Decompression alone or fusion in single-level lumbar spinal stenosis with spondylolisthesis? A systematic review and meta analysis.


Journal

BMC musculoskeletal disorders
ISSN: 1471-2474
Titre abrégé: BMC Musculoskelet Disord
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968565

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
10 Sep 2024
Historique:
received: 11 11 2023
accepted: 28 06 2024
medline: 11 9 2024
pubmed: 11 9 2024
entrez: 10 9 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The objective of this systematic review and metaanalysis is to compare the efficacy and safety of decompression alone versus decompression plus fusion in single-level lumbar spinal stenosis with spondylolisthesis. A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Ovid Medline databases was conducted to find randomized control trials (RCTs) or cohort studies that compared decompression alone and decompression plus fusion in single-level lumbar spinal stenosis with spondylolisthesis. Operation time; reoperation; postoperative complications; postoperative Oswestry disability index(ODI) scores and scores related to back and leg pain were collected from eligible studies for meta-analysis. We included 3 randomized controlled trials and 9 cohort studies with 6182 patients. The decompression alone group showed less operative time(P < 0.001) and intraoperative blood loss(p = 0.000), and no significant difference in postoperative complications was observed in randomized controlled trials(p = 0.428) or cohort studies(p = 0.731). There was no significant difference between the other two groups in reoperation(P = 0.071), postoperative ODI scores and scores related to back and leg pain. In this study, we found that the decompression alone group performed better in terms of operation time and intraoperative blood loss, and there was no significant difference between the two surgical methods in rate of reoperation and postoperative complications, ODI, low back pain and leg pain. Therefore, we come to the conclusion that decompression alone is not inferior to decompression and fusion in patients with single-level lumbar spinal stenosis with spondylolisthesis.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39256670
doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-07641-5
pii: 10.1186/s12891-024-07641-5
doi:

Types de publication

Systematic Review Journal Article Meta-Analysis Comparative Study

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

726

Subventions

Organisme : Tianjin Key Medical Discipline(Specialty) Construction Project
ID : TJYXZDXK-064B
Organisme : Tianjin Key Project of Applied Basic Research
ID : 22JCZDJC00250
Organisme : Tianjin Health Science and Technology Key Discipline Special Project
ID : TJWJ2022XK016

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s).

Références

Walter KL, O’Toole JE. Lumbar spinal stenosis. JAMA. 2022;328:310.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.6137 pubmed: 35503646
Zaina F, Tomkins-Lane C, Carragee E, Negrini S. Surgical versus non-surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016, 2016:Cd010264.
Matz PG, Meagher RJ, Lamer T, Tontz WL Jr., Annaswamy TM, Cassidy RC, Cho CH, Dougherty P, Easa JE, Enix DE, et al. Guideline summary review: an evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Spine J. 2016;16:439–48.
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.11.055 pubmed: 26681351
Alvarez JA, Hardy RH Jr. Lumbar spine stenosis: a common cause of back and leg pain. Am Fam Physician. 1998;57:1825–34.
pubmed: 9575322
Bydon M, Alvi MA, Goyal A. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: definition, natural history, Conservative Management, and Surgical Treatment. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2019;30:299–304.
doi: 10.1016/j.nec.2019.02.003 pubmed: 31078230
Katz JN, Zimmerman ZE, Mass H, Makhni MC. Diagnosis and management of lumbar spinal stenosis: a review. JAMA. 2022;327:1688–99.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.5921 pubmed: 35503342
Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, Tosteson AN, Blood E, Hanscom B, Herkowitz H, Cammisa F, Albert T, Boden SD, et al. Surgical versus nonsurgical therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:794–810.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0707136 pubmed: 18287602 pmcid: 2576513
Malmivaara A, Slätis P, Heliövaara M, Sainio P, Kinnunen H, Kankare J, Dalin-Hirvonen N, Seitsalo S, Herno A, Kortekangas P, et al. Surgical or nonoperative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis? A randomized controlled trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32:1–8.
doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000251014.81875.6d pubmed: 17202885
Kepler CK, Vaccaro AR, Hilibrand AS, Anderson DG, Rihn JA, Albert TJ, Radcliff KE. National trends in the use of fusion techniques to treat degenerative spondylolisthesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014;39:1584–9.
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000486 pubmed: 24979276
Kim CH, Chung CK, Choi Y, Kim MJ, Kim MJ, Shin S, Yang SH, Hwang SH, Kim DH, Park SB, Lee JH. Increased proportion of Fusion surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis and changes in Reoperation Rate: a Nationwide Cohort Study with a minimum 5-Year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019;44:346–54.
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002805 pubmed: 30028778
Försth P, Ólafsson G, Carlsson T, Frost A, Borgström F, Fritzell P, Öhagen P, Michaëlsson K, Sandén B. A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Fusion surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:1413–23.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1513721 pubmed: 27074066
Tosteson AN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, Skinner JS, Herkowitz H, Albert T, Boden SD, Bridwell K, Longley M, Andersson GB, et al. Surgical treatment of spinal stenosis with and without degenerative spondylolisthesis: cost-effectiveness after 2 years. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:845–53.
doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-149-12-200812160-00003 pmcid: 2658642
Kim S, Mortaz Hedjri S, Coyte PC, Rampersaud YR. Cost-utility of lumbar decompression with or without fusion for patients with symptomatic degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Spine J. 2012;12:44–54.
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2011.10.004 pubmed: 22169001
Inose H, Kato T, Yuasa M, Yamada T, Maehara H, Hirai T, Yoshii T, Kawabata S, Okawa A. Comparison of decompression, Decompression Plus Fusion, and Decompression Plus stabilization for degenerative spondylolisthesis: a prospective, randomized study. Clin Spine Surg. 2018;31:E347–52.
doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000659 pubmed: 29877872 pmcid: 6072383
Austevoll IM, Hermansen E, Fagerland MW, Storheim K, Brox JI, Solberg T, Rekeland F, Franssen E, Weber C, Brisby H, et al. Decompression with or without Fusion in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. N Engl J Med. 2021;385:526–38.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2100990 pubmed: 34347953
Ghogawala Z, Dziura J, Butler WE, Dai F, Terrin N, Magge SN, Coumans JV, Harrington JF, Amin-Hanjani S, Schwartz JS, et al. Laminectomy plus Fusion versus Laminectomy alone for lumbar spondylolisthesis. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:1424–34.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1508788 pubmed: 27074067
Abdel-Fattah AR, Bell F, Boden L, Ferry J, McCormick C, Ross M, Cameron I, Smith T, Baliga S, Myint PK. To fuse or not to fuse: the elderly patient with lumbar stenosis and low-grade spondylolisthesis. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Surgeon. 2023;21:e23–31.
doi: 10.1016/j.surge.2022.02.008 pubmed: 35305933
Shen Z, Guan X, Wang R, Xue Q, Zhang D, Zong Y, Ma W, Zhuge R, Liu Z, He C, et al. Effectiveness and safety of decompression alone versus decompression plus fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Transl Med. 2022;10:664.
doi: 10.21037/atm-22-2208 pubmed: 35845482 pmcid: 9279815
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009;6:e1000097.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 pubmed: 19621072 pmcid: 2707599
Higgins J, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DGJN. -SAfePuP: cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. the cochrane collaboration. 2008, 5:S38.
Inose H, Kato T, Sasaki M, Matsukura Y, Hirai T, Yoshii T, Kawabata S, Hirakawa A, Okawa A. Comparison of decompression, decompression plus fusion, and decompression plus stabilization: a long-term follow-up of a prospective, randomized study. Spine J. 2022;22:747–55.
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2021.12.014 pubmed: 34963630
Badhiwala JH, Leung SN, Jiang F, Wilson JRF, Akbar MA, Nassiri F, Witiw CD, Wilson JR, Fehlings MG. In-hospital course and complications of laminectomy alone Versus Laminectomy Plus Instrumented Posterolateral Fusion for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: a retrospective analysis of 1804 patients from the NSQIP database. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2021;46:617–23.
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003858 pubmed: 33290365
Hua W, Wang B, Ke W, Xiang Q, Wu X, Zhang Y, Li S, Yang S, Wu Q, Yang C. Comparison of clinical outcomes following lumbar endoscopic unilateral laminotomy bilateral decompression and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar Interbody Fusion for one-level lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis. Front Surg. 2020;7:596327.
doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2020.596327 pubmed: 33748179
Joelson A, Nerelius F, Holy M, Sigmundsson FG. Reoperations after decompression with or without Fusion for L3-4 spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis: a study of 372 patients in Swespine, the National Swedish Spine Register. Clin Spine Surg. 2022;35:E389–93.
doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000001255 pubmed: 34629386
Joelson A, Nerelius F, Holy M, Sigmundsson FG. Reoperations after decompression with or without fusion for L4-5 spinal stenosis with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis: a study of 6,532 patients in Swespine, the national Swedish spine register. Acta Orthop. 2021;92:264–8.
doi: 10.1080/17453674.2021.1879505 pubmed: 33506701 pmcid: 8231344
Kimura R, Yoshimoto M, Miyakoshi N, Hongo M, Kasukawa Y, Kobayashi T, Kikuchi K, Okuyama K, Kido T, Hirota R, et al. Comparison of posterior lumbar Interbody Fusion and Microendoscopic muscle-preserving Interlaminar Decompression for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with > 5-Year follow-up. Clin Spine Surg. 2019;32:E380–5.
doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000883 pubmed: 31498276
Matsudaira K, Yamazaki T, Seichi A, Takeshita K, Hoshi K, Kishimoto J, Nakamura K. Spinal stenosis in grade I degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a comparative study of outcomes following laminoplasty and laminectomy with instrumented spinal fusion. J Orthop Sci. 2005;10:270–6.
doi: 10.1007/s00776-005-0887-7 pubmed: 15928889
Sigmundsson FG, Jönsson B, Strömqvist B. Outcome of decompression with and without fusion in spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis in relation to preoperative pain pattern: a register study of 1,624 patients. Spine J. 2015;15:638–46.
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2014.11.020 pubmed: 25450653
Yagi M, Fujita N, Okada E, Tsuji O, Nagoshi N, Tsuji T, Nakamura M, Matsumoto M, Watanabe K. Comparisons of direct costs, outcomes, and cost-utility of decompression surgery with fusion versus decompression alone for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. J Orthop Sci. 2018;23:653–7.
doi: 10.1016/j.jos.2018.04.001 pubmed: 29699906
Sato S, Yagi M, Machida M, Yasuda A, Konomi T, Miyake A, Fujiyoshi K, Kaneko S, Takemitsu M, Machida M, et al. Reoperation rate and risk factors of elective spinal surgery for degenerative spondylolisthesis: minimum 5-year follow-up. Spine J. 2015;15:1536–44.
doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.02.009 pubmed: 25681581
Staartjes VE, Schröder ML. Effectiveness of a decision-making protocol for the Surgical treatment of lumbar stenosis with Grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis. World Neurosurg. 2018;110:e355–61.
doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.11.001 pubmed: 29133000
Vorhies JS, Hernandez-Boussard T, Alamin T. Treatment of degenerative lumbar Spondylolisthesis with Fusion or Decompression alone results in similar rates of reoperation at 5 years. Clin Spine Surg. 2018;31:E74–9.
doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000000564 pubmed: 28671881
Wei FL, Zhou CP, Gao QY, Du MR, Gao HR, Zhu KL, Li T, Qian JX, Yan XD. Decompression alone or decompression and fusion in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. EClinicalMedicine. 2022;51:101559.
doi: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101559 pubmed: 35865739 pmcid: 9294267
Kuo CC, Merchant M, Kardile MP, Yacob A, Majid K, Bains RS. In degenerative spondylolisthesis, unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression leads to less reoperations at 5 years when compared to posterior decompression with Instrumented Fusion: a propensity-matched retrospective analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019;44:1530–7.
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003121 pubmed: 31181016
Perna A, Velluto C, Smakaj A, Tamburrelli F, Borruto MI, Santagada DA, Gorgoglione FL, Liuzza F, Proietti L. Positioning accuracy and facet joints violation after percutaneous pedicle screws placement with robot-assisted versus fluoroscopy-guided technique: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Neurosci Rural Pract. 2023;14:406–12.
doi: 10.25259/JNRP_147_2023 pubmed: 37692811 pmcid: 10483214
Austevoll IM, Gjestad R, Solberg T, Storheim K, Brox JI, Hermansen E, Rekeland F, Indrekvam K, Hellum C. Comparative effectiveness of Microdecompression alone vs Decompression Plus Instrumented Fusion in lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3:e2015015.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.15015 pubmed: 32910195 pmcid: 7489859
Chan AK, Bisson EF, Bydon M, Glassman SD, Foley KT, Potts EA, Shaffrey CI, Shaffrey ME, Coric D, Knightly JJ, et al. A comparison of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion and decompression alone for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Neurosurg Focus. 2019;46:E13.
doi: 10.3171/2019.2.FOCUS18722 pubmed: 31042655
Chan AK, Bisson EF, Bydon M, Glassman SD, Foley KT, Potts EA, Shaffrey CI, Shaffrey ME, Coric D, Knightly JJ, et al. Laminectomy alone versus fusion for grade 1 lumbar spondylolisthesis in 426 patients from the prospective quality outcomes database. J Neurosurg Spine. 2018;30:234–41.
doi: 10.3171/2018.8.SPINE17913 pubmed: 30544348
Briggs H, Milligan PRJJ. CHIP FUSION OF THE LOW BACK FOLLOWING EXPLORATION OF THE SPINAL CANAL. 1944, 26.
Resnick DK, Schmidt BT. Update on spinal Fusion. Neurol Clin. 2022;40:261–8.
doi: 10.1016/j.ncl.2021.11.005 pubmed: 35465873
Resnick DK, Watters WC 3rd, Sharan A, Mummaneni PV, Dailey AT, Wang JC, Choudhri TF, Eck J, Ghogawala Z, Groff MW, et al. Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 9: lumbar fusion for stenosis with spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014;21:54–61.
doi: 10.3171/2014.4.SPINE14274 pubmed: 24980586
Resnick DK, Watters WC 3rd, Mummaneni PV, Dailey AT, Choudhri TF, Eck JC, Sharan A, Groff MW, Wang JC, Ghogawala Z, et al. Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 10: lumbar fusion for stenosis without spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014;21:62–6.
doi: 10.3171/2014.4.SPINE14275 pubmed: 24980587

Auteurs

Haiyang Cheng (H)

Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, 300070, China.

Gan Luo (G)

Department of Orthopedics, Chengdu Integrated Traditional Chinese Medicine &Western Medicine Hospital, Chengdu First People's Hospital, Chengdu, 610016, China.

Dan Xu (D)

Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, 300070, China.

Yuqiao Li (Y)

Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100871, China.

Houzhi Yang (H)

Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, 300070, China.

Sheng Cao (S)

Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, 300070, China.

Tianwei Sun (T)

Tianjin Medical University, Tianjin, 300070, China. billsuntw@163.com.
Department of Spinal Surgery, Tianjin Union Medical Center, Tianjin, 300121, China. billsuntw@163.com.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH