Factory and construction work is associated with an increased risk of severe lumbar spinal stenosis on MRI: A case control analysis within the wakayama spine study.

BACKGROUND: To explore the association of MRI-diagnosed severe lumbar spinal stenosis with occupation. METHODS: Occupational data were collected by questionnaire and all participants underwent spine MRI scans using the same protocol. Central lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) was graded qualitatively. Those with severe LSS (>two-thirds narrowing) were compared with the controls with lesser degrees of stenosis or no stenosis. RESULTS: Data were available for 722 subjects, mean age 70.1 years. 239 (33%) cases with severe LSS were identified. Factory/construction workers had an almost four-fold increased risk of severe LSS after adjustment for age, sex, smoking, and walking speed amongst those aged <75 years (OR 3.97, 95%CI 1.46-10.85). Severe LSS was also associated with squatting ≥1 h/day (OR 1.76, 95%CI 1.01-3.07) but this association became non-significant after adjustment. CONCLUSION: Further research is needed but this study adds more evidence that occupational factors are associated with an increased risk and/or severity of degenerative disease of the lumbar spine.

Follow-up score, change score or percentage change score for determining clinical important outcome following surgery? An observational study from the Norwegian registry for Spine surgery evaluating patient reported outcome measures in lumbar spinal stenosis and lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of outcomes for spinal surgeries is challenging, and an ideal measurement that reflects all aspects of importance for the patients does not exist. Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), EuroQol (EQ-5D) and Numeric Rating Scales (NRS) for leg pain and for back pain are commonly used patients reported outcome measurements (PROMs). Reporting the proportion of individuals with an outcome of clinical importance is recommended. Knowledge of the ability of PROMs to identify clearly improved patients is essential. The purpose of this study was to search cut-off criteria for PROMs that best reflect an improvement considered by the patients to be of clinical importance. METHODS: The Global Perceived Effect scale was utilized to evaluate a clinically important outcome 12 months after surgery. The cut-offs for the PROMs that most accurately distinguish those who reported 'completely recovered' or 'much improved' from those who reported 'slightly improved', unchanged', 'slightly worse', 'much worse', or 'worse than ever' were estimated. For each PROM, we evaluated three candidate response parameters: the (raw) follow-up score, the (numerical) change score, and the percentage change score. RESULTS: We analysed 3859 patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis [(LSS); mean age 66; female gender 50%] and 617 patients with Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis [(LDS); mean age 67; 72% female gender]. The accuracy of identifying 'completely recovered' and 'much better' patients was generally high, but lower for EQ-5D than for the other PROMs. For all PROMs the accuracy was lower for the change score than for the follow-up score and the percentage change score, especially among patients with low and high PROM scores at baseline. The optimal threshold for a clinically important outcome was ≤24 for ODI, ≥0.69 for EQ-5D, ≤3 for NRS leg pain, and ≤ 4 for NRS back pain, and, for the percentage change score, ≥30% for ODI, ≥40% for NRS leg pain, and ≥ 33% for NRS back pain. The estimated cut-offs were similar for LSS and for LDS. CONCLUSION: For estimating a 'success' rate assessed by a PROM, we recommend using the follow-up score or the percentage change score. These scores reflected a clinically important outcome better than the change score.

Multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis treated with Dynesys stabilization versus lumbar fusion in elderly patients: a retrospective study with a minimum of 5 years' follow-up.

INTRODUCTION: Middle- and long-term outcomes of multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis treated with Dynesys stabilization (DS) have rarely been reported. Older age and multi-segmental degeneration may be positive factors in achieving satisfactory outcomes following DS. The present study aimed to compare the middle- and long-term outcomes of DS with lumbar fusion for treatment of multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis (ms-LSS) in elderly patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzed patients with ms-LSS treated by DS or lumbar fusion from January 2011 to April 2013. Twenty-two patients were included in the Dynesys group, and 44 patients treated by lumbar fusion and rigid fixation were included in the fusion group. Clinical outcomes were assessed by VAS and ODI. Radiological outcomes were measured by range of motion (ROM) of stabilized segments and the proximal adjacent segment, intervertebral disc height (DH) and L1-S1 lumbar lordosis angle (LL). Modified Pfirrmann grade score was used to access disc degeneration. OUTCOMES: The mean follow-up time of the Dynesys group and fusion group was 68.50 ± 6.40 and 70.14 ± 7.26 months, respectively. Baseline data were similar between the two groups. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of improvement of clinical outcomes (VAS and ODI). DS preserved a certain degree of ROM (3.74 ± 2.00) of surgical segments. ROM of proximal adjacent segment underwent an increase in both groups at the final follow-up. The DH of the surgical segments and proximal adjacent segment in both groups was significantly lower than that before surgery (P = 0.000). LL of both groups improved (P = 0.000), and there was no significant difference between the two groups. The modified Pfirrmann score of proximal adjacent segment of both groups increased at the final follow-up. The fusion group underwent a more significant increase (P = 0.000), whereas the inter-group difference showed no significance (P = 0.090). CONCLUSION: DS is a safe and effective surgical treatment of multi-segmental lumbar spinal stenosis in the elderly population. DS preserves a certain degree of mobility of surgical segments.

Comparison of two types of exercises in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of core stability exercise versus conventional exercise in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. METHODS: Between January 2014 and May 2017, patients with lumbar spinal stenosis were recruited and divided into group of core stability exercise or conventional exercise randomly. All the patients were treated using middle frequency electrotherapy, in addition to that, the patients in group of core stability exercise were treated using core stability exercise. The patients in group of conventional exercise were treated using conventional exercise. The outcome was evaluated using Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, self-reported walking capacity and lumbar lordosis angle at baseline and after treatment. RESULTS: In the current study, sixty-two patients with lumbar spinal stenosis met the inclusion and exclusion criteria, in which 33 patients were included in group of core stability exercise and 29 in group of conventional exercise. After treatment, both Japanese Orthopedic Association scores (p<0.05) and self-reported walking capacity (p<0.05) increased significantly in each group when compared with baseline. The self-reported walking capacity and JOA scores in the group of core stability exercise were significantly higher than those in the conventional exercise group (p<0.05). However, both the intragroup and intergroup comparison of lumbar lordosis presented with no significance (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: Core stability exercise presents with better efficacy than conventional exercise in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Does the effectiveness of core stability exercises correlate with the severity of spinal stenosis in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis?

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the effectiveness of core stability exercises correlates with the severity of spinal stenosis in patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. METHODS: Forty-two patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis treated in the department of orthopedics of our hospital between May 2013 and January 2016 were included in the study. All the patients performed core stability exercises once daily for six weeks, and the clinical outcomes were evaluated using Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score and self-reported walking capacity. The anteroposterior osseous spinal canal diameter was measured to evaluate the severity of spinal stenosis. The correlation between the stenosis degree and the differences of Japanese Orthopaedic Association score or self-reported walking capacity at baseline and after treatment were analyzed. RESULTS: The patients were divided into three groups according to the spinal stenosis degree. In the three groups, there was no significant difference in JOA or self-reported walking distance at baseline (p>0.05) and after treatment (p>0.05). The JOA scores and self-reported walking distance were significantly increased after treatment (p<0.05) in any of the three groups when compared to the baseline. Also, there was no significant correlation between the stenosis degree and the difference of JOA (p>0.05) or self-reported walking distance (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: There was no significantcorrelation between the effectiveness of core stability exercises and the severity of spinal stenosis in patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.

Five-year radiological outcomes between decompression alone and decompression with an interlaminar device for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Background: There is limited literature regarding radiological outcomes in the use of interlaminar devices as an adjunct to decompression compared to decompression alone (DA) for symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). This study aims to assess and compare 5-year radiological outcomes following spinal decompression and decompression with ILD (D + ILD). Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of prospectively collected data of 94 patients who underwent spinal decompression with or without ILD insertion between 2007-2015. Patients with symptomatic LSS who met the study criteria were offered spinal decompression with or without ILD insertion. Those patients who accepted ILD insertion were placed in the D + ILD group (n=39); while those opting for DA, were placed in the DA group (n=55). Radiological indices were assessed preoperatively, immediate post-operative, 2 years and 5 years postoperatively. Results: There were a total of 94 patients with 55 in the DA group and 39 in the D + ILD group. In both groups, there was no significant change post-operatively in the sagittal balance parameters namely, the mean pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, sacral slope and pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis (PI - LL) during the 5-year follow-up. Comparing between the groups, there was no significant difference in sagittal balance parameters. Comparing between DA versus D + ILD, there was no significant difference in overall lordosis, but the D + ILD had a significant reduction in sagittal angle (at the index level) of 2.3° compared to the DA group (P=0.01). In the control group, there was no significant difference in the anterior disc, posterior disc and foraminal height post-operatively. In the D + ILD group, there was a significant mean increase of 1.3 mm in anterior disc height, 1.8 mm in posterior disc height and 4.7 mm in foraminal height compared to the control group. In both groups, there was significant improvement in all clinical outcomes namely 36-item short form survey physical component summary (SF36 PCS), 36-item short form survey mental component summary (SF36 MCS) and visual analogue scale (VAS). Comparing the groups, there was significant improvement in the D + ILD group in SF36 MCS (P=0.01) but no difference in SF36 PCS or VAS. Reoperation rates were equivalent. Conclusions: Our study found that in the management of lumbar stenosis, the use of an ILD as an adjunct device compared to DA had significant improvement in anterior disc, posterior disc and foraminal height with expected focal kyphosis at the level of intervention without change in the lumbar lordosis and sagittal balance at 5 years.

Degenerative Spinal Stenosis and Ipsi-Contralateral Decompression: Presentation of a Surgical Technique and Clinical Cases.

Lumbar spinal stenosis is a widespread condition that significantly affects the quality of life in elderly individuals. Conservative therapy has a positive effect on patients whose primary symptom is pain. However, in severe cases with the presence of hypesthesia and paresis, surgical treatment comes into consideration. The aim of surgery is to decompress the neurovascular elements compressed by the narrowed spinal canal while preserving spinal stability. Conventional laminectomy, with or without fusion, has been considered effective for the treatment of this pathology, but its drawbacks are significant, including tissue trauma, secondary instability, and a substantial percentage of reoperations due to complications. In recent years, various minimally invasive spine surgery techniques have emerged, showing comparable results to laminectomy decompression in terms of relieving symptomatic spinal stenosis. Additionally, these techniques offer significant benefits such as minimal tissue trauma, reduced complication rates, and shorter operative time and recovery periods. Given the continuous development and improvement, minimally invasive surgery is expected to widely replace traditional open surgery for the treatment of lumbar stenosis in the future. In this article, we present our experience in the surgical treatment of patients with degenerative lumbar stenosis, detailing the technique of the minimally invasive procedure we utilize and highlighting some of the clinical cases in which it has been applied.

MRI parameters predict central lumbar spinal stenosis combined with redundant nerve roots: a prospective MRI study.

Background: To observe changes in the cauda equina nerve on lumbar MRI in patients with central lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Methods: 878 patients diagnosed with LSS by clinical and MRI were divided into the redundant group (204 patients) and the nonredundant group (674 patients) according to the presence or absence of redundant nerve roots (RNRs). The anteroposterior diameter of the spinal canal (APDS) and the presence of multiple level stenosis, disc herniation, thickening of ligamentum flavum (LF) and increased epidural fat were assessed on MRI. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to explore the predictors of LSS combined with RNRs. Results: Patients with LSS combined with RNRs had thicker epidural fat, smaller APDS and more combined multifaceted stenosis. Female patients and older LSS patients were more likely to develop RNRs; there was no difference between two groups in terms of disc herniation (p > 0. 05). Age, APDS, multiple level stenosis, and increased epidural fat were significantly correlated with the formation of LSS combined with RNRs (p < 0.05). Conclusion: A smaller APDS and the presence of multiple level stenosis, thickening of LF, and increased epidural fat may be manifestations of anatomical differences in patients with LSS combined with RNRs. Age, APDS, multiple level stenosis, and increased epidural fat play important roles. The lumbar spine was measured and its anatomy was observed using multiple methods, and cauda equina changes were assessed to identify the best anatomical predictors and provide new therapeutic strategies for the management of LSS combined with RNRs.

Perspective: Efficacy and outcomes for different lumbar interspinous devices (ISD) vs. open surgery to treat lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

Background: Interspinous devices (ISD) constitute a minimally invasive (MI) alternative to open surgery (i.e., laminectomy/decompression with/without fusion (i.e., posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF)/posterolateral instrumented fusion (PLF)) for treating lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Biomechanically, static and/or dynamic ISD "offload" pressure on the disc space, increase intervertebral foraminal/disc space heights, reverse/preserve lordosis, limit range of motion (ROM)/stabilize the surgical level, and reduce adjacent segment disease (ASD). Other benefits reported in the literature included; reduced operative time (OR Time), length of hospital stay (LOS), estimated blood loss (EBL), and improved outcomes (i.e., ODI (Oswestry Disability Index), VAS (Visual Analog Scale), and/or SF-36 (Short-Form 36)). Methods: Various studies documented the relative efficacy and outcomes of original (i.e., Wallis), current (i.e., X-STOP, Wallis, DIAM, Aperius PercLID), and new generation (i.e., Coflex, Superion Helifix, In-Space) ISD used to treat LSS vs. open surgery. Results: Although ISD overall resulted in comparable or improved outcomes vs. open surgery, the newer generation ISD provided the greatest reductions in critical cost-saving parameters (i.e., OR time, LOS, and lower reoperation rates of 3.7% for Coflex vs. 11.1% for original/current ISD) vs. original/current ISD and open surgery. Further, the 5-year postoperative study showed the average cost of new generation Coflex ISD/decompressions was $15,182, or $11,681 lower than the average $26,863 amount for PLF. Conclusion: Patients undergoing new generation ISD for LSS exhibited comparable or better outcomes, but greater reductions in OR times, EBL, LOS, ROM, and ASD vs. those receiving original/current ISD or undergoing open surgery.

Effectiveness of X-stop Interspinous Distractor Device Versus Laminectomy for Treatment of Lumbar Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Lumbar spinal stenosis refers to the narrowing of the spinal canal in the lumbar region. There is an increasing need to determine the treatment modality for lumbar spinal stenosis by comparing the outcomes of X-stop interspinous distractors and laminectomy. The objective of this study is to determine the effectiveness of the X-stop interspinous distractor compared to laminectomy. This systematic review fundamentally abides by the procedures delineated in the Cochrane methodology while the reporting is done according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Three databases searched generated a total of 943 studies, with PubMed being the source for the bulk of the articles. Six studies were selected for inclusion in this study. The effectiveness of the interspinous distractor devices and laminectomy can be determined through their impact on the quality of life, rates of complications, and the amount of money utilized. This meta-analysis fundamentally emphasizes that laminectomy is a more effective intervention for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis as it is more cost-effective and results in fewer complications in the long term.

Exacerbation of Spinal Stenosis Symptoms Following Neuraxial Anesthesia in an Achondroplastic Cesarean Section.

We report the case of an achondroplastic female who presented with acute neurologic decline following epidural anesthesia for an elective cesarean section. Achondroplasia presents unique anatomical challenges to anesthesiologists in perioperative management, and cesarean sections are standard for achondroplastic pregnancies. High rates of spinal stenosis and lumbar radiculopathy in this patient population make administration of epidural analgesia technically challenging and may increase the risk of neurologic injury. Ultrasound is an effective means of administering epidural anesthesia for most patients; however, its utility is user-dependent and more challenging for those with obesity and abnormal spinal anatomy, both of which are common in achondroplasia. Cephalic and thoracic anatomical features in achondroplasia can also make general anesthesia challenging. Therefore, preoperative imaging may help guide preoperative planning based on patient anatomy and individual risk factors to reduce the risks of complications in this patient population. This report includes details from the patient's prenatal care, cesarean section, and 18 months of follow-up.

Influence of Spinopelvic Alignment on the Clinical Outcomes Following Decompression Surgery for Lumbar Stenosis.

Introduction The role of sagittal spinopelvic alignment in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) patients and its potential influence on post-decompression surgery outcomes is a topic of growing interest. Lumbar spinal stenosis is a prevalent degenerative condition, and with an aging population, the frequency of surgical interventions for LSS has risen. While decompression surgery aims to relieve symptoms, the potential impact of preoperative spinopelvic alignment on postoperative results remains controversial. This study examined the correlation between sagittal spinopelvic parameters and clinical outcomes in LSS patients undergoing decompression surgery. Methods This study included 100 patients with LSS who underwent decompression surgery between 2021 and 2023 and 100 healthy individuals as a control group. The LSS group comprised 50 men and 50 women, with a mean age of 55.8±12.41 years, while the control group consisted of 50 men and 50 women, with a mean age of 55.17±13.39 years. Sagittal spinopelvic alignment parameters, including pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch, and sagittal vertical axis, were assessed preoperatively. Postoperative clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores. Results In the cohort of 200 participants, 100 were diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), and 100 were healthy controls. Both groups had an equal gender distribution (50 males and 50 females). The mean age was 55.8 (±12.4) years for the LSS group and 55.2 (±13.4) years for the control group. Among the analyzed radiographic parameters, only lumbar lordosis (LL) levels showed a significant difference between groups, notably lower in the LSS group (p=0.020). Preoperative VAS scores in LSS patients averaged 7.58±1.32, which postoperatively dropped to 2.22±1.95 (p<0.001). Similarly, ODI (%) declined from a preoperative average of 55.76±11.65 to 18.62±18.17 postoperatively (p<0.001). Patients with postoperative ODI levels exceeding 20% had higher preoperative scores and significantly altered radiographic measurements. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis indicated PT as the most predictive radiographic parameter, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.945. Multivariate logistic regression pinpointed PT and LL as key predictors associated with increased risks for postoperative Oswestry disability levels exceeding 20%. Conclusion Our study suggests that sagittal spinopelvic alignment plays an important role in the development and progression of LSS. Addressing sagittal alignment may be crucial for achieving optimal clinical outcomes after decompression surgery. Further research is needed to elucidate the mechanisms underlying the relationship between sagittal alignment and LSS.

Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Laminectomy-Bilateral Decompression Using a Monoportal Scope and Bipolar Coagulator for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Technical Report.

The purpose of this study was to introduce the application of a monoportal scope and bipolar coagulator used in full-endoscopic spine surgery (FESS) for unilateral biportal endoscopy-unilateral laminectomy bilateral decompression (UBE-ULBD) in those with central stenosis. A 68-year-old man who presented with cauda equina symptoms underwent UBE-ULBD to improve his central stenosis at the L2/3 level. In this technique, a FESS scope was attached to a camera portal in place of a common arthroscope. A decompression tool was subsequently inserted through the working portal, and the lower border of the vertebral lamina and the lower border of the contralateral lamina were resected. Additionally, the superior border of the L3 level was thinned using a high-speed drill, and the ligament flavum was excised. The operation time was 70 minutes, and his symptoms improved. The patient was discharged from the hospital four days postoperatively. We found three advantages of using a FESS scope and bipolar coagulator, including the ability to 1) stabilize the camera via placement of the sleeve against the bone, 2) minimize the wounded area by irrigating saline on the side of the scope, and 3) provide bipolar tissue hemostasis in an isolated area around the nerves. Therefore, among the UBE techniques, we believe that assisted full-endoscopic spine surgery (AFESS) is a viable option to offer a more minimally invasive surgery for patients with stenosis.

Pain Management Interventions in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Literature Review.

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) occurs due to the narrowing of the space within the vertebral canal and or intervertebral foramina. This results in the compression of the spinal cord and possibly the roots of the spinal nerves. Lower back pain and neurogenic claudication (NC) are major symptoms of spinal stenosis. This is a literature review that summarizes the important findings pertaining to pain management of spinal stenosis. Twenty-four original articles were assessed. Pain can be treated through non-invasive or surgical methods. Conservative techniques include physical exercises, epidural corticosteroid injection, local anesthetic injection therapy, and oral analgesics. Surgical intervention deals with the decompression of the affected spinal region, with or without vertebral fusion surgery. Other novel surgical techniques include implantation of specific equipment, known as interspinous spacer devices and minimally invasive lumbar decompression (MILD). Most studies offering a comparative analysis have demonstrated that surgical intervention is more efficacious than non-surgical interventions to manage pain associated with spinal stenosis.

Lumbar Epidural Hematoma as a Rare Complication From Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression.

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common and debilitating pathology globally. Conservative and surgical treatment options exist for patients. Recently, minimally invasive lumbar decompression (MILD) has been described as a less invasive technique for the treatment of early spinal stenosis ≥2.5mm ligamentum thickening or in patients at high risk for general anesthesia. Often, MILD is performed by interventional pain providers and shows low complication rates. We describe a 76-year-old woman who presented to the emergency department immediately after undergoing a MILD procedure at an outside surgery center with lower back/sacral pain resulting from an acute epidural hematoma extending from T12-L3. Early recognition and surgical evacuation resulted in a good outcome with no complications. Our goal is to increase awareness of this rare complication and encourage multidisciplinary approaches to managing LSS between spine surgeons and pain providers.

Effectiveness and safety of decompression alone versus decompression plus fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis with degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: There have been lingering controversies reported decompression and plus fusion. And the relative safety of fusion in addition to standard decompression remains unclear. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of decompression alone or combined with fusion in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS). Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched the databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for relevant literature from their inception to 28th December 2021. We identified the eligible studies based on the PICOS principles, populations (LSS with DS), interventions (decompression alone), controls (decompression combined with fusion), outcomes [overall reoperation rate, complications, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), operative time, the amount of blood lost, length of stay (LOS), and visual analog scales (VAS)], study design (cohort studies). Quality assessment for individual study was performed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Results: In all, 12 articles involving a total of 14,693 patients were finally included in the study, the majority of patients underwent decompression alone (DA group: n=11,598) and the rest underwent decompression associated with fusion (FU group: n=3,095). The quality of most of the included studies was regarded as high quality. The results indicated that the FU group had a higher rate of complication [relative risk (RR): 1.770, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.485 to 2.110], longer operative time [weighted mean difference (WMD): 51.037, 95% CI: 13.743 to 88.330], and increased blood loss (WMD: 258.354, 95% CI: 150.468 to 366.239) than the DA group (all P<0.05), with no significant differences for overall reoperation rate (RR: 0.879, 95% CI: 0.432 to 1.786), ODI (WMD: -2.569, 95% CI: -6.548 to 1.409), LOS (WMD: 3.838, 95% CI: -2.172 to 9.848), and VAS found between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusions: In patients with LSS + DS, the effectiveness and safety of decompression alone may be superior to decompression plus fusion in terms of complication rate, operative time, and the amount of bleeding. However, more high-quality literature is needed in the future to confirm the best treatment choice for patients with LSS + DS.

Metastatic Renal Cell Cancer Instigating Paraplegia in a Male Patient.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) constitutes about 2% of all adult malignancies and is the most common malignant renal neoplasm with bony metastases occurring in up to 50% of patients with RCC. In this case, we report a 42-year-old male who presented with chronic back pain and had a sudden episode of paraplegia. The patient was initially referred to the orthopedics service. He had a lumbar X-ray done followed by a CT of the spine that showed a burst fracture of the L1 vertebra with incidental finding of a right renal mass suspicious of RCC. Upon further investigations, the patient was found to have a large heterogeneous renal cortical mass with multiple cystic changes and necrosis invading the Gerota's fascia as well as a tumor thrombus extending into the right renal vein and inferior vena cava. Although it has been well established that RCC metastasizes to bones and it is not uncommon for vertebral column involvement, sudden paraplegia and incontinence resulting from lumbar fracture due to metastatic RCC has not been widely published. Conclusively, RCC is a common malignancy in which a significant number of patients have metastatic disease upon presentation and this can lead to initial confusion and delay in diagnosis, hence it should be part of the differential diagnosis when investigating chronic bony pain and pathological fractures.

Case Report: Five-Level Unilateral Laminectomy Bilateral Decompression (ULBD) by Two-Stage Unilateral Biportal Endoscopy (UBE).

Introduction: Unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) is a relatively new yet common minimally invasive procedure in spine surgery, capable of achieving adequate decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis through unilateral laminectomy bilateral decompression (ULBD). Neither additional fusion nor rigid fixation is required, as UBE-ULBD rarely causes iatrogenic lumbar instability. However, to our knowledge, five-level ULBD via two-stage UBE without lumbar fusion has been yet to be reported in the treatment of multilevel lumbar spinal stenosis. Case description: We present a case of an 80-year-old female patient who developed progressive paralysis of the lower extremities. Radiographic examinations showed multilevel degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis and extensive compression of the dural sac and nerve roots from L1-2 to L5-S1. The patient underwent five-level ULBD through two-stage UBE without lumbar fusion or fixation. One week after the final procedure, the patient could ambulate with walking aids and braces. Moreover, no back pain or limited lumbar motion was observed at the 6-month follow-up. Conclusion: Multilevel ULBD through UBE may provide elderly patients with an alternative, minimally invasive procedure for treating spinal stenosis. This procedure could be achieved by staging surgeries. In this case, we reported complaints of little back pain, despite not needing to perform lumbar fusion or fixation.

Differentiation of pain-related functional limitations in surgical patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) using the Oswestry Disability Index: a Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN) study.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is the most commonly used outcome measure of functional outcome in spine surgery. The ability of the ODI to differentiate pain related functional limitation specifically related to degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is unclear. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the ability of the functional subsections of the ODI to differentiate the specific patient limitation(s) from symptomatic LSS and the functional impact of surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Analysis of prospectively collected data from the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN). PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 1,497 lumbar spinal stenosis patients with a dominant complaint of neurogenic claudication, radiculopathy or back pain were identified in the CSORN registry. OUTCOME MEASURES: The ODI questionnaire version 2.0 was assessed as an outcome measure. METHODS: The difference at baseline and the pre-to-post (1-year) surgical change of the ODI individual questions was assessed. Analysis of variance, two-tailed paired sample Student t test were used for statistical analysis. Cohen d was used as an index of effect size, defined as "large" when d ≥0.8. RESULTS: The mean age at surgery was 65 (±11) years and (50.8%) of the patients were female. Preoperatively, highest functional limitations were noted for standing, lifting, walking, pain intensity and social life (mean 3.2, 2.9, 2.5, 2.9, 2.5 respectively). At 1-year follow-up, overall there was a significant improvement in all individual questions and the overall ODI (all p<.001), with similar patterns seen for each dominant complaint. The greatest effect of surgery was noted in the walking, social life and standing domains (all d≥0.81), while personal care, sitting and lifting showed the least improvement (all d≤0.51). In subgroup analyses, the overall ODI baseline scores and subsection limitations were statistically significantly higher in females, those without degenerative spondylolisthesis and those undergoing fusion, although these differences were not considered clinically significant. Preoperative differentiation of LSS specific functional limitation and postoperative changes in all subgroups was similar to the overall LSS cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study support the ability of the ODI to differentiate the self-reported pain related functional effects of neurogenic claudication, radiculopathy or back pain from LSS and changes associated with surgical intervention. Disaggregated use of the ODI could be a simple tool to aid in preoperative education regarding specific areas of pain related dysfunction and potential for improvement with LSS surgery.

Objectifying clinical gait assessment: using a single-point wearable sensor to quantify the spatiotemporal gait metrics of people with lumbar spinal stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Wearable accelerometer-containing devices have become a mainstay in clinical studies which attempt to classify the gait patterns in various diseases. A gait profile for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) has not been developed, and no study has validated a simple wearable system for the clinical assessment of gait in lumbar stenosis. This study identifies the changes to gait patterns that occur in LSS to create a preliminary disease-specific gait profile. In addition, this study compares a chest-based wearable sensor, the MetaMotionC© device and inertial measurement unit python script (MMC/IMUPY) system, against a reference-standard, videography, to preliminarily assess its accuracy in measuring the gait features of patients with LSS. METHODS: We conduct a cross-sectional observational study examining the walking patterns of 25 LSS patients and 33 healthy controls. To construct a preliminary disease-specific gait profile for LSS, the gait patterns of the 25 LSS patients and 25 healthy controls with similar ages were compared. To assess the accuracy of the MMC/IMUPY system in measuring the gait features of patients with LSS, its results were compared with videography for the 21 LSS and 33 healthy controls whose walking bouts exceeded 30 m. RESULTS: Patients suffering from LSS walked significantly slower, with shorter, less frequent steps and higher asymmetry compared to healthy controls. The MMC/IMUPY system had >90% agreement with videography for all spatiotemporal gait metrics that both methods could measure. CONCLUSIONS: The MMC/IMUPY system is a simple and feasible system for the construction of a preliminary disease-specific gait profile for LSS. Before clinical application in everyday living conditions is possible, further studies involving the construction of a more detailed disease-specific gait profile for LSS by disease severity, and the validation of the MMC/IMUPY system in the home environment, are required.