Degrees of Canal Stenosis, Levels of Interleukin-6 (IL-6) And C-Reactive Protein (CRP) Preoperative as Predictors of the Output of Neurogenic Claudication Outcome Score (NCOS) 8 Weeks Post-Decompression-Stabilization-Fusion in Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Patients

Introduction: Lumbar Spinal Stenosis (LSS) or spinal stenosis is the most common spinal disease in elderly patients. LSS is also one of the leading causes of spinal surgery in the world. The problem that is often encountered is the limited predictor of outcomes that are considered affordable and accurate, so as to provide education to patients about possible output after the surgery process is carried out. Therefore, a predictor is needed that is considered accurate and affordable such as the degree of measurable canal stenosis of Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), serum levels of C-Reactive Protein (CRP) and Interleukin-6 (IL-6) Method: This study used a prospective cohort design conducted to compare Neurogenic Claudication Outcome Score scores among people with degenerative lumbar canal stenosis whose post-decompression-stabilization-fusion had higher degrees of canal stenosis (measured through Schizas grading of Magnetic resonance Imaging/MRI) examinations), as well as high pre-operative CRP and IL-6 levels with those with normal CRP and IL-6 levels. From the population of lumbar spinal stenosis, the selection of samples was conducted consecutively sampling. After that, statistical tests in the form of descriptor tests, normality tests, risk factor assessments with 2x2 cross tabulation, and proportion comparison analysis using the Fisher Exact test. Result: Severe lumbar canal stenosis degrees resulted in worse NCOS 8 weeks postoperative than mild degrees of lumbar canal stenosis, with statistically significant differences (p=0.008; p < 0.05) and RR 6.4 (0.99-41.08). High CRP levels resulted in worse NCOS 8 weeks postoperative than mild lumbar degrees of canal stenosis, with statistically significantly differences (p=0.008; p < 0.05) and RR 6.4 (0.99-41.08). High pre-operative IL-6 levels resulted in worse NCOS 8 weeks postoperative than normal pre-operative IL-6 levels with statistically significantly differences (p=0.002; p < 0.05) and RR 8 (1.24-51.50). Conclusion: Degrees of preoperative (mild) canal stenosis, high pre-operative CRP levels, and high levels of pre-operative IL-6 were predictors for better 8-week NCOS scores in patients with post-decompression-stabilizing-fusion degenerative LSS disease. Key words: Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis, IL-6, CRP, canal degree stenosis, NCOS.

Walking Biomechanics and Spine Loading in Patients With Symptomatic Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis is a leading cause of pain and mobility limitation in older adults. It is clinically believed that patients with lumbar spinal stenosis adopt a flexed trunk posture or bend forward and alter their gait pattern to improve tolerance for walking. However, a biomechanical assessment of spine posture and motion during walking is broadly lacking in these patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate lumbar spine and pelvic sagittal angles and lumbar spine compressive loads in standing and walking and to determine the effect of pain and neurogenic claudication symptoms in patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis. Seven participants with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis, aged 44–82, underwent a 3D opto-electronic motion analysis during standing and walking trials in asymptomatic and symptomatic states. Passive reflective marker clusters (four markers each) were attached to participants at T1, L1, and S2 levels of the spine, with additional reflective markers at other spinal levels, as well as the head, pelvis, and extremities. Whole-body motion data was collected during standing and walking trials in asymptomatic and symptomatic states. The results showed that the spine was slightly flexed during walking, but this was not affected by symptoms. Pelvic tilt was not different when symptoms were present, but suggests a possible effect of more forward tilt in both standing (p = 0.052) and walking (p = 0.075). Lumbar spine loading during symptomatic walking was increased by an average of 7% over asymptomatic walking (p = 0.001). Our results did not show increased spine flexion (adopting a trunk-flexed posture) and only indicate a trend for a small forward shift of the pelvis during both symptomatic walking and standing. This suggests that provocation of symptoms in these patients does not markedly affect their normal gait kinematics. The finding of increased spine loading with provocation of symptoms supports our hypothesis that spine loading plays a role in limiting walking function in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis, but additional work is needed to understand the biomechanical cause of this increase.

Assessing the Outcome of Transforminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion with Instrumentation in Treatment of Degenerative Lumbar Disorders

Background Degenerative lumbar disorders are relatively common condition that typically affects persons over the age of 50 and are more common in females. Patients typically present with a constellation of symptoms that include back pain, radiculopathy, and/or neurogenic claudication. Aim of the Work to assess the clinical and radiological outcome of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) and posterolateral fusion (PLF) in the treatment of degenerative lumbar disorders. Patients and Methods a prospective study was conducted on patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis and degenerative lumbar spine stenosis who were admitted to Neurosurgical department at Ain Shams University hospital and Arab contractors medical center and underwent lumbar spine fixation with either transforaminal interbody fusion or posterolateral fusion from February 2017 to February 2019. The patients were divided into two groups according to the operative procedure done for each group. Group A (20 patients) included patients who underwent transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Group B (20 patients) included patients who underwent posterolateral fusion. Results We found that both TLIF and PLF provide improvement of disability and pain in patients with degenerative lumbar disorders. TLIF is superior to PLF with regard to achieving radiographic fusion. There is no strong evidence to support the use of TLIF over traditional PLF in treatment of degenerative lumbar disorders, especially with the increased material costs associated with interbody fusion. Conclusion both TLIF and PLF provide improvement of disability and pain in patients with degenerative lumbar disorders. TLIF is superior to PLF with regard to achieving radiographic fusion.

Spinal Sagittal Alignment Among Patients with Degenerative Lumbar Canal Stenosis

Background: Degenerative lumbar canal stenosis (DLS) is a common spinal pathology characterized by radicular pain and neurogenic claudication. Sagittal alignment and its indices have been affected in several spinal pathologies and may play a key role in surgical planning and outcome. In this case-control study, we aimed to assess sagittal alignment among patients with DLS compared to healthy individuals. Materials and Methods: Sixty patients DLS and 60 healthy volunteers were selected. Pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), thoracic kyphosis (TK), and sagittal vertical axis (SVA) were obtained in lateral standing X-ray radiographs. Results: Mean LL was lower in DLS patients (35.3±10.2) compared to normal controls (44.78±12.95), which was statistically significant (P <0.05). In contrast, there were no significant differences in PI, SVA, and SS between the groups. In patients with DLS, TK was lower, and PT was higher when compared to healthy individuals (P<0.05). Conclusion: Patients with DLS utilize decreased lordosis of the lumbar spine as a compensatory mechanism to decompress the thecal sac and spinal roots and improve their symptoms. Consequently, these patients recruit compensatory adjustments such as thoracic hyperkyphosis and increased PT to maintain sagittal alignment. [GMJ.2021;10:e2128]

Physical and Psychological Factors Associated With Walking Capacity in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis With Neurogenic Claudication: A Systematic Scoping Review

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current state of scientific knowledge regarding physical and psychological factors associated with walking capacity in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) with neurogenic claudication.Design: Systematic scoping review.Literature Search: We searched CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), MEDLINE, Cochrane, PsycINFO, and SPORTDiscus databases.Study Selection Criteria: Cohorts and cross-sectional studies reporting on associations between physical or psychological factors and impaired walking capacity in patients with symptomatic LSS were included.Data Synthesis: Data were synthetized to identify associations between physical or psychological factors and either walking capacity, gait pattern characteristics, or functional tasks.Results: Twenty-four studies were included. Walking capacity was significantly correlated with several pain outcomes, disability, estimated walking distance, and cross-sectional area of the lumbar spine. Gait pattern characteristics such as speed and stride were strongly and positively correlated with disability outcomes. Functional tasks were significantly correlated with lower back and upper limb disability, lower limb endurance strength, ranges of motion, and speed. Associations with psychological factors were mostly conflicting except for the Rasch-based Depression Screener and the Pain Anxiety Symptom Scale (PASS-20) questionnaire that were associated with a decreased performance in functional tasks.Conclusion: Physical and psychological factors that are associated with walking capacity in patients with symptomatic LSS were identified. However, many associations reported between physical or psychological factors and walking capacity were conflicting, even more so when correlated with walking capacity specifically.

MRI Features and Clinical Significance of Spinal Epidural Lipomatosis: All You Should Know

: Spinal epidural lipomatosis (SEL) is defined as the abnormal accumulation of unencapsulated adipose tissue in the spinal epidural space. SEL can be asymptomatic or can cause a wide range of symptoms, the most common of which is neurogenic claudication. Several other neurological manifestations may also occur, above all myelopathy and radicular symptoms. The spinal level most frequently involved in patients with SEL is the lumbar one, followed by the thoracic one. Imaging plays a key role in disease assessment. MRI is considered the most effective and sensitive modality for diagnosing and staging SEL. Anyway, also CT scan can diagnose SEL. The diagnosis may be incidental (in mild-moderate disease) or may be taken into account in cases with neurological symptoms (in moderate-severe disease). There are some recognized risk factors for SEL, the most common of which are exogenous steroid use and obesity. Recent studies have found an association between SEL and obesity, hyperlipidemia and liver fat deposition. As a matter of fact, SEL can be considered the spinal hallmark of metabolic syndrome. Risk factors control represents the initial treatment strategy in patients with SEL (e.g. weight loss, steroid therapy suspension). Surgical decompression may be required when conservative treatment fails or when the patient develops acute/severe neurological symptoms.

Manual therapy and canal enlargement exercises versus conventional physiotherapy in lumbar stenosis – a study protocol

INTRODUCTION: Lumbar Canal Stenosis (LCS) is known as the well-established reason for pain and depleted walking capacity in patients with manifestations of paresthesia and pain in the lower back, gluteal region, posterior thigh, and legs which are termed as ‘Neurogenic Claudication’ (NC). Manual therapy combined with canal enlargement exercises and conventional physiotherapy may be considered in eradicating pain and NC symptoms, hence improving the quality of life. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with LCS with canal diameter 8-12 mm at the level of L4 and below will be recruited for this study. Through the Block randomization method, they will be randomized into two interventional groups: Manual Therapy & Canal Enlargement (MTCE) (n=16) and Conventional Physiotherapy (Cp) (n=16) groups. MTCE group will receive manual therapy and canal enlargement exercises, while the Cp group will receive only conventional physiotherapy. Both interventional groups will receive 3 days of treatment per week for 4 weeks. Modified Oswestry Disability questionnaire (MODI), Antero-Posterior (AP) canal diameter, Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), and Claudication Distance (CD) will be used for the evaluation. In addition, modified Oswestry Disability Index, AP canal Diameter, NPRS, Claudication distance, an SLR will be measured at baseline and post-intervention. DISCUSSION: The results of this research will dictate the applicability of manual therapy with an exercise protocol of canal enlargement exercises on pain and functional disability in patients with LCS.

Results of posterior decompression with non-instrumented lumbar fusion surgery in cases of degenerative lumbar canal stenosis presenting with neurogenic claudication in a tertiary care hospital

<p><strong>Background:</strong> Degenerative lumbar canal stenosis remains an important public health problem in today’s date. With the overall average age of the world’s population rising steadily it is important to have an optimal treatment plan affordable to the masses. Non-instrumented fusion after decompression remains an important treatment option which is affordable to the masses and effectively treats the instability occurring due to degeneration process. This study aims to understand the results of such treatment in a tertiary care center catering to the masses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study was conducted in 34 patients with diagnosed degenerative lumbar canal stenosis with neurogenic claudication who underwent decompressive laminectomy with a posterolateral strut graft posterolateral fusion from July 2018 to August 2020. Each patient was followed up for 12 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the present study, a total of 34 patients with degenerative lumbar canal stenosis with neurogenic claudication were included. There were 18 male and 16 female patients. The pre-operative Swiss spinal stenosis Score was 61-80 (52.9%) and these scores improved to a majority of patients in the category of 21-40 (82.4%) at 1 year postoperatively. The average VAS score was 4.7±1.8 preoperatively while the average post op VAS score was 0.8±0.77.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Non-instrumented fusion of the vertebrae with decompression has significantly improved results at 1 year follow up postoperatively and it is an excellent easy and cost-effective technique if used in a properly selected patient. Further studies are required to assess its long-term results.</p>

Decompression alone versus decompression and instrumented fusion for the treatment of isthmic spondylolisthesis: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE The most advocated surgical technique to treat symptoms of isthmic spondylolisthesis is decompression with instrumented fusion. A less-invasive classical approach has also been reported, which consists of decompression only. In this study the authors compared the clinical outcomes of decompression only with those of decompression with instrumented fusion in patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis. METHODS Eighty-four patients with lumbar radiculopathy or neurogenic claudication secondary to low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis were randomly assigned to decompression only (n = 43) or decompression with instrumented fusion (n = 41). Primary outcome parameters were scores on the Roland Disability Questionnaire (RDQ), separate visual analog scales (VASs) for back pain and leg pain, and patient report of perceived recovery at 12-week and 2-year follow-ups. The proportion of reoperations was scored as a secondary outcome measure. Repeated measures ANOVA according to the intention-to-treat principle was performed. RESULTS Decompression alone did not show superiority in terms of disability scores at 12-week follow-up (p = 0.32, 95% CI −4.02 to 1.34), nor in any other outcome measure. At 2-year follow-up, RDQ disability scores improved more in the fusion group (10.3, 95% CI 3.9–8.2, vs 6.0, 95% CI 8.2–12.4; p = 0.006, 95% CI −7.3 to −1.3). Likewise, back pain decreased more in the fusion group (difference: −18.3 mm, CI −32.1 to −4.4, p = 0.01) on a 100-mm VAS scale, and a higher proportion of patients perceived recovery as showing “good results” (44% vs 74%, p = 0.01). Cumulative probabilities for reoperation were 47% in the decompression and 13% in the fusion group (p < 0.001) at the 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS In patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis, decompression with instrumented fusion resulted in comparable short-term results, significantly better long-term outcomes, and fewer reoperations than decompression alone. Decompression with instrumented fusion is a superior surgical technique that should in general be offered as a first treatment option for isthmic spondylolisthesis, but not for degenerative spondylolisthesis, which has a different etiology.