ArticleJournal of craniovertebral junction & spine
"Only fixation" in cases with failed decompression for lumbar canal stenosis - Analysis of outcome in 14 cases.
Article in Journal of craniovertebral junction & spine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Lumbar canal "stenosis:" Instability is the issue and stabilization is the treatment.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineArticle
- Degenerative lumbosacral spondylolisthesis: Instability as the primary pathology and stabilization as definitive treatment. Experience with 28 cases treated by only fixation without any decompression.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: The rationale of "only fixation" of affected spinal segments without any form of bone or soft-tissue decompression in cases with failed decompressive laminectomy for lumbar canal stenosis is discussed on the basis of an experience with 14 cases. Materials and Methods: During the period between 2010 and 2022, 14 patients who symptomatically worsened or did not improve following a long-segment "wide" decompressive laminectomy for multisegmental lumbar canal stenosis were identified. All patients were treated by segmental spinal stabilization aimed at arthrodesis by facetal distraction by Goel's facetal spacers (6 cases) or Camille's transarticular facetal fixation (8 cases). No bone, soft tissue, or disc resection was done for spinal or neural canal "decompression." Oswestry Disability Index and Visual Analog Scale were used to clinically assess the patients before and after the surgery and at follow-up. In addition, video recordings of patient's self-assessment of clinical outcome were used to monitor the outcome. Results: During the average period of follow-up of 71 months (range 6 months to 16 years), all patients recovered in majority of their major symptoms, the recovery was observed in the immediate postoperative period. During the period of follow-up, none of the patients complained of recurrent symptoms or needed any additional surgery. There was firm stabilization and evidences of bone fusion of the treated spinal segments in all patients. There were no infections or implant failure. No patient worsened after treatment. Conclusions: Instability of the spinal segments is the primary issue in cases with lumbar canal stenosis and stabilization in the treatment.
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.