Cargando…

Indications for prophylactic lumbar decompression at the L3/4 level in patients with L4/5 responsible lumbar spinal canal stenosis

INTRODUCTION: Lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSS) is a very common disease. When the responsible level is considered to be L4/5 despite the appearance of double-level (L3/4 and L4/5) stenosis on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), it is difficult for spinal surgeons to decide whether prophylactic decom...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Asari, Toru, Aburakawa, Shuichi, Kumagai, Gentaro, Tanaka, Sunao, Ishibashi, Yasuyuki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Japanese Society for Spine Surgery and Related Research 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6698573/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31440633
http://dx.doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.1.2016-0032
Descripción
Sumario:INTRODUCTION: Lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSS) is a very common disease. When the responsible level is considered to be L4/5 despite the appearance of double-level (L3/4 and L4/5) stenosis on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), it is difficult for spinal surgeons to decide whether prophylactic decompression should be performed at the L3/4 level. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between the dural sac cross-sectional area (DCSA) at the L3/4 level and clinical symptoms in patients with double-level stenosis. METHODS: Thirty-five patients with double-level stenosis were registered in this study. All patients underwent decompression surgery at the L4/5 responsible level. The severity of patients' symptoms was evaluated by the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score and its rate of recovery. A measurement program on MRI was used to determine the DCSA. RESULTS: The clinical course of LSS according to the JOA score recovery rate at the final follow-up revealed that the good group (≥50%) included 27 patients, and the poor group (<50%) included 8 patients. In the good group, the mean DCSA at the L3/4 level was 72.3 ± 32.1 mm(2) preoperatively and 71.3 ± 29.0 mm(2) at the final follow-up. In contrast, in the poor group, the mean DCSA at the L3/4 level was 49.1 ± 23.8 mm(2) preoperatively and 40.6 ± 14.1 mm(2) at the final follow-up. Significant differences were observed in the preoperative and final follow-up DCSAs at the L3/4 level between two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the present results, prophylactic decompression surgery at the L3/4 level should be performed for patients with double-level stenosis and DCSA <50 mm(2) at the L3/4 level.