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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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