Does the duration of symptoms in patients with spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis affect outcomes?: Analysis of the spine outcomes research trial

Spine

Volumn 36, Issue 25, 2011, Pages 2197-2210

  Radcliff, Kristen E ^a   Rihn, Jeff ^a   Hilibrand, Alan ^a   Diiorio, Timothy ^a   Tosteson, Tor ^b   Lurie, Jon D ^b   Zhao, Wenyan ^b   Vaccaro, Alexander R ^a   Albert, Todd J ^a   Weinstein, James N ^b  

^a THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b DARTMOUTH HITCHCOCK MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

degenerative spondylolisthesis; lumbar; outcomes; spinal stenosis; surgery

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMORBIDITY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPINE SURGERY; SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VERTEBRAL CANAL STENOSIS;

AGED; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PAIN MEASUREMENT; PROGNOSIS; QUESTIONNAIRES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SPINAL FUSION; SPINAL STENOSIS; SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 81855227010     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182341edf     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Weinstein JN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, et al. Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. N Engl J Med 2007; 356 : 2257-70.
2. Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, et al. Surgical versus nonoperative treatment for lumbar SS four-year results of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010; 35 : 1329-38.
3. Yamashita K, Ohzono K, Hiroshima K. Patient satisfaction as an outcome measure after surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis: Testing the validity and discriminative ability in terms of symptoms and functional status. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006; 31 : 2602-8.
4. Yasar B, Simsek S, Er U, et al. Functionaland clinical evaluation for the surgical treatment of degenerative stenosis of the lumbar spinal canal. J Neurosurg Spine 2009; 11 : 347-52.
5. Amundsen T, Weber H, Nordal HJ, et al. Lumbar spinal stenosis: Conservative or surgical management? A prospective 10-year study. Spine 2000; 25 : 1424-35; discussion 35-6.
6. Jönsson B. Patient-related factors predicting the outcome of decompressive surgery. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 1993; 251 : 69-70.
7. Parke W, Gammell K, Rothman R. Arterial vascularization of the cauda equina. J Bone Jt Surg 1981; 63 : 53.
8. Olmarker K, Rydevik B, Holm S, et al. Effects of experimental graded compression on blood fl ow in spinal nerve roots. A vital microscopic study on the porcine cauda equina. J Orthop Res 1989; 7 : 817-23.
9. Kornblum MB, Fischgrund JS, Herkowitz HN, et al. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis: A prospective longterm study comparing fusion and pseudarthrosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2004; 29 : 726-33; discussion 733-4.
10. Gupta R, Rowshan K, Chao T, et al. Chronic nerve compression induces local demyelination and remyelination in a rat model of carpal tunnel syndrome. Exp Neurol 2004; 187 : 500-8.
11. Chao T, Pham K, Steward O, et al. Chronic nerve compression injury induces a phenotypic switch of neurons within the dorsal root ganglia. J Comp Neurol 2008; 506 : 180-93.
12. Herno A, Airaksinen O, Saari T, et al. Lumbar spinal stenosis: A matched-pair study of operated and non-operated patients. Br J Neurosurg 1996; 10 : 461-5.
13. Jönsson B, Annertz M, Sjöberg C, et al. A prospective and consecutive study of surgically treated lumbar spinal stenosis. Part I: Clinical features related to radiographic findings. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1997; 22 : 2932-7.
14. Jönsson B, Stromqvist B. Repeat decompression of lumbar nerve roots. A prospective two-year evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1993; 75 : 894-7.
15. McGregor AH, Hughes SP. The evaluation of the surgical management of nerve root compression in patients with low back pain. Part 2: Patient expectations and satisfaction. Spine 2002; 27 : 1471-6.
16. Spratt KF, Keller TS, Szpalski M, et al. A predictive model for outcome after conservative decompression surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Eur Spine J 2004; 13 : 14-21.
17. Herno A, Partanen K, Talaslahti T, et al. Long-term clinicaland magnetic resonance imaging follow-up assessment of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis after laminectomy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1999; 24 : 1533-7.
18. Jönsson B, Stromqvist B. Motor affliction of the L5 nerve root in lumbar nerve root compression syndromes. Spine 1995; 20 : 2012-5.
19. Katz JN, Stucki G, Lipson SJ, et al. Predictors of surgical outcome in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1999; 24 : 2229-33.
20. McGregor AH, Hughes SP. The evaluation of the surgical management of nerve root compression in patients with low back pain: Part 1: The assessment of outcome. Spine 2002; 27 : 1465-70.
21. Yamashita K, Hayashi J, Ohzono K, et al. Correlation of patient satisfaction with symptom severity and walking ability after surgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2003; 28 : 2477-81.
22. Yamashita K, Ohzono K, Hiroshima K. Five-year outcomes of surgical treatment for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: A prospective observational study of symptom severity at standard intervals after surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006; 31 : 1484-90.
23. Jönsson B, Annertz M, Sjöberg C, et al. A prospective and consecutive study of surgically treated lumbar spinal stenosis. Part II: Five-year follow-up by an independent observer. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1997; 22 : 2938-44.
24. Turner JA, Ersek M, Herron L, et al. Surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Attempted meta-analysis of the literature. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1992; 17 : 1-8.
25. Katz JN, Lipson SJ, Larson MG, et al. The outcome of decompressive laminectomy for degenerative lumbar stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1991; 73 : 809-16.