AIM: To investigate the mid-term efficacy of bilateral decompression with a unilateral approach (BDUA) on symptoms and qualityof life of in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), with low grade (with percentage slip 60 years) and adult (<60 years), similar improvements were seen in bothgroups.CONCLUSION: BDUA could be quite effective in reducing pain, improving quality of life and walking distance with no worsening ofthe grade or degree of slipping.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:AIM: To investigate the mid-term efficacy of bilateral decompression with a unilateral approach (BDUA) on symptoms and qualityof life of in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), with low grade (with percentage slip 60 years) and adult (<60 years), similar improvements were seen in bothgroups.CONCLUSION: BDUA could be quite effective in reducing pain, improving quality of life and walking distance with no worsening ofthe grade or degree of slipping.
📊
Key Findings & Data:AIM: To investigate the mid-term efficacy of bilateral decompression with a unilateral approach (BDUA) on symptoms and qualityof life of in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), with low grade (with percentage slip 60 years) and adult (<60 years), similar improvements were seen in bothgroups.CONCLUSION: BDUA could be quite effective in reducing pain, improving quality of life and walking distance with no worsening ofthe grade or degree of slipping.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:AIM: To investigate the mid-term efficacy of bilateral decompression with a unilateral approach (BDUA) on symptoms and qualityof life of in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), with low grade (with percentage slip 60 years) and adult (<60 years), similar improvements were seen in bothgroups.CONCLUSION: BDUA could be quite effective in reducing pain, improving quality of life and walking distance with no worsening ofthe grade or degree of slipping.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters
Özet
AIM: To investigate the mid-term efficacy of bilateral decompression with a unilateral approach (BDUA) on symptoms and qualityof life of in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), with low grade (with percentage slip 60 years) and adult (<60 years), similar improvements were seen in bothgroups.CONCLUSION: BDUA could be quite effective in reducing pain, improving quality of life and walking distance with no worsening ofthe grade or degree of slipping.
🔖
Cite This Article
ÖĞDEN, M., YÜKSEL, U., AKKAYA, S., KAMAŞAK, K., DAGLI, A. T., BAKAR, B. (2019). The Effects of Microdecompression on Patients with Lumbar Degenerative Spinal Stenosis with or without Degenerative Spondylolisthesis. Turkish Neurosurgery, Cilt: 29 - Sayı: 2, 205–212. https://ajindex.com/articles/405282
Alimi M, Hofstetter CP, Torres-Campa JM, Navarro-Ramirez R, Cong GT, Njoku I Jr, Härtl R: Unilateral tubular approach for bilateral laminotomy: Effect on ipsilateral and contralateral buttock and leg pain. Eur Spine J 26: 389-396, 2017 2. Balderston RA, Auerbach JD: The Definition of Lumbar Spinal Instability and Its Clinical Significance. Semin Spine Surg 17: 240-242, 2005 3. Boonstra AM, Schiphorst Preuper HR, Reneman MF, Posthumus JB, Stewart RE: Reliability and validity of the visual analogue scale for disability in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Int J Rehabil Res 31: 165-9, 2008 4. Boukebir MA, Berlin CD, Navarro-Ramirez R, Heiland T, Schöller K, Rawanduzy C, Kirnaz S, Jada A, Härtl R: TenStep Minimally Invasive Spine Lumbar Decompression and Dural Repair Through Tubular Retractors. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) 13: 232-245, 2017 5. Burgstaller JM, Porchet F, Steurer J, Wertli MM: Arguments for the choice of surgical treatments in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis-a systematic appraisal of randomized controlled trials. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 16: 96, 2015 6. Dohzono S, Toyoda H, Matsumura A, Terai H, Suzuki A, Nakamura H: Clinical and Radiological Outcomes after Microscopic Bilateral Decompression via Unilateral Approach for Degenerative Lumbar Disease: Minimum 5-Year FollowUp. Asian Spine J 11: 285-293, 2017 7. Edward C. Benzel, M. PélegrinEdward C. Benzel: SPINE SURGERY: Tecniques, Complication, Avoidance, and Management”. Volume one (Second edition). Elsevier Health Sciences, 2004. 8. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB: The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine 25: 2940-52, 2000 9. Giannadakis C, Solheim O, Jakola AS, Nordseth T, Gulati AM, Nerland US, Nygaard ØP, Solberg TK, Gulati S: Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Individuals Aged 80 and Older: A Multicenter Observational Study. Am Geriatr Soc 64: 2011- 2018, 2016 10. Hu W, Zhao J, Gong C, Zou M, Yuan JH, Liu XY: A comparison of efficacy between unilateral laminectomy approach bilateral decompression and traditional total laminectomy decompression in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi 96: 1673-6, 2016 11. Kelleher MO, Timlin M, Persaud O, Rampersaud YR: Success and failure of minimally invasive decompression for focal lumbar spinal stenosis in patients with and without deformity. Spine 35: 981-7, 2010 12. Machado GC, Ferreira PH, Yoo RI, Harris IA, Pinheiro MB, Koes BW: Surgical options for lumbar spinal stenosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 11: CD012421, 2016