ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
A new surgery choice of bilateral laminoplasty for symptomatic three or more-level lumbar canal stenosis in patients over 60 years old: a two-year retrospective study.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMulti-level lumbar canal stenosis (LCS) in patients over 60 years is common and frequently complicated by significant comorbidities, making surgical decisions complex. While posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) is often used, bilateral laminoplasty offers a potential motion-preserving alternative. This study compares outcomes of bilateral laminoplasty versus PLIF for multi-level LCS in this elderly population.
methodsThis retrospective study included consecutive patients >60 years with ≥3-level LCS undergoing bilateral laminoplasty or PLIF at our center. Patients were followed for a mean of approximately 24 months. We first detailed the bilateral laminoplasty technique. Then, outcomes were assessed using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score for neurological function, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) for quality of life. Perioperative parameters, complications, and comorbidities were analyzed.
resultsFifty-one patients met inclusion criteria and surveyed (26 laminoplasty, 25 PLIF). Laminoplasty demonstrated significantly shorter operative time (1.8±0.4 vs. 3.2±0.7 hours) and reduced blood loss (102±38 vs. 318±204 ml) compared to PLIF. Transfusion rates were lower with laminoplasty (0% vs 52%). Both groups showed significant improvements in VAS, JOA, and ODI scores at final follow-up. Laminoplasty achieved significantly better final ODI scores. Comorbidity rates were high, but no serious complications were found.
conclusionBilateral laminoplasty is a safe and effective surgical option for patients over 60 years with multi-level LCS, offering comparable clinical improvements to PLIF while providing advantages of shorter operative time, significantly reduced blood loss and transfusion requirements. It represents a valuable motion-preserving alternative in this comorbid population.
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.