Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38894862›Full record

Trial reportJournal of pain research2024

24-Month Outcomes of Indirect Decompression Using a Minimally Invasive Interspinous Fixation Device versus Standard Open Direct Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Prospective Comparison.

Ganesan Baranidharan, Beatrice Bretherton, Richard G Feltbower, Jake Timothy, Almas Latif Khan, Ashok Subramanian, Mushtaq Ahmed, Tracey A Crowther, Helen Radford, Harun Gupta and 4 more

Abstract readCase ReportsClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of pain research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Revision surgical technique for laterally placed MinuteManJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

14 authors.

Ganesan BaranidharanPain Management Department, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
Beatrice BrethertonPain Management Department, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1569-5872
Richard G FeltbowerLeeds Institute for Data Analytics, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Jake TimothyDepartment of Neuroscience, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
Almas Latif KhanDepartment of Spine Surgery, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
Ashok SubramanianSomerset Spinal Surgery Service, Musgrove Park Hospital, Taunton, UK.
Mushtaq AhmedDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust, Dudley, UK.
Tracey A CrowtherPain Management Department, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
Helen RadfordResearch & Innovation, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
Harun GuptaDepartment of Radiology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
Muthusamy ChandramohanRadiology Department, Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK.
Douglas P BeallComprehensive Specialty Care, Edmond, OK, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8340-696X
Timothy R DeerThe Spine and Nerve Center of the Virginias, Charleston, WV, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8907-7730
Thomas HedmanDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0301-3707

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: An early-stage, multi-centre, prospective, randomised control trial with five-year follow-up was approved by Health Research Authority to compare the efficacy of a minimally invasive, laterally implanted interspinous fixation device (IFD) to open direct surgical decompression in treating lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Two-year results are presented. Patients and Methods: Forty-eight participants were randomly assigned to IFD or decompression. Primary study endpoints included changes from baseline at 8-weeks, 6, 12 and 24-months follow-ups for leg pain (visual analogue scale, VAS), back pain (VAS), disability (Oswestry Disability Index, ODI), LSS physical function (Zurich Claudication Questionnaire), distance walked in five minutes and number of repetitions of sitting-to-standing in one minute. Secondary study endpoints included patient and clinician global impression of change, adverse events, reoperations, operating parameters, and fusion rate. Results: Both treatment groups demonstrated statistically significant improvements in mean leg pain, back pain, ODI disability, LSS physical function, walking distance and sitting-to-standing repetitions compared to baseline over 24 months. Mean reduction of ODI from baseline levels was between 35% and 56% for IFD (p<0.002), and 49% to 55% for decompression (p<0.001) for all follow-up time points. Mean reduction of IFD group leg pain was between 57% and 78% for all time points (p<0.001), with 72% to 94% of participants having at least 30% reduction of leg pain from 8-weeks through 24-months. Walking distance for the IFD group increased from 66% to 94% and sitting-to-standing repetitions increased from 44% to 64% for all follow-up time points. Blood loss was 88% less in the IFD group (p=0.024) and operating time parameters strongly favoured IFD compared to decompression (p<0.001). An 89% fusion rate was assessed in a subset of IFD participants. There were no intraoperative device issues or re-operations in the IFD group, and only one healed and non-symptomatic spinous process fracture observed within 24 months. Conclusion: Despite a low number of participants in the IFD group, the study demonstrated successful two-year safety and clinical outcomes for the IFD with significant operation-related advantages compared to surgical decompression.

Indexed as

interspinous fixation devicelumbar spinal stenosisminimally invasive spinepatient reported outcomesposterior lateral arthrodesissurgical decompression

Identifiers

PMID38894862
PMCPMC11182879

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.