Menu
Menu
19 Harley St, London, W1G 9QJ, UK

Interspinous Spacer versus Traditional Decompressive Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Interspinous Spacer versus Traditional Decompressive Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PLoS One. 2014;9(5):e97142

Authors: Wu AM, Zhou Y, Li QL, Wu XL, Jin YL, Luo P, Chi YL, Wang XY

Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dynamic interspinous spacers, such as X-stop, Coflex, DIAM, and Aperius, are widely used for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. However, controversy remains as to whether dynamic interspinous spacer use is superior to traditional decompressive surgery.
METHODS: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched during August 2013. A track search was performed on February 27, 2014. Study was included in this review if it was: (1) a randomized controlled trial (RCT) or non-randomized prospective comparison study, (2) comparing the clinical outcomes for interspinous spacer use versus traditional decompressive surgery, (3) in a minimum of 30 patients, (4) with a follow-up duration of at least 12 months.
RESULTS: Two RCTs and three non-randomized prospective studies were included, with 204 patients in the interspinous spacer (IS) group and 217 patients in the traditional decompressive surgery (TDS) group. Pooled analysis showed no significant difference between the IS and TDS groups for low back pain (WMD: 1.2; 95% CI: -10.12, 12.53; P?=?0.03; I2?=?66%), leg pain (WMD: 7.12; 95% CI: -3.88, 18.12; P?=?0.02; I2?=?70%), ODI (WMD: 6.88; 95% CI: -14.92, 28.68; P?=?0.03; I2?=?79%), RDQ (WMD: -1.30, 95% CI: -3.07, 0.47; P?=?0.00; I2?=?0%), or complications (RR: 1.39; 95% CI: 0.61, 3.14; P?=?0.23; I2?=?28%). The TDS group had a significantly lower incidence of reoperation (RR: 3.34; 95% CI: 1.77, 6.31; P?=?0.60; I2?=?0%).
CONCLUSION: Although patients may obtain some benefits from interspinous spacers implanted through a minimally invasive technique, interspinous spacer use is associated with a higher incidence of reoperation and higher cost. The indications, risks, and benefits of using an interspinous process device should be carefully considered before surgery.

PMID: 24809680 [PubMed – as supplied by publisher]

Interspinous Spacer versus Traditional Decompressive Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PLoS One. 2014;9(5):e97142

Authors: Wu AM, Zhou Y, Li QL, Wu XL, Jin YL, Luo P, Chi YL, Wang XY

Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dynamic interspinous spacers, such as X-stop, Coflex, DIAM, and Aperius, are widely used for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. However, controversy remains as to whether dynamic interspinous spacer use is superior to traditional decompressive surgery.
METHODS: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched during August 2013. A track search was performed on February 27, 2014. Study was included in this review if it was: (1) a randomized controlled trial (RCT) or non-randomized prospective comparison study, (2) comparing the clinical outcomes for interspinous spacer use versus traditional decompressive surgery, (3) in a minimum of 30 patients, (4) with a follow-up duration of at least 12 months.
RESULTS: Two RCTs and three non-randomized prospective studies were included, with 204 patients in the interspinous spacer (IS) group and 217 patients in the traditional decompressive surgery (TDS) group. Pooled analysis showed no significant difference between the IS and TDS groups for low back pain (WMD: 1.2; 95% CI: -10.12, 12.53; P = 0.03; I2 = 66%), leg pain (WMD: 7.12; 95% CI: -3.88, 18.12; P = 0.02; I2 = 70%), ODI (WMD: 6.88; 95% CI: -14.92, 28.68; P = 0.03; I2 = 79%), RDQ (WMD: -1.30, 95% CI: -3.07, 0.47; P = 0.00; I2 = 0%), or complications (RR: 1.39; 95% CI: 0.61, 3.14; P = 0.23; I2 = 28%). The TDS group had a significantly lower incidence of reoperation (RR: 3.34; 95% CI: 1.77, 6.31; P = 0.60; I2 = 0%).
CONCLUSION: Although patients may obtain some benefits from interspinous spacers implanted through a minimally invasive technique, interspinous spacer use is associated with a higher incidence of reoperation and higher cost. The indications, risks, and benefits of using an interspinous process device should be carefully considered before surgery.

PMID: 24809680 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

What our patients say ...

Consultant Spinal Surgeon
Consultant Spinal Surgeon
Consultant Spinal Surgeon
Consultant Spinal Surgeon
Consultant Spinal Surgeon
Consultant Spinal Anaesthetist

This surgical technique consists of a percutaneous approach for the treatment of small to medium size hernias of the intervertebral disc by laser energy. The main objective is to reduce the intradiscal pressure in the nucleus pulposus

Laser Disc Surgery can be performed under local anaesthetic as a day case at our centre on the prestigious Harley Street.
What is London spine unit and How it Works

The London Spine Unit was established in 2005 and has successfully treated over 5000 patients. All conditions are treated.

treatment of all spinal disorders

The London Spine Unit specialises in Minimally Invasive Treatments allowing rapid recovery and return to normal function

Trusted by patients worldwide

The London Spine Unit provides the highest quality care to all patients and has VIP services for those seeking exceptional services

Laser Spine Surgery Articles

SHADES of grey – The challenge of ‘grumbling’ cauda equina symptoms in older adults with lumbar spinal stenosis.
Abstract Diagnosing cauda equina syndrome is challenging in older adults with lumbar spinal stenosis. Understanding these challenges is vital for
Read more.
The influence of preoperative mental health on clinical outcomes after laminectomy in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.
Abstract OBJECTIVE: The influence of preoperative mental health on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis
Read more.
MicroRNA transcriptome analysis on hypertrophy of ligamentum flavum in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.
Abstract Introduction: Molecular pathways involved in ligamentum flavum (LF) hypertrophy are still unclarified. The purpose of this study was to
Read more.
Salvage Strategy for Failed Spinal Fusion Surgery Using Lumbar Lateral Interbody Fusion technique: A Technical Note.
Abstract Introduction: Failed spinal fusion surgery sometimes requires salvage surgery when symptomatic, especially with postsurgical decrease in intervertebral disc height
Read more.
Integrated anatomy of the neuromuscular, visceral, vascular, and urinary tissues determined by MRI for a surgical approach to lateral lumbar
Abstract Introduction: To comprehensively investigate the anatomy of the neuromuscular, visceral, vascular, and urinary tissues and their general influence on
Read more.
Clinical Outcomes of Treating Cervical Adjacent Segment Disease by Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Versus Total Disc Replacement: A Systematic
Related Articles Clinical Outcomes of Treating Cervical Adjacent Segment Disease by Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Versus Total Disc Replacement:
Read more.

If you have any emergency Doctor’s need, simply call our 24 hour emergency

Your personal case manager will ensure that you receive the best possible care.

Call Now 

+44 844 589 2020
+44 203 973 8810