“Spinous process splitting laminectomy for lumbar spinal stenosis: 2D operative video”

Author(s):  
M. Gagliardi ◽  
A. Guiroy ◽  
A. Sícoli ◽  
N. Gonzalez Masanés ◽  
A. Morales Ciancio ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (9) ◽  
pp. 2254-2261
Author(s):  
Erland Hermansen ◽  
Ivar Magne Austevoll ◽  
Christian Hellum ◽  
Kjersti Storheim ◽  
Tor Åge Myklebust ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose To investigate changes in dural sac area after three different posterior decompression techniques in patients undergoing surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Summary of background data Decompression of the nerve roots is the main surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis. The aim of this study was to radiologically investigate three commonly used posterior decompression techniques. Methods The present study reports data from one of two multicenter randomized trials included in the NORDSTEN study. In the present trial, involving 437 patients undergoing surgery, we report radiological results after three different midline retaining posterior decompression techniques: unilateral laminotomy with crossover (UL) (n = 146), bilateral laminotomy (BL) (n = 142) and spinous process osteotomy (SPO) (n = 149). MRI was performed before and three months after surgery. The increase in dural sac area and Schizas grade at the most stenotic level was evaluated. Three different predefined surgical indicators of substantial decompression were used: (1) postoperative dural sac area of > 100 mm2, (2) increase in the dural sac area of at least 50% and (3) postoperative Schizas grade A or B. Results No differences between the three surgical groups were found in the mean increase in dural sac area. Mean values were 66.0 (SD 41.5) mm2 in the UL-group, 71.9 (SD 37.1) mm2 in the BL-group and 68.1 (SD 41.0) mm2 in the SPO-group (p = 0.49). No differences in the three predefined surgical outcomes between the three groups were found. Conclusion For patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, the three different surgical techniques provided the same increase in dural sac area. Clinical trial registration The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov reference on November 22th 2013 under the identifier NCT02007083.


2007 ◽  
pp. 353-364
Author(s):  
Dimitriy Kondrashov ◽  
Ken Y. Hsu ◽  
James F. Zucherman

Spine ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (23) ◽  
pp. E1461-E1468 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mamoru Kawakami ◽  
Shin-ichi Nakao ◽  
Daisuke Fukui ◽  
Yasunori Kadosaka ◽  
Toshiko Matsuoka ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erland Hermansen ◽  
Gunnar Moen ◽  
Anne Marie Fenstad ◽  
Rune Birketvedt ◽  
Kari Indrekvam

2009 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 587-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ko Matsudaira ◽  
Takashi Yamazaki ◽  
Atsushi Seichi ◽  
Kazuto Hoshi ◽  
Nobuhiro Hara ◽  
...  

The authors developed an original procedure, modified fenestration with restorative spinoplasty (MFRS) for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. The first step is to cut the spinous process in an L-shape, which is caudally reflected. This procedure allows easy access to the spinal canal, including lateral recesses, and makes it easy to perform a trumpet-style decompression of the nerve roots without violating the facet joints. After the decompression of neural tissues, the spinous process is anatomically restored (spinoplasty). The clinical outcomes at 2 years were evaluated using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scale and patients' satisfaction. Radiological follow-up included radiographs and CT. Between January 2000 and December 2002, 109 patients with neurogenic intermittent claudication with or without mild spondylolisthesis underwent MFRS. Of these, 101 were followed up for at least 2 years (follow-up rate 93%). The average score on the self-administered JOA scale in 89 patients without comorbidity causing gait disturbance improved from 13.3 preoperatively to 22.9 at 2 years' follow-up. Neurogenic intermittent claudication disappeared in all cases. The patients' assessment of treatment satisfaction was “satisfied” in 74 cases, “slightly satisfied” in 12, “slightly dissatisfied” in 2, and “dissatisfied” in 1 case. In 16 cases (18%), a minimum progression of slippage occurred, but no symptomatic instability or recurrent stenosis was observed. Computed tomography showed that the lateral part of the facet joints was well preserved, and the mean residual ratio was 80%. The MFRS technique produces an adequate and safe decompression of the spinal canal, even in patients with narrow and steep facet joints in whom conventional fenestration is technically demanding.


2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
RK Pokharel ◽  
K Kafle ◽  
RL Pradhan ◽  
LL Shah

BACKGROUND Lumbar spinal stenosis is one of the common morbid conditions of adult population. Surgical intervention is recommended if conservative treatment is not effective. Aim of the surgery is to decompress neural tissues and it may vary from simple unilateral foraminotomy or laminotomy to multilevel bilateral laminectomy. Conventional laminectomy violates posterior stability and foraminotomy limits access to the neural tissues. Different techniques have been developed for adequate decompression with preservation of posterior stabilizing structures. METHODS Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis in 22 cases was treated by laminectomy with spinous process osteotomy and re-positioning during October 2007 to August 2009. All cases had back pain with radicular pain and intermittent neurogenic claudication. Average age of the cases was 49.5 years and the average duration of symptom was 7 months. Conservative treatment was tried for 4 months. Average follow up period was 2.5 months. RESULTS Post operatively 82% of the cases were satisfied. There was no radicular pain and intermittent claudication in all cases. Persistence of back pain and numbness in lower limbs was common complaints of majority of the cases. CONCLUSION “Laminectomy with spinous process osteotomy and re-positioning” technique easily decompresses lumbar spinal stenosis with preservation of posterior osteo-ligamentous structure. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/noaj.v1i1.8127 Nepal Orthopaedic Association Journal Vol.1(1) 2010


2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 210-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jimmy D. Miller ◽  
Mary C. Miller ◽  
Marsha G. Lucas

Interspinous process spacers have recently become available for treatment of symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis. To date, there have been few data regarding the causes of failure. The authors present 2 cases in which there was erosion of the spinous processes adjacent to the interspinous process spacers. In 1 patient, the recurrence of symptoms was likely related to the erosive changes. Such abnormal changes allow settling of the posterior spinal elements and probably results from continued motion at the treated levels.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document