Laminectomy plus Fusion versus Laminectomy Alone for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.

BACKGROUND: The comparative effectiveness of performing instrumented (rigid pedicle screws affixed to titanium alloy rods) lumbar spinal fusion in addition to decompressive laminectomy in patients with symptomatic lumbar grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis is unknown. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled trial, we assigned patients, 50 to 80 years of age, who had stable degenerative spondylolisthesis (degree of spondylolisthesis, 3 to 14 mm) and symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis to undergo either decompressive laminectomy alone (decompression-alone group) or laminectomy with posterolateral instrumented fusion (fusion group). The primary outcome measure was the change in the physical-component summary score of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36; range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life) 2 years after surgery. The secondary outcome measure was the score on the Oswestry Disability Index (range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more disability related to back pain). Patients were followed for 4 years. RESULTS: A total of 66 patients (mean age, 67 years; 80% women) underwent randomization. The rate of follow-up was 89% at 1 year, 86% at 2 years, and 68% at 4 years. The fusion group had a greater increase in SF-36 physical-component summary scores at 2 years after surgery than did the decompression-alone group (15.2 vs. 9.5, for a difference of 5.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.1 to 11.3; P=0.046). The increases in the SF-36 physical-component summary scores in the fusion group remained greater than those in the decompression-alone group at 3 years and at 4 years (P=0.02 for both years). With respect to reductions in disability related to back pain, the changes in the Oswestry Disability Index scores at 2 years after surgery did not differ significantly between the study groups (-17.9 in the decompression-alone group and -26.3 in the fusion group, P=0.06). More blood loss and longer hospital stays occurred in the fusion group than in the decompression-alone group (P<0.001 for both comparisons). The cumulative rate of reoperation was 14% in the fusion group and 34% in the decompression-alone group (P=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with degenerative grade I spondylolisthesis, the addition of lumbar spinal fusion to laminectomy was associated with slightly greater but clinically meaningful improvement in overall physical health-related quality of life than laminectomy alone. (Funded by the Jean and David Wallace Foundation and others; SLIP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00109213.).

Increased Patient Enrollment to a Randomized Surgical Trial Through Equipoise Polling of an Expert Surgeon Panel.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patients who learned the views of an expert surgeons' panel's assessment of equipoise between 2 alternative operative treatments had increased likelihood of consenting to randomization. BACKGROUND: Difficulty obtaining patient consent to randomization is an important barrier to conducting surgical randomized clinical trials, the gold standard for generating clinical evidence. METHODS: Observational study of the rate of patient acceptance of randomization within a 5-center randomized clinical trial comparing lumbar spinal decompression versus lumbar spinal decompression plus instrumented fusion for patients with symptomatic grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. Eligible patients were enrolled in the trial and then asked to accept randomization. A panel of 10 expert spine surgeons was formed to review clinical information and images for individual patients to provide an assessment of suitability for randomization. The expert panel vote was disclosed to the patient by the patient's surgeon before the patient decided whether to accept randomization or not. RESULTS: Randomization acceptance among eligible patients without expert panel review was 40% (19/48) compared with 81% (47/58) among patients undergoing expert panel review (P < 0.001). Among expert-reviewed patients, randomization acceptance was 95% when all experts or all except 1 voted for randomization, 75% when 2 experts voted against randomization, and 20% with 3 or 4 votes against (P < 0.001 for trend). CONCLUSIONS: Patients provided with an expert panel's assessment of their own suitability for randomization were twice as likely to agree to randomization compared with patients receiving only their own surgeon's recommendation.

Prospective outcomes evaluation after decompression with or without instrumented fusion for lumbar stenosis and degenerative Grade I spondylolisthesis.

OBJECT: There is considerable debate among spine surgeons regarding whether fusion should be used to augment decompressive surgery in patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis involving Grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis. The authors prospectively evaluated the outcomes of patients treated between 2000 and 2002 at two institutions to determine whether fusion improves functional outcome 1 year after surgery. METHODS: Patients ranged in age from 50 to 81 years. They presented with degenerative Grade I (3- to 14-mm) spondylolisthesis and lumbar stenosis without gross instability (< 3 mm of motion at the level of subluxation). Those in whom previous surgery had been performed at the level of subluxation were excluded. Each patient completed Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaires preoperatively and at 6 to 12 months postoperatively. Some patients underwent decompression alone (20 cases), whereas others underwent decompression and posterolateral instrumentation-assisted fusion (14 cases), at the treating surgeon's discretion. Baseline demographic data, radiographic features, and ODI and SF-36 scores were similar in both groups. The 1-year fusion rate was 93%. Both forms of surgery independently improved outcome compared with baseline status, based on ODI and SF-36 physical component summary (PCS) results (p < 0.001). Decompression combined with fusion led to an improvement in ODI scores of 27.5 points, whereas decompression alone was associated with a 13.6-point increase (p = 0.02). Analysis of the SF-36 PCS data also demonstrated a significant intergroup difference (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Surgery substantially improved 1-year outcomes based on established outcomes instruments in patients with Grade I spondylolisthesis and stenosis. Fusion was associated with greater functional improvement.