Effectiveness of decompression alone versus decompression plus fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- PMID: 28361467
- DOI: 10.1007/s00402-017-2685-z
Effectiveness of decompression alone versus decompression plus fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Abstract
Introduction: The debate on efficacy of fusion added to decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is ongoing. No meta-analysis has compared the effectiveness of decompression versus decompression plus fusion in treating patients with LSS.
Methods: A literature search was performed in the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and Springer databases from 1970 to 2016. Relevant references were selected and the included studies were manually reviewed. We included trials evaluating decompression surgery compared to decompression plus fusion surgery in treating patients with LSS. The primary outcomes analyzed were back pain, leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index scores (ODI), the quality-of-life EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), duration of operation, intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, major complications, walking ability, number of reoperation, and finally clinically excellent and good rates. Data analysis was conducted using the Review Manager 5.2 software.
Results: Fifteen studies involving 17,785 patients with LSS were included. The overall effect mean difference (MD) (95% CI) in the differences between pre- and post-operative back pain, leg pain, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and length of stay were 0.04 (-0.36, 0.44), 0.69 (-0.38, 1.76), -2.04 (-3.12, -0.96), -3.96 (-6.64, -1.27) and -4.21 (-10.03, 1.62) (z = 0.18, 1.26, 3.71, 2.89 and 1.41, respectively; P = 0.86, 0.55, 0.0002, 0.004 and 0.16, respectively) in random effects models. The overall effect MD (95% CI) in ODI, EQ-5D, and walking ability were 0.43 (-1.15, 2.00), 0.01 (-0.01, 0.03) and 0.04 (-0.49, 0.57) (z = 0.52, 1.16 and 0.15, respectively; P = 0.59, 0.24 and 0.88, respectively) in fixed effects models. The overall effect odds ratio (OR) (95% CI) of major complications, number of reoperations, and clinically excellent and good rates between the two groups were 0.70 (0.60, 0.81), 1.04 (0.90, 1.19) and 0.31 (0.06, 1.59) (z = 4.63, 0.53 and 1.40, respectively; P < 0.00001, 0.60 and 0.16, respectively). Our study reveals no difference in the effectiveness between the two surgical techniques.
Conclusions: The additional fusion in the management of LSS yielded no clinical improvements over decompression alone within a 2-year follow-up period. But fusion resulted in a longer duration of operation, more blood loss, and a higher risk of complications. Therefore, the appropriate surgical protocol for LSS should be discussed further.
Keywords: Decompression; Degenerative spondylolisthesis; Fusion; Lumbar spinal stenosis; Meta-analysis.
Similar articles
-
Impact of obesity on complications and outcomes: a comparison of fusion and nonfusion lumbar spine surgery.J Neurosurg Spine. 2017 Feb;26(2):158-162. doi: 10.3171/2016.7.SPINE16448. Epub 2016 Oct 14. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017. PMID: 27740396
-
Surgical options for lumbar spinal stenosis.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Nov 1;11(11):CD012421. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012421. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016. PMID: 27801521 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Decompression plus fusion versus decompression alone for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Eur Spine J. 2017 Dec;26(12):3084-3095. doi: 10.1007/s00586-017-5200-x. Epub 2017 Jun 24. Eur Spine J. 2017. PMID: 28647763 Review.
-
Decompression and coflex interlaminar stabilisation compared with conventional surgical procedures for lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Int J Surg. 2017 Apr;40:60-67. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.02.056. Epub 2017 Feb 22. Int J Surg. 2017. PMID: 28254421 Review.
-
Decompression versus decompression plus fusion for treating degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Pain Pract. 2023 Apr;23(4):390-398. doi: 10.1111/papr.13193. Epub 2022 Dec 25. Pain Pract. 2023. PMID: 36504445 Review.
Cited by
-
Effects of "fixation-fusion" sequence of lumbar surgery on surgical outcomes for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial.BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023 Dec 1;24(1):928. doi: 10.1186/s12891-023-07052-y. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023. PMID: 38041036 Free PMC article.
-
The Essence of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis, 2021: 4. Surgical Treatment.Spine Surg Relat Res. 2023 Jul 27;7(4):308-313. doi: 10.22603/ssrr.2022-0209. eCollection 2023 Jul 27. Spine Surg Relat Res. 2023. PMID: 37636139 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Longitudinal Comparative Analysis of Complications and Subsequent Interventions Following Stand-Alone Interspinous Spacers, Open Decompression, or Fusion for Lumbar Stenosis.Adv Ther. 2023 Aug;40(8):3512-3524. doi: 10.1007/s12325-023-02562-6. Epub 2023 Jun 8. Adv Ther. 2023. PMID: 37289411 Free PMC article.
-
Short-Term Patient Outcomes Using the Interlaminar Endoscopic Surgical System Ilessys® Delta System versus Bilateral Laminotomy: A Single-Center Study of 80 Patients with Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.Med Sci Monit. 2023 May 9;29:e938477. doi: 10.12659/MSM.938477. Med Sci Monit. 2023. PMID: 37157236 Free PMC article.
-
Correlation of psoas major muscle morphology with function and clinical symptoms in patients with symptomatic multilevel lumbar spinal stenosis.J Orthop Surg Res. 2023 Feb 15;18(1):111. doi: 10.1186/s13018-023-03596-w. J Orthop Surg Res. 2023. PMID: 36793071 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
