worse physical status, the segmental decompression of spinal canal, posterior intervertebral fusion and short transpedical instrument fixation were performed. Group 2 included 8 cases whose Cobb angle of LDK was less than 20°, the segmental decompression of spinal canal, posterior intervertebral fusion and one-level or multilevel lamina osteotomy were performed, instrumentation-assisted correction was used. Group 3 included 6 cases whose Cobb angle of LDK was more than 20°, the canal decompression and one-level transvertebral wedge osteotomy were performed, instrumentation-assisted correction, intervertebral fusion and posterior-lateral fusion were used. Results Incision healedby first intention in all patients. One patient suffered from superior mesenteric artery syndrome at 6 hours after operationand healed after symptomatic management. The neurologic function was improved to grade E at 2 weeks after opeartion. All patients were followed-up 24-54 months (average 26 months). At last follow-up，the Oswestry Disabil ity Index of all patients was 30.5% ± 9.6%; showing significant difference when compared with preoperation (55.9% ± 11.8%, P lt; 0.05). The back pain scoring and leg pain scoring were 2.8 ± 1.6 and 2.4 ± 1.6, respectively according to the Numeric Rating Scale score; showing significant differences when compared with preoperation (7.5 ± 0.5 and 7.3 ± 0.7, P lt; 0.05). The Numeric Rating Scale score and Oswestry Disabil ity Index in all patients were improved obviously when compared with before operation (P lt; 0.05). During the follow-up period, there was no instrumentation failure or correction loss and the fusion rate was up to 100%. Conclusion For spinal stenosis associated with LDK patients, the most important therapic purpose is to improve cl inical symptom through reconstruction lumbar stabil ization and spinal biomechanics l ine in sagittal plane. Overall estimate of the cl inical appearance and imageology character is necessary when making decision of which segments needed to be fixation and fusion. Individual ized treatment strategy may be the best choice.
ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of body mass index (BMI) on the outcome of posterior 360° fusion for single-level lumbar degenerative diseases. MethodsA retrospective study was carried on 302 cases of singlelevel lumbar degenerative diseases treated with posterior 360° fusion between September 2009 and September 2013. All patients were divided into 3 groups according to BMI: normal weight (BMI<24 kg/m2) in 105 cases (group A), overweight (24 kg/m2≤BMI< 28 kg/m2) in 108 cases (group B), and obese (BMI≥28 kg/m2) in 89 cases (group C). There was no significant difference in gender, age, disease duration, disease patterns, affected segments, preoperative Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score and Oswestry disability index (ODI) among 3 groups (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and complications were recorded. The lumbar function was assessed by JOA score and ODI at pre- and post-operation (at 3, 6, and 24 months). ResultsThe operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative hospital stay of group C were significantly more than those of groups A and B (P<0.05), but no significant difference was found between group A and group B (P>0.05). The patients were followed up 24-45 months. Postoperative JOA score and ODI showed significant improvements in each group when compared with preoperative ones (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference among groups at each time point after operation (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of total complications among 3 groups (χ2=3.288, P=0.193). The incidence of incision-related complications (infection and poor healing) in group C was significantly higher than that of groups A and B (P<0.05), but no significant difference was shown between group A and group B (P>0.05). However, there was no significant difference in cerebrospinal fluid leak, pseudarthrosis formation, and revision among 3 groups (P>0.05). ConclusionPosterior 360° fusion for single-level lumbar degenerative diseases can obtain good effectiveness in patients with different BMI, but patients whose BMI was ≥28 kg/m2 have longer operation time, more intraoperative blood loss, longer hospital stay, and higher incidence of postoperative incision-related complications.
ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) with bilateral decompression via unilateral approach and bilateral decompression via bilateral approaches in the treatment of single-segment lumbar spinal stenosis.MethodsBetween February 2015 and January 2017, 70 cases of single-segment lumbar spinal stenosis were treated with MIS-TLIF. The bilateral decompression via unilateral approach (group U) was performed in 36 cases and bilateral decompression via bilateral approaches (group B) in 34 cases. There was no significant difference in age, gender, body mass index, disease duration, distribution of responsibility segments, preoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) score of low back pain and leg pain and Oswestry disability index (ODI) score (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospitalization stay after operation, complications related to operation, incidence of asymptomatic lateral root symptoms, VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain, and ODI score before and after operation were compared between the two groups. X-ray film and CT scan at 12 months after operation were used to assessted the intervertebral bony fusion.ResultsThe operation time and intraoperative blood loss in group U were significantly less than those in group B (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in hospitalization stay after operation between the two groups (t=–0.311, P=0.757). During the operation, 1 case in group U and 2 cases in group B had dural tear. No screw placement related nerve injury or asymptomatic lateral root symptoms occurred after operation. The patients were followed up 24 to 38 months, with an average of 32.8 months in group U and 35.5 months in group B. The VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain at 2 days, 3, 6, and 12 months after operation were significantly lower than that before operation in the two groups (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). The ODI scores at 3, 6 and 12 months after operation were significantly lower than that before operation in the two groups (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05). Radiographic examination showed interbody fusion at 12 months after operation in the two groups.ConclusionMIS-TLIF is safe and effective in the treatment of single-segment lumbar spinal stenosis with bilateral decompression via unilateral approach and bilateral decompression via bilateral approaches. Bilateral decompression via unilateral approach takes less operation time and has less intraoperative blood loss.