Comparative observational study of surgical outcomes of lumbar foraminal stenosis using minimally invasive microsurgical extraforaminal decompression alone versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a prospective cohort study

被引:24
|
作者
Kim, Ho-Joong [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Jeong, Jin-Hwa [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Cho, Hyeon-Guk [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Chang, Bong-Soon [4 ,5 ]
Lee, Choon-Ki [4 ,5 ]
Yeom, Jin S. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Seoul Natl Univ Coll Med, Spine Ctr, Songnam 463707, South Korea
[2] Seoul Natl Univ Coll Med, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Songnam 463707, South Korea
[3] Seoul Natl Univ Bundang Hosp, Songnam 463707, South Korea
[4] Seoul Natl Univ Coll Med, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Seoul 110744, South Korea
[5] Seoul Natl Univ Hosp, Seoul 110744, South Korea
关键词
Lumbar foraminal stenosis; Microsurgical extraforaminal decompression; Posterior lumbar interbody fusion; SPINAL STENOSIS;
D O I
10.1007/s00586-014-3592-4
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
There is no comparative study regarding surgical outcomes between microsurgical extraforaminal decompression (MeFD) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) for the treatment of lumbar foraminal stenosis (LFS). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes of LFS using two different techniques: MeFD alone or PLIF. For the purposes of this study, a prospectively collected observational cohort study was conducted. Fifty-five patients diagnosed with LFS who were scheduled to undergo spinal surgery were included in this study. According to the chosen surgical technique, patients were assigned to either the MeFD group (n = 25) or the PLIF group (n = 30). The primary outcome was Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score at 1 year after surgery. The baseline patient characteristics and preoperative ODI score, visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back and leg pain, and Short Form-36 score were not significantly different between the two groups. At 12 months postoperative, the mean ODI score in the MeFD and PLIF groups was 25.68 +/- A 14.49 and 27.20 +/- A 12.56, respectively, and the 95 % confidence interval (-9.76-6.73) was within the predetermined margin of equivalence. The overall ODI score and VAS scores for back and leg pain did not differ significantly over the follow-up assessment time between the two groups. However, the ODI score and VAS scores for back and leg pain improved significantly over time after surgery in both groups. In the MeFD group, revision surgery was required in three patients (12 %). This study demonstrated that MeFD alone and PLIF have equivalent outcomes regarding improvement in disability at 1 year after surgery. However, the higher rate of revision surgery in the MeFD group should emphasize the technically optimal amount of decompression.
引用
收藏
页码:388 / 395
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A comparative study of two reconstruction procedures for osteoporotic vertebral fracture with lumbar spinal stenosis: Posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus posterior and anterior and combined surgery
    Machino, Masaaki
    Ando, Kei
    Kobayashi, Kazuyoshi
    Ota, Kyotaro
    Morozumi, Masayoshi
    Tanaka, Satoshi
    Ito, Keigo
    Kato, Fumihiko
    Ishiguro, Naoki
    Imagama, Shiro
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SCIENCE, 2020, 25 (01) : 52 - 57
  • [42] Clinical Efficacy of Bilateral Decompression Using Biportal Endoscopic Versus Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Degenerative Diseases
    Song, Xin
    Ren, Zhinan
    Cao, Shuyan
    Zhou, Weiwei
    Hao, Yingjie
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2023, 173 : E371 - E377
  • [43] Indirect foraminal decompression after anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a prospective radiographic study using a new pedicle-to-pedicle technique
    Rao, Prashanth J.
    Maharaj, Monish M.
    Phan, Kevin
    Abeygunasekara, Manil Lakshan
    Mobbs, Ralph J.
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2015, 15 (05): : 817 - 824
  • [44] Comparative Effectiveness and Economic Evaluations of Open Versus Minimally Invasive Posterior or Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion A Systematic Review
    Goldstein, Christina L.
    Phillips, Frank M.
    Rampersaud, Y. Raja
    SPINE, 2016, 41 (08) : S74 - S89
  • [45] Posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion in spondylolisthesis: a prospective controlled study in the Han nationality
    Cheng, Lei
    Nie, Lin
    Zhang, Li
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2009, 33 (04) : 1043 - 1047
  • [46] Posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion in spondylolisthesis: a prospective controlled study in the Han nationality
    Lei Cheng
    Lin Nie
    Li Zhang
    International Orthopaedics, 2009, 33 : 1043 - 1047
  • [47] Radiographic and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Lordotic Versus Non-lordotic Static Interbody Devices in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Longitudinal Comparative Cohort Study
    Lawless, Michael H.
    Claus, Chad F.
    Tong, Doris
    Jordan, Noah
    Dosanjh, Amarpal
    Hanson, Connor T.
    Carr, Daniel A.
    Houseman, Clifford M.
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2022, 14 (01)
  • [48] Recovery pattern after decompression of central lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective observational cohort study
    Hareni, Niyaz
    Ebrahimnia, Soheil
    Rosengren, Bjoern E.
    Karlsson, Magnus K.
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH, 2024, 19 (01)
  • [49] Recovery pattern after decompression of central lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective observational cohort study
    Niyaz Hareni
    Soheil Ebrahimnia
    Björn E. Rosengren
    Magnus K. Karlsson
    Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 19
  • [50] Midline Lumbar Fusion Versus Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Involving L5-S1 For Degenerative Lumbar Diseases: A Comparative Study
    Wang, Yuetian
    Feng, Tianhao
    Wang, Shijun
    Fu, Haoyong
    Li, Chunde
    Sun, Haolin
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2023, 172 : E86 - E93