Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27981454›Full record

ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2017

Is the duration of pre-operative conservative treatment associated with the clinical outcome following surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis? A study based on the Spine Tango Registry.

Thomas Zweig, Juliane Enke, Anne F Mannion, Rolf Sobottke, Markus Melloh, Brian J C Freeman, Emin Aghayev, Spine Tango Contributors

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in 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. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The Implementation of Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome (PSPS): Mechanism-Based Recommendations.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2026
    Guideline
  2. Danish national clinical guidelines for surgical and nonsurgical treatment of patients with lumbar spinal 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 · 2019
    Guideline
  3. Article
  4. Dual task function differences in chronic low back pain: a narrative review.The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association · 2025
    Article
  5. The Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) comes of age: 18 years of efficient and effective patient-reported outcome measurement in the field of spinal disorders. Part 1. Development of the COMI, interpretation of scores, and use in research.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 · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Can the Charlson Comorbidity Index be used to predict the ASA grade in patients undergoing spine surgery?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 · 2020
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Shaping conservative spinal services with the Spine Tango Registry.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 · 2018
    Article
  12. The Michel Benoist and Robert Mulholland yearly European Spine Journal Review : A survey of the "medical" articles in the European Spine Journal, 2017.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 · 2018
    Review
  13. Central lumbar spinal stenosis: natural history of non-surgical patients.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
    Article
  14. Review
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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Thomas ZweigThe Spine Center Bern, Schänzlistrasse 39, 3000, Bern, Switzerland. zweig@memcenter.unibe.ch.ORCID 0000-0002-2496-1418
Juliane EnkeSwiss Center of Excellence in Medical Registries and Data Linkage (Swiss RDL), Institute for Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Finkenhubelweg 11, 3012, Bern, Switzerland.
Anne F MannionSpine Center, Department of Teaching, Research and Development, Schulthess Klinik, Lengghalde 2, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland.
Rolf SobottkeCentre for Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Medical Center Städte Region Aachen, Mauerfeldchen 25, 52146, Würselen, Germany.
Markus MellohCenter for Health Sciences, School of Health Professions, Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Technikumstrasse 71, 8401, Winterthur, Switzerland.
Brian J C FreemanDepartment of Spinal Surgery, Discipline of Orthopaedics and Trauma, School of Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
Emin AghayevSwiss Center of Excellence in Medical Registries and Data Linkage (Swiss RDL), Institute for Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Finkenhubelweg 11, 3012, Bern, Switzerland.
Spine Tango Contributors
University of Bern · CHKliniken der Stadt Köln · DESchulthess-Klinik · CHThe University of Adelaide · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe incidence of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) continues to rise, with both conservative and surgical management representing options for its treatment. The timing of surgery for LSS varies from shortly after the onset of symptoms to several months or years after conservative treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between the duration of pre-operative conservative treatment and the ultimate outcome following surgical interventions for LSS.

methodsThe study was based on prospective multicentre registry data (Spine Tango). Cases of LSS with a documented duration of conservative treatment, undergoing spinal decompression with at least one post-operative patient assessment between 3 and 30 months, were included in the study. Cases of LSS with spondylolisthesis, additional spinal pathology or previous spinal surgery were excluded. Interrogation of the Spine Tango Registry listed 3478 patients meeting the prescribed inclusion criteria. This cohort was stratified into four groups: (1) no previous treatment (n = 497; 14.3%), (2) conservative treatment <6 months (n = 965; 27.8%), (3) conservative treatment between 6 and 12 months (n = 758; 21.8%), and (4) conservative treatment >12 months (n = 1258; 36.1%). Group 4 reference group in regression analysis. The inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was applied using the propensity score to balance the groups for their characteristics. Outcome measures included achievement of the minimum clinically important change (MCIC) score of 2 points for (a) back pain, (b) leg pain and (c) Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI), and (d) surgical complications, (e) general complications and (f) operation time >2 h.

resultsPatient group ("duration of conservative therapy") was not associated with achievement of the MCIC for post-operative relief of leg pain (p = 0.22), achievement of MCIC for the COMI score (p = 0.054), surgical complications (p = 0.11) or general complications (p = 0.14). Only MCIC for post-operative relief of back pain (p = 0.021) and operation time were significantly associated with patient group (p = 0.038). However, compared with the reference group of >12 months of conservative treatment there was no significant difference in the likelihood of achieving the MCIC for those with none, <6 or 6-12 months of conservative treatment.

conclusionsThe duration of pre-operative conservative treatment was not associated with the ultimate outcome of decompression surgery. Further research is required to investigate optimal thresholds/indications for surgery and its appropriate timing in individual patients.

Indexed as

Conservative TreatmentDecompression, SurgicalPatient Outcome AssessmentPreoperative CareAgedBack PainFemaleHumansMaleOperative TimeRegistriesSpinal StenosisTime FactorsConservative treatmentLumbar spinal stenosisRegistrySpine TangoTiming of surgery

Identifiers

PMID27981454
OpenAlexW2562399777

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.