Introduction:

The need to combine fusion with decompression in patients with lumbar canal stenosis is still controversial. The aim of this study was to show that isolated decompression leads to the same outcomes as decompression plus fusion in patients who have preserved global sagittal balance.

Materials and methods:

A single-center retrospective cohort of 110 patients who were operated for a single-level lumbar stenosis was divided into two groups based on the treatment: isolated decompression or fusion-decompression. These patients had a normal odontoid-hip axis angle (ODHA) (-5° to +2°) and had no spondylolisthesis or frontal deformity. We compared the clinical outcome scores and spinal-pelvic parameters preoperatively and at 1 year of follow-up. We evaluated the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) corresponding to a 12.8-point difference in the Owestry Disability Index (ODI). The analysis in each group was based on the MCID.

Results:

The clinical outcome scores improved significantly in both groups. There was a 77% decrease in the ODI > 12.8 points with no significant difference between groups. The analysis based on the MCID showed that patients with a poor clinical result at 1 year in the isolated decompression group were more likely to have lumbar pain, while the ones in the fusion-decompression group were more likely to have radicular pain.

Conclusion:

The clinical and radiological results of fusion-decompression are not superior at 1 year relative to isolated decompression for treating single-level lumbar canal stenosis in patients with compensated sagittal balance. Full-spine weight bearing radiographs are key to determining the patient’s sagittal balance and to ensuring there are no radiological instability factors that may require a stabilizing procedure.

Level of evidence:

IV; retrospective study of data collected prospectively.