Laminectomy plus Fusion versus Laminectomy Alone for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
- PMID: 27074067
- DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1508788
Laminectomy plus Fusion versus Laminectomy Alone for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis
Abstract
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.).
Comment in
-
Fusion for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis--Safeguard or Superfluous Surgical Implant?N Engl J Med. 2016 Apr 14;374(15):1478-9. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe1600955. N Engl J Med. 2016. PMID: 27074071 No abstract available.
-
Fusion in degenerative spondylolisthesis becomes controversial…again.Evid Based Med. 2016 Aug;21(4):148-9. doi: 10.1136/ebmed-2016-110474. Epub 2016 Jul 7. Evid Based Med. 2016. PMID: 27388799 No abstract available.
-
Fusion for Lumbar Stenosis With Spondylolisthesis: Results From 2 Randomized Trials.Neurosurgery. 2016 Aug;79(2):N18-20. doi: 10.1227/01.neu.0000489889.10464.a7. Neurosurgery. 2016. PMID: 27428640 No abstract available.
-
To Fuse or Not to Fuse: That is (Still) the Question.World Neurosurg. 2016 Oct;94:563-565. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.07.083. Epub 2016 Jul 28. World Neurosurg. 2016. PMID: 27476692 No abstract available.
-
Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 11;375(6):597-8. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1606502. N Engl J Med. 2016. PMID: 27509111 No abstract available.
-
Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 11;375(6):598. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1606502. N Engl J Med. 2016. PMID: 27509112 No abstract available.
-
Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 11;375(6):598-9. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1606502. N Engl J Med. 2016. PMID: 27509113 No abstract available.
-
Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.N Engl J Med. 2016 Aug 11;375(6):600-1. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1606502. N Engl J Med. 2016. PMID: 27517105 No abstract available.
-
Fusion in degenerative spondylolisthesis: how to reconcile conflicting evidence.J Spine Surg. 2016 Jun;2(2):143-5. doi: 10.21037/jss.2016.06.02. J Spine Surg. 2016. PMID: 27683712 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
More on Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.N Engl J Med. 2016 Nov 3;375(18):1807. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1610998. N Engl J Med. 2016. PMID: 27806223 No abstract available.
-
More on Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.N Engl J Med. 2016 Nov 3;375(18):1806-1807. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1610998. N Engl J Med. 2016. PMID: 27806224 No abstract available.
-
Point of View.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017 Jan 1;42(1):33. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001754. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017. PMID: 28002362 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.N Engl J Med. 2016 Apr 14;374(15):1413-23. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1513721. N Engl J Med. 2016. PMID: 27074066 Clinical Trial.
-
Should patients with lumbar stenosis and grade I spondylolisthesis be treated differently based on spinopelvic alignment? A retrospective, two-year, propensity matched, comparison of patient-reported outcome measures and clinical outcomes from multiple sites within a single health system.Spine J. 2023 Jan;23(1):92-104. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2022.08.020. Epub 2022 Sep 3. Spine J. 2023. PMID: 36064091
-
Effectiveness of a Decision-Making Protocol for the Surgical Treatment of Lumbar Stenosis with Grade 1 Degenerative Spondylolisthesis.World Neurosurg. 2018 Feb;110:e355-e361. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.11.001. Epub 2017 Nov 10. World Neurosurg. 2018. PMID: 29133000
-
Diagnosis and Management of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Review.JAMA. 2022 May 3;327(17):1688-1699. doi: 10.1001/jama.2022.5921. JAMA. 2022. PMID: 35503342 Review.
-
Does Concomitant Degenerative Spondylolisthesis Influence the Outcome of Decompression Alone in Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis? A Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.World Neurosurg. 2019 Mar;123:226-238. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.11.246. Epub 2018 Dec 18. World Neurosurg. 2019. PMID: 30576810 Review.
Cited by
-
Machine Learning Models Leveraging Smartphone-Based Patient Mobility Data Can Accurately Predict Functional Outcomes After Spine Surgery.J Clin Med. 2024 Oct 30;13(21):6515. doi: 10.3390/jcm13216515. J Clin Med. 2024. PMID: 39518657 Free PMC article.
-
Surgical options for ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament of the cervical spine: a narrative review.J Orthop Surg Res. 2024 Nov 1;19(1):707. doi: 10.1186/s13018-024-05215-8. J Orthop Surg Res. 2024. PMID: 39487441 Free PMC article. Review.
-
A randomized trial on three different minimally invasive decompression techniques for lumbar spinal stenosis. Five years follow-up from the NORDSTEN-SST.Eur Spine J. 2024 Oct 24. doi: 10.1007/s00586-024-08514-0. Online ahead of print. Eur Spine J. 2024. PMID: 39448401
-
Surgical interventions for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review with network meta-analysis.BMC Med. 2024 Oct 8;22(1):430. doi: 10.1186/s12916-024-03653-z. BMC Med. 2024. PMID: 39379938 Free PMC article.
-
Challenges in Contemporary Spine Surgery: A Comprehensive Review of Surgical, Technological, and Patient-Specific Issues.J Clin Med. 2024 Sep 14;13(18):5460. doi: 10.3390/jcm13185460. J Clin Med. 2024. PMID: 39336947 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical