Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

Spine

COMPARATIVE CLINICO-RADIOLOGICAL STUDY OF INTERLAMINAR DECOMPRESSION IN LUMBAR CANAL STENOSIS WITH AND WITHOUT COFLEX¯ INTERSPINOUS SPACER

Britspine, British Scoliosis Society (BSS), Society for Back Pain Research (SBPR), British Association of Spine Surgeons (BASS)



Abstract

Patients with neurogenic claudication from lumbar canal stenosis non-responsive to non-surgical treatment are usually managed with spinal decompression with or without fusion. Flexion at stenotic segments relieves symptoms by increasing canal cross-sectional area, intervertebral foraminal height. Interspinous spacers work by causing flexion at the treated segement. We used COFLEX¯ [Paradigm Spine] a titanium interspinous spacer along with interlaminar decompression where indicated.

To compare the clinical and radiological results of patients undergoing interlaminar decompression with or without use of COFLEX¯.

Pre and post-operative assessment and comparison of clinical outcomes of Oswestry disability index(ODI), Visual analog Scale(VAS), Short Form-36(SF-36) and radiological outcomes of disc heights of operated and adjacent levels, intervertebral foraminal heights, sagittal angles of the operated segment.

All consecutive patients undergoing spinal decompression at one or more levels from Jan to Dec 2008 were included. Patients with clinically symptomatic back pain for a duration longer than claudication pain were offered interspinous spacer at L4/5 level or above.

In first group(n-20), patients were treated with inter-laminar decompression and COFLEX¯ with a standard posterior approach. In second group(n-25) inter-laminar decompression for the involved segment was performed. All patients are on follow-up.

Clinical and radiological outcomes were compared at 6 months and 1 year.

Statistically significant(p<0.001) improvements in ODI, VAS(back), VAS(leg) and SF-36 in patients in whom COFLEX¯ was used. Radiological parameters also showed significant improvements(p<0.05).

Use of COFLEX¯ spacer is justified in patients with symptomatic disc degeneration with neurogenic claudication when treated operatively.