Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24307067›Full record

Observational studyClinical orthopaedics and related research2014

Elderly patients have similar outcomes compared to younger patients after minimally invasive surgery for spinal stenosis.

Ilyas S Aleem, Y Raja Rampersaud

Abstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The clinical course of pain and disability following surgery for spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Effectiveness of posterior decompression techniques compared with conventional laminectomy for lumbar stenosis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2015
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Impact of age on comparative outcomes of decompression alone versus fusion for L4 degenerative spondylolisthesis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Age-related Differences in Clinical Outcomes of Lumbar Discectomy.Geriatric orthopaedic surgery & rehabilitation · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Cochrane in CORRClinical orthopaedics and related research · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ilyas S AleemDepartment of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Y Raja Rampersaud
S.P.E.C.I.E.S. · USUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOlder patients undergo surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in great numbers, but as a result of substantial diagnostic and surgical heterogeneity, the impact of age on results after surgery is poorly defined. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We compared groups of patients younger and older than 70 years with relative clinical and surgical homogeneity to determine differences in (1) interval improvement in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively and (2) perioperative adverse events.

methodsWe performed a subgroup analysis of an ongoing prospective observational study. Patients were divided based primarily on age (younger than 70 years [n = 68] and 70 years or older [n = 41]) and secondarily on procedure (minimally invasive decompression alone or decompression and instrumented fusion). With the exception of age and American Society of Anesthesiologists status, the two age groups were similar (p > 0.3) in baseline demographics and ODI. Mean pre- and postoperative ODI were compared between groups at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months. Perioperative adverse events were also compared.

resultsAt all time intervals, both younger and older patients demonstrated (p = 0.05 to < 0.001) improvements in ODI. At the 1-year mark, no differences in ODI were demonstrated between the younger and older patients for decompression only (21 versus 26 [p = 0.29]) or decompression and fusion (19 versus 18 [p = 0.97]). Interval improvement in ODI was not different between younger and older patients at any time point for decompression only (6 weeks: -18 versus -20 [p = 0.66]; 6 months: -21 versus -17 [p = 0.41]; 12 months: -21 versus -15 [p = 0.29]) or decompression and fusion (6 weeks: -11 versus -12 [p = 0.58]; 6 months: -21 versus -22 [p = 0.69]; 12 months: -23 versus -27 [p = 0.97]). There were no differences in perioperative adverse events between groups (p = 0.67).

conclusionsWhen clinical and surgical heterogeneity is minimized, improvements in terms of disability as measured by the ODI and the frequency of adverse events after surgery in elderly patients with lumbar spinal stenosis are comparable to those of younger patients. For patients with focal lumbar spinal stenosis, age alone should not dissuade us from considering surgical intervention if otherwise indicated. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Indexed as

AgedAge FactorsDecompression, SurgicalDisability EvaluationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresPostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesRecovery of FunctionSpinal FusionSpinal StenosisTime FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID24307067
PMCPMC4016446
OpenAlexW2132264350

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.