-
Cureus Aug 2018The first line of treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis (with or without lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis) involves conservative options such as anti-inflammatory... (Review)
Review
The first line of treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis (with or without lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis) involves conservative options such as anti-inflammatory drugs and analgesics. Approximately, 10%-15% of patients require surgery. Surgical treatment aims to decompress the spinal canal and dural sac from degenerative bony and ligamentous overgrowth. Different studies have given conflicting results. The aim of our study is to clear the confusion by comparing two surgical techniques. This meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. A literature search was conducted of the Ovid Embase, Scopus, Pubmed, Ovid Medline, Google Scholar, and Cochrane library databases. A quality and risk of bias assessment was also done. The analysis was done using Revman software (The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014, Copenhagen, Denmark). A total of 76 studies were extracted from the literature search and 29 studies with relevant information were shortlisted. Nine studies were included in the meta-analysis after a quality assessment and eligibility. Fusion with decompression surgery was found to be a better technique when compared to decompression alone for spinal stenosis in terms of the Oswestry Disability index and the visual analog pain scale for back and leg pain. On the basis of the meta-analysis of the recent medical literature, the authors concluded that decompression with fusion is a 3.5-times better surgical technique than decompression alone for spinal stenosis.
PubMed: 30345192
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.3135 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2022Primary sporadic intradural malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST) in the spinal canal is a type of rare neoplasm with challenging diagnosis and therapy. The...
Epidemiology, Characteristic, and Prognostic Factors of Primary Sporadic Intradural Malignant Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumor in the Spinal Canal: A Systematic Literature Review.
PURPOSE
Primary sporadic intradural malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor (MPNST) in the spinal canal is a type of rare neoplasm with challenging diagnosis and therapy. The overall prognosis of this tumor is markedly different from that of the usual spinal intradural tumors. The purpose of this systematic review is to reduce the misdiagnosis and enhance the prognosis of the disease by reviewing the literature.
METHODS
PubMed, Medline, and Embase databases were searched for articles in English language published from 1980 to May 2021, yielding 500 potentially relevant articles. The keywords were as follows: "spinal", "malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor", "neurosarcoma", "malignant schwannoma", and "malignant neurofibroma". Thirteen papers met the eligibility criteria, including 55 cases with spinal intradural primary sporadic MPNSTs, which were confirmed by post-operation pathology. We further analyzed the clinical manifestations, radiological manifestations, pathological features, comprehensive treatment strategies, and prognosis.
RESULTS
Fifty-five spinal intradural primary sporadic MPNSTs from 30 (54.5%) male and 25 (45.5%) female patients with an average age at diagnosis of 40 years (range, 3-70 years) were included in the study. The most common clinical manifestations were local or radicular pain and motor disturbance. All tumors had significant enhancement and heterogeneous enhancement was more common. Out of 18 lesions, 14 were diagnosed as high grade and the remaining 4 were diagnosed as low grade. The ki-67 labeling index ranged from 5% to 60%. The median recurrence and survival time were 36 and 72 months, respectively. The log-rank tests indicated that significant predictors of OS were patient age (≤30 vs. >30 years) at the time of diagnosis and the presence of metastatic disease, and similar analyses for RFS demonstrated that the presence of metastatic disease was the only significant predictor (60 vs. 10 months). The multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis revealed that absence of metastasis was an independent factor for predicting a favorable prognosis.
CONCLUSIONS
Spinal intradural primary sporadic MPNSTs are challenging malignant tumors without a systematic treatment plan. The factors affecting its prognosis are not clear. Even after surgical treatment and adjuvant treatment, the recurrence rate and mortality rate are still high. Clinicians should be alert to the possibility of this disease and achieve early detection and treatment.
PubMed: 35898898
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.911043 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Aug 2022For some patients, local anesthesia (LA) in percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED), especially during canal shaping and discectomy, is insufficient for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
For some patients, local anesthesia (LA) in percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (PTED), especially during canal shaping and discectomy, is insufficient for analgesia. Epidural anesthesia (EA) is infrequently applied in PTED but reports satisfactory results. Previous studies present conflicting results in analgesia satisfactory and adverse events. Differences in surgery details and small sample size might explain conflicting results. Meta-analysis pools the results from individual studies to create a larger sample size and provides a more reliable conclusion. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EA in PTED.
METHODS
The search terms "percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy" and "anesthesia" are used to search Cochrane, Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, OVID, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, and Wanfang from inception to 2021-08. Inclusion criteria is defined according to PICOS principals: P (patients): patients are diagnosed with lumbar disc herniation or spinal canal stenosis. I (intervention): patients undergo PTED under EA. C (comparisons): patients undergo PTED under LA. O (outcomes): primary outcomes: intraoperative visual analogue scale (VAS), anesthesia satisfactory, sufentanil usage. Secondary outcomes: adverse events, surgery exit, bleed volume, X-ray radiation. S (study design): randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The Cochrane RoB 2.0 is used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. Authors perform meta-analysis through Review Manager 5.4.
RESULTS
A total of 6 studies representing 529 patients are included: EA group includes 261 patients, and LA group includes 268 patients. All studies lack design of allocation concealment and blinding of participants and personnel. Only Luo reports blinding of outcome assessment in 2019. Meta analysis concludes that EA is superior in intraoperative analgesic [mean difference (MD) =-4.31; 95% confidence interval (CI): -4.52 to -4.09; P<0.00001], anesthesia satisfactory [odds ratio (OR) =10.06; 95% CI: 2.41 to 41.98; P=0.002], sufentanil usage (MD =-9.12; 95% CI: -10.34 to -7.90; P<0.00001), adverse events (OR =0.19; 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.52; P=0.001). There is no difference in bleed volume (MD =-2.61; 95% CI: -5.45 to 0.23; P=0.07), exit rate (OR =0.23; 95% CI: 0.04 to 1.35; P=0.10) and future effects (MD =-0.23; 95% CI: -0.50 to 0.03; P=0.08).
DISCUSSION
EA is an effective and safe anesthesia method for PTED and might achieve better clinical results than LA. More high-quality research is needed to provide high-quality evidence for efficacy and safety.
Topics: Anesthesia, Epidural; Anesthesia, Local; Diskectomy; Humans; Lumbar Vertebrae; Sufentanil; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35871273
DOI: 10.21037/apm-21-3413 -
Spine Surgery and Related Research Jan 2023Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a potential tool for the objective assessment of spinal cord injury (SCI) because it correlates well with the spatial and temporal... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a potential tool for the objective assessment of spinal cord injury (SCI) because it correlates well with the spatial and temporal extension of spinal cord pathology. This study aimed to systematically identify currently available scoring system based on MRI parameters, including measurement of the spinal cord lesion length in sagittal view (intramedullary lesion length (IMLL)) and morphology of the lesion in axial view (Brain and Spinal Injury Center (BASIC) score).
METHODS
A systematic search was conducted using the PubMed/MEDLINE database for English-language studies with the keywords "cervical," "spinal cord injury," "scoring system," "scoring," "classification," and "magnetic resonance imaging" to systematically identify the scoring system based on MRI parameters. The main outcomes of interest are the scoring system's inter- and intraobserver reliabilities and its predictive accuracy of neurological outcome.
RESULTS
After assessing the full text and applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 13 articles were found to be eligible. The inter- and intraobserver reliabilities were rated as good until perfect for increased signal intensity (ISI), maximum canal compromise (MCC), maximum spinal cord compression (MSCC), BASIC score, cord-canal-area ratio, space available for the cord, and the compression ratio. The weighted mean difference of IML between the group with converted ASIA Impairment Scale (AIS) grade and the group without conversion is 31.79 ( =93%, =0.008). The percentage of agreement between the initial BASIC score of 4 with AIS grade of A at follow-up is 100%.
CONCLUSIONS
Certain MRI parameters, including IML and BASIC score, have good reliability and correlate well with neurological outcome, making them candidates for building simple and objective scoring system for cervical SCI. Level of Evidence: 2A.
PubMed: 36819628
DOI: 10.22603/ssrr.2021-0255 -
Asian Spine Journal Apr 2023This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness between unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) technique and microscopic decompression (MD) technique in lumbar...
Comparison of Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy Decompression and Microscopic Decompression Effectiveness in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Treatment: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
This study aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness between unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) technique and microscopic decompression (MD) technique in lumbar spinal stenosis treatment. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and other databases were used to conduct extensive literature searches. RevMan ver. 5.3 software was used for the statistical analysis. Eleven studies were included with 930 patients, including 449 patients in the UBE group and 521 in the MD group. Both techniques revealed similar operative times at -1.77 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI], -7.59 to 4.05 minutes; p =0.55), the postoperative dural expansion area at -1.27 (95% CI, -19.30 to 16.77; p =0.89), the postoperative complications at 0.76 (95% CI, 0.47 to 1.22; p =0.26), the preoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for leg pain, and the last follow-up (>12 months) VAS for leg pain at -0.04 (95% CI, -0.14 to 0.06; p =0.47), the preoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the last follow-up (>12 months) ODI scores at -0.18 (95% CI, -0.76 to 0.40; p =0.54), and patient satisfaction (the modified MacNab score) at 1.15 (95% CI, 0.54 to 2.42; p =0.72). However, intraoperative bleeding was lower following the UBE technique at -52.78 mL (95% CI, -93.47 to -12.08 mL; p =0.01) and was shorter following the UBE technique at -3.06 (95% CI, -3.84 to -2.28; p <0.01). UBE and MD technology have no significant differences in efficacy or safety in the treatment of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis based on this meta-analysis. However, the UBE technique has less intraoperative bleeding and a shorter hospital stay. It has a slight advantage and is a better surgical option than the MD technique. It can be an alternative minimally invasive spinal surgery method.
PubMed: 36740930
DOI: 10.31616/asj.2021.0527 -
Cureus Apr 2023Lumbar spinal stenosis refers to the narrowing of the spinal canal in the lumbar region. There is an increasing need to determine the treatment modality for lumbar... (Review)
Review
Lumbar spinal stenosis refers to the narrowing of the spinal canal in the lumbar region. There is an increasing need to determine the treatment modality for lumbar spinal stenosis by comparing the outcomes of X-stop interspinous distractors and laminectomy. The objective of this study is to determine the effectiveness of the X-stop interspinous distractor compared to laminectomy. This systematic review fundamentally abides by the procedures delineated in the Cochrane methodology while the reporting is done according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Three databases searched generated a total of 943 studies, with PubMed being the source for the bulk of the articles. Six studies were selected for inclusion in this study. The effectiveness of the interspinous distractor devices and laminectomy can be determined through their impact on the quality of life, rates of complications, and the amount of money utilized. This meta-analysis fundamentally emphasizes that laminectomy is a more effective intervention for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis as it is more cost-effective and results in fewer complications in the long term.
PubMed: 37077368
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.37535 -
Global Spine Journal Mar 2024Systematic review and meta-analysis. (Review)
Review
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the radiographic risk factors for adjacent segment disease (ASD) following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative cervical spine pathologies.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library databases were searched up to December 2023. The primary inclusion criteria were degenerative spinal conditions treated with ACDF, comparing radiological parameters in patients with and without postoperative ASD. The radiographic parameters included intervertebral disc height, cervical sagittal alignment, sagittal segmental alignment, range of motion, segmental height, T1 slope, sagittal vertical axis (SVA), thoracic inlet angle (TIA), and plate to disc distance (PPD). Risk of bias was assessed for all studies. The Cochrane Review Manager was utilized to perform the meta-analysis.
RESULTS
From 7044 articles, 13 retrospective studies were included in the final analysis. Three studies had "not serious" bias and the other 10 studies had serious or very serious bias. The total number of patients in the included studies was 1799 patients. Five studies included single-level ACDF, 2 studies included multi-level ACDF, and 6 studies included single or multi-level ACDF. On meta-analysis, the significant risk factors associated with ASD development were reduced postoperative cervical lordosis (mean difference [MD] = 3.35°, = .002), reduced last-follow-up cervical lordosis (MD = -3.02°, = .0003), increased preoperative to postoperative cervical sagittal alignment change (MD = -3.68°, = .03), and the presence of developmental cervical canal stenosis (Odds ratio [OR] = 4.17, < .001).
CONCLUSIONS
Decreased postoperative cervical lordosis, greater change in cervical sagittal alignment and developmental cervical canal stenosis were associated with an increased risk of ASD following ACDF.
PubMed: 38469858
DOI: 10.1177/21925682241237500 -
International Journal of Surgery... Mar 2016The purpose of the study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the clinical results of anterior and posterior approaches for the treatment of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Anterior versus posterior approach for the treatment of cervical compressive myelopathy due to ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
PURPOSE
The purpose of the study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the clinical results of anterior and posterior approaches for the treatment of cervical compressive myelopathy due to cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL).
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials or non-randomized controlled trials published since January 1995 to October 2015 that compared the clinical effectiveness of anterior and posterior surgical approaches for the treatment of cervical OPLL were acquired by a comprehensive search in three electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library). A total of 13 studies (1050 patients) were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis.
RESULT
The results indicated that no statistically significant differences between the anterior group and posterior group in terms of preoperative JOA score [P = 0.16, SMD = 0.1 (-0.04, 0.23)] and recovery rate of patients with canal-occupying ratio < 50%-60% [p = 0.89, SMD = 0.03 (-0.35, 0.41)]. The anterior group showed higher postoperative JOA score [P < 0.05, SMD = 0.23 (0.05, 0.41)], overall recovery rate (regardless of canal-occupying ratio) [P < 0.01, SMD = 0.79 (0.31, 1.27)], especially a significant higher recovery rate of patients with canal-occupying ratio > 50%-60% [P < 0.01, SMD = 1.50 (0.52, 2.47)]. However, it also revealed that the postoperative complication rate [P < 0.05, OR = 1.90 (1.08, 3.36)], blood loss [P < 0.01, SMD = 0.63 (0.34, 0.93)] and operative time [P < 0.01, SMD = 1.86 (1.07, 2.65)] were significantly higher.
CONCLUSION
Based on the results above, anterior approach surgery was associated with better overall (regardless of the canal-occupying ratio) postoperative neural function than posterior approach in the treatment of cervical compressive myelopathy due to OPLL. We thought anterior approach especially preferable to patients with canal-occupying ratio > 50%-60%, although it leads to a higher surgical trauma and incidence of surgery-related complications. Posterior approach surgery was relatively safer with lower surgical trauma and incidence of complications. We also suggest posterior approach for patients with canal-occupying ratio < 50%-60%, since the postoperative neural function was similar between the two groups for this part of patients.
Topics: Cervical Vertebrae; Decompression, Surgical; Humans; Non-Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Operative Time; Ossification of Posterior Longitudinal Ligament; Postoperative Complications; Postoperative Period; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spinal Cord Compression; Spinal Fusion; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26804354
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.01.038 -
Spine Oct 2016Systematic literature review and expert survey OBJECTIVE.: The aim of this study was to determine factors associated with neurologic improvement in patients with... (Review)
Review
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic literature review and expert survey OBJECTIVE.: The aim of this study was to determine factors associated with neurologic improvement in patients with neurologic deficits secondary to metastatic epidural spinal cord compression (MESCC). Clear understanding of these factors will guide surgical decision-making by helping to elucidate which patients are more likely to benefit from surgery and how surgeons can increase the probability of neurologic and functional restoration.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA
Surgical spinal cord decompression has been shown to improve neurologic function in patients with symptomatic MESCC. However, prognostication of neurologic improvement after surgery remains challenging, owing to sparse data and complexity of these patients.
METHODS
PubMed and Embase databases were searched for relevant publications. PRISMA Statement guided publication selection and data reporting. GRADE guidelines were used for evidence quality evaluation and recommendation formulation.
RESULTS
Low-quality evidence supports the use of the duration and severity of neurologic deficit as predictors of neurological recovery in patients with MESCC. Low-quality evidence supports the use of thoracic level of compression and previous irradiation as adverse predictors of neurological recovery. Nearly all of the AOSpine Knowledge Forum Tumor members who responded to the survey agreed that ambulation with assistance represented a successful surgical result and that duration of ambulation loss and the severity of weakness should be considered when trying to predict whether surgery would result in restoration of ambulation.
CONCLUSIONS
Review of literature and expert opinion support the importance of duration of ambulation loss and the severity of neurologic deficit (muscle strength, bladder function) in prediction of neurologic recovery among patients with symptomatic MESCC. Efforts to reduce the duration of ambulation loss and to prevent progression of neurologic deficits should be made to improve the probability of neurologic recovery.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
2.
Topics: Decompression, Surgical; Epidural Space; Humans; Recovery of Function; Spinal Cord Compression; Spinal Neoplasms
PubMed: 27488300
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001827 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Mar 2022The aim of this review was to analyze the existing literature and investigate the outcomes or complications of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) combined with... (Review)
Review
The aim of this review was to analyze the existing literature and investigate the outcomes or complications of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) combined with indirect decompression for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DS). A database search algorithm was used to query MEDLINE, COCHRANE, and EMBASE to identify the literature reporting LLIF with indirect decompression for DS between January 2010 and December 2021. Improvements in outcome measures and complication rates were pooled and tested for significance. A total of 412 publications were assessed, and 12 studies satisfied the inclusion criteria after full review. The pooled data available in the included studies showed that 438 patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis (mean age 65.2 years; mean body mass index (BMI) 38.1 kg/m) underwent LLIF. A total of 546 disc spaces were operated on. The most frequently treated levels were L4-L5 and L3-L4. Clinically, the average improvement was 32.5% in ODI, 46.3 mm in low back pain, and 48.3 mm in leg pain estimated from the studies included. SF-36 PCS improved by 51.5% and MCS improved by 19.5%. For radiological outcomes, a reduction in slippage was seen in 6.3%. Disc height increased by 55%, foraminal height increased by 21.1%, the foraminal area on the approach side increased by 21.9%, and on the opposite side it increased by 26.1%. The cross-sectional spinal canal area increased by 20.6% after surgery. Post-operative complications occurred in 5-40% of patients with thigh symptoms, such as anterior thigh numbness, dysesthesia, discomfort, pain, and sensory deficits. Indirect decompression by LLIF for DS is an effective method for improving pain and dysfunction with less surgical invasion. In addition, it has the effect of significantly improving disc height, foraminal height and area, and segmental lordosis on radiological outcomes compared to the posterior approach.
Topics: Aged; Cross-Sectional Studies; Decompression; Humans; Low Back Pain; Lumbar Vertebrae; Retrospective Studies; Spinal Fusion; Spondylolisthesis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35454331
DOI: 10.3390/medicina58040492