medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8036 (Electronic)
ISSN 2306-4102 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Colegio Mexicano de Ortopedia y Traumatología

2002, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Acta Ortop Mex 2002; 16 (2)

Surgical treatment of the lumbar spinal canal stenosis

Miramontes MV, Rosales OLM, Reyes-Sánchez AA

Language: Spanish
References: 41
Page: 70-75
PDF size: 247.03 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective. First description available data from symptoms of lumbar spinal canal stenosis are from 1899. Disease is known as well as spondylosis, vertebral degenerative syndrome and spondyloarthrosis. Abnormal decrease in diameters of either spinal canal, root canal or foramina, produce neural symptoms of deficit such as neurogenic claudication, numbness, dysesthesia or weakness of lower limbs that worsen as a result of activity and improve with rest. This paper has been designed in order to assess the results of recalibrating all interior structures of the spine as outlined before, as well as posterior fusion and transpedicular instrumentation in cases of lumbar stenosis. Material and methods. A series of 86 patients who were operated on as described above because of a history from 10 days to 20 years (av. 5.3 years, mean 10) of symptomatic lumbar spine stenosis syndrome that failed to improve with conservative treatment is reported. There were 50 females and 36 males, with age from 50 to 84 years (av. 67, mean 62). Recalibration was performed in all, while fusion and fixation only in 65 and fusion without fixation in the remaining 21. All patients were assessed at one year and at 7 years after operation. Results. According to the Talghot scale, overall results in terms of pain at one year were excellent in 60 cases (70.5%), good in 8 (9.3%), fair in 16 (18.6%) and poor in 2 (2.3%). At 7 years, the rate of pain had a slight worsening since results were excellent in 60 (70.5%), good in 6 (7.05%), fair in 12 (14.1%) and poor in 7 (8.2%). Asymptomatic loosening of instrumentation occurred in 20 (23.5%), symptomatic in 20 (23.5%) and it was completely broken in 5 (5.8%). Instrumentation was removed in 45 patients. Neurological symptoms relieved in 76 patients (88.2%) and revision surgery was performed in 10 (one with instrumentation and 9 without it) out of the 86 patients (10.7%) because of neural relapsing symptoms which were produced by fibrous neoformation peridural tissue. Conclusion. Surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis must be done only in those cases in whom conservative treatment has failed. Surgical technique is recommended as follows: recalibration and fusion in patients younger than 50 years; laminectomy, recalibration, arthrodesis and transpedicular fixation in those from 50 to 65 years; recalibration, fusion and trans-pedicular fixation in people from 65 to 75 years and postero-lateral arthrodesis and laminectomy without fixation in those older than 75 years.


REFERENCES

  1. Arnoldi CC. Lumbar spinal stenosis and nerve root in treatment syndrome definition and classification. Clin Orthop 1976; 115: 4-5.

  2. Boden SD. Abnormal magnetic resonance sacns of the lumbar spine in asymptomatic subjects. JBJS 1990; 72(A): 403-8.

  3. Bolender NF, et al. Role of computed tomography and myelography in the diagnosis of central spinal stenosis. JBJS 1985; 67(A): 240-5.

  4. Cienega RM y cols. Conducto lumbar estrecho, diagnóstico y tratamiento quirúrgico. Rev Mex Ortop 1991; 5: 19-24.

  5. Conley FK, et al. Decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis and stabilization with knot rods in the elderly patient. Neurosurgery 1990; 26(5): 758-63.

  6. Dai Ly, et al. The effect of flexion-extension motion of lumbar spine on the capacity of the spinal cannal. An experimental study. Spine 1989; 14(5): 523-5.

  7. Eskola A, et al. Calcitonin treatment in lumbar spinal stenosis. A randomized, placebo controlled, double blind. Cross-over study with one year follow-up. Calcif Tissue Int 1992; 50(5): 400-3.

  8. Goel VK, et al. Possible role of stress in inducing spinal stenosis. Along term complications following disk excision. J Biomechan Engen 1990; 112: 478-81.

  9. González EG, et al. Lumbar spinal stenosis. Analysis of pre and postoperative somatosensory evoked potentials. Arch Phys Med Rehab 1985; 66(1): 11-5.

  10. Hall S, et al. Lumbar spinal stenosis. Clinical features, diagnosis procedures and results of surgical treatment in 68 patients. Ann Inter Med 1985; 103(2): 271-5.

  11. Heath JM. The clinical presentation of lumbar spinal stenosis. Ohio Med 1989; 85(6): 484-7.

  12. Herzog RJ. The importance of posterior epidural fat pad in lumbar central canal stenosis. Spine 1991; 16(supl): 32-40.

  13. Herron LD, et al. Lumbar spinal stenosis. Result of surgical treatment. J Spinal Disord 1991; 4(1): 26-33.

  14. Hoogmaterns M, et al. Epidural injection in the treatment of spinal stenosis. Acta Orthop Bel 1987; 53: 409-11.

  15. Jhonson KE, et al. The effect of decompression on the natural course of spinal estenosis, a comparison of surgical treated patients. Spine 1991; 16(5): 615-9.

  16. Jhonson KE, et al. The natural course of lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin Orthop 1992; 279: 82-6.

  17. Katz JN, et al. The outcome of decompressive laminectomy for degenerative lumbar stenosis. JBJS 1991; 73(A): 305-10.

  18. Kent DL, et al. Diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis in adults. A meta-analysis of the accuracy of CT, MR and myelography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992; 158(5): 1135-44.

  19. Kondo M, et al. Electrophysiological studies of intermitent claudication in lumbar stenosis. Spine 1989; 14(8): 862-6.

  20. Kykaldi Willis WH, et al. Editorial comment. Lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin Orthop 1976; 115: 2-3.

  21. Lee CK, et al. Lateral lumbar spinal canal stenosis, classification, pathologic anatomy and surgical decompression. Spine 1988: 13: 313-20.

  22. Lehman TR. Long term follow up of lower fusion patients. Spine 1987; 12(2): 97-104.

  23. Mc Ivor GW, et al. Pathological and myelographic changes in the major types of lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin Orthop 1976; 115: 72-6.

  24. McKinley LM, et al. The marrow lumbar spinal cannal of lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin Orthop 1976; 114: 319-25.

  25. Nasca RJ. Rationale for spinal fusion in lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 1989; 14: 451-54.

  26. Nasca RJ. Surgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 1989; 12: 809-16.

  27. Naylor A. A factors in the development of the spinal stenosis syndrome. JBJS 1990; 61(B): 306-9.

  28. Postachinni F, et al. Treatment of lumbar stenosis. JBJS 1980; 62(B): 78-82.

  29. Reyes JE y cols. Resultados y complicaciones del sistema de fijación vertebral toracolumbar INO. Rev Mex Ortop 1996; 10(6): 276-85.

  30. Rothman, RH et al. Enfermedad del disco lumbar. Capítulo 9. La columna vertebral. 2a. edición. Editorial Panamericana. México. 1985: 541-682.

  31. Russin LA, et al. Spinal stenosis report of series and long term follow up. Clin Orthop 1976; 115: 101-3.

  32. Savage JM. Evolución normal del conducto lumbar estrecho. En disco intervertebral. ed. CECSA, 3a. edición 1981.

  33. Senegas J, et al. Widening of the lumbar vertebral canal as an alternative to laminectomy in the treatment of lumbar stenosis. J Orthop Surg 1988; 2: 93-9.

  34. Spengler D. Current concepts review degenerative stenosis of lumbar spine. JBJS 1987; 69(A): 395-8.

  35. Tile M, et al. Spinal stenosis results of treatment. Clin Orthop 1976; 115: 104-8.

  36. Trueta J. La estructura del cuerpo humano. Ed. Labor 1975; Capítulo 7: 53-62.

  37. Tsuji J, et al. Expansive laminoplasty for lumbar spinal stenosis. Int Orthop 1990; 14: 309-14.

  38. Verbiest H. Results of surgical treatment of idiopathic development stenosis of the lumbar vertebral canal a review of twenty seven years experience. JBJS 1977; 59(b): 181-8.

  39. Verbiest H. Developmental stenosis of the bony lumbar vertebral canal. Acta Orthop Bel 1987; 53: 373-87.

  40. Wiltse LL. The treatment of spinal stenosis. Clin Orthop 1976; 115: 83-91.

  41. Wood GW. Del libro Cirugía Ortopédica de Campbell. Capítulo 75. 7a. Edición. México. Editorial Panamericana. 1988.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com