Skip to main content
Log in

Functional outcome of surgical management of degenerative lumbar canal stenosis

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: The long term outcomes of decompressive surgery on relief of pain and disability in degenerative lumbar canal stenosis are unclear. The aim of our study was to evaluate the outcome of surgical management of secondary degenerative lumbar canal stenosis and to analyze the effect on outcome variables using Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score.

Materials and Methods: Thirty-two patients of degenerative lumbar canal stenosis managed surgically were included in this study. Laminectomy (n=2), laminectomy with disectomy (n=23), laminectomy and disectomy with instrumental stabilization (n=5), and laminectomy, disectomy with posterior interbody fusion (n=2) were performed. JOA scoring system for low backache was used to assess the patients. The recovery rate was calculated as described by Hirabayashi et al. (1981). Surgical outcome was assessed based on the recovery rate and was classified using a four-grade scale: Excellent, improvement of >90%; good, 75–89% improvement; fair, 50–74% improvement; and poor, below 49% improvement. The patients were evaluated at 3 months, one year and at last followup.

Results: At 3-month followup, 18.75% patients showed excellent outcome, 62.50% patients showed good outcome, and 18.75% showed fair outcome. At 1-year followup, 64% patients showed excellent outcome and 36% patients showed good outcome. At >1 year followup (average 34.2 months, range: 2–110 months), 64% patients showed excellent outcome, 28% showed good outcome, and 8% showed fair outcome. No patient had poor outcome. Outcome of the patients improved as the time after surgery increased till 1 year and was sustained thereafter till the last followup.

Conclusion: Operative treatment in patients of degenerative lumbar canal stenosis yields excellent results as observed on the basis of JOA scoring system. No patient got recurrence of symptoms of nerve compression.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Arbit E, Pannullo S. Lumbar stenosis: A clinical review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001;384:137–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Herkowitz H. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1995;20:1084–90.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bridwell KH. Lumbar spinal stenosis. Diagnosis, management, and treatment. Clin Geriatr Med 1994;10:677–701.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Garfin SR, Herkowitz HN, Mirkovic S. Spinal stenosis. AAOS Instructional Course Lectures 2000;49:361–74.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Hall S, Bartleson J, Onofrio B, Baker H Jr, Okazaki H, O‘ Duffy D. Lumbar spinal stenosis-clinical features, diagnostic procedures, and result of surgical treatment in 68 patients. Ann Intern Med 1985;103:271–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Spivak J. Degenerative spinal stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg 1998;80:1053–66.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Arnoldi CC, Brodsky AE, Cauchoix J, Crock HV, Dommisse GF, Edgar MA et al. Definition and classification of lumbar spinal stenosis and nerve root entrapment syndromes. Clin Orthop 1976;115:4–5.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Yone K, Sakou T. Usefulness of Posner’s definition of spinal instability for selection of surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord 1999;12:40–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hirabayashi K, Miyakawa J, Satomi K. Operative result and postoperative progression of ossification among patients with ossification of cervical posterior longitudinal ligament. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1981;6:354–64.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Porter RW, Hibbert C. Calcitonin treatment for neurogenic claudication. Spine 1983;8:585–92.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Ganz JC. Lumbar spinal stenosis: Postoperative results in terms of preoperative posture-related pain. J Neurosurg 1990;72:71–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Weinstein JN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, Hanscom B, Tosteson AN, Blood EA, et al. Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. N Engl J Med 2007;356:2257–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Herron LD, Mangelsdorf C. Lumbar spinal stenosis: Results of surgical treatment. J Spinal Disord 1991;4:26–33.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, Tosteson A, Blood E, Herkowitz H, et al. Surgical versus nonoperative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis four-year results of the spine patient outcomes research trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010;35:1329–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Getty CJ. Lumbar spinal stenosis: The clinical spectrum and the results of operation. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1980;62:481–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Postacchini F, Cinotti G. Bone regrowth after surgical decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg 1992;74B:862–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Postacchini F. Surgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa) 1999;24:1043–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anil Kumar Gupta.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nath, R., Middha, S., Gupta, A.K. et al. Functional outcome of surgical management of degenerative lumbar canal stenosis. IJOO 46, 285–290 (2012). https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.96380

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.96380

Key words

Navigation