Aperius PercLID stand alone interspinous system for the treatment of degenerative lumbar stenosis: Experience on 152 cases

Journal of Spinal Disorders and Techniques

Volumn 23, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 203-207

  Nardi, Piervittorio ^a   Cabezas, Daniel ^a   Rea, Giancarla ^a   Pettorini, Benedetta Ludovica ^a  

^a FONDAZIONE POLICLINICO UNIVERSITARIO A GEMELLI IRCCS   (Italy)

Author keywords

Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis; Interspinous device; Neurogenic intermittent claudication

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; APERIUS PERCLID STAND ALONE INTERSPINOUS SYSTEM; ARTICLE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CONSERVATIVE TREATMENT; DEGENERATIVE DISEASE; DEGENERATIVE LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS; DEVICE REMOVAL; FEMALE; FLUOROSCOPY; FUNCTIONAL STATUS; HUMAN; IMPLANT; INTERMITTENT CLAUDICATION; LOCAL ANESTHESIA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; OPERATION DURATION; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PATIENT POSITIONING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SAFETY; SCORING SYSTEM; SKIN INCISION; STANDING; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT FAILURE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TROCAR; VERTEBRAL CANAL STENOSIS; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; ZURICH CLAUDICATION QUESTIONNAIRE SCORE;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERMITTENT CLAUDICATION; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PATIENT SELECTION; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; PROSTHESIS IMPLANTATION; QUESTIONNAIRES; SPINAL STENOSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 77952232286     PISSN: 15360652     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e31819b08da     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Szpalski M, Gunzburg R. Lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly: an overview. Eur Spine J. 2003;12: S170-S175.
2. Amundsen T, Weber H, Nordal HJ, et al. Lumbar spinal stenosis: conservative or surgical management?: a prospective 10-year study. Spine. 2000;25:1424-1435.
3. Riew KD, Yin Y, Gilula L, et al. The effect of nerve-root injections on the need for operative treatment of lumbar radicular pain. A prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82:1589-1593.
4. Hilibrand AS, Rand N. Degenerative lumbar stenosis: diagnosis and management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 1999;7:239-249.
5. Pratt RK, Fairbank JC, Virr A. The reliability of the Shuttle Walking Test, the Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire, the Oxford Spinal Stenosis Score, and the Oswestry Disability Index in the assessment of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine. 2002;27:84-91.
6. Schonstrom N, Lindahl S, Willen J, et al. Dynamic changes in the dimensions of the lumbar spinal canal: an experimental study in vitro. J Orthop Res. 1989;7:115-121.
7. Metz LN, Deviren V. Low-grade spondylolisthesis. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2007;18:237-248.
8. Solberg TK, Olsen JA, Ingebrigtsen T, et al. Health-related quality of life assessment by the EuroQol-5D can provide cost-utility data in the field of low-back surgery. Eur Spine J. 2005;14:1000-1007.
9. Taylor VM, Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, et al. Low back pain hospitalization. Recent United States trends and regional variations. Spine. 1994;19:1207-1212.
10. Arbit E, Pannullo S. Lumbar stenosis: a clinical review. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;384:137-143.
11. Atlas SJ, Keller RB, Wu YA, et al. Long-term outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis: 8 to 10 year results from the Maine lumbar spine study. Spine. 2005;30:936-943.
12. Lauryssen C. Appropriate selection of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis for interspinous process decompression with the X STOP device. Neurosurg Focus. 2007;22: E5.
13. Zucherman JF, Hsu KY, Hartjen CA, et al. A prospective randomized multi-center study for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with the X STOP interspinous implant: 1-year results. Eur Spine J. 2004;13:22-31.
14. Zucherman JF, Hsu KY, Hartjen CA, et al. A multicenter, prospective, randomized trial evaluating the X STOP interspinous process decompression system for the treatment of neurogenic intermittent claudicatio: two-year follow-up results. Spine. 2005;30:1351-1358.
15. Tuli SK, Yerby SA, Katz JN. Methodological approaches to developing criteria for improvement in lumbar spinal stenosis surgery. Spine. 2006;31:1276-1280.
16. Herno A, Saari T, Suomalainen O, et al. The degree of decompressive relief and its relation to clinical outcome in patients undergoing surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine. 1999;24:1010-1014.