Institute of Public Health and Clinical Nutrition, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland 3

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Institute of Public Health and Clinical Nutrition, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland 3"

Transcription

1 Scandinavian Journal of Surgery 101: , 2012 Preoperative predictors for good postoperative satisfaction and functional outcome in lumbar spinal stenosis surgery a prospective observational study with a two-year follow-up T. Aalto 1, S. Sinikallio 2, H. Kröger 3, H. Viinamäki 4, A. Herno 5, V. Leinonen 6, V. Turunen 7, S. Savolainen 6, O. Airaksinen 5 1 Kyyhkylä Rehabilitation Center and Hospital, Mikkeli, Finland 2 Institute of Public Health and Clinical Nutrition, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland 3 Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Kuopio University Hospital and Bone Cartilage Research Unit, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland 4 Institute of Clinical Medicine, Psychiatry. University of Eastern Finland and Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland 5 Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland 6 Department of Neurosurgery, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland 7 Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland Abstract Background and Aims: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is the most frequent indication for back surgery in adults aged over 65 years, but about one-third of operated patients have less than good/excellent results from the operation. Awareness of outcome predictors and their predictive values may help clinicians in their assessment of the prognosis of patients when considering surgical treatment. Our aim was to study the preoperative predictors in LSS for a good postoperative outcome (satisfaction with surgery and functional improvement) with a two-year follow-up. Material and Methods: LSS patients (n = 102) completed a questionnaire preoperatively and on two-year follow-up. Preoperative patient-related predictors, self-rated health, comorbidities and preoperative treatment were assessed. Satisfaction with the surgical outcome was assessed with a seven-category scale; satisfaction was determined to be good if the patient response was condition has considerably improved or totally cured. Other responses ( condition has slightly improved or worse) represented poorer satisfaction. A good functional outcome was determined as > 30% relative improvement compared to the presurgery score in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Results: The predictors for good satisfaction were age < 75 years at operation (OR 4.03; 95% CI ; p = 0.012) and no previous lumbar operation (OR 3.65; 95% CI ; p = 0.031). Predictors for a good improvement in the ODI score were regular preoperative analgesic use < 12 months (OR 3.40; 95% CI ; p = 0.020), non-smoking (OR 3.47; 95% CI ; p = 0.035) and good (above average) self-rated health (OR 3.27; 95% CI ; p = 0.039). Correspondence: Timo J. Aalto, M.D. Kyyhkylä Rehabilitation Center Kyyhkyläntie 9 FI Mikkeli, Finland timo.aalto@kyyhkyla.fi

2 256 T. Aalto, S. Sinikallio, H. Kröger, et al. Conclusions: In LSS, regular analgesic treatment preoperatively for 12 months or less, self-rated health above average and non-smoking predicted a good postoperative functional improvement. An age under 75 years and no previous lumbar operation predicted good postoperative satisfaction with the surgery. Key words: Lumbar stenosis; surgical treatment; predictor factor, outcome; satisfaction; disability Introduction Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is the most frequent indication for spinal surgery in the elderly (1), but one-third of operated patients have less than good/ excellent results from the operation (2 6). The critical decision on whether and when to consider decompressive surgery requires an understanding of the expected surgical outcome, this being based extensively on radiological stenotic findings accompanied by coherent clinical symptoms. In addition, other preoperative factors also predict the postoperative outcome of spinal surgery (5, 7 10). Awareness of the predictors and their predictive values may help clinicians in their assessment of prognosis of patients when considering surgical treatment. In this study we examined the predictive value of eighteen preoperative factors in LSS with respect to good patient satisfaction with surgery and a good improvement of functional ability two years postoperatively. Material and methods The prospective study included 102 patients with clinically and radiologically defined LSS (9 10). Briefly, selection for surgery was made by the orthopaedist or neurosurgeon at Kuopio University Hospital between October 2001 and October The inclusion criteria were: 1) presence of back, buttock, and/or lower extremity pain, with radiographic evidence (computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or rhizography) of compression of the cauda equina and/or exiting nerve roots due to degenerative changes (ligamentum flavum, facet joints, osteophytes and/or disc material) (11 13) and 2) the surgeon s judgement that the patient had clinically significant degenerative LSS as the main diagnosis indicative for operative treatment (11). In addition, all the patients had a history of ineffective responses to conservative treatment. A previous spine operation or co-existing disc herniation was permitted; however, LSS still had to be the main diagnosis for the operation. The exclusion criteria included emergency or urgent spinal operation precluding recruitment and protocol investigations; cognitive impairment prohibiting completion of the questionnaires or other failures in co-operation; and the presence of metallic particles in the body preventing the MRI investigation. The surgeons sent the information about patients eligible for the operation to the Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (DPRM), which organised the study. The patients received an account of the study during their outpatient visit to the Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine and provided informed consent. The study design was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Kuopio and Kuopio University Hospital. Predictors Predictors were gathered from responses in the prospectively collected preoperative questionnaire unless otherwise stated. The patient-related predictors were age (years at operation), gender, body mass index (kg/m 2 ), smoking (0 = never, 1 = I have stopped smoking, 2 = yes, occasionally and 3 = yes, regularly); marital status (1 = married, 2 = cohabiting, 3 = single, 4 = widowed and 5 = divorced) and education (1 = secondary or higher degree examination, 0 = lower grade schooling). The self-rated health of the patients was assessed with the question How would you rate your health at present? (0 = good, 1 = quite good, 2 = average, 3 = quite poor and 4 = poor), modified from Katz et al. (14). Comorbidity affecting walking ability was assessed using preoperative medical charts of study visits, medical charts of surgeons and the Work Ability Index (WAI; patients reporting musculoskeletal diseases) (15) as a means to detect clear objective disability affecting walking performance, in addition to LSS. Five patients had symptomatic knee arthrosis, two had symptomatic hip arthrosis, one had both knee and hip-arthrosis and two had rheumatoid arthritis. The self-reported number of current or recurring diseases diagnosed by a physician, i.e. number of comorbidities, was assessed using the WAI (15). Diabetes (y/n; type 2) was classified separately from the WAI score. With respect to preoperative treatment, the question Have you performed self-acting back exercises? (yes/ no) was included. The frequency of analgesic use was assessed with the question Have you used analgesics during the last month? (0 = no, 1 = occasionally, 2 = about once a week, 3 = a few times a week, 4 = daily or almost daily and 5 = I use analgesics continually at the maximum doses). The duration of preoperative analgesic use was assessed with the question How long have you regularly used analgesics for your back problem or radiating pain to the lower extremities? (0 = no use of analgesics or under one month, 1 = 1 3 months, 2 = 3 6 months, 3 = 6 12 months and 4 = over one year). In-patient rehabilitation due to back problems and the preoperative use of a supportive belt during the previous year (0 = no, 1 = occasionally, 2 = about once a week, 3 = a few times a week, 4 = daily or almost daily) were evaluated. Previous lumbar operations were recorded retrospectively using medical charts. The predictors were dichotomised in order to use clinically oriented cut-off limits (Table 1A and 2A). With respect to age, 75 years was chosen as a cut-off (16). In order to calculate the body mass index (BMI), the height and weight were measured preoperatively. A BMI of 30 kg/m 2 is considered as the border between slight and moderate obesity (17). With respect to comorbidities, the mean split of the data was used. Concerning the duration of regular preoperative use of analgesics for back and/or leg pain (paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), codeine, tramadol, and/or anticonvulsants), all cut-offs (3, 6 and 12 months) were examined.

3 Preoperative predictors for good postoperative satisfaction and functional outcome 257 Outcome measures and the definition of a good outcome on two-year follow-up Satisfaction with the surgical outcome was assessed using a seven-category scale as follows: 3 = surgery was a total failure, 2 = condition is now considerably worse, 1 = condition is now slightly worse, 0 = no change, 1 = condition has slightly improved, 2 = condition has considerably improved and 3 = totally cured. With respect to satisfaction, a good outcome consisted of those patients who were either totally cured or reported condition considerably improved, whereas a worse outcome consisted of the other responses (10). A good outcome in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI, 0 100%) (18 19) was considered as a >30% improvement over the pre-surgery score ((postsurgery score presurgery score)/presurgery score) x 100%; modified from Mannion et al. (20)). Treatment before surgery Sixty-eight patients had been provided with self-acting back exercises (any source). For back and/or leg pain, 88 patients had used NSAIDs or paracetamol, 47 tramadol or codeine and 10 patients were prescribed anticonvulsants. Thirty-seven patients used analgesics daily or almost daily, and 24 patients reported continuous use at maximum doses. No strong opioids were used. Sixty patients had used analgesics regularly during the previous 12 months. Fortyfour patients had undergone in-patient rehabilitation due to their back problem. A supportive belt had been used by 25 patients during the previous 12 months, and 16 patients had undergone a prior lumbar operation. Surgical treatment The patients had (on average) severe symptoms due to LSS: preoperatively, the mean ODI was 43.9%, and leg pain on walking and back pain at rest (median; numeric rating scale 0 10; mean during previous week) were rated as 7 and 4, respectively. All the patients had open or microscopic decompressive surgery of the affected level(s), i.e. laminotomy, hemilaminectomy or laminectomy, with undercutting facetectomy due to lateral (n = 18) or both central and lateral (n = 84) LSS, with a mean dural sac area of 68.6 mm 2 at the most stenotic level. In addition to laminar decompression, disc excision was also performed in seven cases (one at level 2 3; one at level 3 4; four at level L4 5 and one at level L5 S1); LSS due other degenerative stenotic changes was also the main diagnosis in these patients. Lumbar fusion, two with instrumentation, was included in the decompression procedure in 19 cases. The indication for additional lumbar fusion was concomitant spondylolisthesis. Statistical analysis Univariate analysis (Pearson chi-squared) was applied to investigate the significance level for each predictor. Following univariate analysis, predictors with a significance level p < 0.1 were included in a binary logistic multivariate model to adjust for intervariable associations. Statistical significance was accepted at the p < 0.05 level, and significant predictors in the multivariate models were considered as the main results. All the patients (n = 102) were evaluated preoperatively. Drop-outs were excluded from the analysis (1 patient). To ensure maximum statistical power, the data from the latest follow-up of four patients who had died before the two-year follow-up were included in the analysis (representing 6 12-month postoperative follow-up data on these patients; data not shown). Thus, the data of 101 patients were finally analysed. Results Of the 102 patients, eighty-two (80%) were operated under the age of 75 years. There were 59 females and 43 males. BMI was under 30 in 46 (45%) patients. Twenty patients (20%) smoked either occasionally or regularly. Sixty-five patients (64%) were married or living with a partner. At least secondary-level education was reported in 39 (38%) patients. Self-rated health was good or quite good in 27 (26%) of the 102 patients before the operation. More than five comorbidities were reported by 55 patients (54%). Ten patients (10%) had a comorbidity affecting their walking ability, and eleven patients (11%) had type 2 diabetes. In 101 patients with follow-up data, good satisfaction with the surgical outcome was reported by 63.4% of the patients (Table 1A). The mean ODI improved from the preoperative level (43.9%) by 17.4 percentage points at the two-year follow-up (p < , t- test), and 62.4% achieved a good outcome in the improvement (> 30%) of disability (Table 2A). This corresponded to an 8 56 percentage point improvement in ODI scores in this study population. The distribution of the predictors (data not imputed) in the good and worse outcome study groups, and univariate analysis are presented in Table 1A (Satisfaction) and Table 2A (ODI). Multivariate models (Tables 1B and 2B) Predictors for good satisfaction were age < 75 years at operation (OR 4.03; 95% CI ; p = 0.012) and no previous lumbar operation (OR 3.65; 95% CI ; p = 0.031). Predictors for good improvement in the ODI were regular preoperative analgesic use < 12 months (OR 3.40; 95% CI ; p = 0.020), non-smoking (OR 3.47; 95% CI ; p = 0.035) and self-rated health above average (OR 3.27; 95% CI ; p = 0.039). The percentage of highly satisfied patients was 69.1% among the patient group < 75 years and 40.0% among the patient group 75 years. The respective percentages for a good improvement in the ODI were 55.0% and 64.2% (p = ns). The percentage of highly satisfied patients was 68.2% among patients without a previous lumbar operation and 37.5% among patients with a previous lumbar operation. The respective percentages for a good improvement in the ODI were 65.9% and 43.8% (p = ns). The percentage of patients reporting a good improvement in the ODI was 78.9% among the patient group regular preoperative analgesic use < 12 months and 52.5% for the group regular preoperative analgesic use 12 months. The respective percentages of highly satisfied patients were 76.3% and 57.6% (p = ns). The percentage of patients reporting a good improvement in the ODI was 67.5% among non-smokers and 45.0% among smokers. The respective percentages for highly satisfied patients were 66.3% and 55.0%

4 258 T. Aalto, S. Sinikallio, H. Kröger, et al. Table 1A Univariate analysis for satisfaction and appearance of preoperative predictors in the postoperative study groups according to the outcome. Predictors Satisfaction good outcome Worse outcome p-value (n = 64) (n = 37) (Pearson chi-squared) Patient-related predictors Age < 75 years 87.5% 67.6% *0.015* Male gender 37.5% 51.4% Body mass index < 30 kg/m % 43.2% Smoking (never or stopped) 82.8% 75.0% Married/cohabiting (yes) 68.8% 54.1% Education ( secondary school examination) 35.9% 43.2% Self-rated health and comorbidities Self-rated health (> average) 34.4% 14.3% *0.032* Number of comorbidities ( 5 (mean)) 59.4% 47.2% No comorbidity affecting walking ability 93.7% 83.8% Diabetes (type 2) 12.5% 05.6% Preoperative treatment Self-acting exercises (yes) 71.2% 73.5% Use of analgesics (a few times a week or less) 43.8% 35.4% Preop. analgesic use < 3 months 22.2% 14.7% Preop. analgesic use < 6 months 28.6% 20.6% Preop. analgesic use < 12 months 46.0% 26.5% *0.060* In-patient rehab. due to back problem (yes) 45.2% 45.5% Use of supportive belt (yes) 22.2% 31.4% No previous lumbar operation 90.6% 73.0% *0.019* * Predictors included in the multivariate model (p < 0.1). Table 2A Univariate analysis for the Oswestry Disability Index and appearance of predictors in the postoperative study groups according to the outcome. Preoperative predictors Oswestry Disability Index good outcome Worse outcome p-value (n = 63) (n = 38) (Pearson chi-squared) Patient-related predictors Age < 75 years 82.5% 76.3% Male gender 38.1% 50.0% Body mass index < 30 kg/m % 47.4% Smoking (never or stopped) 85.7% 70.3% *0.062* Married/cohabiting (yes) 66.7% 57.9% Education ( secondary school examination) 34.9% 44.7% Self-rated health and comorbidities Self-rated health (> average) 35.5% 13.5% *0.018* Number of comorbidities ( mean (5)) 59.7% 47.4% No comorbidity affecting walking ability 90.5% 89.5% Diabetes (type 2) 11.3% 7.9% Preoperative treatment Self-acting exercises (yes) 65.5% 82.9% *0.071* Use of analgesics (a few times a week or less) 46.8% 27.0% *0.052* Preop. analgesic use < 3 months 24.6% 11.1% Preop. analgesic use < 6 months 32.8% 13.9% *0.040* Preop. analgesic use < 12 months 49.2% 22.2% *0.009* In-patient rehab. due to back problem (yes) 44.3% 47.1% Use of supportive belt (yes) 22.6% 30.6% Previous lumbar operation (no) 88.9% 76.3% *0.094* * Predictors included in the multivariate model (p < 0.1). Table 1B Multivariate model: Predictors for good satisfaction with surgery ( total cure or condition has considerably improved ). Predictors OR (95% CI) p-value Age < 75 years 4.03 ( ) No previous lumbar operation 3.65 ( ) OR = Odds ratio. CI = Confidence interval. Table 2B Multivariate model: Predictors for good (> 30%) improvement of ODI. Predictors OR (95% CI) p-value Preop. analgesic use < 12months 3.40 ( ) Non-smoking/stopped previously 3.47 ( ) Self-rated health (> average) 3.27 ( ) OR = Odds ratio. CI = Confidence interval.

5 Preoperative predictors for good postoperative satisfaction and functional outcome 259 (p = ns). The percentage of patients reporting a good improvement in the ODI was 81.5% in the patient group SRH > average and 55.6% in the patient group SRH average. The respective percentages of highly satisfied patients were 81.5% and 58.3% (p = ns). Discussion In this prospective, observational study with a twoyear follow-up, the outcome was evaluated with two specific outcome measures in LSS surgery, i.e. patient satisfaction and the validated ODI score. The definition of a good outcome included at least a 30% relative improvement in the ODI, or patient satisfaction indicated by the reporting of totally cured or condition has considerably improved. We used rigorous categorisation of satisfaction with surgery in order to identify the patients who were truly satisfied with the results of the surgery. In addition, the predictors had clear cut-off values. As far as we know, this is the first time that a previous lumbar operation (PLO) has been demonstrated to have significant predictive value for worse satisfaction in a prospective study consisting of only LSS patients (5, 7). Of those 16 patients who had undergone a previous operation, 6 patients were truly satisfied ( condition has considerably improved or totally cured ), and of the 10 less satisfied patients, 9 reported condition has slightly improved and only one patient reported no change. Nevertheless, 15/16 patients had at least slight improvement, and thus patients with a prior operation still have a fair possibility of benefiting from an operation. An age of 75 years or over predicted worse patient satisfaction. However, increased age did not predict a worse outcome in the ODI. To optimise postoperative satisfaction in LSS, these results highlight the need for careful preoperative discussion concerning realistic expectations and the goal of the operation, particularly among elderly patients, and also with patients who have previously undergone a lumbar operation. These results are in line with the study of Jakola et al., in which a decompressive LSS operation was determined to be safe for patients aged over 70 years, and a clinically meaningful improvement in functional status and also the quality of life can be expected (21). Ishii et al (22) reported inferior results after cervical laminoplasty among patients 75 years or above, compared to younger age groups. We tested also other cut-offs (60, 65 and 70 years) which indicated however no predictive value. We thus recommend that the cut-off age of 75 years should be interpreted with caution and confirmed in further LSS studies. Smoking has been found to be a negative predictor for the outcome following lumbar disc herniation surgery (7), lumbar fusion (23 24), and also in the latest large register study (n = 4555) in LSS including the ODI and overall satisfaction as outcome measures, in which smokers also tended to use more analgesics before the operation and two years postoperatively (25). Our finding was that non-smoking individuals, including patients who have stopped smoking before surgery, have an odds ratio of over three for having a good functional improvement (ODI) following surgery. Our multivariate model also included the preoperative use of analgesics. As only three of the fused patients were smokers, the effect of nicotine on the revascularisation of the bone grafts (26) did not explain the poorer results for smokers in our population. Despite the ultimate mechanism of effect of tobacco, this study strengthens the belief that smoking also has a harmful effect among surgically treated LSS patients. Self-rated health (SRH) predicted a good improvement in the ODI score. In LSS surgery, better (excellent/good) SRH has been reported as a predictor of a better outcome (satisfaction, symptoms and walking ability) by Katz et al. (14). Instead of a four-item scale (excellent/good/fair/poor), we used a modified fivescale instrument, comparing patients with good or quite good SRH to the average/quite poor/poor SRH group. In the univariate analysis, an association with satisfaction was also noted (Table 1A). It has been suggested that the independent effect of selfassessed health might result from the respondents personal knowledge of current morbidity, incipient health problems, or other factors that influence the outcomes (27). For the first time in LSS, a clear cut-off value was found in the preoperative duration of regular analgesic use, i.e. analgesic use for 12 months or less predicted a good improvement in disability compared to patients with regular analgesic use of over 12 months. Our result is supported by the findings of Lawrence et al., according to which preoperative narcotic use for over six months on a daily basis predicted a worse outcome after cervical decompression and arthrodesis for radicular pain, with a minimum two-year followup (28). This finding may be useful when considering the timing of the operation. Longer preoperative symptoms have been reported to predict a worse outcome in lateral stenosis, but with no threshold value (29). We did not enquire about the duration of preoperative symptoms, but this duration of preoperative symptoms is likely to be longer than the duration of regular consumption of analgesics. Thus, regular consumption of analgesics may possibly be a better potential predictor, since it may reflect the presence of persistent and severe symptoms warranting operative decompression within a reasonable time window in order to prevent irreversible neural damage. However, before stronger recommendations for LSS treatment guidelines can be made, further studies are needed to confirm this 12-month time period. The regular preoperative consumption of analgesics in central stenosis has been reported to be associated with greater postoperative pain (29). The frequency of use of analgesics in our study remained at the non-significant level. Limitations Our study population was relatively small. We defined this study to present preoperative patient characteristics, preoperative treatment, self-rated health and comorbidities, excluding peroperative factors.

6 260 T. Aalto, S. Sinikallio, H. Kröger, et al. Some predictors had a low prevalence in this population (diabetes, comorbidity affecting walking ability), diminishing the statistical power when comparing these subgroups to the other subjects. It is therefore possible that some predictors in this study with nonsignificant results (predictive value) could have achieved a significant predictive value with a larger study population. With respect to the outcome measures, we only examined the predictors for good satisfaction with surgery and a good improvement in disability. These shortcomings, however, do not diminish the predictive value of the identified significant predictors in LSS. The present study may help clinicians in their assessment of the prognosis of patients when considering surgical treatment. However, prognostic studies are not designed to answer the question of what is the indication for surgery. Conclusion Regular analgesic use for 12 months or less preoperatively, better self-rated health (above average) and non-smoking predicted a good postoperative functional improvement. Age < 75 years and no previous lumbar operation both predicted good postoperative satisfaction with surgery. Acknowledgements We thank Vesa Kiviniemi for the statistical advice. This study was supported by a Kuopio University Hospital EVO grant and a research grant from the Finnish Cultural Foundation (Hulda Tossavainen Foundation 2003; Aili and Leo Davidsson Foundation 2009, St. Michel Central Hospital 200-year Fund 2010, and the Kaisu and Urho Kiukas Foundation 2011). References 01. Taylor VM, Deyo RA, Cherkin DC et al: Low back pain hospitalization. Recent United States trends and regional variations. Spine 1994;19: Malmivaara A, Slätis P, Heliövaara M et al: Surgical or nonoperative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis? A randomized controlled trial. Spine 2007;32: Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD et al: Surgical versus nonsurgical therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis. N Engl J Med 2008;358: Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD et al: Surgical versus nonoperative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis four-year results of the spine patient outcomes research trial. Spine 2010;35: Aalto TJ, Malmivaara A, Kovacs F et al: Preoperative predictors for postoperative clinical outcome in lumbar spinal stenosis: systematic review. Spine 2006;31:E648 E Turner J, Ersek M, Herron L et al: Surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Attempted meta-analysis of the literature. Spine 1992; 17: Mannion AF, Elfering A: Predictors of surgical outcome and their assessment. Eur Spine J 2006;1:S Mannion AF, Denzler R, Dvorak J et al: A randomised controlled trial of post-operative rehabilitation after surgical decompression of the lumbar spine. Eur Spine J 2007;16: Sinikallio S, Aalto T, Airaksinen O et al: Depression is associated with a poorer outcome of lumbar spinal stenosis surgery: a two-year prospective follow-up study. Spine 2011;36: Sinikallio S, Aalto TJ, Airaksinen O et al: Lumbar spinal stenosis patients are satisfied with short-term results of surgery younger age, symptom severity, disability and depression decrease satisfaction. Disabil Rehabil 2007;29: Katz JN, Lipson SJ, Brick GW et al: Clinical correlates of patient satisfaction after laminectomy for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 1995;20: Schönström NS, Bolender NF, Spengler DM: The pathomorphology of spinal stenosis as seen on CT scans of the lumbar spine. Spine 1985;10: Spengler DM: Current concepts review: Degenerative stenosis of the lumbar spine. J Bone Joint Surg 1987;69A: Katz JN, Stucki G, Lipson SJ, Fossel AH et al: Predictors of surgical outcome in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 1999;24: Tuomi K, Ilmarinen J, Jahkola A et al: An approved version of the Work Disability Index. Occupational health series 19, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Helsinki Vitaz TW, Raque GH, Shields CB et al: Surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in patients older than 75 years of age. J Neurosurg. 1999;91(2 Suppl): Mustajoki P, Kaukua J, Annanmäki L et al: Aikuisten lihavuus. Duodecim 2007;123: Fairbank JCT, Pynsent PB: The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine 2000;25: Grönblad M, Hupli M, Wennerstrand P et al: Intercorrelation and test-retest reliability of the Pain Disability Index (PDI) and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ) and their correlation with pain intensity in low back pain patients. Clin J Pain 1993;9: Mannion AF, Junge A, Grob D et al: Development of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Part 2: sensitivity to change afterspinal surgery. Eur Spine J 2006;15: Jakola AS, Sorlie A, Gulati S et al: Clinical outcomes and safety assessment in elderly patients undergoing Decompressive laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective study. BMC Surg 2010;10: Ishii M, Wada E, Hamada M: Deterioration of surgical outcomes with aging in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Spinal Disord Tech 2012:17 (Epub ahead of print) 23. Andersen T, Christensen FB, Laursen M et al: Smoking as a predictor of negative outcome in lumbar spine fusion. Spine 2001;26: Glassman SD, Angnost SC, Parker A et al: The effect of cigarette smoking and smoking cessation on spinal fusion. Spine 2000;25: Sanden B, Forsth P, Michaelsson K: Smokers show less improvement than nonsmokers two years after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a study of 4555 patients from the Swedish spine register. Spine 2011;36: Daftari TK, Whitesides TE Jr, Heller JG et al: Nicotine on the revascularization of bone graft. An experimental study in rabbits. Spine 1994;19: Idler EL, Kasl S: Health perceptions and survival: do global evaluations of health status really predict mortality? J Gerontol 1991;46:S Lawrence JT, London N, Bohlman HH et al: Preoperative narcotic use as a predictor of clinical outcome: results following anterior cervical arthrodesis. Spine 2008;33: Jönsson B: Patient-related factors predicting the outcome of decompressive surgery. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 1993;251:69 70 Received: October 6, 2011 Accepted: February 23, 2012

Accuracy and reproducibility of a retrospective outcome assessment for lumbar spinal stenosis surgery

Accuracy and reproducibility of a retrospective outcome assessment for lumbar spinal stenosis surgery Kuittinen et al. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 2012, 13:83 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Accuracy and reproducibility of a retrospective outcome assessment for lumbar spinal stenosis surgery Pekka Kuittinen

More information

Cover Page. The handle holds various files of this Leiden University dissertation.

Cover Page. The handle   holds various files of this Leiden University dissertation. Cover Page The handle http://hdl.handle.net/1887/29800 holds various files of this Leiden University dissertation. Author: Moojen, Wouter Anton Title: Introducing new implants and imaging techniques for

More information

SWESPINE THE SWEDISH SPINE REGISTER 2010 REPORT

SWESPINE THE SWEDISH SPINE REGISTER 2010 REPORT SWESPINE THE SWEDISH SPINE REGISTER 21 REPORT SEPTEMBER 21 SWEDISH SOCIETY OF SPINAL SURGEONS Björn Strömqvist Peter Fritzell Olle Hägg Bo Jönsson ISBN 978-91-978553-8-9 Table of Contents 2 Introduction

More information

Does fusion improve the outcome after decompressive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis?

Does fusion improve the outcome after decompressive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis? P. Försth, K. Michaëlsson, B. Sandén From The Swedish Spine Register, Sweden SPINE Does fusion improve the outcome after decompressive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis? A TWO-YEAR FOLLOW-UP STUDY INVOLVING

More information

QF-78. S. Tanaka 1, T.Yokoyama 1, K.Takeuchi 1, K.Wada 2, T. Tanaka 2, S.Abrakawa 2, G.Kumagai 2, T.Asari 2, A.Ono 2, Y.

QF-78. S. Tanaka 1, T.Yokoyama 1, K.Takeuchi 1, K.Wada 2, T. Tanaka 2, S.Abrakawa 2, G.Kumagai 2, T.Asari 2, A.Ono 2, Y. QF-78 Patient-oriented outcomes after musclepreserving interlaminar decompression for patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis: Multi-center study to identify risk factors for poor outcomes S. Tanaka

More information

Syddansk Universitet. Published in: Danish Medical Journal. Publication date: Document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Syddansk Universitet. Published in: Danish Medical Journal. Publication date: Document version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Syddansk Universitet Patient are satisfied one year after decompression surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis Tendal Paulsen, Rune; Bouknaitir, Jamal Bech; Fruensgaard, Søren; Carreon, Leah Y; Andersen, Mikkel

More information

Does obesity affect outcomes after decompressive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis? A multicenter observational registry-based study

Does obesity affect outcomes after decompressive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis? A multicenter observational registry-based study Does obesity affect outcomes after decompressive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis? A multicenter observational registry-based study Charalampis Giannadakis, Ulf S. Nerland, Ole Solheim, Asgeir S. Jakola,

More information

Natural Evolution of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Natural Evolution of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Natural Evolution of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis William R. Sears, MB BS FRACS Wentworth Spine Clinic, Sydney, Australia MUST KNOW An understanding of the natural evolution of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is

More information

Ioannis D. GELALIS, Christina ARNAOUTOGLOU, Giorgos CHRISTOFOROU, Marios G. LYKISSAS, Ioannis BATSILAS, Theodoros XENAKIS

Ioannis D. GELALIS, Christina ARNAOUTOGLOU, Giorgos CHRISTOFOROU, Marios G. LYKISSAS, Ioannis BATSILAS, Theodoros XENAKIS ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA et TRAUMATOLOGICA TURCICA Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2010;44(3):235-240 doi:10.3944/aott.2010.2278 Prospective analysis of surgical outcomes in patients undergoing decompressive laminectomy

More information

Lumbar Laminotomy DEFINING APPROPRIATE COVERAGE POSITIONS NASS COVERAGE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS TASKFORCE

Lumbar Laminotomy DEFINING APPROPRIATE COVERAGE POSITIONS NASS COVERAGE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS TASKFORCE NASS COVERAGE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS Lumbar Laminotomy DEFINING APPROPRIATE COVERAGE POSITIONS North American Spine Society 7075 Veterans Blvd. Burr Ridge, IL 60527 TASKFORCE Introduction North American

More information

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Lumbar Spinal Stenosis This article is also available in Spanish: Estenosis de la columna lumbar (topic.cfm?topic=a00701). A common cause of low back and leg pain is lumbar spinal stenosis. As we age,

More information

Pasquale Donnarumma 1, Roberto Tarantino 1, Lorenzo Nigro 1, Marika Rullo 2, Domenico Messina 3, Daniele Diacinti 4, Roberto Delfini 1.

Pasquale Donnarumma 1, Roberto Tarantino 1, Lorenzo Nigro 1, Marika Rullo 2, Domenico Messina 3, Daniele Diacinti 4, Roberto Delfini 1. Original Study Decompression versus decompression and fusion for degenerative lumbar stenosis: analysis of the factors influencing the outcome of back pain and disability Pasquale Donnarumma 1, Roberto

More information

Effects of Viewing an Evidence-Based Video Decision Aid on Patients Treatment Preferences for Spine Surgery. ACCEPTED

Effects of Viewing an Evidence-Based Video Decision Aid on Patients Treatment Preferences for Spine Surgery. ACCEPTED Spine Publish Ahead of Print DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182055c1e Effects of Viewing an Evidence-Based Video Decision Aid on Patients Treatment Preferences for Spine Surgery. Jon D. Lurie, MD, MS; Kevin F.

More information

SWESPINE THE SWEDISH SPINE REGISTER THE 2011 REPORT

SWESPINE THE SWEDISH SPINE REGISTER THE 2011 REPORT SWESPINE THE SWEDISH SPINE REGISTER THE 211 REPORT www.4s.nu SEPTEMBER 211 SWEDISH SOCIETY OF SPINAL SURGEONS Björn Strömqvist Peter Fritzell Olle Hägg Bo Jönsson ISBN 978-91-979378-8-7 Table of contents

More information

Spine Tango annual report 2012

Spine Tango annual report 2012 DOI 10.1007/s00586-013-2943-x SPINE TANGO REPORT 2012 Spine Tango annual report 2012 M. Neukamp G. Perler T. Pigott E. Munting M. Aebi C. Röder Received: 31 July 2013 / Published online: 30 August 2013

More information

Evidence Table. Study Type: Randomized controlled trial. Study Aim: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the X-Stop interspinous implant.

Evidence Table. Study Type: Randomized controlled trial. Study Aim: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the X-Stop interspinous implant. Evidence Table Clinical Area: Reference: Spinal decompression device for lumbar spinal stenosis Zucherman JF et al. A prospective randomized multi-center study for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis

More information

Peggers Super Summaries: The Aging Spine

Peggers Super Summaries: The Aging Spine Aging Spine: AGING PROCESS Osteopenia 10% of 50 year old males and 25% of 50 year females Disc dehydration Facet degeneration Soft tissue hypertrophy 2 0 deformity Leg pain worse than back pain from nerve

More information

Original Article Management of Single Level Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: Decompression Alone or Decompression and Fusion

Original Article Management of Single Level Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: Decompression Alone or Decompression and Fusion Egyptian Journal of Neurosurgery Volume 9 / No. 4 / October - December 014 51-56 Original Article Management of Single Level Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: Decompression Alone or Decompression

More information

The effect of duration of symptoms on standard outcome measures in the surgical treatment of spinal stenosis

The effect of duration of symptoms on standard outcome measures in the surgical treatment of spinal stenosis Eur Spine J (2007) 16: 199 206 DOI 10.1007/s00586-006-0078-z ORIGINAL ARTICLE Leslie C. L. Ng Suhayl Tafazal Philip Sell The effect of duration of symptoms on standard outcome measures in the surgical

More information

Patient Selection and Lumbar Operative Interventions

Patient Selection and Lumbar Operative Interventions Patient Selection and Lumbar Operative Interventions John C France MD Professor of Orthopaedic & Neurosurgery West Virginia University Low back pain is a symptom not a diagnosis Epidemiology of LBP General

More information

THRESHOLD POLICY T17 SPINAL SURGERY FOR ACUTE LUMBAR CONDITIONS

THRESHOLD POLICY T17 SPINAL SURGERY FOR ACUTE LUMBAR CONDITIONS THRESHOLD POLICY T17 SPINAL SURGERY FOR ACUTE LUMBAR CONDITIONS Policy author: Ipswich and East Suffolk and West Suffolk CCGs with support from Public Health Suffolk Policy start date: September 2014 Subsequent

More information

Does Multilevel Lumbar Stenosis Lead to Poorer Outcomes?

Does Multilevel Lumbar Stenosis Lead to Poorer Outcomes? Does Multilevel Lumbar Lead to Poorer Outcomes? A Subanalysis of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) Lumbar Study Daniel K. Park, MD,* Howard S. An, MD,* Jon D. Lurie, MD, MS, Wenyan Zhao,

More information

This procedure lacks scientific evidence of effectiveness, and is not covered.

This procedure lacks scientific evidence of effectiveness, and is not covered. ARBenefits Approval: 09-21-2011 Effective Date: 01-01-2012 Revision Date: Code(s): 0275T Medical Policy Title: Minimally Invasive, Image-Guided Lumbar Decompression for Spinal Stenosis Document: ARB0186

More information

See the corresponding editorial in this issue, pp J Neurosurg Spine 21: , 2014 AANS, 2014

See the corresponding editorial in this issue, pp J Neurosurg Spine 21: , 2014 AANS, 2014 See the corresponding editorial in this issue, pp 150 152. J Neurosurg Spine 21:153 159, 2014 AANS, 2014 Affective disorders influence clinical outcomes after revision lumbar surgery in elderly patients

More information

2016 OPAM Mid-Year Educational Conference, sponsored by AOCOPM Thursday, March 10, 2016 C-1

2016 OPAM Mid-Year Educational Conference, sponsored by AOCOPM Thursday, March 10, 2016 C-1 Long-term Outcomes of Lumbar Fusion Among Workers Compensation Subjects : An Historical Cohort Study Trang Nguyen M.D., Ph.D. David C. Randolph M.D, M.P.H. James Talmage MD Paul Succop PhD Russell Travis

More information

CERVICAL SPONDYLOSIS & CERVICAL DISC DISEASE

CERVICAL SPONDYLOSIS & CERVICAL DISC DISEASE CERVICAL SPONDYLOSIS & CERVICAL DISC DISEASE Cervical spondylosis l Cervical osteophytosis l Most common progressive disease in the aging cervical spine l Seen in 95% of the people by 65 years Pathophysiology

More information

Spinal canal stenosis Degenerative diseases F 06

Spinal canal stenosis Degenerative diseases F 06 What is spinal canal stenosis? The condition known as spinal canal stenosis is a narrowing (stenosis) of the spinal canal that in most cases develops due to the degenerative (wear-induced) deformation

More information

New York Science Journal 2017;10(8)

New York Science Journal 2017;10(8) Outcome of surgical intervention with different modalities in treatment of lumbar canal stenosis. Ahmed Mohamed Shaker Eidarous Elakhras 1, Ahmed M. El Sherif 2 and Mostafa Elsyed Mohamed 3 1 Neurosurgical

More information

Original Article Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery 2017;9: https://doi.org/ /cios

Original Article Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery 2017;9: https://doi.org/ /cios Original Article Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery 2017;9:177-183 https://doi.org/10.4055/cios.2017.9.2.177 The Effect of Anxiety, Depression, and Optimism on Postoperative Satisfaction and Clinical Outcomes

More information

Same Segment Early Recurrence in Surgery of Lumbar Canal Stenosis- Role of Dissectomy

Same Segment Early Recurrence in Surgery of Lumbar Canal Stenosis- Role of Dissectomy IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences (IOSR-JDMS) e-issn: 2279-0853, p-issn: 2279-0861.Volume 15, Issue 8 Ver. II (August. 2016), PP 34-40 www.iosrjournals.org Same Segment Early Recurrence in Surgery

More information

Populations Interventions Comparators Outcomes Individuals: With lumbar spinal stenosis

Populations Interventions Comparators Outcomes Individuals: With lumbar spinal stenosis Image-Guided Minimally Invasive Decompression for Spinal (701126) (Formerly Image-Guided Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression for Spinal ) Medical Benefit Effective Date: 10/01/17 Next Review Date:

More information

Image-Guided Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (IG-MLD) for Spinal Stenosis. Original Policy Date

Image-Guided Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (IG-MLD) for Spinal Stenosis. Original Policy Date MP 7.01.107 Image-Guided Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (IG-MLD) for Spinal Stenosis Medical Policy Section Surgery Issue 12/2013 Original Policy Date 12/2013 Last Review Status/Date Reviewed

More information

Lumbar total disc replacement

Lumbar total disc replacement The Norwegian TDR Study Lumbar total disc replacement Predictors for long-term outcome Background Lumbar total disc replacement (TDR) is a surgical option for selected patients with chronic low back pain

More information

Samir Lapsiwala, MD. Fort Worth Brain and Spine Institute Fort Worth Brain and Spine Institute GEN-SP-32

Samir Lapsiwala, MD. Fort Worth Brain and Spine Institute Fort Worth Brain and Spine Institute GEN-SP-32 Samir Lapsiwala, MD Fort Worth Brain and Spine Institute Fort Worth Brain and Spine Institute In 2010, 40 million people age 65 and over lived in the United States, accounting for 13 percent of the total

More information

Lumbar Disc Prolapse: Management and Outcome Analysis of 96 Surgically treated Patients

Lumbar Disc Prolapse: Management and Outcome Analysis of 96 Surgically treated Patients Lumbar Disc Prolapse: Management and Outcome Analysis of 96 Surgically treated Patients A. Akbar ( Department of Neurosurgery, Chandka Medical College, Larkana. ) A. Mahar ( Department of Orthopedic Surgery,

More information

Preoperative Predictors for Postoperative Clinical Outcome in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Preoperative Predictors for Postoperative Clinical Outcome in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Preoperative Predictors for Postoperative Clinical Outcome in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Systematic Review SPINE Volume 31, Number 18, pp E648 E663 2006, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc. Timo J. Aalto,

More information

ProDisc-L Total Disc Replacement. IDE Clinical Study

ProDisc-L Total Disc Replacement. IDE Clinical Study Total Disc Replacement IDE Clinical Study Study Design TDR vs. circumferential fusion: Multi-center, prospective, randomized trial 17 centers, 292 patients 162 patients 80 fusion patients 50 non-randomized

More information

Bilateral Foot Drop Without Cauda Equinae Syndrome Due To L4-L5 Disc Prolapse: A Case Report

Bilateral Foot Drop Without Cauda Equinae Syndrome Due To L4-L5 Disc Prolapse: A Case Report ISPUB.COM The Internet Journal of Neurosurgery Volume 5 Number 1 Bilateral Foot Drop Without Cauda Equinae Syndrome Due To L4-L5 Disc Prolapse: A Case Report R Ramnaryan, C Palinikumar Citation R Ramnaryan,

More information

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE OUTCOMES OF PRIMARY AND REVISION DISCECTOMY SURGERY MS Patel, J Braybrooke, M Newey, P Sell BACKGROUND Following primary discectomy, a recurrent lumbar disc herniation at the

More information

ProDisc-L Total Disc Replacement. IDE Clinical Study.

ProDisc-L Total Disc Replacement. IDE Clinical Study. ProDisc-L Total Disc Replacement. IDE Clinical Study. A multi-center, prospective, randomized clinical trial. Instruments and implants approved by the AO Foundation Table of Contents Indications, Contraindications

More information

Copyright 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

Copyright 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited. SPINE An International Journal for the study of the spine Publish Ahead of Print DOI : 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001506 How Effective is Physical Therapy for Common Low Back Pain Diagnoses? A multivariate

More information

LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS

LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS North American Spine Society Public Education Series WHAT IS LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS? The vertebrae are the bones that make up the lumbar spine (low back). The spinal canal runs through

More information

Lumbar spinal canal stenosis Degenerative diseases F 08

Lumbar spinal canal stenosis Degenerative diseases F 08 What is lumbar spinal canal stenosis? This condition involves the narrowing of the spinal canal, and of the lateral recesses (recesssus laterales) and exit openings (foramina intervertebralia) for the

More information

Comparison of Radiologic Signs and Clinical Symptoms of Spinal Stenosis

Comparison of Radiologic Signs and Clinical Symptoms of Spinal Stenosis SPINE Volume 31, Number 16, pp 1834 1840 2006, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc. Comparison of Radiologic Signs and Clinical Symptoms of Spinal Stenosis C. Martina Lohman, MD, PhD,* Kaj Tallroth, MD,

More information

Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (MILD )

Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (MILD ) Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (MILD ) Brian Durkin, DO Director, Center for Chronic Pain Department of Anesthesiology Stony Brook University, NY MILD QA/QI Study TEAM Helene Benveniste, MD, PhD

More information

Degenerative spondylolisthesis at the L4 L5 in a 32-year-old female with previous fusion for idiopathic scoliosis: A case report

Degenerative spondylolisthesis at the L4 L5 in a 32-year-old female with previous fusion for idiopathic scoliosis: A case report Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery 2003: 11(2): 202 206 Degenerative spondylolisthesis at the L4 L5 in a 32-year-old female with previous fusion for idiopathic scoliosis: A case report RB Winter Clinical Professor,

More information

Corporate Medical Policy

Corporate Medical Policy Corporate Medical Policy Image-Guided Minimally Invasive Decompression (IG-MLD) for File Name: Origination: Last CAP Review: Next CAP Review: Last Review: image-guided_minimally_invasive_decompression_for_spinal_stenosis

More information

Original Date: October 2015 LUMBAR SPINAL FUSION FOR

Original Date: October 2015 LUMBAR SPINAL FUSION FOR National Imaging Associates, Inc. Clinical guidelines Original Date: October 2015 LUMBAR SPINAL FUSION FOR Page 1 of 9 INSTABILITY AND DEGENERATIVE DISC CONDITIONS FOR CMS (MEDICARE) MEMBERS ONLY CPT4

More information

BMJ Open. Comparative Effectiveness of Microdecompression and Laminectomy for Central Lumbar Spinal Stenosis An Observational Study

BMJ Open. Comparative Effectiveness of Microdecompression and Laminectomy for Central Lumbar Spinal Stenosis An Observational Study Comparative Effectiveness of Microdecompression and Laminectomy for Central Lumbar Spinal Stenosis An Observational Study Journal: BMJ Open Manuscript ID: bmjopen-0-00 Article Type: Protocol Date Submitted

More information

International Journal of Recent Innovations in Academic Research

International Journal of Recent Innovations in Academic Research Volume-2, Issue-4, August 2018, Page No: 20-28 ISSN : 2635-3040 ADDITION OF MICRODISCECTOMY IN LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS AND RETROSPECTIVE ASSESSMENT WITH RESULTS OF SAME SURGEON Ozan Ganiüsmen Assistant

More information

Degenerative Disease of the Spine

Degenerative Disease of the Spine Degenerative Disease of the Spine Introduction: I. Anatomy Talk Overview II. Overview of Disease Processes: A. Spondylosis B. Intervertebral Disc Disease III. Diagnosis IV. Therapy Introduction: Myelopathy

More information

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Older Adults - Gender Differences

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Older Adults - Gender Differences Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences. 2009 Sep 15; 2(3):200-204. doi:10.3889/mjms.1857-5773.2009.0062 Basic Science OPEN ACCESS Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Older Adults - Gender Differences Niki Matveeva

More information

Outcome of Spine Injections on the basis of MRI Findings. Personal use only. Tobias Dietrich Kantonsspital St.Gallen

Outcome of Spine Injections on the basis of MRI Findings. Personal use only. Tobias Dietrich Kantonsspital St.Gallen Outcome of Spine Injections on the basis of MRI Findings Tobias Dietrich Kantonsspital St.Gallen Evidence for Spinal Injections? Pe Skeletal Radiology 2010 rso na lu se moderate- to-strong evidence supporting

More information

Key Primary CPT Codes: Refer to pages: 7-9 Last Review Date: October 2016 Medical Coverage Guideline Number:

Key Primary CPT Codes: Refer to pages: 7-9 Last Review Date: October 2016 Medical Coverage Guideline Number: National Imaging Associates, Inc. Clinical guidelines CERVICAL SPINE SURGERY: ANTERI CERVICAL DECOMPRESSION WITH FUSION CERVICAL POSTERI DECOMPRESSION WITH FUSION CERVICAL ARTIFICIAL DISC CERVICAL POSTERI

More information

Patient Preferences and Expectations for Care

Patient Preferences and Expectations for Care SPINE Volume 33, Number 24, pp 2663 2668 2008, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Patient Preferences and Expectations for Care Determinants in Patients With Lumbar Intervertebral Disc Herniation Jon D. Lurie,

More information

Populations Interventions Comparators Outcomes Individuals: With lumbar spinal stenosis

Populations Interventions Comparators Outcomes Individuals: With lumbar spinal stenosis Image-Guided Minimally Invasive Decompression for Spinal (701126) Medical Benefit Effective Date: 10/01/18 Next Review Date: 07/19 Preauthorization No Review Dates: 09/10, 07/11, 07/12, 07/13, 07/14, 07/15,

More information

Lumbar spinal stenosis is narrowing of the spinal canal that results in compression of the cauda

Lumbar spinal stenosis is narrowing of the spinal canal that results in compression of the cauda 1 CHAPTER 32: CLINICAL RESULTS OF THE IDE TRIAL OF X-STOP INTERSPINOUS SYSTEMS ELIZABETH YU AND JAMES ZUCHERMAN Lumbar spinal stenosis Lumbar spinal stenosis is narrowing of the spinal canal that results

More information

SpineFAQs. Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

SpineFAQs. Lumbar Spondylolisthesis SpineFAQs Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Normally, the bones of the spine (the vertebrae) stand neatly stacked on top of one another. The ligaments and joints support the spine. Spondylolisthesis alters the

More information

Top spine papers of 2016

Top spine papers of 2016 Top spine papers of 2016 Ai Mukai, MD Texas Orthopedics, Sports & Rehabilitation University of Texas-Austin, PM&R Residency October 21, 2016 Top papers in spine? Top papers in Spine How do you define top?

More information

The outcome of decompression surgery for lumbar herniated disc is influenced by the level of concomitant preoperative low back pain

The outcome of decompression surgery for lumbar herniated disc is influenced by the level of concomitant preoperative low back pain Eur Spine J (2011) 20:1166 1173 DOI 10.1007/s00586-010-1670-9 ORIGINAL ARTICLE The outcome of decompression surgery for lumbar herniated disc is influenced by the level of concomitant preoperative low

More information

Long term prognosis of young adults after ACDF

Long term prognosis of young adults after ACDF Long term prognosis of young adults after ACDF Tuomas Hirvonen MD 1,2 Johan Marjamaa MD, PhD 1,2 Jari Siironen MD, PhD 1 Anniina Koski-Palkén MD, PhD 1 1 Department of Neurosrugery, Helsinki University

More information

Is the Sedimentation Sign Associated With Spinal Stenosis Surgical Treatment Effect in SPORT?

Is the Sedimentation Sign Associated With Spinal Stenosis Surgical Treatment Effect in SPORT? SPINE Volume 40, Number 3, pp 129-136 2015, Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. RANDOMIZED TRIAL Is the Associated With Spinal Stenosis Surgical Treatment Effect in SPORT? Rachel A. Moses,

More information

Responses to Key Questions for Washington State Health Care Authority Health Technology Assessment of Surgery for Symptomatic Lumbar Radiculopathy

Responses to Key Questions for Washington State Health Care Authority Health Technology Assessment of Surgery for Symptomatic Lumbar Radiculopathy The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS), American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS), AANS/CNS Section on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves (DSPN), Congress of Neurological

More information

Wendy Field Advanced Physiotherapy Practitioner June 2018

Wendy Field Advanced Physiotherapy Practitioner June 2018 Wendy Field Advanced Physiotherapy Practitioner June 2018 Radiculopathy???? Lumbar radicular pain is where the clinician suspects the pain is coming from a lumbar nerve root. Essentially we are looking

More information

Better Outcomes for Older People with Spinal Trouble (BOOST) Research Programme

Better Outcomes for Older People with Spinal Trouble (BOOST) Research Programme Better Outcomes for Older People with Spinal Trouble (BOOST) Research Programme Background Low back pain (LBP) is now recognised as the leading disabling condition in the world. LBP is a highly variable

More information

DEGENERATIVE SPINAL DISEASE PRABIN SHRESTHA ANISH M SINGH B&B HOSPITAL

DEGENERATIVE SPINAL DISEASE PRABIN SHRESTHA ANISH M SINGH B&B HOSPITAL SPINAL CHAPTER, NESON DEGENERATIVE SPINAL DISEASE PRABIN SHRESTHA ANISH M SINGH B&B HOSPITAL INTRODUCTION DEGENERATIVE SPINAL DISEASE Gradual loss of normal structure and function of spine with time Also

More information

Does functional evaluation and magnetic resonance imaging finding in a case of lumbar canal stenosis co-relate: a study of 50 cases

Does functional evaluation and magnetic resonance imaging finding in a case of lumbar canal stenosis co-relate: a study of 50 cases International Journal of Research in Orthopaedics Hussain N et al. Int J Res Orthop. 2017 Jul;3(4):751-755 http://www.ijoro.org Original Research Article DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.intjresorthop20172543

More information

LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS

LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS Always occurs in the mobile segment. Factors play role in Stenosis Pre existing congenital or developmental narrowing of the lumbar spinal canal Translation of one anatomic segment

More information

Medical Policy An independent licensee of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association

Medical Policy An independent licensee of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association Lumbar Spinal Fusion Page 1 of 29 Medical Policy An independent licensee of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association Title: See Also: Lumbar Spinal Fusion Interspinous Fixation (Fusion) Devices http://www.bcbsks.com/customerservice/providers/medicalpolicies/policies.shtml

More information

Adult Isthmic Spondylolisthesis

Adult Isthmic Spondylolisthesis Adult Isthmic Spondylolisthesis North American Spine Society Public Education Series What Is Adult Isthmic Spondylolisthesis? The spine is made up of a series of connected bones called vertebrae. In about

More information

Disability and health-related quality of life in patients undergoing spinal fusion: a comparison with a general population sample

Disability and health-related quality of life in patients undergoing spinal fusion: a comparison with a general population sample Pekkanen et al. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 13, 14:211 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Disability and health-related quality of life in patients undergoing spinal fusion: a comparison with a general population

More information

CAN WE PREDICT SURGERY FOR SCIATICA?

CAN WE PREDICT SURGERY FOR SCIATICA? 7 CAN WE PREDICT SURGERY FOR SCIATICA? Improving prediction of inevitable surgery during non-surgical treatment of sciatica. Wilco C. Peul Ronald Brand Raph T.W.M. Thomeer Bart W. Koes Submitted for publication

More information

Medical Policy Original Effective Date: Revised Date: Page 1 of 11

Medical Policy Original Effective Date: Revised Date: Page 1 of 11 Page 1 of 11 Content Disclaimer Description Coverage Determination Clinical Indications Lumbar Spine Surgery Lumbar Spine Surgery Description Indication Coding Lumbar Spinal Fusion (single level)surgery

More information

Lumbar Spinal Fusion Corporate Medical Policy

Lumbar Spinal Fusion Corporate Medical Policy Lumbar Spinal Fusion Corporate Medical Policy File name: Lumbar Spinal Fusion File code: UM.SURG.15 Origination: 09/01/2016 Last Review: 09/29/2016 Next Review: 09/29/2017 Effective Date: 01/01/2017 Populations

More information

Image-Guided Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (IG-MLD) for Spinal Stenosis

Image-Guided Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (IG-MLD) for Spinal Stenosis Image-Guided Minimally Invasive Lumbar Last Review Status/Date: June 2013 Page: 1 of 10 Image-Guided Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression (IG-MLD) for Spinal Stenosis Description Image-guided minimally

More information

MR imaging is a noninvasive diagnostic tool and has been

MR imaging is a noninvasive diagnostic tool and has been ORIGINAL RESEARCH H. Ozawa H. Kanno Y. Koizumi N. Morozumi T. Aizawa T. Kusakabe Y. Ishii E. Itoi Dynamic Changes in the Dural Sac Cross-Sectional Area on Axial Loaded MR Imaging: Is There a Difference

More information

Medical Policy An independent licensee of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association

Medical Policy An independent licensee of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association Lumbar Spinal Fusion Page 1 of 28 Medical Policy An independent licensee of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association Title: See Also: Lumbar Spinal Fusion Interspinous Fixation (Fusion) Devices http://www.bcbsks.com/customerservice/providers/medicalpolicies/policies.shtml

More information

SWESPINE THE SWEDISH SPINE REGISTER THE 2009 REPORT

SWESPINE THE SWEDISH SPINE REGISTER THE 2009 REPORT SWESPINE THE SWEDISH SPINE REGISTER THE 29 REPORT www.4s.nu SEPTEMBER 29 SWEDISH SOCIETY OF SPINAL SURGEONS Björn Strömqvist Peter Fritzell Olle Hägg Bo Jönsson ISBN 978-91-978553-1- Table of contents

More information

SPINE An International Journal for the study of the spine Publish Ahead of Print DOI : /BRS

SPINE An International Journal for the study of the spine Publish Ahead of Print DOI : /BRS SPINE An International Journal for the study of the spine Publish Ahead of Print DOI : 1.197/BRS.1364 Patient-Rated Outcomes of Lumbar Fusion in Patients with Degenerative Disease of the Lumbar Spine:

More information

Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield Central Region Clinical Claim Edit

Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield Central Region Clinical Claim Edit Subject: Laminotomy (Hemilaminectomy) with Decompression of Nerve Root(s), Including Partial Facetectomy, Foraminotomy and/or Excision of Herniated Intervertebral Disc, Reexploration, Single Interspace-Lumbar

More information

Minimally Invasive Laminectomy in Spondylolisthetic Lumbar Stenosis

Minimally Invasive Laminectomy in Spondylolisthetic Lumbar Stenosis The Ochsner Journal 14:38 43, 2014 Ó Academic Division of Ochsner Clinic Foundation Minimally Invasive Laminectomy in Spondylolisthetic Lumbar Stenosis Ilias N. Caralopoulos, MD, Cuong J. Bui, MD Department

More information

A PROSPECTIVE STUDY OF INCIDENTAL DURAL TEARS IN MICROENDOSCOPIC LUMBAR DECOMPRESSION SURGERY: INCIDENCE AND OUTCOMES

A PROSPECTIVE STUDY OF INCIDENTAL DURAL TEARS IN MICROENDOSCOPIC LUMBAR DECOMPRESSION SURGERY: INCIDENCE AND OUTCOMES A PROSPECTIVE STUDY OF INCIDENTAL DURAL TEARS IN MICROENDOSCOPIC LUMBAR DECOMPRESSION SURGERY: INCIDENCE AND OUTCOMES Takahiro Tsutsumimoto, Mutsuki Yui, Masashi Uehara, Hiroki Ohba, Hiroshi Ohta, Hidemi

More information

Interlaminar Decompression & Stabilization. Reginald Davis, M.D., FAANS, FACS Director of Clinical Research

Interlaminar Decompression & Stabilization. Reginald Davis, M.D., FAANS, FACS Director of Clinical Research Interlaminar Decompression & Stabilization Reginald Davis, M.D., FAANS, FACS Director of Clinical Research Disclosures Background Device meant to stabilize the spine without fusion following decompression

More information

Aperius interspinous implant versus open surgical decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis

Aperius interspinous implant versus open surgical decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis The Spine Journal 11 (2011) 933 939 Clinical Study interspinous implant versus open surgical decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis Roberto Postacchini, MD a, Emiliano Ferrari, MD b, Gianluca Cinotti,

More information

Am I eligible for the TOPS study? Possibly, if you suffer from one or more of the following conditions:

Am I eligible for the TOPS study? Possibly, if you suffer from one or more of the following conditions: Am I eligible for the TOPS study? Possibly, if you suffer from one or more of the following conditions: Radiating leg pain Greater leg / buttock pain than back pain Severe pain sets in when walking as

More information

Minamide A*, Yoshida M*, Yamada H*, Hashizume H*, NakagawaY*, Iwasaki H*, Tsutsui S*, Hiroyuki Oka H**.

Minamide A*, Yoshida M*, Yamada H*, Hashizume H*, NakagawaY*, Iwasaki H*, Tsutsui S*, Hiroyuki Oka H**. Efficacy of Posterior Segmental Decompression Surgery for Pincer Mechanism in Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy -A retrospective case control study using propensity score matching Minamide A*, Yoshida M*,

More information

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Lumbar Spinal Stenosis by David Borenstein, MD In a previous article on low back pain, I reviewed the anatomy of the spine and discussed three causes of low back pain: muscle strain, herniated intervertebral

More information

Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is a

Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is a WScJ 4: 1-5, 2013 Functional Evaluation Using the Modified Japanese Orthopedic Association Score (mjoa) for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy by Age, Gender, and Type of Disease Parisa Azimi 1*, Sohrab Shahzadi

More information

Spine and Fusion. Adjacent Segment Disease. 36Ihsan SOLAROGLU M.D., M. Ozerk OKUTAN M.D., Gurdal NUSRAN M.D.

Spine and Fusion. Adjacent Segment Disease. 36Ihsan SOLAROGLU M.D., M. Ozerk OKUTAN M.D., Gurdal NUSRAN M.D. Lumbar Posterior Hybrid Dynamic Stabilisation and Fusion Systems 36Ihsan SOLAROGLU M.D., M. Ozerk OKUTAN M.D., Gurdal NUSRAN M.D. Spine and Fusion It has been more than a century since 1911 when Albee

More information

Delayed surgery in neurologically intact patients affected by thoraco-lumbar junction burst fractures: to reduce pain and improve quality of life

Delayed surgery in neurologically intact patients affected by thoraco-lumbar junction burst fractures: to reduce pain and improve quality of life Original Study Delayed surgery in neurologically intact patients affected by thoraco-lumbar junction burst fractures: to reduce pain and improve quality of life Lorenzo Nigro 1, Roberto Tarantino 1, Pasquale

More information

A Structural Service Plan: Towards Better and Safer Spine Surgeries. Department of Orthopaedics & Traumatology Tuen Mun Hospital

A Structural Service Plan: Towards Better and Safer Spine Surgeries. Department of Orthopaedics & Traumatology Tuen Mun Hospital A Structural Service Plan: Towards Better and Safer Spine Surgeries Department of Orthopaedics & Traumatology Tuen Mun Hospital Cheung KK Wong CY Chan Andrew Tse Alfred Chow YY Department of Orthopaedics

More information

Segmental stability following minimally invasive decompressive surgery with tubular retractor for lumbar spinal stenosis

Segmental stability following minimally invasive decompressive surgery with tubular retractor for lumbar spinal stenosis Segmental stability following minimally invasive decompressive surgery with tubular retractor for lumbar spinal stenosis Department of Spinal surgery, Research Institute for Brain and Blood Vessels-Akita

More information

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Lower Extremity Arthroplasty

Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Lower Extremity Arthroplasty The Journal of Arthroplasty Vol. 8 No. 3 1993 Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Lower Extremity Arthroplasty Michael J. McNamara, MD, Kimberly G. Barrett, RN, BSN, Michael J. Christie, MD, and Dan M. Spengler,

More information

Original Article Comparison of decompression only versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar nerve root canal stenosis in elderly patients

Original Article Comparison of decompression only versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar nerve root canal stenosis in elderly patients Int J Clin Exp Med 2016;9(8):16491-16497 www.ijcem.com /ISSN:1940-5901/IJCEM0028754 Original Article Comparison of decompression only versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion for lumbar nerve root canal

More information

FirstCarolinaCare Spinal Surgery Prior authorization Guidelines

FirstCarolinaCare Spinal Surgery Prior authorization Guidelines FirstCarolinaCare Spinal Surgery Prior authorization Guidelines Subject LUMBAR FUSION (arthrodesis) Next Review 06/2014 General Requirements for Lumbar Spinal Fusion: 1. Prior authorization is required

More information

Systematic review Cervical artificial disc replacement versus fusion in the cervical spine: a systematic review (...)

Systematic review Cervical artificial disc replacement versus fusion in the cervical spine: a systematic review (...) Systematic review Cervical artificial disc replacement versus fusion in the cervical spine: a systematic review (...) 59 59 66 Cervical artificial disc replacement versus fusion in the cervical spine:

More information

The factors of deterioration in long-term clinical course of lumbar spinal canal stenosis after successful conservative treatment

The factors of deterioration in long-term clinical course of lumbar spinal canal stenosis after successful conservative treatment Tsubosaka et al. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research (2018) 13:239 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-018-0947-2 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access The factors of deterioration in long-term clinical course

More information

What Improvement in Function and Pain Intensity is Meaningful to Patients Recovering from Low-Risk Arm Fractures?

What Improvement in Function and Pain Intensity is Meaningful to Patients Recovering from Low-Risk Arm Fractures? ORIGINAL ARTICLE What Improvement in Function and Pain Intensity is Meaningful to Patients Recovering from Low-Risk Arm Fractures? ABSTRACT Background Small, statistically significant differences in patient-reported

More information

of thoracolumbar burst fractures

of thoracolumbar burst fractures Clin Orthop Relat Res (2016) 474:619 624 / DOI 10.1007/s11999-015-4305-y Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research A Publication of The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons Published online: 23 April

More information