Decompression versus decompression plus fusion for treating degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundDegenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) is a complex clinical syndrome that leads to spinal compression. Decompression with fusion has been the most commonly used surgical procedure for treating DLSS symptoms for many years. However, the exact role of fusion and its effectiveness in DLSS therapy has recently been debated. ObjectiveThe main purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of decompression alone and decompression plus fusion in the treatment of DLSS with or without spondylolisthesis. Study DesignA systematic review and meta-analysis of the therapeutic effects of decompression for DLSS with or without the combination of fusion. MethodsA literature search in five relevant databases, including Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Cochrane Library was performed from the inception of the database to March 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the comparison between decompression and decompression plus fusion for DLSS were included. ResultsA total of seven studies, 894 patients were analyzed in this meta-analysis. Among these, 443 patients were included in the decompression plus fusion group while 451 patients were included in the decompression alone group. Pooled analysis showed that the combination of decompression with fusion had no superior benefits to decompression alone in terms of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score in the first 2 years and long-term follow-up after surgery, also no significant difference in the improvement of back and leg pain was found between two groups. Adding fusion to decompression was associated with a longer operation time, higher complication rate, more blood loss, and extended hospital stay. Furthermore, there was no difference in reoperation rates and patients' satisfaction between the two groups at the last follow-up. ConclusionDecompression plus fusion may not be associated with a better clinical outcome in ODI scores and back or leg pain improvement but with a longer duration of operation time, extended hospital stay, and more blood loss.