Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis: A comparative study of 5-year outcomes following decompression with fusion and microendoscopic decompression

20Citations
Citations of this article
22Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Study Design: Retrospective review of prospectively collected outcome data. Purpose: To compare 5-year outcomes following decompression with fusion (FU) and microendoscopic decompression (MED) in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) and to define surgical indication limitations regarding the use of MED for this condition. Overview of Literature: There have been no comparative studies on mid- or long-term outcomes following FU and MED for patients with DLS. Methods: Forty-one consecutive patients with DLS were surgically treated. Sixteen patients first underwent FU (FU group), and 25 then underwent MED (MED group). The 5-year clinical outcomes following the two surgical methods were compared using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire. Results: The degree of improvement (DOI) for social life function was significantly greater in the MED group than in the FU group. Although not statistically significant, DOIs for the other four functional scores were also greater in the MED group than in the FU group. However, patients with a large percentage of slippage in the neutral position might experience limited improvement in low back pain, those with a large percentage of slippage at maximal extension might experience limited improvement in three functional scores, and those with a small intervertebral angle at maximal flexion might have limited improvement in three functional scores after MED for DLS. Therefore, we statistically compared the DOIs between the FU and MED groups regarding the preoperative percentage of slippage in the neutral position among patients with greater than 20% slippage, the preoperative percentage of slippage at maximal extension among patients with greater than 15% slippage, and the intervertebral angle at flexion among patients with angles lesser than -5°; however, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups. Conclusions: MED is a useful minimally invasive surgical procedure that possibly offers better clinical outcomes than FU for DLS.

References Powered by Scopus

Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis: A prospective study comparing decompression with decompression and intertransverse process arthrodesis

857Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Terminology and measurement of spondylolisthesis

316Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

JOA Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ)/JOA Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire (JOACMEQ) the report on the development of revised versions April 16, 2007 : tthe Subcommittee of the Clinical Outcome Committee of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association on Low Back Pain and Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation

227Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Comparison of Decompression, Decompression Plus Fusion, and Decompression Plus Stabilization for Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Prospective, Randomized Study

74Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Decompression alone or decompression and fusion in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

30Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

An Algorithmic Approach to Treating Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: An Evidenced-Based Approach

27Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Aihara, T., Toyone, T., Murata, Y., Inage, K., Urushibara, M., & Ouchi, J. (2018). Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis: A comparative study of 5-year outcomes following decompression with fusion and microendoscopic decompression. Asian Spine Journal, 12(1), 132–139. https://doi.org/10.4184/asj.2018.12.1.132

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

Researcher 4

50%

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 2

25%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

13%

Lecturer / Post doc 1

13%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 11

65%

Nursing and Health Professions 3

18%

Neuroscience 2

12%

Business, Management and Accounting 1

6%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free