A Review of the Significance, Indications, Techniques, and Outcomes of Revision Lumbar Laminectomy Surgery

Hulen, Christopher A.

doi:10.1053/j.semss.2008.08.005

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We suggest that this may help prevent spinal instability, which can occur after traditional laminectomy [9]. Indeed, Tai et al [17] have suggested that maintained integrity of the posterior complex helps stabilize the decompressed spine.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In our experience, sublaminartrimming laminoplasty allows for sufficient widening of the spinal canal to resolve the symptoms of spinal stenosis. Importantly, none of the patients treated in this manner experienced recurrent stenosis, which is a relatively common problem with other surgical approaches [5,9]. We routinely treat patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis, adult lumbar scoliosis, or spinal stenosis at more than three levels with PLF or PLIF.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the quality of reported studies was variable and the effectiveness of this approach remains uncertain [18]. Unfortunately, current surgical approaches for the treatment of lumbar canal stenosis are, in many cases, associated with relatively high rates of reoperation and indeed recurrent stenosis [5,9]. Clearly, there is room for further optimization of surgical approaches in the treatment of lumbar canal stenosis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, most patients with extensive lumbar canal stenosis undergo surgery to alleviate symptoms and improve function [7]. Various surgical procedures were described for the treatment of extensive lumbar canal stenosis, including laminectomy, laminotomy, and laminoplasty [9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. Laminectomy is the standard option for surgical decompression of spinal stenosis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Clinical outcomes following sublaminar-trimming laminoplasty for extensive lumbar canal stenosis

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Current surgical approaches for treatment of lumbar canal stenosis are often associated with relatively high rates of reoperation and recurrent stenosis. We have developed a new approach for treatment of this condition: sublaminar-trimming laminoplasty. To describe the surgical approach of sublaminar-trimming laminoplasty and to assess associated outcomes. Methods Patients with extensive lumbar canal stenosis who received sublaminar-trimming laminoplasty from 2006 to 2008 were considered for inclusion in the study. The surgery comprised aspects of laminotomy and laminectomy. The following were assessed before surgery and 3 years after surgery: leg and back pain by visual analog scale (VAS), extent of disability by Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), severity of back pain by Japanese Orthopedic Association Score for Back Pain (JOA), walking tolerance, and leg numbness. Complications were noted. Results A total of 49 patients were included in the study (mean age 65.6 ± 10.6 years). VAS leg and back pain, ODI, and JOA scores significantly changed from before surgery to 3 years after surgery (P \ 0.001). Mean changes (95 % confidence interval) were -6.2

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Clinical outcomes following sublaminar-trimming laminoplasty for extensive lumbar canal stenosis

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although several surgical procedures have been described to treat lumbar spinal canal stenosis ranging from minimally invasive procedures to complete laminectomy and facetectomy with or without fusion, recurrent stenosis or instability is still a relatively postoperative common problem. 1,11 Unlike laminotomy in which foraminal and lateral recess decompression are limited, 9 the sublaminar decompression technique adequately decompresses the central canal, neural foramina, and the lateral recesses. 10 Nakaie et al, 7 described wide fenestration technique allowing mainly adequate central decompression.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sublaminar Decompression and Fusion in the Management of Stenotic Lumbar Degenerative Disorders

Saleh¹,

Abdelrazek²,

Elgawhary³

2018

Egyptian Spine Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Data: Lumbar degenerative disorders may result in low back pain, leg pain and limitation of walking distance that can disturb the patients' life. Several surgical procedures have been used to treat spinal canal stenosis ranging from minimal invasive to extensive decompression and fusion. However, recurrence of symptoms or instability may occur postoperatively.Purpose: To evaluate efficacy and safety of sublaminar decompression and fusion in the management of lumbar degenerative disorders. Study Design: Prospective clinical case study. Patients and Methods: Twenty patients including; 7 central canal stenosis, 5 degenerative disc disease, 4 foraminal and central stenosis, and 4 central stenosis and spondylolisthesis patients were enrolled in this study. All were treated with sublaminar decompression and fusion. Pre-and post-operative clinical evaluation included Visual Analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Pre-and post-operative measurement of anteroposterior thecal diameter, thecal cross-sectional area, right and left foraminal height were obtained using MRI and CT-scan. The mean follow up duration was 13.85±8.30 (Range, 8-33) months.Results: VAS of leg pain improved from 7.3±1.4 to 2.4±0.9, VAS of the back pain improved from 7.4±0.9 to 2.3±0.5. ODI improved from 76±7.5 to 29.5±8.3. Anteroposterior thecal diameter changed from 10.4±1.4 mm to 14.1±1.1mm. Thecal sac cross sectional area improved from 134.2±19.6 mm 2 to 184±20.4 mm 2 . Right foraminal height changed from 4.4±0.5 mm to 5.4±0.5 mm and left foraminal height changed from 4.2±0.5 mm to 5.2±0.5 mm. The mean time to achieve bone fusion in our series was 8.1 months and the fusion rate was 95%.Conclusion: Sublaminar decompression and fusion is safe and effective procedure in treatment of stenotic degenerative spinal disorders. It achieves high fusion rate without serious complications. (2018ESJ166)

show abstract

Grinding trajectory generator in robot-assisted laminectomy surgery

2021

Int J CARS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Review of the Significance, Indications, Techniques, and Outcomes of Revision Lumbar Laminectomy Surgery

Cited by 5 publications

References 75 publications

Clinical outcomes following sublaminar-trimming laminoplasty for extensive lumbar canal stenosis

Clinical outcomes following sublaminar-trimming laminoplasty for extensive lumbar canal stenosis

Sublaminar Decompression and Fusion in the Management of Stenotic Lumbar Degenerative Disorders

Grinding trajectory generator in robot-assisted laminectomy surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About