Background: For decades, traditional open surgical techniques were used to treat lumbar disc herniation and lumbar canal stenosis (LCS). However, seeking for better outcomes for patients and avoiding extensive bony loss with its sequences had raised minimally invasive technique for treating these disorders as an alternative surgery. Methods: This is a retrospective study in which 54 patients of LCS were operated upon via unilateral minimally invasive technique to decompress the canal in a 360 degrees fashion through laminotomy, deroofing of opposite laminar side, sublaminar ligamintectomy, bilateral foraminotomies and discectomy. We used VAS scores and ODI to assess clinical outcomes with a period of one year follow-up. Results: Our results demonstrated that minimally invasive techniques for treating these disorders are effective procedures. Minimally invasive 360 degrees decompression for treating LCS had better outcomes regarding postoperative back pain, smaller incisions, less bony loss and early ambulation. Conclusion: Minimally invasive techniques for treating lumbar canal stenosis of different causes could be considered a better option instead of traditional full laminectomy with better outcomes as regards respecting the anatomical layers such as posterior spinal integrity and musculature, postoperative pain, accompanied with less blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and shorter recovery periods.
References
[1]
Asgarzadie, F. and Khoo, L.T. (2007) Minimally Invasive Operative Management for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Overview of Early and Long-Term Outcomes. Orthopedic Clinics of North America, 38, 387-399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2007.02.006
[2]
Kapoor, R., Kumar, B. and Singh, M.R. (2017) Evaluation of Wide Interlaminar Fenestration Surgery in Degenerative Lumbar Canal Stenosis. International Journal of Orthopaedics, 3, 607-613. https://doi.org/10.22271/ortho.2017.v3.i3i.96
[3]
Schroeder, G.D., Kurd, M.F. and Vaccaro, A.R. (2016) Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: How Is It Classified? Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 24, 843-852. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-D-15-00034
[4]
Allegri, M., Montella, S., Salici, F., Valente, A., Marchesini, M., Compagnone, C., et al. (2016) Mechanisms of Low Back Pain: A Guide for Diagnosis and Therapy. F1000Research, 5, F1000. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.8105.2
[5]
Thomas, N.W., Rea, G.L., Pikul, B.K., Mervis, L.J., Irsik, R. and McGregor, J.M. (1997) Quantitative Outcome and Radiographic Comparisons between Laminectomy and Laminotomy in the Treatment of Acquired Lumbar Stenosis. Neurosurgery, 41, 567-574. https://doi.org/10.1227/00006123-199709000-00011
[6]
Deen, H.G., Fenton, D.S. and Lamer, T.J. (2003) Minimally Invasive Procedures for Disorders of the Lumbar Spine. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 78, 1249-1256. https://doi.org/10.4065/78.10.1249
[7]
Riesenburger, R.I. and David, C.A. (2006) Lumbar Microdiscectomy and Microendoscopic Discectomy. Minimally Invasive Therapy & Allied Technologies, 15, 267-270. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645700600958432
[8]
Zaina, F., Tomkins, L.C., Carragee, E. and Negrini, S. (2016) Surgical versus Nonsurgical Treatment for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 41, 857-868. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000001635
[9]
Mixter, W.J. (1937) Rupture of the Lumbar Intervertebral Disk: An Etiologic Factor for So-Called “Sciatic” Pain. Annals of Surgery, 106, 777-787. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-193710000-00027
[10]
Robinson, J.S. (1983) Sciatica and the Lumbar Disk Syndrome: A Historic Perspective. Southern Medical Journal, 76, 232-238. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007611-198302000-00022
[11]
Bresnahan, L., Ogden, A.T., Natarajan, R.N. and Fessler, R.G. (2009) A Biomechanical Evaluation of Graded Posterior Element Removal for Treatment of Lumbar Stenosis: Comparison of a Minimally Invasive Approach with Two Standard Laminectomy Techniques. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 34, 17-23. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318191438b
[12]
See, D.H. and Kraft, G.H. (1975) Electromyography in Paraspinal Muscles Following Surgery for Root Compression. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 56, 80-83.
[13]
Sihvonen, T., Herno, A., Paljärvi, L., Airaksinen, O., Partanen, J. and Tapaninaho, A. (1993) Local Denervation Atrophy of Paraspinal Muscles in Postoperative Failed Back Syndrome. Spine, 18, 575-581. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199304000-00009
[14]
Tuite, G.F., Stern, J.D., Doran, S.E., Papadopoulos, S.M., McGillicuddy, J.E., Oyedijo, D.I., et al. (1994) Outcome after Laminectomy for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis. Part I: Clinical Correlations. Journal of Neurosurgery, 81, 699-706. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1994.81.5.0699
[15]
Hamdan Hass, T.A. and Abdulan, A.S. (2020) Spinal Instability Following Multilevel Decompressive Laminectomy without Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Canal Stenosis. World Journal of Surgery and Surgical Research, 3, Article No. 1193.
[16]
Williams, R.W. (1978) Microlumbar Discectomy: A Conservative Surgical Approach to the Virgin Herniated Lumbar Disc. Spine, 3, 175-182. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-197806000-00015
[17]
Shamji, M.F., Goldstein, C.L., Wang, M., Uribe, J.S. and Fehlings, M.G. (2015) Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery in the Elderly: Does It Make Sense? Neurosurgery, 77, S108-S115. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0000000000000941
[18]
Maroon, J.C. (2002) Current Concepts in Minimally Invasive Discectomy. Neurosurgery, 51, S137-S145. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006123-200211002-00019
[19]
Schizas, C., Tsiridis, E. and Saksena, J. (2005) Microendoscopic Discectomy Compared with Standard Microsurgical Discectomy for Treatment of Uncontained or Large Contained Disc Herniations. Neurosurgery, 57, 357-360. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.00000176650.71193.F5
[20]
Fukusaki, M., Kobayashi, I., Hara, T. and Sumikawa, K. (1998) Symptoms of Spinal Stenosis Do Not Improve after Epidural Steroid Injection. Clinical Journal of Pain, 14, 148-151. https://doi.org/10.1097/00002508-199806000-00010
[21]
Khoo, L.T. and Fessler, R.G. (2002) Microendoscopic Decompressive Laminectomy for the Treatment of Lumbar Stenosis. Neurosurgery, 51, S146-S154. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006123-200211002-00020
[22]
Thome, C., Zevgaridis, D., Leheta, O., Bazner, H., Pockler-Schoniger, C., Wohrle, J., et al. (2005) Outcome after Less-Invasive Decompression of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Randomized Comparison of Unilateral Laminectomy, Bilateral Laminectomy, and Laminectomy. Journal of Neurosurgery, Spine, 3, 129-141. https://doi.org/10.3171/spi.2005.3.2.0129
[23]
Weiner, B.K., Walker, M., Brower, R. and McCulloch, J.A. (1999) Microdecompression for Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis. Spine, 24, 2268-2272. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199911010-00016
[24]
Seok, W.K., Chang, L.J., Chong, G.K., Seung, M.L. and Ho, S. (2007) Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spinal Decompression: A Comparative Study between Bilateral Laminotomy and Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression. Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society, 42, 195-199.
[25]
Mobbs, R., Li, J., Sivabalan, P., Raley, D. and Rao, P. (2014) Outcomes after Decompressive Laminectomy for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Comparison between Minimally Invasive Unilateral Laminectomy for Bilateral Decompression and Open Laminectomy. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 21, 179-186. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.4.SPINE13420
[26]
Rahman, M., Summer, L.E., Richter, B., Mimran, R. and Jacob, R.P. (2008) Comparison of Techniques for Decompressive Lumbar Laminectomy: The Minimally Invasive versus the “Classic” Open Approach. Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery, 51, 100-105. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-1022542
[27]
Popov, V. and Anderson, D.G. (2012) Minimal Invasive Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis. Advances in Orthopedics, 12, Article ID: 645321. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/645321
