. 2022 Mar 24;14(3):e23467.
doi: 10.7759/cureus.23467.
eCollection 2022 Mar.
Affiliations
Affiliations
- 1 Orthopaedics, Spine Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, USA.
- 2 Orthopaedic Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, USA.
- 3 Orthopaedic Surgery, Indiana Spine Health, Indianapolis, USA.
- 4 Orthopaedic Surgery, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, USA.
Item in Clipboard
Michael McCarthy et al.
Cureus.
.
Display options
Format
. 2022 Mar 24;14(3):e23467.
doi: 10.7759/cureus.23467.
eCollection 2022 Mar.
Affiliations
- 1 Orthopaedics, Spine Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, USA.
- 2 Orthopaedic Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, USA.
- 3 Orthopaedic Surgery, Indiana Spine Health, Indianapolis, USA.
- 4 Orthopaedic Surgery, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Chicago, USA.
Item in Clipboard
Display options
Format
Abstract
Study design This was a retrospective analysis of patient-reported outcomes across a two-year period. Summary of background data Patients suffering from lumbar stenosis may experience low back pain, neurogenic claudication, and weakness. Patients can benefit from surgical intervention, including decompression with or without fusion. However, the superiority of any single fusion construct remains controversial. Objective The goal of this study was to compare Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT) measures in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis treated surgically with lumbar decompression and fusion with or without interbody fusion. Methods A retrospective review of patients with lumbar stenosis undergoing lumbar decompression and one-level fusion was performed. PROMIS® CAT Physical Function (PF) and Pain Interference (PI) assessments were administered using a web-based platform pre and postoperatively. Results Sixty patients with lumbar stenosis undergoing one-level lumbar fusion were identified. Twenty-seven patients underwent posterior lumbar fusion (PSF) alone and 33 underwent one-level lumbar interbody fusion (IF). Patients undergoing IF had better absolute PF scores compared to patients undergoing PSF at one-year postoperatively (48.9 v 41.6, p=0.002) and greater relative improvement in PF scores from baseline at one-year postoperatively (D13.6 v D8.6, p=0.02). A subgroup analysis of patients undergoing TLIF v PSF showed better absolute PF scores at the one-year follow-up in the TLIF group (47.1 v 42.3, p=0.04). No differences were found in PI scores at any time point between the PSF and IF groups. Patients undergoing IF had significantly shorter hospital stays (2.5 v 3.3 days, p=0.02) compared to patients undergoing PSF. Conclusions Patients with lumbar spinal stenosis treated with one-level IF reported higher absolute PF scores and experienced greater relative improvement in PF scores from baseline at one-year follow-up compared to patients treated with PSF alone. Additionally, IF is associated with a decreased length of hospital stay as compared to PSF.
Keywords:
interbody fusion; patient reported outcomes measurement; posterior spinal fusion; spinal stenosis; spondylolisthesis.
Copyright © 2022, McCarthy et al.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors have declared financial relationships, which are detailed in the next section.
Figures
References
-
-
United States trends in lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative conditions. Deyo RA, Gray DT, Kreuter W, Mirza S, Martin BI. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005;30:1441–1445.
–
PubMed
-
-
-
Cost-effectiveness of surgical treatment for degenerative spondylolisthesis and spinal stenosis. Harrop JS, Hilibrand A, Mihalovich KE, Dettori JR, Chapman J. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2014;39:0–85.
-
Cite