European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society
-
To report the techniques and safety of one-staged combined decompression for the patients with tandem spinal stenosis (TSS) at cervical and thoracic spine. ⋯ Combined cervico-thoracic decompression could provide fair neurological outcomes for patients with cervico-thoracic TSS, but it was complicated with high rate of undesirable postoperative events. So, more efforts should be done against its eventful postoperative course before its wide application.
-
Multiple outcome measures exist to evaluate the outcomes of spinal decompression surgery; however, these tend to be complex and are difficult to express to the patient pre-operatively to accurately guide their expectations. We present outcomes, in terms of walking distance measurement, of a prospective single surgeon series of 76 consecutive patients with spinal stenosis. ⋯ This study demonstrates that walking distance is an accurate and accessible method of determining surgical outcomes.
-
Patients enrolled in clinical studies typically represent a sub-set of all who are eligible, and selection bias may compromise the generalizability of the findings. Using Registry data, we evaluated whether surgical patients recruited by one of the referring centres into the Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Outcome Study (LSOS; a large-scale, multicentre prospective observational study to determine the probability of clinical benefit after surgery) differed in any significant way from those who were eligible but not enrolled. ⋯ A high proportion of eligible patients were not enrolled in the study. Non-enrolment was explained in part by the specific surgeon, worse baseline COMI status, and having a fusion. The findings may reflect a tendency of the referring surgeon not to overburden more disabled patients and those undergoing more extensive surgery with the commitments of a study. Beyond these factors, non-enrolment appeared to be somewhat arbitrary, and was likely related to surgeon forgetfulness, time constraints, and administrative errors. Researchers should be aware of potential selection bias in their clinical studies, measure it (where possible) and discuss its implications for the interpretation of the study's findings.
-
We aimed to study generational changes in the dimensions of cervical and lumbar bony spinal canals in Western Switzerland. ⋯ Younger generation patients have smaller bony spinal canals also in the cervical spine even though this difference is less marked than at the lumbar level. There is, nevertheless, moderate positive correlation between these two anatomical regions. Perinatal factors that adversely influence spinal growth, such as increased maternal age and smoking, could explain these generational changes, given that body height has increased during the same time period. The lesser difference observed in the cervical spine could be due to later closure of the neurocentral synchondrosis at this level.
-
Lumbar spinal stenosis in the presence of degenerative spondylolisthesis is generally treated by means of surgery. The role of lumbar decompression without fusion is not clear. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess whether patients who undergo decompression alone have a favourable outcome without the need for a subsequent fusion. ⋯ Our study's results show that a lumbar decompression procedure without arthrodesis in a consecutive cohort of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis had a significant post-operative improvement in ODI, EQ-5D, and VAS. The rate of post-operative instability and subsequent fusion is not high. Only one in 10 patients in this group ended up needing a subsequent fusion at a mean follow-up of 36 months, indicating that fusion is not always necessary in these patients.