ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Lumbar spinal stenosis exacerbated by spinal epidural lipomatosis: a case report.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To characterize the presentation, diagnostic strategy, and postoperative recovery patterns in a patient with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) complicated by spinal epidural lipomatosis (SEL), and to evaluate the role of selective nerve root block (SNRB) in guiding staged minimally invasive decompression. Methods: We analyzed the clinical course of a 65-year-old man presenting with neurogenic claudication and right lower extremity numbness after a course of inhaled glucocorticoids. Preoperative assessment included radiography, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which demonstrated degenerative central canal stenosis at L4/5 and epidural lipomatosis at L5/S1. Because imaging findings were multilevel and symptom dominance was unclear, SNRB localized the symptomatic level and guided staged arthroscopy-assisted uniportal decompression. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), SF-36 quality-of-life scores, walking tolerance, and neurological examinations during 4 months of follow-up. Results: SNRB identified L4/5 as the primary symptomatic level, supporting initial targeted decompression. Following Stage 1 decompression at L4/5, neurogenic claudication and motor weakness improved rapidly, with VAS decreasing from 7 to 4 and ODI improving from 52 to 38. Persistent plantar numbness prompted Stage 2 decompression with excision of excessive epidural fat at L5/S1, after which VAS further decreased to 2 and ankle plantarflexion strength improved relative to baseline. At the final follow-up, ODI improved to 20 and the SF-36 composite score increased from 32.6 to 70.8. Walking tolerance markedly improved, only mild plantar paresthesia persisted. No perioperative complications or postoperative instability were observed. Conclusions: This case suggests that SEL may trigger or unmask clinical symptoms of degenerative LSS and highlights distinct recovery trajectory between focal degenerative stenosis and diffuse epidural fat-related compression. SNRB-guided staged minimally invasive decompression enabled precise level selection and favorable functional outcomes, underscoring its value in managing multilevel lumbar pathology complicated by SEL.
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.