ArticleClinical interventions in aging2017
Five-year durability of stand-alone interspinous process decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis.
Article in Clinical interventions in aging, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.
- Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression and Interspinous Process Device for the Management of Symptomatic Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: a Literature Review.Current pain and headache reports · 2020Pooled it
- Minimally Invasive Surgery for the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Comprehensive Review.Current pain and headache reports · 2026Review
- Real-world complications, utilization patterns, and patient selection for the vertiflex interspinous process device: A national cohort analysis.Interventional pain medicine · 2026Article
- The MOTION randomized controlled trial for treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis using the percutaneous mild® procedure: 5-year results.Interventional pain medicine · 2026Article
- Efficacy and Safety of the Use of Interspinous Spacers in the Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Mapping Gap and Scoping Review.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2026Article
- An Algorithmic Overview of Advanced Pain Therapies: A Narrative Review.Current pain and headache reports · 2025Review
- Pacific Spine and Pain Society (PSPS) Evidence Review of Surgical Treatments for Lumbar Degenerative Spinal Disease: A Narrative Review.Pain and therapy · 2024Review
- Prospective 5-year follow-up of L5-S1 versus L4-5 midline decompression and interspinous-interlaminar fixation as a stand-alone treatment for spinal stenosis compared with laminectomies.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2023Article
- A Differential Clinical Benefit Examination of Full Lumbar Endoscopy vs Interspinous Process Spacers in the Treatment of Spinal Stenosis: An Effect Size Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes.International journal of spine surgery · 2022Article
- The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline of Interventional Treatments for Low Back Pain.Journal of pain research · 2022Review
- Best Practices for Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Treatment 2.0 (MIST): Consensus Guidance from the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN).Journal of pain research · 2022Review
- Neurosurgical Management of Interspinous Device Complications: A Case Series.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Decompression Using Minimally Invasive Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Associated with Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Review.Pain and therapy · 2021Review
- Current concepts of spondylosis and posterior spinal motion preservation for radiologists.Skeletal radiology · 2021Review
- The durability of minimally invasive lumbar decompression procedure in patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis: Long-term follow-up.Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain · 2021Observational
- The use of minimally invasive interspinous process devices for the treatment of lumbar canal stenosis: a narrative literature review.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2021Review
- Comparison of Adverse Outcomes Following Placement of Superion Interspinous Spacer Device Versus Laminectomy and Laminotomy.International journal of spine surgery · 2021Article
- Multicenter Retrospective Review of Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Minimally Invasive Lumbar Interspinous Fusion Device.Journal of pain research · 2021Article
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness and Safety of Interspinous Process Decompression (Superion).Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLumbar spinal stenosis is the most common indication for spine surgery in older adults. Interspinous process decompression (IPD) using a stand-alone spacer that functions as an extension blocker offers a minimally invasive treatment option for intermittent neurogenic claudication associated with spinal stenosis.
methodsThis study evaluated the 5-year clinical outcomes for IPD (Superion
resultsAt 5 years, 84% of patients (74 of 88) demonstrated clinical success on at least two of three ZCQ domains. Individual ZCQ domain success rates were 75% (66 of 88), 81% (71 of 88), and 90% (79 of 88) for ZCQss, ZCQpf, and ZCQps, respectively. Leg and back pain success rates were 80% (68 of 85) and 65% (55 of 85), respectively, and the success rate for ODI was 65% (57 of 88). Percentage improvements over baseline were 42%, 39%, 75%, 66%, and 58% for ZCQss, ZCQpf, leg and back pain VAS, and ODI, respectively (all
conclusionAfter 5 years of follow-up, IPD with a stand-alone spacer provides sustained clinical benefit.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.