The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5436-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
The primary objective of this systematic review is to compare the outcome after decompression with and without concomitant instrumented fusion in patients with lumbar stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. Does adding fusion to simple decompression lead to better results?
PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Cochrane, Web of Science, CINAHL and Academic Search Premier were searched. All studies comparing outcome of decompression alone to decompression with concomitant-instrumented fusion in patients suffering from symptomatic lumbar stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis were included. Risk of bias was assessed using an adapted version of the Cowley checklist.
Eleven studies were included in the analysis involving 3119 patients in total. In the majority of studies, including two RCTs, clinical outcome of both patient groups was comparable regarding most clinical outcome measures.
Currently there is not enough evidence that adding instrumented fusion to a decompression leads to superior outcomes compared to decompression only in patients with lumbar stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. The most important clinical outcome measures, including the ODI, show comparable results. Therefore, the least invasive and least costly procedure, being decompression alone, is preferred in patients with low-grade spondylolisthesis with predominant leg pain.
These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
Postacchini F et al (1991) Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. II. Surgical treatment. Ital J Orthop Traumatol 17(4):467–477 PubMed
Forsth P et al (2013) Does fusion improve the outcome after decompressive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis? A two-year follow-up study involving 5390 patients. Bone Jt J 95-B(7):960–965 CrossRef
Herkowitz HN, Kurz LT (1991) Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. A prospective study comparing decompression with decompression and intertransverse process arthrodesis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 73(6):802–808 CrossRef
Fischgrund JS et al (1997) 1997 Volvo Award winner in clinical studies. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis: a prospective, randomized study comparing decompressive laminectomy and arthrodesis with and without spinal instrumentation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 22(24):2807–2812 CrossRef
Kornblum MB et al (2004) Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis: a prospective long-term study comparing fusion and pseudarthrosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29(7):726–733 CrossRef
Martin CR et al (2007) The surgical management of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32(16):1791–1798 CrossRef
Okuda S et al (2007) Surgical outcomes of posterior lumbar interbody fusion in elderly patients. Surgical technique. J Bone Jt Surg Am 89(Suppl 2 Pt.2):310–320 CrossRef
Mardjetko SM et al (1994) Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. A meta-analysis of literature 1970–1993. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 19(20 Suppl):2256s–2265s CrossRef
Dall BE, Rowe DE (1985) Degenerative spondylolisthesis. Its surgical management. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 10(7):668–672 CrossRef
Herron LD, Mangelsdorf C (1991) Lumbar spinal stenosis: results of surgical treatment. J Spinal Disord 4(1):26–33 PubMed
Kristof RA et al (2002) Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis-induced radicular compression: nonfusion-related decompression in selected patients without hypermobility on flexion-extension radiographs. J Neurosurg 97(3):281–286 PubMed
Kelleher MO et al (2010) Success and failure of minimally invasive decompression for focal lumbar spinal stenosis in patients with and without deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35(19):E981–E987 CrossRef
Deyo RA et al (2010) Trends, major medical complications, and charges associated with surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in older adults. J Am Med Assoc 303(13):1259–1265 CrossRef
Ostelo RW et al (2008) Interpreting change scores for pain and functional status in low back pain: towards international consensus regarding minimal important change. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33(1):90–94 CrossRef
Plotz GMJ, Benini A (1998) Lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: review of 106 operated cases with degenerative anterior vertebral translation as the predominant aspect of the spondylosis. Neurosurg Q 8(4):271–287 CrossRef
Park JH et al (2012) A comparison of unilateral laminectomy with bilateral decompression and fusion surgery in the treatment of grade I lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 154(7):1205–1212 CrossRef
Katz JN et al (1997) Lumbar laminectomy alone or with instrumented or noninstrumented arthrodesis in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Patient selection, costs, and surgical outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 22(10):1123–1131 CrossRef
Kuntz KM et al (2000) Cost-effectiveness of fusion with and without instrumentation for patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1(25):1132–1139 CrossRef
Sengupta DK, Herkowitz HN (2003) Lumbar spinal stenosis. Treatment strategies and indications for surgery. Orthop Clin N Am 34(2):281–295 CrossRef
Leone A et al (2009) Degenerative lumber intervertebral instability: what is it and how does imaging contribute? Skelet Radiol 38(6):529–533 CrossRef
- Decompression with or without concomitant fusion in lumbar stenosis due to degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review
M. L. Dijkerman
G. M. Overdevest
W. A. Moojen
C. L. A. Vleggeert-Lankamp
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie
Mail Icon II