ArticleJAMA network open2022
Incidence of Revision Surgery After Decompression With vs Without Fusion Among Patients With Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.
Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Five-year outcomes from a multi-center prospective randomized controlled trial of minimally invasive interspinous fixation versus open direct decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis.Interventional pain medicine · 2026Article
- Adoption of intraoperative mechanomyography as a spinal decompression endpoint: A single-surgeon comparison by era.North American Spine Society journal · 2026Article
- Cartilage intermediate layer protein inhibits ligamentum flavum hypertrophy mediated by TGF-β1/SMAD3/SERPINE2 signaling pathway.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2026Article
- Radiographic phenotype-driven clustering in lumbar decompression: comparative study of outcome and reoperation risk.The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society · 2026Article
- Threshold-Anchored Mechanomyography Metrics for Patient Stratification in Spinal Decompression: Associations with Early Pain Outcomes.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Long-Term Spinopelvic Alignment Following Unilateral Laminotomy with Bilateral Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Retrospective Analysis Using Surgimap Digital X-Ray Imaging.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Article
- Disc bulging predicts poor outcomes of decompression surgery for lumbar spinal canal 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 · 2025Article
- Pearls and Pitfalls of Revision Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Technical Note.Cureus · 2025Article
- Comparison of reoperation incidence after fusion versus decompression for lumbar degenerative disease: A propensity score-weighted study.Annals of clinical epidemiology · 2025Article
- Experimental ex vivo characterization of the biomechanical effects of laminectomy and posterior fixation of the lumbo-sacral spine.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Fusion versus decompression alone for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis: a target trial emulation with index trial benchmarking.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 · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the Concentration of Selected Elements in the Serum of Patients with Degenerative Stenosis of the Lumbosacral Spine.Biological trace element research · 2024Article
- Cutting-Edge Biomaterials in Intervertebral Disc Degeneration Tissue Engineering.Pharmaceutics · 2024Review
- Biomechanics after spinal decompression and posterior instrumentation.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 · 2023Article
- A Study of 179 Patients with Degenerative Stenosis of the Lumbosacral Spine to Evaluate Differences in Quality of Life and Disability Outcomes at 12 Months, Between Conservative Treatment and Surgical Decompression.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Article
- Presentation, Diagnosis, and Management of Lower Back Pain Associated with Spinal Stenosis: A Narrative Review.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Only limited data derived from large prospective cohort studies exist on the incidence of revision surgery among patients who undergo operations for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS). Objective: To assess the cumulative incidence of revision surgery after 2 types of index operations-decompression alone or decompression with fusion-among patients with DLSS. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed data from a multicenter, prospective cohort study, the Lumbar Stenosis Outcome Study, which included patients aged 50 years or older with DLSS at 8 spine surgery and rheumatology units in Switzerland between December 2010 and December 2015. The follow-up period was 3 years. Data for this study were analyzed between October and November 2021. Exposures: All patients underwent either decompression surgery alone or decompression with fusion surgery for DLSS. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the cumulative incidence of revision operations. Secondary outcomes included changes in the following patient-reported outcome measures: Spinal Stenosis Measure (SSM) symptom severity (higher scores indicate more pain) and physical function (higher scores indicate more disability) subscale scores and the EuroQol Health-Related Quality of Life 5-Dimension 3-Level questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) summary index score (lower scores indicate worse quality of life). Results: A total of 328 patients (165 [50.3%] men; median age, 73.0 years [IQR, 66.0-78.0 years]) were included in the analysis. Of these, 256 (78.0%) underwent decompression alone and 72 (22.0%) underwent decompression with fusion. The cumulative incidence of revisions after 3 years of follow-up was 11.3% (95% CI, 7.4%-15.1%) for the decompression alone group and 13.9% (95% CI, 5.5%-21.5%) for the fusion group (log-rank P = .60). There was no significant difference in the need for revision between the 2 groups over time (unadjusted absolute risk difference, 2.6% [95% CI, -6.3% to 11.4%]; adjusted absolute risk difference, 3.9% [95% CI, -5.2% to 17.0%]; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.40 [95% CI, 0.63-3.13]). The number of revisions was significantly associated with higher SSM symptom severity scores (β, 0.171; 95% CI, 0.047-0.295; P = .007) and lower EQ-5D-3L summary index scores (β, -0.061; 95% CI, -0.105 to -0.017; P = .007) but not with higher SSM physical function scores (β, 0.068; 95% CI, -0.036 to 0.172; P = .20). The type of index operation was not significantly associated with the corresponding outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study showed no significant association between the type of index operation for DLSS-decompression alone or fusion-and the need for revision surgery or the outcomes of pain, disability, and quality of life among patients after 3 years. Number of revision operations was associated with more pain and worse quality of life.
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.