Calcitonin treatment in lumbar spinal stenosis: A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, cross-over study with one-year follow-up

1992 ◽  
Vol 50 (5) ◽  
pp. 400-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antti Eskola ◽  
Timo Pohjolainen ◽  
Hannu Alaranta ◽  
Juhani Soini ◽  
Kaj Tallroth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Calcitonin Treatment ◽  
One Year ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

scholarly journals Study of Percutaneous Lumbar Decompression and Treatment Algorithm for Patients Suffering from Neurogenic Claudication

2012 ◽  
Vol 6;15 (6;12) ◽  
pp. 451-460
Author(s):  
Timothy R. Deer
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Radicular Pain ◽  
Neurogenic Claudication ◽  
Lumbar Decompression ◽  
Reduction Of Pain ◽  
One Year ◽  
Lumbar Spinal ◽  
Over Time

Background: Symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) patients often suffer from multiple etiologies, and patient symptoms must be differentiated and identified as either neurogenic claudication, radicular pain, or both. The most common symptom associated with LSS is neurogenic claudication, which has been reported to occur in 91% to 100% of the LSS patient population. Neurogenic claudication symptoms are described as pain radiating to the lower extremities that begins and worsens as the patient ambulates. Neurogenic claudication symptoms worsen over time and can eventually result in significant life-altering functional limitations. Symptomatic LSS patients may also suffer from radicular pain, which is a persistent pain transmitted through neural pathways, and is associated with inflammation of the exiting nerve root. Objective: To assess patient safety, pain reduction, and functional status of patients treated with percutaneous lumbar decompression. Study Design: Single-center, prospective clinical study of 46 consecutive patients with neurogenic claudication symptoms related to lumbar spinal stenosis. Setting: US interventional pain management practice. Methods: From March 2010 to January 2011, 46 LSS patients suffering from neurogenic claudication underwent mild percutaneous lumbar decompression. Of these, 12-week, 6-month and one-year followup was available for 35 patients. Outcome Assessment: Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ). Outcomes were assessed at baseline, 12-week, 6-month and one-year follow-up. Results: One-year follow-up patients in this study experienced statistically and clinically significant improvement in physical function, as well as reduction of pain intensity. The initial improvement in these patients, which was significant, was sustained through one year, with no significant differences among the interim follow-up visit periods. These results demonstrate early improvement following treatment with a high degree of durability over time. There were no serious device or procedure-related complications reported in this study. Limitations: Single-center study with no control group. Conclusions: In this study, the mild procedure was shown to be safe. In addition, patients experienced significant improvement in mobility and reduction of pain one year after the procedure. One-year outcomes were not significantly different from interim results, indicating that the significant improvement following treatment, occurring as early as 12 weeks, was maintained through one year. This high degree of consistency over time indicates the durability of percutaneous lumbar decompression in the treatment of neurogenic claudication in symptomatic LSS. Key words: Spine, lumbar, lumbar spinal stenosis, neurogenic claudication, decompression, ligamentum flavum, mild, percutaneous.

scholarly journals One-year follow-up for the therapeutic efficacy of pregabalin in patients with leg symptoms caused by lumbar spinal stenosis

2014 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 893-899 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naoto Takahashi ◽  
Itaru Arai ◽  
Satoru Kayama ◽  
Kenji Ichiji ◽  
Hironari Fukuda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Therapeutic Efficacy ◽  
One Year ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

scholarly journals Prospective one-year follow-up of lumbar spinal stenosis in a regional community

2018 ◽  
Vol Volume 11 ◽  
pp. 455-464
Author(s):  
Koji Otani ◽  
Shin-Ichi Kikuchi ◽  
Shoji Yabuki ◽  
Akira Onda ◽  
Takuya Nikaido ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Regional Community ◽  
One Year ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

scholarly journals A long-term (4- to 12-year) follow-up study of surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis

2000 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 563-570 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Cornefjord ◽  
G. Byröd ◽  
H. Brisby ◽  
B. Rydevik
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Treatment ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Follow Up Study ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Minimally Invasive versus Open Thoracolumbar Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Patients with Diabetes: A CSORN Study

2021 ◽  
pp. 13
Author(s):  
Kalpesh Hathi
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Research Network ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Patients With Diabetes ◽  
One Year ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Introduction: This study was aimed at comparing outcomes of minimally invasive (MIS) versus OPEN surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) in patients with diabetes. Methodology: This retrospective cohort study included patients with diabetes who underwent spinal decompression alone or with fusion for LSS within the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) database. Outcomes of MIS and OPEN approaches were compared for two cohorts: (i) patients with diabetes who underwent decompression alone (N = 116; MIS, n = 58, OPEN, n = 58) and (ii) patients with diabetes who underwent decompression with fusion (N = 108; MIS, n = 54, OPEN, n = 54). Mixed measures analyses of covariance compared modified Oswestry Disability Index (mODI) and back and leg pain at one-year post operation. The number of patients meeting minimum clinically important difference (MCID) or minimum pain/disability at one year were compared. Result: MIS approaches had less blood loss (decompression alone difference 99.66 mL, p = 0.002; with fusion difference 244.23, p < 0.001) and shorter LOS (decompression alone difference 1.15 days, p = 0.008; with fusion difference 1.23 days, p = 0.026). MIS compared to OPEN decompression with fusion had less patients experience an adverse event (difference, 13 patients, p = 0.007). The MIS decompression with fusion group had lower one-year mODI (difference, 14.25, p < 0.001) and back pain (difference, 1.64, p = 0.002) compared to OPEN. More patients in the MIS decompression with fusion group exceeded MCID at one year for mODI (MIS 75.9% vs OPEN 53.7%, p = 0.028) and back pain (MIS 85.2% vs OPEN 70.4%, p = 0.017). Conclusion: MIS approaches were associated with more favorable outcomes for patients with diabetes undergoing decompression with fusion for LSS.

scholarly journals Improvement of Back and Leg Pain after Lumbar Spinal Decompression without Fusion

2018 ◽  
Vol 80 (02) ◽  
pp. 081-087
Author(s):  
Nicola Bongartz ◽  
Christian Blume ◽  
Hans Clusmann ◽  
Christian Müller ◽  
Matthias Geiger
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Lumbar Spinal Stenosis ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Clear Trend ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Lumbar Spinal

Background To evaluate whether decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis without fusion leads to sufficient improvement of back pain and leg pain and whether re-decompression alone is sufficient for recurrent lumbar spinal stenosis for patients without signs of instability. Material and Methods A successive series of 102 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (with and without previous lumbar surgery) were treated with decompression alone during a 3-year period. Data on pre- and postoperative back pain and leg pain (numerical rating scale [NRS] scale) were retrospectively collected from questionnaires with a return rate of 65% (n = 66). The complete cohort as well as patients with first-time surgery and re-decompression were analyzed separately. Patients were dichotomized to short-term follow-up (< 100 weeks) and long-term follow-up (> 100 weeks) postsurgery. Results Overall, both back pain (NRS 4.59 postoperative versus 7.89 preoperative; p < 0.0001) and leg pain (NRS 4.09 versus 6.75; p < 0.0001) improved postoperatively. The short-term follow-up subgroup (50%, n = 33) showed a significant reduction in back pain (NRS 4.0 versus 6.88; p < 0.0001) and leg pain (NRS 2.49 versus 6.91: p < 0.0001). Similar results could be observed for the long-term follow-up subgroup (50%, n = 33) with significantly less back pain (NRS 3.94 versus 7.0; p < 0.0001) and leg pain (visual analog scale 3.14 versus 5.39; p < 0.002) postoperatively. Patients with previous decompression surgery benefit significantly regarding back pain (NRS 4.82 versus 7.65; p < 0.0024), especially in the long-term follow-up subgroup (NRS 4.75 versus 7.67; p < 0.0148). There was also a clear trend in favor of leg pain in patients with previous surgery; however, it was not significant. Conclusions Decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis without fusion led to a significant and similar reduction of back pain and leg pain in a short-term and a long-term follow-up group. Patients without previous surgery benefited significantly better, whereas patients with previous decompression benefited regarding back pain, especially for long-term follow-up with a clear trend in favor of leg pain.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document