SPINAL INSTABILITY FOLLOWING SURGERY FOR DEGENERATIVE LUMBAR STENOSIS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5457/ams.v41i1.261Keywords:
lumbar stenosis, laminectomy, lamnotomy, instabilityAbstract
Background: Recognition that total laminectomy may perpetuate or cause segmental instability heralded the introduction of less invasive techniques of decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis surgery.
Aim: It was our aim to compare formal laminectomy and minimally invasive decompressive procedures in terms of safety and clinical outcome, specifically in respect to the development of postoperative spinal instability.
Methods: A retrospective analysis of medical records for 73 patients operated on for lumbar spinal stenosis (22 patients after laminectomy and 51 patients after minimally invasive decompression), with available follow-up data was performed. Basic variables were analyzed in respect to clinical outcome and in regard to development of radiological instability.
Results: Radiologic instability was present in 27,3% of patients after laminectomy, as compared to only 2,0% after laminotomy (p<0,001). Regression analysis identified presence of preoperative slip (p=0,0056) and type of surgery (p=0,0204) as sole predictors of instability after surgery. Clinical outcome analysis (laminectomy vs. laminotomy) revealed favorable outcome in both treatment groups, although significantly in favor of the laminotomy group (VAS p= 0,013 and RM p=0,031). Finally, difference in outcome was affected by weather radiologic instability was present or not (p=0,04 and p=0,09 for difference in outcome graded by VAS and RM values respectively)
Conclusion: Our results suggest that laminectomy is associated with prohibitively high incidence of postoperative radiologic instability when compared to minimally invasive decompression techniques. Furthermore, radiological instability translates to worse clinical outcome. Finally, patients undergoing laminectomy experience less favorable clinical outcome when compared to those undergoing minimally invasive decompression surgeries.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright transfer
The listed authors warrant that they are the authors and sole owners of the submitted manuscript. The authors also warrant that the work is original; that it has not been previously published in print or electronic format and is not under consideration by another publisher or electronic medium; that it has not been previously transferred, assigned, or otherwise encumbered; and that the authors have full power to grant such rights. With respect to the results of this work, the manuscript of this or substantially similar content will not be submitted to any other journal until the review process in the Acta Medica Salinianana has been officially completed (acceptance or rejection of the manuscript). The paper will not be withdrawn from the review process by the Acta Medica Saliniana Editorial Board until the review process is completed. The authors will comply with the requests of the Acta Medica Saliniana Editors and reviewers to improve the paper for publication. The eventual disagreements will be submitted in a written form; the authors are aware that the disagreement(s) with the Acta Medica Saliniana requests may result in the rejection of the manuscript. The authors hereby grant to the Acta Medica Saliniana the right to edit, revise, abridge, and condense the manuscript. If the manuscript is accepted for publication in the Acta Medica Saliniana, the authors hereby transfer the copyright of the paper to the Acta Medica Saliniana. The authors permit the Acta Medica Saliniana to allow third parties to copy any part of the journal without asking for permission, provided that the reference to the source is given. For papers with more than one author: All other co-authors agree to allow the corresponding author to make decisions regarding prepublication release of the information in the paper to the media, federal agencies, or both.
