Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society

The Korean Neurosurgical Society (대한신경외과학회)
권호 표지

Efficacy of Unilateral Laminectomy for Bilateral Decompression in Elderly Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

  • Ji, Yong-Cheol (Department of Neurosurgery, College of Medicine, Chung-Ang University) ;
  • Kim, Young-Baeg (Department of Neurosurgery, College of Medicine, Chung-Ang University) ;
  • Hwang, Sung-Nam (Department of Neurosurgery, College of Medicine, Chung-Ang University) ;
  • Park, Seung-Won (Department of Neurosurgery, College of Medicine, Chung-Ang University) ;
  • Kwon, Jeong-Taik (Department of Neurosurgery, College of Medicine, Chung-Ang University) ;
  • Min, Byung-Kook (Department of Neurosurgery, College of Medicine, Chung-Ang University)
  • Published : 2005.06.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The aim of our study is to evaluate the effectiveness of unilateral hemilaminectomy for bilateral decompression in elderly patients with degenerative spinal stenosis. For this purpose, we studied the co-morbid condition and clinical outcome of patients who underwent decompressive surgery using the unilateral approach technique. Methods: Thirty-four patients over 65years of age who underwent unilateral partial laminectomy for bilateral decompression from January 2000 to October 2003 were analyzed. These patients were studied for preoperative co-morbid condition and physical status according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists(ASA) classification, postoperative morphometrical change, and clinical outcomes, including visual analogue scale(VAS) score. The mean follow-up was 23months (range 6 - 48months). Results: A patient's physical status was recorded as class I, II, or III by ASA classification, which correlated to 41.2%, 44.1%, and 14.7% of patients, respectively. The cross-sectional area of the pre- and postoperative dural sac at the level of the stenosis was $52.5{\pm}19.9mm^2$ and $110.6{\pm}18.2mm^2$, respectively. The outcome was excellent in 8.8%, good in 58.8%, fair in 23.6%, and poor in 8.8% of the patients. The VAS was changed postoperatively to $3.1{\pm}1.2$. There was no operation-related transfusion yet there was no evidence of postoperative instability at the follow-up examination. Conclusion: Unilateral laminectomy for bilateral decompression, in spite of the limited exposure, can result in satisfactory decompression of the lumbar spinal stenosis and tolerable clinical outcome. This approach is thought to be appropriate for elderly patients who have a greater surgical burden.

Keywords

References

  1. Adachi K, Futami T, Ebihara A, Yamaya T, Kasai N, Nakazawa T, et al : Spinal canal enlargement procedure by restorative laminoplasty for the treatment of lumbar canal stenosis. Spine J 3 : 471-478, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1529-9430(03)00149-9
  2. Amundsen T, Weber H, Nordal HJ, Magnaes B, Abdelnoor M, Lilleas F : Lumbar spinal stenosis : Conservative or surgical management ? : A prospective 10-year study. Spine 25 : 1424-1435, 2000 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200006010-00016
  3. Arinzon ZH, Fredman B, Zohar E, Shabat S, Feldman JS, Jedeikin R, et al : Surgical management of spinal stenosis : a comparison of immediate and long term outcome in two geriatric patient populations. Arch Gerontol Geriat 36 : 273-279, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4943(02)00172-3
  4. Carreon LY, Puno RM, Dimar JR, Glassman SD, Johnson JR : Perioperative complications of posterior lumbar decompression and arthrodesis in older adults. J Bone Joint Surg 85A : 2089-2092, 2003
  5. Cho JM, Yoon SH, Park HC, Park HS, Kim EY, Ha Y : Surgery of spinal stenosis in elderly patients-Bilateral canal widening through unilateral approach. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 35 : 492-497, 2004
  6. Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Loeser JD Bigos SJ, Ciol MA : Morbidity and mortality in association with operation on the lumbar spine; The influence of age, diagnosis, and procedure. Bone Joint Surg 74A : 536-543, 1992
  7. DiPierro CG, Helm GA, Shaffrey CI, Chadduck JB, Henson SL, Malik JM, et al : Treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis by extensive unilateral decompression and contralateral autologous bone fusion : Operative technique and results. J Neurosurg 84 : 166-173, 1996 https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1996.84.2.0166
  8. Fessler RG : Minimally invasive spine surgery. Neurosurgery 51(Suppl 5) : 3-4, 2002
  9. Fox MW, Onofrio BM, Onofrio BM, Hanssen AD : Clinical outcomes and radiological instability following decompressive lumbar laminectomy for degenerative spinal stenosis : a comparison of patients undergoing concomitant arthrodesis versus decompression alone. J Neurosurg 85 : 793-802, 1996 https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1996.85.5.0793
  10. Fredman B, Arinzon Z, Zohar E, Shabat S, Jedeikin R, Fidelman ZG, et al : Observations on the safety and efficacy of surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis in geriatric patients. Eur Spine J 11 : 571-574, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-002-0409-7
  11. Garfin SR, Herkowitz HN, Mirkovic S : Spinal stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg 81 : 572-586, 1999 https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199904000-00016
  12. Gunzburg R, Szpalski M : The conservative surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly. Eur Spine J 12(Suppl 2) : 176-180, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-003-0611-2
  13. Herno A, Airaksinen O, Saari T, Luukkonen M : Lumbar spinal stenosis : a matched-pair study of operated and non-operated patients. Br J Neurosurg 10 : 461-465, 1996 https://doi.org/10.1080/02688699647087
  14. Hindle RJ, Pearcy M, Cross A : Mechanical function of human lumbar interspinous and supraspinous ligaments. J Biomed Eng 12 : 340-344, 1990 https://doi.org/10.1016/0141-5425(90)90010-K
  15. Iwamoto J, Takeda T : Effect of surgical treatment on physical activity and bone resorption in patients with neurogenic intermittent claudication. J Orthop Sci 7 : 84-90, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1007/s776-002-8426-9
  16. Kalbarczyk A, Lukes A, Seiler RW : Surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 140 : 367-341, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1007/s007010050110
  17. Katz JN, Lipson SJ, Brick GW, Grobler LJ, Weinstein JN, Fossel AH, et al : Clinical correlates of patient satisfaction after laminectomy for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 20 : 1155-1160, 1995 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199505150-00008
  18. Khoo LT, Fessler RG : Microendoscopic decompressive laminotomy for the treatment of lumbar stenosis. Neurosurgery 51(Suppl 5) : 146-154, 2002
  19. Lim SJ, Kim YT, Ha HG : Microsurgical decompression of lumbar stenosis : Technical innovations and early experience of 20 cases. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 26 : 780-786, 1997
  20. Mackay DC, Wheelwright EF : Unilateral fenestration in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Br J Neurosurg 12 : 556-558, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1080/02688699844420
  21. Mariconda M, Fava R, Gatto A, Longo C, Milano C : Unilateral laminectomy for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis : a prospective comparative study with conservatively treated patients. J Spinal Disord Tech 15 : 39-46, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1097/00024720-200202000-00006
  22. Mariconda M, Zanforlino G, Celestino GA, Brancaleone S, Fava R, Minano C : Factors influencing the outcome of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord 13 : 131-137, 2000 https://doi.org/10.1097/00002517-200004000-00007
  23. Okuyama K, Abe E, Suzuki T, Tamura Y, Chiba M, Sato K : Influence of bone mineral density on pedicle screw fixation : a study of pedicle screw fixation augmenting posterior lumbar interbody fusion in elderly patients. Spine J 1 : 402-407, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1529-9430(01)00078-X
  24. Palmer S, Turner R, Palmer R : Bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis involving a unilateral approach with microscope and tubular retractor system. J Neurosurg 97(Suppl 2) : 213-217, 2002
  25. Ragab AA, Fye MA, Bohlman HH : Surgery of the lumbar spine for spinal stenosis in 118 patients 70 years of age or older. Spine 28 : 348-353, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200302150-00007
  26. Reindl R Steffen T, Cohen L Aebi M : Elective lumbar spinal decompression in the elderly : Is it a high-risk operation? Can J Surg 46 : 43-46, 2003
  27. Shabat S, Leitner Y, Nyska M, Berner Y, Fredman B, Gepstein R : Surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in patients aged 65 years and older. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 35 : 143-152, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4943(02)00016-X
  28. Spetzger U, Bertalanffy H, Reinges MH, Gilsbach JM : Unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis. Part II : Clinical experiences. Acta Neurochir 139 : 397-403, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01808874
  29. Szpalski M, Gunzburg R, Melot C, Aebi M : The aging of the population : a growing concern for spine care in the twenty-first century. Eur Spine J 12 (Suppl 2) : 81-83, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-003-0592-1
  30. Szpalski M, Gunzburg R : Lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly : an overview. Eur Spine J 12(Suppl 2) : 170-175, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-003-0612-1
  31. Weiner BK, Walker M, Brower RS, McCulloch JA : Microdecompression for lumbar spinal canal stenosis. Spine 24 : 2268-2272, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199911010-00016
  32. Zander T, Rohlmann A, Klockner C, Bergmann G : Influence of graded facetectomy and laminectomy on spinal biomechanics. Eur Spine J 12 : 427-434, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-003-0540-0