Surgical versus nonsurgical therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Surgery for spinal stenosis is widely performed, but its effectiveness as compared with nonsurgical treatment has not been shown in controlled trials. METHODS: Surgical candidates with a history of at least 12 weeks of symptoms and spinal stenosis without spondylolisthesis (as confirmed on imaging) were enrolled in either a randomized cohort or an observational cohort at 13 U.S. spine clinics. Treatment was decompressive surgery or usual nonsurgical care. The primary outcomes were measures of bodily pain and physical function on the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form General Health Survey (SF-36) and the modified Oswestry Disability Index at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 and 2 years. RESULTS: A total of 289 patients were enrolled in the randomized cohort, and 365 patients were enrolled in the observational cohort. At 2 years, 67% of patients who were randomly assigned to surgery had undergone surgery, whereas 43% of those who were randomly assigned to receive nonsurgical care had also undergone surgery. Despite the high level of nonadherence, the intention-to-treat analysis of the randomized cohort showed a significant treatment effect favoring surgery on the SF-36 scale for bodily pain, with a mean difference in change from baseline of 7.8 (95% confidence interval, 1.5 to 14.1); however, there was no significant difference in scores on physical function or on the Oswestry Disability Index. The as-treated analysis, which combined both cohorts and was adjusted for potential confounders, showed a significant advantage for surgery by 3 months for all primary outcomes; these changes remained significant at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: In the combined as-treated analysis, patients who underwent surgery showed significantly more improvement in all primary outcomes than did patients who were treated nonsurgically. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000411 [ClinicalTrials.gov].)

Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis.

BACKGROUND: Management of degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis is controversial. Surgery is widely used, but its effectiveness in comparison with that of nonsurgical treatment has not been demonstrated in controlled trials. METHODS: Surgical candidates from 13 centers in 11 U.S. states who had at least 12 weeks of symptoms and image-confirmed degenerative spondylolisthesis were offered enrollment in a randomized cohort or an observational cohort. Treatment was standard decompressive laminectomy (with or without fusion) or usual nonsurgical care. The primary outcome measures were the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form General Health Survey (SF-36) bodily pain and physical function scores (100-point scales, with higher scores indicating less severe symptoms) and the modified Oswestry Disability Index (100-point scale, with lower scores indicating less severe symptoms) at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years. RESULTS: We enrolled 304 patients in the randomized cohort and 303 in the observational cohort. The baseline characteristics of the two cohorts were similar. The one-year crossover rates were high in the randomized cohort (approximately 40% in each direction) but moderate in the observational cohort (17% crossover to surgery and 3% crossover to nonsurgical care). The intention-to-treat analysis for the randomized cohort showed no statistically significant effects for the primary outcomes. The as-treated analysis for both cohorts combined showed a significant advantage for surgery at 3 months that increased at 1 year and diminished only slightly at 2 years. The treatment effects at 2 years were 18.1 for bodily pain (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.5 to 21.7), 18.3 for physical function (95% CI, 14.6 to 21.9), and -16.7 for the Oswestry Disability Index (95% CI, -19.5 to -13.9). There was little evidence of harm from either treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In nonrandomized as-treated comparisons with careful control for potentially confounding baseline factors, patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis treated surgically showed substantially greater improvement in pain and function during a period of 2 years than patients treated nonsurgically. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000409 [ClinicalTrials.gov].)

The impact of bone mineral density and disc degeneration on shear strength and stiffness of the lumbar spine following laminectomy

Purpose Laminectomy is a standard surgical procedure for elderly patients with symptomatic degenerative lumbar stenosis. The procedure aims at decompression of the affected nerves, but it also causes a reduction of spinal shear strength and shear stiffness. The magnitude of this reduction and the influence of bone mineral density (BMD) and disc degeneration are unknown. We studied the influence of laminectomy, BMD, and disc degeneration on shear force to failure (SFF) and shear stiffness (SS). Methods Ten human cadaveric lumbar spines were obtained (mean age 72.1 years, range 53-89 years). Laminectomy was performed either on L2 or L4, equally divided within the group of ten spines. BMD was assessed by dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Low BMD was defined as a BMD value below the median. Intervertebral discs were assessed for degeneration by MRI (Pfirrmann) and scaled in mild and severe degeneration groups. Motion segments L2-L3 and L4-L5 were isolated from each spine. SFF and SS were measured, while loading simultaneously with 1,600 N axial compression. Results Low BMD had a significant negative effect on SFF. In addition, a significant interaction between low BMD and laminectomy was found. In the high BMD group, SFF was 2,482 N (range 1,678-3,284) and decreased to 1,371 N (range 940-1,886) after laminectomy. In the low BMD group, SFF was 1,339 N (range 909-1,628) and decreased to 761 N (range 561-1,221). Disc degeneration did not affect SFF, nor did it interact with laminectomy. Neither low BMD nor the interaction of low BMD and laminectomy did affect SS. Degeneration and its interaction with laminectomy did not significantly affect SS. Conclusions In conclusion, low BMD significantly decreased SFF before and after lumbar laminectomy. Therefore, DXA assessment may be an important asset to preoperative screening. Lumbar disc degeneration did not affect shear properties of lumbar segments before or after laminectomy. © 2012 Springer-Verlag

The Incidence of Adjacent Segment Degeneration after Cervical Disc Arthroplasty (CDA): A Meta Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Cervical disc arthroplasty is being used as an alternative degenerative disc disease treatment with fusion of the cervical spine in order to preserve motion. However, whether replacement arthoplasty in the spine achieves its primary patient centered objective of lowering the frequency of adjacent segment degeneration is not verified yet.We conducted a meta-analysis according to the guidelines of the Cochrane Collaboration using databases including PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Embase. The inclusion criteria were: 1) Randomized, controlled study of degenerative disc disease of the cervical spine involving single segment or double segments using Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) as controls; 2) A minimum of two-year follow-up using imaging and clinical analyses; 3) Definite diagnostic evidences for "adjacent segment degeneration" and "adjacent segment disease"; 4) At least a minimum of 30 patients per population. Two authors independently selected trials; assessed methodological quality, extracted data and the results were pooled.No study has specifically compared the results of adjacent segment degenerative; Two papers describing 140 patients with 162 symptomatic cervical segment disorders and compared the rate of postoperative adjacent segment disease development between CDA and ACDF treatments, three publications describing the rate of adjacent-segment surgery including 1273 patients with symptomatic cervical segments. The result of the meta-analysis indicates that there were fewer the rate of adjacent segment disease and the rate for adjacent-segment surgery comparing CDA with ACDF, but the difference was not statistically significant.Based on available evidence, it cannot be concluded, that CDA can significantly reduce the postoperative rate of the adjacent segment degenerative and adjacent segment disease. However, due to some limitations, the results of this meta-analysis should be cautiously accepted, and further studies are needed

Cervical disc herniation and cervical spondylosis surgically treated by Cloward procedure: a 10-year-minimum follow-up study

BACKGROUND: Cervical degenerative pathology produces pain and disability, and if conservative treatment fails, surgery is indicated. The aim of this study was to determined whether anterior decompression and interbody fusion according to Cloward is effective for treating segmental cervical degenerative pathology and whether the results are durable after a 10-year-minimum follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-one patients affected by single-level cervical degenerative pathology between C4 and C7 were surgically treated by the Cloward procedure. Clinical evaluation was rated using the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and the visual analog scale (VAS). At last follow-up, the outcomes were rated according to Odom's criteria. On radiographs, the sagittal segmental alignment (SSA) of the affected level and the sagittal alignment of the cervical spine (SACS) were measured. RESULTS: Average NDI was 34 preoperatively and 11 at last follow-up. Average VAS was 7 preoperatively and 1 at last follow-up. According to Odom's criteria, the outcome was considered excellent in 18 cases, good in 22, and fair in 11. Average SSA was 0.5 +/- 2.1 preoperatively, 1.8 +/- 3.8 at 6 months, and 1.8 +/- 5.7 at last follow-up. Average SACS was 16.5 +/- 4.0 preoperatively, 20.9 +/- 5.8 at 6 months, and 19.9 +/- 6.4 at last follow-up. Degenerative changes at the adjacent levels were observed in 18 patients (35.3%). CONCLUSIONS: The Cloward procedure proved to be a suitable and effective technique for treating segmental cervical degenerative pathology, allowing good clinical and radiographic outcomes even at a long-term follow-up

Quantitative radiologic criteria for the diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic literature review

Background: Beside symptoms and clinical signs radiological findings are crucial in the diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). We investigate which quantitative radiological signs are described in the literature and which radilogical criteria are used to establish inclusion criteria in clincical studies evaluating different treatments in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods: A literature search was performed in Medline, Embase and the Cochrane library to identify papers reporting on radiological criteria to describe LSS and systematic reviews investigating the effects of different treatment modalities. Results: 25 studies reporting on radiological signs of LSS and four systematic reviews related to the evaluation of different treatments were found. Ten different parameters were identified to quantify lumbar spinal stenosis. Most often reported measures for central stenosis were antero-posterior diameter (< 10 mm) and cross-sectional area (< 70 mm2) of spinal canal. For lateral stenosis height and depth of the lateral recess, and for foraminal stenosis the foraminal diameter were typically used. Only four of 63 primary studies included in the systematic reviews reported on quantitative measures for defining inclusion criteria of patients in prognostic studies. Conclusions: There is a need for consensus on well-defined, unambiguous radiological criteria to define lumbar spinal stenosis in order to improve diagnostic accuracy and to formulate reliable inclusion criteria for clinical studies