Observational studyEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026
Central sensitization as a predictor of short-term postoperative outcomes in lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective observational study.
Observational study in 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, 2026. 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.
- Integrating the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) into Neuropelveological Practice: A Systematic Review of Endometriosis and Overlapping Pelvic Pain Syndromes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- The Impact of Irritable Bowel Syndrome on Spine Surgery Outcomes: A Comprehensive Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCentral sensitization (CS) has been increasingly recognized as a key factor influencing pain perception and recovery in degenerative spinal disorders. This study aimed to investigate whether preoperative CS predicts postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing decompression surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).
methodsEighty-six patients with LSS who underwent decompression surgery were prospectively evaluated. CS was assessed using the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI), with a cutoff score of ≥ 40 defining CS. Visual analogue scale (VAS) pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) were recorded preoperatively and at three months. Between-group comparisons and multivariate regression analyses were performed to determine the independent effect of CS on postoperative improvement.
resultsPatients with CS (54.7%) reported significantly greater baseline pain, disability, and anxiety (all p<0.05). Although both groups improved postoperatively, the magnitude of improvement was smaller in CS+ patients. Between-group differences were significant for reductions in low back pain (p=0.038), leg pain (p=0.003), numbness (p=0.001), disability (p<0.001), and physical quality of life (p<0.001). Regression analyses found that CS independently predicted poorer improvement in disability (β = +22.7, p<0.001), pain (β = +2.3, p<0.001), and physical function (β = −12.4, p<0.001), explaining up to 42% of the variance in postoperative outcomes.
conclusionPreoperative CS is independently associated with less favorable short-term postoperative recovery following lumbar decompression for LSS. Routine assessment of CS may help identify patients at risk for suboptimal outcomes and guide individualized perioperative management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41701351What 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.