Journals / Türk Nöroşirürji Dergsi / 2018 / Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 2

Choosing the Surgical Decompression Method in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Lomber Dar Kanalda Cerrahi Dekompresyon Yönteminin Seçimi

Pages
221–229
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Despite the availability of many surgical techniques, superiority in terms of efficiency of one technique against the others is still being discussed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Lumbar spinal stenosis can be defined as narrowing of the spinal canal, lateral recesses and vertebral foraminae secondary to soft tissue and bone changes.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The number of surgical procedures performed for lumbar spinal stenosis has increased over the years with the increase in the elderly population and expectancy of life quality.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Despite the availability of many surgical techniques, superiority in terms of efficiency of one technique against the others is still being discussed.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Lumbar spinal stenosis can be defined as narrowing of the spinal canal, lateral recesses and vertebral foraminae secondary to soft tissue and bone changes. The number of surgical procedures performed for lumbar spinal stenosis has increased over the years with the increase in the elderly population and expectancy of life quality. Patients are referred for surgery in case of unresponsiveness to conservative treatment, neurological deficits, limited daily activity, and shortening of walking distance that is incompatible with everyday life. Total laminectomy, medial facetectomy and foraminotomy are the gold standards in lumbar spinal stenosis surgery but the long operation time, excessive tissue damage and bleeding, high risk of postoperative instability and mortality, and the morbidity for the patient group, mostly elderly, has resulted in a search for alternatives. Minimal invasive spine surgery techniques have been used for spinal stenosis with the access provided by the microscope and endoscopy. Minimal invasive spine surgery techniques are generally focused on less tissue damage, accelerated healing period, reduced postoperative pain, low complication rate, minimal blood loss, maintaining stabilization, and early return to daily activity and work. Despite the availability of many surgical techniques, superiority in terms of efficiency of one technique against the others is still being discussed.

Özet

Lomber dar kanal, spinal kanalın, lateral reseslerinin, nöral foramenlerin yumuşak doku ve kemik değişiklikler nedeniyle daralması olarak tanımlanabilir. Yaşlı nüfus ve yaşam kalitesi beklentilerinin artması ile lomber dar kanal için uygulanan cerrahi işlemlerin sayısı yıllar içinde artmaktadır. Konservatif tedavilere cevap alınamaması, nörolojik defisitin varlığı, kısıtlı günlük aktivite, yürüme mesafesinin günlük yaşamla bağdaşmayacak kadar kısalması durumunda hastalar cerrahi tedaviye yönlendirilir. Total laminektomi, medial fasetektomi ve foraminotomi lomber dar kanal cerrahisinde altın standart olarak kabul edilmekle beraber operasyon süresinin uzun olması, doku hasarının ve kanama miktarının fazla olması, çoğunlukla yaşlı olan bu hasta grubundaki mortalite, morbidite ve postoperatif dönemde instabilite riskinin yüksek olması alternatif arayışlarına neden olmuştur. Mikroskop ve endoskopinin kullanımı ile minimal invazif spinal cerrahi teknikler lomber dar kanal tedavisinde giderek yaygınlaşmaya başlamıştır. Minimal invazif cerrahi yaklaşımları genel olarak daha az doku hasarı, iyileşme süresini hızlandırmayı, postoperatif ağrıyı azaltmayı, düşük komplikasyon oranı, minimal kan kaybı, stabilizasyonun bozulmaması, günlük aktivitelere ve iş hayatına erken dönüşe odaklanır. Birçok cerrahi teknik mevcut olmasına karşın, bir tekniğin diğerlerine karşı etkinlik açısından üstünlüğü halen tartışılmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞENEL, A., GÜÇLÜ, D. G. (2022). Choosing the Surgical Decompression Method in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis. Türk Nöroşirürji Dergsi, Cilt: 28 - Sayı: 2, 221–229. https://ajindex.com/articles/637343

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Anderson PA, Tribus CB, Kitchel SH: Treatment of neurogenic claudication by interspinous decompression: Application of the x-stop device in patients with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 4(6): 463-471, 2006 2. Aryanpur J, Ducker T: Multilevel lumbar laminotomies: An alternative to laminectomy in the treatment of lumbar stenosis. Neurosurgery 26(3): 429-432, 1990 3. Atlas SJ, Deyo RA, Keller RB, Chapin AM, Patrick DL, Long JM, Singer DE: The Maine Lumbar Spine Study, Part III. 1-year outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 21(15): 1787-1794, 1996 4. Aykaç B, Copuroğlu C, Ozcan M, Ciftdemir M, Yalnız E: Postoperative evaluation of quality of life in lumbar spinal stenosis patients following instrumented posterior decompression. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 45: 47-52, 2011 5. Banczerowski P, Vajda J, Veres R: Exploration and decompression of the spinal canal using split laminotomy and its modification, the 'archbone' technique. Neurosurgery 62(5 Suppl 2): ONS432-440, 2008 6. Bresnahan L, Ogden AT, Natarajan RN, Fessler RG: A biomechanical evaluation of graded posterior element removalfor treatment of lumbar stenosis: Comparison of a minimally invasive approach with two standard laminectomy techniques. Spine 34(1): 17-23, 2009 7. Bridwell KH, Sedgewick TA, O'Brien MF, Lenke LG, Baldus C: The role of fusion and instrumentation in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord 6: 461-472, 1993 8. Cavusoglu H, Turkmenoglu O, Kaya RA, Tuncer C, Colak I, Sahin Y: Efficacy of unilateral laminectomy for bilateral decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis. Turk Neurosurg 17: 100-108, 2007 9. Cavuşoğlu H, Kaya RA, Türkmenoglu ON, Tuncer C, Colak I, Aydin Y: Midterm outcome after unilateral approach for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: 5-year prospective study. Eur Spine J 16: 2133-2142, 2007 10. Celik SE, Celik S, Goksu K, Kara A, Ince I: Microdecompressive laminatomy with a 5-year follow-up period for severe lumbar spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord Tech 23: 229-235, 2010 11. Cho DY, Lin HL, Lee WY, Lee HC: Split-spinous process laminotomy and discectomy for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: A preliminary report. J Neurosurg Spine 6(3): 229- 239, 2007 12. Cornefjord M, Byröd G, Brisby H, Rydevik B: A long-term (4- to 12-year) follow-up study of surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Eur Spine J 9: 563-570, 2000 13. Diwan AD, Parvartaneni H,