Outcome after Surgery of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: a Randomized Comparison of Bilateral Laminotomy, Trumpet Laminectomy, and Conventional Laminectomy

被引:28
|
作者
Haddadi, Kaveh [1 ]
Qazvini, Hamid Reza Ganjeh [2 ]
机构
[1] Mazandaran Univ Med Sci, Emam Hosp, Diabet Res Ctr, Dept Neurosurg, Sari, Iran
[2] Mazandaran Univ Med Sci, Fac Med, Dept Neurosurg, Sari, Iran
来源
FRONTIERS IN SURGERY | 2016年 / 3卷
关键词
lumbar stenosis; outcome; laminectomy; laminotomy; trumpet;
D O I
10.3389/fsurg.2016.00019
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Laminectomy is the traditional operating method for the decompression of spinal canal stenosis. New partial decompression processes have been suggested in the treatment of lumbar stenosis. The benefit of a micro surgical approach is the chance of an extensive bilateral decompression of the spinal canal or foramen at one or numerous levels, through a minimal para-spinal muscular separation. Purpose: To match the safety and the clinical consequences after a bilateral laminotomy, laminectomy and trumpet laminectomy in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis who were randomized to one of three treatment groups. Study design: Prospective study. Methods: One hundred twenty consecutive patients with 227 levels of lumbar stenosis without significant herniated discs or instability were randomized to three treatment groups [bilateral laminotomy (Group 1), laminectomy (Group 2), and trumpet laminectomy (Group 3)]. Perioperative parameters and complications were documented. Symptoms and scores, such as a visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index, and patient satisfaction, were assessed preoperatively at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Adequate decompression was achieved in all patients on the basis of surgeon satisfaction. Results: The global complication rate was lowest in patients who had undertaken bilateral laminotomy (Group 1). The minimum follow-up of 12 months was achieved in 100% of patients. Matched with that experience in Group 1, but, with more remaining back and leg pain was found in Group 2, 3.85 +/- 0.28 and 1.60 +/- 0.44, respectively and 3.24 +/- 0.22 and 2.44 +/- 0.26 in Group 3, respectively compared with 1.84 +/- 0.28 and 1.25 +/- 0.12 (Group 1) at the 1-year follow-up assessment (p < 0.05). It was the same for the ODI scores, which reached 14 +/- 8% (Group 1), 28 +/- 12% (Group 2), and 26 +/- 16 after 12 months of surgery (Group 3) (significant, p < 0.01 compared with preoperative scores). Patient satisfaction was higher in Group 1, with 7.5, 20, and 25% of patients displeased (in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively; p < 0.01). Conclusion: Bilateral Laminotomy is certified acceptable and harmless in decompression of lumbar stenosis, causing a highly significant decrease of symptoms and disability.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Outcome after less-invasive decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis:: a randomized comparison of unilateral laminotomy, bilateral laminotomy, and laminectomy
    Thomé, C
    Zevgaridis, D
    Leheta, O
    Bäzner, H
    Pöckler-Schöniger, C
    Wöhrle, J
    Schmiedek, P
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2005, 3 (02) : 129 - 141
  • [2] Long-Term Outcome after Less Invasive Surgery for Decompression of Lumbar Stenosis - A Randomized Comparison of Unilateral Laminotomy, Bilateral Laminotomy and Laminectomy
    Thome, Claudius
    Schubert, Gerrit A.
    Stier, Reinhard
    Hegewald, Aldemar A.
    Schmiedek, Peter
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2010, 113 (02) : A432 - A433
  • [3] Bilateral laminotomy and laminectomy with fusion for lumbar stenosis
    Wiwanitkit, Viroj
    NEUROLOGY ASIA, 2010, 15 (03) : 287 - 287
  • [4] TRUMPET LAMINECTOMY FOR LUMBAR DEGENERATIVE SPINAL STENOSIS
    KANAMORI, M
    MATSUI, H
    HIRANO, N
    KAWAGUCHI, Y
    KITAMOTO, R
    TSUJI, H
    JOURNAL OF SPINAL DISORDERS, 1993, 6 (03): : 232 - 237
  • [5] A comparative study of bilateral laminotomy and laminectomy with fusion for lumbar stenosis
    Mahadewa, Tjokorda G. B.
    Maliawan, Sri
    Sudewi, A. A. Raka
    Senapathi, Tjokorda G. A.
    NEUROLOGY ASIA, 2010, 15 (02) : 153 - 158
  • [6] Outcomes after decompressive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: comparison between minimally invasive unilateral laminectomy for bilateral decompression and open laminectomy
    Mobbs, Ralph Jasper
    Li, Jane
    Sivabalan, Praveenan
    Raley, Darryl
    Rao, Prashanth J.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY-SPINE, 2014, 21 (02) : 179 - 186
  • [7] Comparison of Spinous Process-Splitting Laminectomy versus Conventional Laminectomy for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
    Uehara, Masashi
    Takahashi, Jun
    Hashidate, Hiroyuki
    Mukaiyama, Keijiro
    Kuraishi, Shugo
    Shimizu, Masayuki
    Ikegami, Shota
    Futatsugi, Toshimasa
    Ogihara, Nobuhide
    Hirabayashi, Hiroki
    Kato, Hiroyuki
    ASIAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2014, 8 (06) : 768 - 776
  • [8] Comparison of the Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Full-Endoscopic Laminotomy and Conventional Subtotal Laminectomy for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Randomized Controlled Trial
    Kim, Jung-Hoon
    Kim, Young-Jin
    Ryu, Kyeong-Sik
    Kim, Jin-Sung
    GLOBAL SPINE JOURNAL, 2024, 14 (06) : 1760 - 1770
  • [9] Comparison of posterior decompression techniques and conventional laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis
    Zhang, Yong
    Wei, Fei-Long
    Liu, Zhi-Xin
    Zhou, Cheng-Pei
    Du, Ming-Rui
    Quan, Jian
    Wang, Yan-Peng
    FRONTIERS IN SURGERY, 2022, 9
  • [10] Bilateral laminotomy through a unilateral approach (minimally invasive) versus open laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis
    Horan, Jack
    Ben Husien, Mohammed
    Bolger, Ciaran
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2021, 35 (02) : 161 - 165