Object The development of minimally invasive surgical techniques is driven by the quest for better patient outcomes. There is some evidence for the use of minimally invasive surgery for degenerative lumbar spine stenosis (LSS), but there are currently no studies comparing outcomes with matched controls. The object of this study was to compare outcomes following minimally invasive unilateral laminectomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) to a standard “open” laminectomy for LSS. Methods The authors conducted a prospective, 1:1 randomized trial comparing ULBD to open laminectomy for degenerative LSS. The study enrolled 79 patients between 2007 and 2009, and adequate data for analysis were available in 54 patients (27 in each arm of the study). Patient demographic characteristics and clinical characteristics were recorded and clinical outcomes were obtained using pre- and postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, visual analog scale (VAS) scores for leg pain, patient satisfaction index scores, and postoperative 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) scores. Results Significant improvements were observed in ODI and VAS scores for both open and ULBD interventions (p < 0.001 for both groups using either score). In addition, the ULBD-treated patients had a significantly better mean improvement in the VAS scores (p = 0.013) but not the ODI scores (p = 0.055) compared with patients in the open-surgery group. ULBD-treated patients had a significantly shorter length of postoperative hospital stay (55.1 vs 100.8 hours, p = 0.0041) and time to mobilization (15.6 vs 33.3 hours, p < 0.001) and were more likely to not use opioids for postoperative pain (51.9% vs 15.4%, p = 0.046). Conclusions Based on short-term follow-up, microscopic ULBD is as effective as open decompression in improving function (ODI score), with the additional benefits of a significantly greater decrease in pain (VAS score), postoperative recovery time, time to mobilization, and opioid use.

No abstract

No abstract

The authors describe a hybrid technique that involves a combination of open decompression and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) and percutaneously inserted pedicle screws. This technique allows performance of PLIF and decompression via a midline incision and approach without compromising operative time and visualization. Furthermore, compared to standard open decompression, this approach reduces post-operative wound pain because the small midline incision significantly reduces muscle trauma by obviating the need to dissect the paraspinal muscles off the facet joint complex and by avoiding posterolateral fusion, thus requiring limited lateral muscle dissection off the transverse processes. A series of patients with Grade I-II spondylolisthesis at L4-5 and moderate-severe canal/foraminal stenosis underwent midline PLIF at L4-5, with closure of the midline incision. Percutaneous pedicle screws were inserted, thereby minimizing local muscle trauma, reduction of the spondylolisthesis being performed by using a pedicle screw construct. Rods were inserted percutaneously to link the L4 and L5 pedicle screws. Image intensification was used to confirmed satisfactory screw placement and reduction of spondylolisthesis. The results of a prospective study comparing a standard open decompression and fusion technique for spondylolisthesis versus the minimally invasive hybrid technique are discussed. The minimally invasive technique resulted in shorter hospital stay, earlier mobilization and reduced postoperative narcotic usage. The long-term clinical outcomes were equivalent in the two groups.