Scoliosis and interspinous decompression with the X-STOP: prospective minimum 1-year outcomes in lumbar spinal stenosis

被引:9
作者
Rolfe, Kevin W. [1 ]
Zucherman, James F. [2 ]
Kondrashov, Dimitriy G. [2 ]
Hsu, Ken Y. [2 ]
Nosova, Emily [2 ]
机构
[1] Harbor UCLA Med Ctr, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Torrance, CA 90509 USA
[2] St Marys Spine Ctr, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA
关键词
Scoliosis; X-STOP; Interspinous decompression; Neurogenic intermittent claudication; Lumbar spinal stenosis; RELIABILITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.spinee.2010.08.004
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The X-STOP interspinous decompression device, as a treatment for neurogenic intermittent claudication (NIC) because of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), has been shown to be superior to nonoperative control treatment. Current Food and Drug Administration labeling limits X-STOP use to NIC patients with a maximum of 25 degrees concomitant lumbar scoliosis. This value was arrived at arbitrarily by the device developers and is untested. PURPOSE: To determine X-STOP utility for NIC in patients with concomitant lumbar scoliosis. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, single institution, clinical outcome study comparing patients with scoliosis with patients without scoliosis who underwent X-STOP interspinous decompression for NIC because of LSS. PATIENT SAMPLE: A cohort of 179 consecutive patients, 63 with scoliosis (Cobb angle 11 degrees or more) and 116 without scoliosis, with symptoms attributable to NIC treated between January 2006 and May 2007, were included in the study. OUTCOME MEASURES: All patients completed self-reported preoperative and minimum 1-year postoperative outcome forms. Functional measures included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, and maximum walking and standing times in minutes. Three questions measured patient satisfaction: How satisfied were you with the procedure (very satisfied, somewhat satisfied, somewhat dissatisfied, or very dissatisfied); Would you have the procedure again? (yes or no); Would you recommend the procedure to a friend? (yes or no). METHODS: Before analysis, the 179 consecutive X-STOP patients were divided into three groups: Group 1 (controls without scoliosis, n=116); Group 2 (low scoliosis: 11-25 degrees, n=41), and Group 3 (high scoliosis: 26 degrees or more, n=22). The three groups were not statistically different for any preoperative functional scores. Groups were analyzed for pre- to postoperative functional change and level of satisfaction. Segmental scoliosis at the treated level was also analyzed. RESULTS: Fifty-six percent of Group 1 and Group 2 patients, but only 18% of Group 3 patients, achieved the success criterion of an ODI improvement of 15 or more points (Group 3 the outlier, p=.004). The satisfaction rate was Group 1, 76%; Group 2, 78%; Group 3, 59% (Group 3 the outlier, p=.0001). On average, all three groups improved for each outcome: Group 1 (ODI 17.3, VAS 2.0, standing time 39 minutes, and walking time 43 minutes), Group 2 (ODI 20.0, VAS 1.9, standing time 65 minutes, and walking time 64 minutes), Group 3 (ODI 7.2, VAS 0.9, standing time 18 minutes, and walking time 16 minutes). There was no statistical relationship between any outcome and segmental scoliosis. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome success rate for the X-STOP procedure to treat NIC is lower in patients with overall lumbar scoliosis more than 25 degrees but is unaltered by segmental scoliosis at the affected level. Although patients and surgeons must be aware that the presence of more than 25 degrees of scoliosis portends less favorable results with X-STOP implantation for NIC because of LSS, success in these patients is not precluded, and selection of treatment must be put into the context of individual patient risk and other treatment options. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:972 / 978
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] An interspinous process distractor (X STOP) for lumbar spinal stenosis in elderly patients - Preliminary experiences in 10 consecutive coses
    Lee, JB
    Hida, K
    Seki, T
    Iwasaki, Y
    Minoru, A
    JOURNAL OF SPINAL DISORDERS & TECHNIQUES, 2004, 17 (01): : 72 - 77
  • [32] Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis treatment with Aperius™ PerCLID™ system and Falena® interspinous spacers: 1-year follow-up of clinical outcome and quality of life
    Masala, Salvatore
    Marcia, Stefano
    Taglieri, Amedeo
    Chiaravalloti, Antonio
    Calabria, Eros
    Raguso, Mario
    Piras, Emanuele
    Simonetti, Giovanni
    INTERVENTIONAL NEURORADIOLOGY, 2016, 22 (02) : 217 - 226
  • [33] Paradoxical Radiographic Changes of Coflex Interspinous Device with Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
    Lee, Nam
    Shin, Dong Ah
    Kim, Keung Nyun
    Yoon, Do Heum
    Ha, Yoon
    Shin, Hyun Chul
    Yi, Seong
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2016, 85 : 177 - 184
  • [34] Evaluating 5-year outcomes of interlaminar devices as an adjunct to decompression for symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis
    Naresh Kumar
    Andrew Cherian Thomas
    Meetrra Seyher Rajoo
    Sean Junn Kit Lee
    Laranya Kumar
    Liang Shen
    Pradnya Mohite
    Kasia Chen Xi Chua
    European Spine Journal, 2023, 32 : 1367 - 1374
  • [35] Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic decompression versus posterior short-segment fusion for treating degenerative lumbar scoliosis with lumbar spinal stenosis: a cohort study with a minimum five year followup
    Song, He
    Wang, Aobo
    Wang, Tianyi
    Fan, Ning
    Du, Peng
    Wu, Qichao
    Zang, Lei
    Yuan, Shuo
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2025, : 1211 - 1222
  • [36] Long-Term Outcomes Following Lumbar Microendoscopic Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis with and without Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: Minimum 10-Year Follow-Up
    Aihara, Takato
    Endo, Kenji
    Suzuki, Hidekazu
    Kojima, Atsushi
    Sawaji, Yasunobu
    Urushibara, Makoto
    Matsuoka, Yuji
    Takamatsu, Taichiro
    Murata, Kazuma
    Konishi, Takamitsu
    Yamauchi, Hideya
    Endo, Hiroo
    Yamamoto, Kengo
    WORLD NEUROSURGERY, 2021, 146 : E1219 - E1225
  • [37] Mid-term changes in spinopelvic sagittal alignment in lumbar spinal stenosis with coexisting degenerative spondylolisthesis or scoliosis after minimally invasive lumbar decompression surgery: minimum five-year follow-up
    Salimi, Hamidullah
    Toyoda, Hiromitsu
    Terai, Hidetomi
    Yamada, Kentaro
    Hoshino, Masatoshi
    Suzuki, Akinobu
    Takahashi, Shinji
    Tamai, Koji
    Hori, Yusuke
    Yabu, Akito
    Nakamura, Hiroaki
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2022, 22 (05) : 819 - 826
  • [38] RETRACTED ARTICLE: Comparison of two FDA-approved interspinous spacers for treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: Superion versus X-STOP—a meta-analysis from five randomized controlled trial studies
    He Zhao
    Li-Jun Duan
    Yu-Shan Gao
    Yong-Dong Yang
    Ding-Yan Zhao
    Xiang-Sheng Tang
    Zhen-guo Hu
    Chuan-Hong Li
    Si-Xue Chen
    Tao Liu
    Xing Yu
    Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 13
  • [39] Clinical and radiological outcomes of lumbar endoscopic decompression for treating lumbar spinal stenosis and degenerative lumbar scoliosis: a retrospective study at mean 4.4 years follow-up
    Fan, Ning
    Wang, Aobo
    Yuan, Shuo
    Du, Peng
    Wang, Tianyi
    Zang, Lei
    FRONTIERS IN SURGERY, 2025, 11
  • [40] Midterm outcome after unilateral approach for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: 5-year prospective study
    Halit Çavuşoğlu
    Ramazan Alper Kaya
    Osman Nuri Türkmenoglu
    Cengiz Tuncer
    İbrahim Çolak
    Yunus Aydın
    European Spine Journal, 2007, 16 : 2133 - 2142