Association of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis with Severe Disability and Mortality Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults: The Locomotive Syndrome and Health Outcomes in the Aizu Cohort Study.

STUDY DESIGN: This prospective cohort study analyzed data from the Locomotive Syndrome and Health Outcomes in the Aizu Cohort Study. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and severe disability and mortality among community-dwelling older adults. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Only a few studies have investigated LSS longitudinally, and the study participants were limited to selected patients diagnosed with LSS during a hospital visit. Additionally, the prognosis of LSS remains unclear. METHODS: We enrolled independent community-dwelling older adults aged 65 years or older at the time of a baseline health checkup in 2008. LSS was diagnosed using a validated diagnostic support tool for LSS. The primary endpoint was a composite of severe disability (long-term care insurance certification grade 4 or 5) and mortality. We used 1 minus Kaplan-Meier failure estimates and the log-rank test to compare the interval between baseline and the predetermined endpoint as well as a Cox proportional hazards model to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for the LSS group with adjustment for possible confounders. Multiple imputation by chained equations was performed for sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Of 2058 subjects enrolled, 1560 did not have missing covariates; 269 (17%) were diagnosed with LSS. After a median follow-up of 5.8 years, the rates of severe disability and mortality were 0.022 per year in subjects with LSS and 0.012 per year in those without (P = 0.006). The adjusted HR for the composite endpoint in the LSS group was 1.55 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-2.38). A similar association was observed after multiple imputation of missing covariates (adjusted HR, 1.51 [95% CI, 1.06-2.16]). CONCLUSION: LSS was associated with severe disability and mortality in community-dwelling older adults. Detection of adults with LSS in the community may contribute to local health promotion.Level of Evidence: 2.

Influence of diabetes mellitus on patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: A nationwide population-based study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the relationship between comorbidities, medical cost, and surgical outcome in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and diabetes mellitus (DM). METHODS: Data on patients with LSS (n = 14,298) were collected from the Korean National Health Insurance Service database from 2005 to 2007. After 8 years of follow-up, a "DM group" (n = 3,478) and a "non-DM group" (n = 10,820) were compared according to outcome measures. Cox proportional hazard regressions were performed to examine the relationship between DM, hypertension (HTN), cardiovascular disease (CVD), chronic kidney disease (CKD), cerebrovascular disease (CbVD), and surgery for LSS. The admission rate and medical cost as well asthe overall survival rate for those who underwent lumbar surgery were also assessed among patients with DM and LSS. RESULTS: Mortality was about 1.35 times higher in the DM group than in the non-DM group. Patients with DM and comorbidities including HTN (hazard ratio [HR], 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-1.56; p<0.001), CVD (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.36-1.73; p<0.001), CKD (HR, 3.18; 95% CI, 2.7-3.76; p<0.001), and CbVD (HR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.49-1.91; p<0.001) showed an increased risk of mortality. The mean hospitalization time and average medical cost of patients with DM who underwent lumbar surgery were 60.8 days, and 7,127 USD, respectively. This was 31.3 days longer, and 6,207 USD higher, respectively, than those of patients with DM who underwent conservative treatment for LSS. Within the DM group, the survival rate of surgical management of LSS had a significant tendency for positive prognosis compared with those administered conservative treatment (p = 0.046). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with LSS, DM was associated both with poor prognosis (most significantly in those with CKD), and increased medical cost in those who underwent surgery. Nevertheless, surgical treatment for LSS in patients with DM was related to favorable prognosis compared with conservative treatment.

Superion Interspinous Spacer Treatment of Moderate Spinal Stenosis: 4-Year Results.

OBJECTIVE: To determine 4-year clinical outcomes in patients with moderate lumbar spinal stenosis treated with minimally invasive stand-alone interspinous process decompression using the Superion device. METHODS: The 4-year Superion data were extracted from a randomized, controlled Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption trial. Patients with intermittent neurogenic claudication relieved with back flexion who failed at least 6 months of nonsurgical management were enrolled. Outcomes included Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) symptom severity (ss), physical function (pf) and patient satisfaction (ps) subdomains, leg and back pain visual analog scale (VAS), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). At 4-year follow-up, 89 of the 122 patients (73%) provided complete clinical outcome evaluations. RESULTS: At 4 years after index procedure, 75 of 89 patients with Superion (84.3%) demonstrated clinical success on at least 2 of 3 ZCQ domains. Individual component responder rates were 83% (74/89), 79% (70/89), and 87% (77/89) for ZCQss, ZCQpf, and ZCQps; 78% (67/86) and 66% (57/86) for leg and back pain VAS; and 62% (55/89) for ODI. Patients with Superion also demonstrated percentage improvements over baseline of 41%, 40%, 73%, 69%, and 61% for ZCQss, ZCQpf, leg pain VAS, back pain VAS, and ODI. Within-group effect sizes all were classified as very large (>1.0): 1.49, 1.65, 1.42, 1.12, and 1.46 for ZCQss, ZCQpf, leg pain VAS, back pain VAS, and ODI. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive implantation of the Superion device provides long-term, durable relief of symptoms of intermittent neurogenic claudication for patients with moderate lumbar spinal stenosis.

Interspinous spacers compared with decompression or fusion for lumbar stenosis: complications and repeat operations in the Medicare population.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis of Medicare claims for 2006-2009. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether interspinous distraction procedures are used selectively in patients with more advanced age or comorbidity, and whether they are associated with fewer complications, lower costs, and less revision surgery than laminectomy or fusion surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: A manufacturer-sponsored randomized trial suggested an advantage of interspinous spacer surgery compared with nonsurgical care, but there are few comparisons with other surgical procedures. Furthermore, there are few population-based data evaluating patterns of use of these devices. METHODS: We used Medicare inpatient claims data to compare age and comorbidity for patients with spinal stenosis undergoing surgery (n = 99,084) with (1) an interspinous process spacer alone; (2) laminectomy and a spacer; (3) decompression alone; or (4) lumbar fusion (1-2 level). We also compared these 4 groups for cost of surgery and rates of revision surgery, major medical complications, wound complications, mortality, and 30-day readmission rates. RESULTS: Patients who received spacers were older than those undergoing decompression or fusion, but had little evidence of greater comorbidity. Patients receiving a spacer alone had fewer major medical complications than those undergoing decompression or fusion surgery (1.2% vs. 1.8% and 3.3%, respectively), but had higher rates of further inpatient lumbar surgery (16.7% vs. 8.5% for decompression and 9.8% for fusion at 2 yr). Hospital payments for spacer surgery were greater than those for decompression alone but less than for fusion procedures. These associations persisted in multivariate models adjusting for patient age, sex, comorbidity score, and previous hospitalization. CONCLUSION: Compared with decompression or fusion, interspinous distraction procedures pose a trade-off in outcomes: fewer complications for the index operation, but higher rates of revision surgery. This information should help patients make more informed choices, but further research is needed to define optimal indications for these new devices. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

Clinical outcomes of spinal surgery in patients treated with hemodialysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to review clinical outcomes, including survival rate, and to discuss the potential benefit of surgical treatments for spinal disorders in patients treated with long-term hemodialysis (HD). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Long-term HD is known to possibly cause destructive spondyloarthropathy (DSA) with spinal canal stenosis. There have been few reports, however, regarding clinical outcomes and patient survival rates after spinal surgeries in this population. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 33 chronic HD patients who underwent 21 cervical and 13 lumbar spinal surgeries. According to the radiologic findings, we divided them into the non-DSA and the DSA groups. In general, only decompression was performed for the non-DSA patients, whereas spinal fusion was added for the DSA patients. We analyzed the following data, respectively: male-female ratio, age, operative time, estimated blood loss, duration of HD, follow-up duration, preoperative and postoperative Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, improvement ratio of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, amyloid deposition characteristics, and survival rate. RESULTS: All patients improved neurologically and functionally after surgery. There were significant differences in the operative time between the DSA and the non-DSA groups in patients with cervical spinal lesions, whereas in patients with lumbar spinal lesions, there were significant differences in sex, operative time, and estimated blood loss. Amyloid deposition was found signficantly more commonly in DSA than in non-DSA patients and was associated with a longer duration of HD. Nine patients died within 49 months of the surgery because of HD-related complications, but there was no surgery-related morbidity. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a trend toward decreased survival rate in non-DSA patients more than 40 months after the index surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Even in patients treated with long-term HD, spinal surgeries reliably obtain neurological and functional improvement if surgeons judge the preoperative inclusion criteria correctly. However, if surgeries are necessary for these patients, surgeons should consider the patients' comorbidity-related survival rate after the spinal surgeries.

The impact of provider volume on the outcomes after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Investigation into the provider volume-outcomes association for patients undergoing spine surgery has been limited. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of surgeon and hospital volume on the outcomes after decompression with or without fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis. METHODS: Data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2005-2008) were retrospectively extracted. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to calculate the adjusted odds of in-hospital mortality and the development of a postoperative complication with increasing surgeon or hospital volume. Provider volume was evaluated continuously and categorically, divided by percentiles into quintiles. Very-low-volume surgeons performed < 15 procedures over 4 years. All analyses were adjusted for differences in patient age, sex, comorbidities, and primary payer, as well as hospital bed size, teaching status, and location (urban vs rural). RESULTS: A total of 48,971 admissions were examined. In-hospital mortality did not differ significantly with increasing provider volume. When examined continuously, greater surgeon volume was associated with a significantly lower adjusted odds of developing a complication (odds ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.78; P < .001). Patients who underwent surgery by very-low-volume surgeons (odds ratio, 1.38; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-1.60; P = .001), but not those treated by low-, medium-, or high-volume surgeons, had a significantly higher complication rate compared with those who underwent surgery by very high-volume surgeons. After adjustment for surgeon volume, hospital volume was not significantly associated with in-hospital mortality or complications. CONCLUSION: In this nationwide study, patients treated by very-low-volume surgeons had a significantly higher complication rate compared with those treated by very high-volume surgeons.

Predictors of surgical, general and follow-up complications in lumbar spinal stenosis relative to patient age as emerged from the Spine Tango Registry.

INTRODUCTION: Published opinions regarding the outcomes and complications in older patients have a broad spectrum and there is a disagreement whether surgery in older patients entails a higher risk. Therefore this study examines the risk of surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis relative to age in the pooled data set of the Spine Tango registry. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between May 2005 and February 2010 the database query resulted in 1,764 patients. The patients were subdivided into three socio-economically relevant age groups: <65 years, 65-74 years, ≥75 years. Frequencies for occurred surgical, general and follow-up complications were assessed. Multivariate and univariate logistic regressions were performed to reveal predictors for respective complication types. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Our study found that age, ASA status and blood loss were significant co-varieties for the occurrence of general complications. The risk of general complications is increased in older versus younger patients. Fusion or rigid stabilization does not lead to more complications. Surgical complications as well as complication rates at follow-up showed no significant age-related variation. Physician-based outcome was good or excellent in over 80% of patients in all age groups.

Occipitocervical fusion in elderly patients.

BACKGROUND: Occipitocervical disease (OCD) in elderly patients will become increasingly common as the population ages. Our experience with occipitocervical fusions (OCF) in this population suggests mixed outcomes. METHODS: Twenty consecutive patients over 65 years old underwent OCF between 1995 and 2005. A retrospective review of demographic, presentation, surgical and outcome data was performed. RESULTS: Twenty patients averaging 75.3 years of age (range 65 to 91) were identified. All patients had evidence of myelopathy; however, the primary surgical indications were progressive spinal cord dysfunction (15), brainstem compression (3), and pain (2). Surgical approach was isolated posterior (9), or anterior transoral odontoidectomy followed by posterior stabilization (11). Overall, surgery improved function modestly; average modified Japanese Orthopedic Association functional score (improved 0.9 grades), average Ranawat Myelopathy Score (improved 0.4 grades), and average Nurick Myelopathy Grade (improved 0.6 grades). However, patients with poor preoperative functional assessment (Ranawat grade ≥ III) had greater neurologic improvement than those with good preoperative function, measured by Nurick grade improvement (1 vs. -0.28; P = .03) and Ranawat grade improvement (0.7 vs. -0.2; P = .03). Additionally, the posterior approach demonstrated significant improvement in Japanese Orthopedic Association functional assessment over patients with anterior/posterior approaches (2.2 vs. -0.3; P = .03), with fewer complications (posterior: 1 minor; anterior/posterior: 1 death, 2 major, 8 minor). Perioperative mortality occurred in 5%, and major morbidity in 10% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Preventing or stabilizing neurologic deficit in patients with OCD may require OCF, despite the patient's age. In the elderly population, our data favor using the posterior approach when possible, and demonstrate greater neurologic improvement in patients with poor preoperative function.

Survivorship analysis of 150 consecutive patients with DIAM™ implantation for surgery of lumbar spinal stenosis and disc herniation.

Recently, the Device for Intervertebral Assisted Motion (DIAM™) has been introduced for surgery of degenerative lumbar disc diseases. The authors performed the current study to determine the survivorship of DIAM™ implantation for degenerative lumbar disc diseases and risk factors for reoperation. One hundred and fifty consecutive patients underwent laminectomy or discectomy with DIAM™ implantation for primary lumbar spinal stenosis or disc herniation. The characteristics of the 150 patients included the following: 84 males and 66 females; mean age at the time of surgery, 46.5 years; median value of follow-up, 23 months (range 1-48 months); 96 spinal stenosis and 54 disc herniations; and 146 one-level (115, L4-5; 31, L5-6) and 4 two-level (L4-5 and L5-6). In the current study, due to lumbosacral transitional vertebra (LSTV) L6 meant lumbarization of S1 and this had a prominent spinous process so that the DIAM™ was implanted at L5-6. Reoperations due to any reasons of the DIAM™ implantation level or adjacent levels were defined as a failure and used as the end point for determining survivorship. The cumulative reoperation rate and survival time were determined via Kaplan-Meier analysis. The log-rank test and Cox regression model were used to evaluate the effect of age, gender, diagnosis, location, and level of DIAM™ implantation on the reoperation rate. During a 4-year follow-up, seven patients (two males and five female) underwent reoperation at the DIAM™ implantation level, giving a reoperation rate of 4.7%. However, no patients underwent reoperation for adjacent level complications. The causes of reoperation were recurrent spinal stenosis (n = 3), recurrent disc herniation (n = 2), post-laminectomy spondylolisthesis (n = 1), and delayed deep wound infection (n = 1). The mean time between primary operation and reoperation was 13.4 months (range 2-29 months). Kaplan-Meier analysis predicted an 8% cumulative reoperation rate 4 years post-operatively. Survival time was predicted to be 45.6 ± 0.9 months (mean ± standard deviation). Based on the log-rank test, the reoperation rate was higher at L5-6 (p = 0.002) and two-level (p = 0.01) DIAM™ implantation compared with L4-5 and one-level DIAM™ implantation. However, gender (p = 0.16), age (p = 0.41), and diagnosis (p = 0.67) did not significantly affect the reoperation rate of DIAM™ implantation. Based on a Cox regression model, L5-6 [hazard ratio (HR), 10.3; 95% CI, 1.7-63.0; p = 0.01] and two-level (HR, 10.4; 95% CI, 1.2-90.2; p = 0.04) DIAM™ implantation were also significant variables associated with a higher reoperation rate. Survival time was significantly lower in L5-6 (47 vs. 22 months, p = 0.002) and two-level DIAM™ implantation (46 vs. 18 months, p = 0.01) compared with L4-5 and one-level DIAM™ implantation. The current results suggest that 8% of the patients who have a DIAM™ implantation for primary lumbar spinal stenosis or disc herniation are expected to undergo reoperation at the same level within 4 years after surgery. Based on the limited data set, DIAM™ implantation at L5-6 and two-level in patients with LSTV are significant risk factors for reoperation.

Life expectancy after lumbar spine surgery: one- to eleven-year follow-up of 1015 patients.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the 10-year survival of a large number of elderly patients who underwent spine surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis, and to identify significant risk factors and compare them with age- and gender-matched controls from the general population. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There have been many studies on treatment options and surgical outcomes for lumbar spinal stenosis. However, survival outcomes after lumbar spinal stenosis surgery have not previously been studied. Because these operations are usually performed for elderly patients, we consider patient survival or life expectancy to be a significant outcome measure. METHODS: Between January 1997 and June 2006, patients underwent spine surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. The date of death was verified using records from the National Health Insurance Corporation. Cumulative 10-year survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and the survival of patients who had undergone spine surgery was compared to that of age- and sex-matched members of the general population. A Cox multivariate regression analysis was used in order to compare the survival rates for different covariates. RESULTS: Using Kaplan-Meier curves, the overall 10-year survival was 87.8% in patients 60 to 70 years old at surgery, and 83.8% in patients 70 to 85 years old at surgery. The 10-year survival rate of female patients and patients who underwent fusion surgery were higher than those of male patients and patients with nonfusion surgery. Compared to the adjusted corresponding portion in general population, the standardized mortality ratios were 0.21, 0.53, and 0.45 in patients aged 50 to 59, 60 to 69, and 70 to 85, respectively. CONCLUSION: Elderly patients who underwent spine surgery for spinal stenosis had reduced mortality compared to the corresponding portion of the general population. Therefore, surgery for spinal stenosis is a justifiable procedure even in elderly patients.

[Long-term survival analysis after surgical management for degenerative lumbar stenosis]. / Etude à long terme du risque de réintervention après traitement chirurgical d'une sténose canalaire lombaire.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The short- and mid-term symptom-relief of surgical treatment for lumbar stenosis is generally acknowledged, but the probability of a long-term reoperation remains to be studied. The purpose of this work was to determine the long-term risk of reoperation after surgical treatment of degenerative lumbar stenosis and to search for factors influencing this probability. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients who underwent from 1989 to 1992 surgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spine stenosis were included in this work. At last follow-up, we noted functional outcome using a specific self-administered questionnaire, patient satisfaction, lumbalgia and radiculalgia using a visual analog scale, SF36 quality-of-life, reoperation or not with time since first operation if performed and the reasons and modalities of the reoperation. The probability of reoperation was determined with the acturarial method. A Cox model was used to search for factors linked with the probability of reoperation; variables studied were: age, comorbid factors, extent of the release, posterolateral arthrodesis or not, extent of the potential fusion, use or not of instrumentation for arthrodesis. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The study included 262 patients. At last follow-up, 61 patients had died a mean 3.7+/-3 years after the operation; only one of these patients had a second operation 22 months after the first. Forty-four patients were lost to follow-up at mean 6.6+/-3 years. Among these 44 patients, four had a second operation during their initial follow-up at mean 47 months. One hundred fifty-seven patients were retained for this analysis at mean 15+/-1 years follow-up. Among these 157 patients, 29 had a second operation a mean 75 months after the first. There were four reasons for reoperating: insufficient release, destabilization within or above the zone of release, development or renewed zone of stenosis, development or renewed discal herniation. The risk of a second operation was 7.4% [95% CI 4.8-11.6], 15.4% [95% CI 10.7-21.1] and 16.5% [95% CI 11.7-219] at five, 10 and 15 years respectively after the first operation. Among the risk factors studied, only one had a significant impact on reoperation: extent of the zone of release (p=0.003). Compared with a release limited to one level, the risk of reoperation after release of three levels or more was five times greater [95% CI 1.8-12.7].

Adjacent segment disease following expansive lumbar laminoplasty.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: We developed the technique of expansive lumbar laminoplasty in 1981. In the procedure of laminoplasty, the spinal canal is decompressed by rotatory elevation of the laminae, and bone grafts from the spinous process and posterior iliac bone are placed on the surface of the operated laminae. Therefore, adjacent segment disease due to mechanical stress could be anticipated in the long-term follow-up. PURPOSE: To investigate the incidence of symptomatic adjacent segment disease after expansive lumbar laminoplasty, to identify the factors which are related to the development of this disease, and to discuss the treatment of this postoperative problem. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: This is a retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Seventy-one patients (53 men and 18 women with a mean age of 55.7 years) underwent expansive lumbar laminoplasty for the treatment of spinal stenosis. The average length of follow-up was 5.4 years with a range of 2 to 13 years. OUTCOME MEASURES: Follow-up evaluation was primarily by means of clinical visits. METHODS: The incidence of adjacent segment disease which resulted in the deterioration of Japanese Orthopaedic Association score was analyzed. The diagnosis of symptomatic adjacent segment disease was based on both newly developed clinical symptoms and radiological lesions at the disc levels adjacent to the lumbar laminoplasty. We evaluated the correlation between the incidence of symptomatic adjacent segment disease and the clinical parameters and radiological parameters. RESULTS: Eight patients (11%) showed deterioration in the lesions at the segment adjacent to laminoplasty. The disease-free survival rates by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were 95.7% at 5 years, 63.1% at 10 years, and 42.1% at 13 years. The incidence of spondylolisthesis in the disease group was higher than that in the disease-free group. The preoperative range of motion of L1-L5 in the disease group was significantly higher than that in the disease-free group. In five patients in whom conservative treatment failed for adjacent segment disease, reoperations were performed and they were effective. CONCLUSIONS: It should be taken into account that adjacent segment disease occurs after expansive lumbar laminoplasty. Spondylolisthesis might be a risk factor for the disease. Although reoperation was effective, it is necessary to consider the patient's age and physical condition before choosing further surgical therapy.

Spinal stenosis surgery in Sweden 1987-1999.

Despite being recognised for many years as a clinical diagnosis, no exact definition of spinal stenosis has yet been agreed, leading to difficulties in interpreting and comparing studies of the incidence, prevalence and treatment. This study presents the first analysis of national data to be reported. It is a retrospective population-based national register study, aimed at analyzing surgical interventions in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, patient characteristics, subsequent development, and case fatality rate, based on Swedish national data for 1987-1999. Complete follow-up data were obtained of incidence and type of spinal stenosis surgery, rate of multiple operations, mortality, underlying causes of death, length of hospital stay, and case fatality rate by linkage of the National Inpatient Register and Swedish Death Register. The study cohort consisted of 10,494 patients. Laminectomy was performed in 89%, and additional fusion in 11%. The mean annual rate of operations was 9.7 per 100,000 inhabitants, the annual number of operations performed increased from 4.7 to 13.2 per 100,000 inhabitants per year. The case fatality rate within 30 days after surgery was 3.5 per 1000 operations. Cardiovascular disease was the most common cause of death (46%). Relative risk of dying within 30 days of admission was doubled in men, and for fusion surgery, and increased four fold in patients older than 80 years. The relative risk of dying decreased during the study period. The results show that spinal stenosis surgery in Sweden has increased, and is associated with a low risk. Within an ageing group of patients, mortality has declined.

Observations on the safety and efficacy of surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis in geriatric patients.

This retrospective study examines the results of surgical decompression of the lumbar spinal canal in 122 geriatric patients (age range 75-89 years) treated under general anesthesia by the same surgeon between the years 1990 and 1999. Patient demographics, perioperative complications, pain profiles before surgery and at the time of data collection (December 2000), as well as overall mortality were recorded. One hundred and twenty-two patients were studied. The average age at the time of surgery was 78.8 years (range 75-89 years). No perioperative deaths were recorded. The mean time elapsed from surgery until patient follow-up was 45.7 months (range 12-119 months). Fourteen patients had died at the time of patient follow-up (December 2000). When compared to pain experienced before surgery, at the time of the interview a significant (P<0.0001) improvement in low-back and radicular pain as well as in the ability to perform daily activities (dressing, washing, getting out of bed and walking) was described. We conclude that, for geriatric patients rated as physical status I-II (>75 years) under the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, surgical release of lumbar spinal stenosis is a safe and effective treatment option. However, the suitability of ASA III patients requires further investigation.

Lumbar spinal stenosis: conservative or surgical management?: A prospective 10-year study.

STUDY DESIGN: A cohort of 100 patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis, characterized in a previous article, were given surgical or conservative treatment and followed for 10 years. OBJECTIVES: To identify the short- and long-term results after surgical and conservative treatment, and to determine whether clinical or radiologic predictors for the treatment result can be defined. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Surgical decompression has been considered the rational treatment. However, clinical experience indicates that many patients do well with conservative treatment. METHODS: In this study, 19 patients with severe symptoms were selected for surgical treatment and 50 patients with moderate symptoms for conservative treatment, whereas 31 patients were randomized between the conservative (n = 18) and surgical (n = 13) treatment groups. Pain was decisive for the choice of treatment group. All patients were observed for 10 years by clinical evaluation and questionnaires. The results, evaluated by patient and physician, were rated as excellent, fair, unchanged, or worse. RESULTS: After a period of 3 months, relief of pain had occurred in most patients. Some had relief earlier, whereas for others it took 1 year. After a period of 4 years, excellent or fair results were found in half of the patients selected for conservative treatment, and in four fifths of the patients selected for surgery. Patients with an unsatisfactory result from conservative treatment were offered delayed surgery after 3 to 27 months (median, 3.5 months). The treatment result of delayed surgery was essentially similar to that of the initial group. The treatment result for the patients randomized for surgical treatment was considerably better than for the patients randomized for conservative treatment. Clinically significant deterioration of symptoms during the final 6 years of the follow-up period was not observed. Patients with multilevel afflictions, surgically treated or not, did not have a poorer outcome than those with single-level afflictions. Clinical or radiologic predictors for the final outcome were not found. There were no dropouts, except for 14 deaths. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome was most favorable for surgical treatment. However, an initial conservative approach seems advisable for many patients because those with an unsatisfactory result can be treated surgically later with a good outcome.

Surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly.

148 elderly patients, aged 70 years or more, diagnosed as having lumbar spinal stenosis, were operated upon at our institution during 1983 to 1995. Totally 161 operative procedures were performed. We analysed retrospectively the results of the surgical treatment. The most frequently performed procedure was multisegmental laminectomy, in 32% interlaminar fenestration and laminotomy were done. In 9 cases fusion was indicated, two of them being secondary operations. The mean hospital stay was 11 days. The morbidity was 6%, and there was one fatality (0.6%). The outcome was determined according to the six-grade classification proposed by Pappas and Sonntag [25]. Overall, in 91% of cases satisfactory-to-excellent results could be achieved. We conclude, that in elderly patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis, with no evidence of instability, decompressive surgery without stabilisation can be done in the majority of patients with low morbidity and high expectation of clinical improvement.

5-year reoperation rates after different types of lumbar spine surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Population-based cohort study of Washington State patients who underwent lumbar spine surgery for degenerative conditions in 1988. OBJECTIVES: To compare complications and reoperation rates during the 5-year period after surgery between patients who have undergone lumbar spine fusion surgery and those who have undergone laminectomy or discectomy alone. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Spinal fusion is associated with wider surgical exposure, more extensive dissection, and longer operative times than lumbar surgery without fusion, and previous studies have shown higher complication rates and hospital charges associated with these more complex procedures. In elderly patients, spinal fusion operations were associated with higher mortality rates than laminectomy or discectomy alone, and reoperation rates were not lower. In the current study, reoperations, mortality, and complications following lumbar spine surgery were examined for the general population. METHODS: A statewide hospital discharge database was used to identify all Washington patients who underwent spine surgery in 1988 and to determine the rate of reoperation during the subsequent 5 years. Administrative records also were used to identify complications, mortality, and hospital charges associated with the operations. Unadjusted complication and reoperation rates for the groups were compared using chi-square statistics. Adjusted rates were compared using logistic regression and proportional hazards (Cox) regression after controlling for age, gender, prior spine surgery, diagnosis, comorbidity, type of surgery, and coverage by Workers' Compensation. RESULTS: Of 6376 patients who underwent lumbar surgery for degenerative conditions in Washington in 1988, 1041 (16%) had operations involving spine fusion. Diagnoses of degenerative disc disease or possible instability were more frequent among patients undergoing fusion surgery, whereas herniated discs were more frequent among those undergoing discectomy or laminectomy alone. Complications were recorded in 18% of fusion patients and 7% of nonfusion patients (P < 0.01), but mortality rates did not differ. Unadjusted reoperation rates over the 5-year period were greater for patients who underwent fusion than for patients who underwent nonfusion surgery (18% vs. 15%, respectively), but after adjustment for baseline characteristics, fusion patients had only a slightly greater (and nonsignificant) risk of reoperation (relative risk 1.1, confidence interval .9-1.3). CONCLUSION: As in previous studies, complications in the current study occurred more frequently among patients who underwent lumbar spine fusion than among those who underwent laminectomy or discectomy alone. Reoperations were at least as frequent after fusion, but the authors could not assess treatment efficacy in terms of pain relief or improved function. Although the characteristics of patients undergoing fusion differed from those undergoing a laminectomy or discectomy alone, there appeared to be sufficient overlap in the clinical populations to warrant closer scrutiny of the safety, efficacy, and indications for spinal fusions, preferably in randomized trials.