Open versus minimally invasive decompression for low-grade spondylolisthesis: analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database

Author:

Bisson Erica F.1,Mummaneni Praveen V.2,Virk Michael S.3,Knightly John4,Alvi Mohammed Ali5,Goyal Anshit5,Chan Andrew K.2,Guan Jian1,Glassman Steven6,Foley Kevin7,Slotkin Jonathan R.8,Potts Eric A.9,Shaffrey Mark E.10,Shaffrey Christopher I.11,Haid Regis W.12,Fu Kai-Ming3,Wang Michael Y.13,Park Paul14,Asher Anthony L.15,Bydon Mohamad5

Affiliation:

1. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah;

2. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, California;

3. Department of Neurological Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York;

4. Atlantic Neurosurgical Specialists, Morristown, New Jersey;

5. Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota;

6. Norton Leatherman Spine Center, Louisville, Kentucky;

7. Department of Neurosurgery, University of Tennessee, Memphis, Tennessee;

8. Geisinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania;

9. Goodman Campbell Brain and Spine, Indianapolis, Indiana;

10. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia;

11. Departments of Neurological Surgery and Orthopedic Surgery, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina;

12. Atlanta Brain and Spine, Atlanta, Georgia;

13. Department of Neurologic Surgery, University of Miami, Florida;

14. Department of Neurologic Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; and

15. Neuroscience Institute, Carolinas Healthcare System and Carolina Neurosurgery & Spine Associates, Charlotte, North Carolina

Abstract

OBJECTIVELumbar decompression without arthrodesis remains a potential treatment option for cases of low-grade spondylolisthesis (i.e., Meyerding grade I). Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques have recently been increasingly used because of their touted benefits including lower operating time, blood loss, and length of stay. Herein, the authors analyzed patients enrolled in a national surgical registry and compared the baseline characteristics and postoperative clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between patients undergoing open versus MIS lumbar decompression.METHODSThe authors queried the Quality Outcomes Database for patients with grade I lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis undergoing a surgical intervention between July 2014 and June 2016. Among more than 200 participating sites, the 12 with the highest enrollment of patients into the lumbar spine module came together to initiate a focused project to assess the impact of fusion on PROs in patients undergoing surgery for grade I lumbar spondylolisthesis. For the current study, only patients in this cohort from the 12 highest-enrolling sites who underwent a decompression alone were evaluated and classified as open or MIS (tubular decompression). Outcomes of interest included PROs at 2 years; perioperative outcomes such as blood loss and complications; and postoperative outcomes such as length of stay, discharge disposition, and reoperations.RESULTSA total of 140 patients undergoing decompression were selected, of whom 71 (50.7%) underwent MIS and 69 (49.3%) underwent an open decompression. On univariate analysis, the authors observed no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of PROs at 2-year follow-up, including back pain, leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index score, EQ-5D score, and patient satisfaction. On multivariable analysis, compared to MIS, open decompression was associated with higher satisfaction (OR 7.5, 95% CI 2.41–23.2, p = 0.0005). Patients undergoing MIS decompression had a significantly shorter length of stay compared to the open group (0.68 days [SD 1.18] vs 1.83 days [SD 1.618], p < 0.001).CONCLUSIONSIn this multiinstitutional prospective study, the authors found comparable PROs as well as clinical outcomes at 2 years between groups of patients undergoing open or MIS decompression for low-grade spondylolisthesis.

Publisher

Journal of Neurosurgery Publishing Group (JNSPG)

Subject

General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3