Cargando…
Minimally Invasive vs. Open Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Patients with Diabetes – A Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network Study
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) vs open surgery (OPEN) for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) in patients with diabetes. METHODS: Patients with diabetes who underwent spinal decompression alone or with fusion for LSS within the Canadi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10448101/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34463136 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682211042576 |
_version_ | 1785094653849108480 |
---|---|
author | Hathi, Kalpesh Bigney, Erin Richardson, Eden Alugo, Tolu El-Mughayyar, Dana Vandewint, Amanda Manson, Neil Abraham, Edward Small, Chris Thomas, Kenneth Fisher, Charles G. Rampersaud, Y. Raja Hall, Hamilton McIntosh, Greg Johnson, Michael G. Bailey, Christopher S. Weber, Michael H. Paquet, Jerome Kingwell, Stephen Nataraj, Andrew Finkelstein, Joel Kelly, Adrienne Attabib, Najmedden |
author_facet | Hathi, Kalpesh Bigney, Erin Richardson, Eden Alugo, Tolu El-Mughayyar, Dana Vandewint, Amanda Manson, Neil Abraham, Edward Small, Chris Thomas, Kenneth Fisher, Charles G. Rampersaud, Y. Raja Hall, Hamilton McIntosh, Greg Johnson, Michael G. Bailey, Christopher S. Weber, Michael H. Paquet, Jerome Kingwell, Stephen Nataraj, Andrew Finkelstein, Joel Kelly, Adrienne Attabib, Najmedden |
author_sort | Hathi, Kalpesh |
collection | PubMed |
description | STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) vs open surgery (OPEN) for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) in patients with diabetes. METHODS: Patients with diabetes who underwent spinal decompression alone or with fusion for LSS within the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) database were included. MIS vs OPEN outcomes were compared for 2 cohorts: (1) patients with diabetes who underwent decompression alone (N = 116; MIS n = 58 and OPEN n = 58), (2) patients with diabetes who underwent decompression with fusion (N = 108; MIS n = 54 and OPEN n = 54). Modified Oswestry Disability Index (mODI) and back and leg pain were compared at baseline, 6–18 weeks, and 1-year post-operation. The number of patients meeting minimum clinically important difference (MCID) or minimum pain/disability at 1-year was compared. RESULTS: MIS approaches had less blood loss (decompression alone difference 100 mL, P = .002; with fusion difference 244 mL, P < .001) and shorter length of stay (LOS) (decompression alone difference 1.2 days, P = .008; with fusion difference 1.2 days, P = .026). MIS compared to OPEN decompression with fusion had less patients experiencing adverse events (AEs) (difference 13 patients, P = .007). The MIS decompression with fusion group had lower 1-year mODI (difference 14.5, 95% CI [7.5, 21.0], P < .001) and back pain (difference 1.6, 95% CI [.6, 2.7], P = .002) compared to OPEN. More patients in the MIS decompression with fusion group exceeded MCID at 1-year for mODI (MIS 75.9% vs OPEN 53.7%, P = .028) and back pain (MIS 85.2% vs OPEN 70.4%, P = .017). CONCLUSIONS: MIS approaches were associated with more favorable outcomes for patients with diabetes undergoing decompression with fusion for LSS. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10448101 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-104481012023-08-25 Minimally Invasive vs. Open Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Patients with Diabetes – A Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network Study Hathi, Kalpesh Bigney, Erin Richardson, Eden Alugo, Tolu El-Mughayyar, Dana Vandewint, Amanda Manson, Neil Abraham, Edward Small, Chris Thomas, Kenneth Fisher, Charles G. Rampersaud, Y. Raja Hall, Hamilton McIntosh, Greg Johnson, Michael G. Bailey, Christopher S. Weber, Michael H. Paquet, Jerome Kingwell, Stephen Nataraj, Andrew Finkelstein, Joel Kelly, Adrienne Attabib, Najmedden Global Spine J Original Articles STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) vs open surgery (OPEN) for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) in patients with diabetes. METHODS: Patients with diabetes who underwent spinal decompression alone or with fusion for LSS within the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) database were included. MIS vs OPEN outcomes were compared for 2 cohorts: (1) patients with diabetes who underwent decompression alone (N = 116; MIS n = 58 and OPEN n = 58), (2) patients with diabetes who underwent decompression with fusion (N = 108; MIS n = 54 and OPEN n = 54). Modified Oswestry Disability Index (mODI) and back and leg pain were compared at baseline, 6–18 weeks, and 1-year post-operation. The number of patients meeting minimum clinically important difference (MCID) or minimum pain/disability at 1-year was compared. RESULTS: MIS approaches had less blood loss (decompression alone difference 100 mL, P = .002; with fusion difference 244 mL, P < .001) and shorter length of stay (LOS) (decompression alone difference 1.2 days, P = .008; with fusion difference 1.2 days, P = .026). MIS compared to OPEN decompression with fusion had less patients experiencing adverse events (AEs) (difference 13 patients, P = .007). The MIS decompression with fusion group had lower 1-year mODI (difference 14.5, 95% CI [7.5, 21.0], P < .001) and back pain (difference 1.6, 95% CI [.6, 2.7], P = .002) compared to OPEN. More patients in the MIS decompression with fusion group exceeded MCID at 1-year for mODI (MIS 75.9% vs OPEN 53.7%, P = .028) and back pain (MIS 85.2% vs OPEN 70.4%, P = .017). CONCLUSIONS: MIS approaches were associated with more favorable outcomes for patients with diabetes undergoing decompression with fusion for LSS. SAGE Publications 2021-08-31 2023-07 /pmc/articles/PMC10448101/ /pubmed/34463136 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682211042576 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Hathi, Kalpesh Bigney, Erin Richardson, Eden Alugo, Tolu El-Mughayyar, Dana Vandewint, Amanda Manson, Neil Abraham, Edward Small, Chris Thomas, Kenneth Fisher, Charles G. Rampersaud, Y. Raja Hall, Hamilton McIntosh, Greg Johnson, Michael G. Bailey, Christopher S. Weber, Michael H. Paquet, Jerome Kingwell, Stephen Nataraj, Andrew Finkelstein, Joel Kelly, Adrienne Attabib, Najmedden Minimally Invasive vs. Open Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Patients with Diabetes – A Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network Study |
title | Minimally Invasive vs. Open Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Patients with Diabetes – A Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network Study |
title_full | Minimally Invasive vs. Open Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Patients with Diabetes – A Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network Study |
title_fullStr | Minimally Invasive vs. Open Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Patients with Diabetes – A Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Minimally Invasive vs. Open Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Patients with Diabetes – A Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network Study |
title_short | Minimally Invasive vs. Open Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Patients with Diabetes – A Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network Study |
title_sort | minimally invasive vs. open surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in patients with diabetes – a canadian spine outcomes and research network study |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10448101/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34463136 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21925682211042576 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hathikalpesh minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT bigneyerin minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT richardsoneden minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT alugotolu minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT elmughayyardana minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT vandewintamanda minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT mansonneil minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT abrahamedward minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT smallchris minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT thomaskenneth minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT fishercharlesg minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT rampersaudyraja minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT hallhamilton minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT mcintoshgreg minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT johnsonmichaelg minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT baileychristophers minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT webermichaelh minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT paquetjerome minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT kingwellstephen minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT natarajandrew minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT finkelsteinjoel minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT kellyadrienne minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy AT attabibnajmedden minimallyinvasivevsopensurgeryforlumbarspinalstenosisinpatientswithdiabetesacanadianspineoutcomesandresearchnetworkstudy |