The Outcome of Laminectomy versus Laminoforaminotomy in Terms of Claudication Distance in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Niaz Ahmed Khan, Muhammad Assad Javed, Nafees Ahmed, Muhammad Anees Awan, Faisal Sultan, Daniyal Ahmed
{"title":"The Outcome of Laminectomy versus Laminoforaminotomy in Terms of Claudication Distance in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis","authors":"Niaz Ahmed Khan, Muhammad Assad Javed, Nafees Ahmed, Muhammad Anees Awan, Faisal Sultan, Daniyal Ahmed","doi":"10.36552/pjns.v26i4.817","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: The study aimed to compare the surgical outcome of two different procedures for lumbar spinal stenosis. It helped us in the decision-making to go for less invasive procedures, as compared to conventional laminectomy in lumbar spinal stenosis patient patients. \nMaterials and Methods:  An interventional randomized controlled trial was conducted in the department of neurosurgery, Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Medical University, PIMS Islamabad. A total of 158 adult patients aged between 35 to 55 years with an established diagnosis of lumbar stenosis and claudication distance of fewer than 100 meters were enrolled. Patients were randomly included into two equal groups via the computerized method. In Group A laminectomy was done and in Group Blaminoforaminotomy was adopted. The outcome was measured in terms of claudication distance at 4 weeks after the procedure, and compared in both groups. \nResults:  The mean age of the patients was 44.92 ± 6.28 years. Poor outcome was significantly lower in the Laminoforaminotomy group as compared to the Laminectomy group, at 4 weeks after the procedure. The frequency of claudication distance > 500m (good) at 4 weeks was found to be 62 (78.5%) in the Laminectomy group and it was found in 74 (93.7%) patients in the Laminoforaminotomy group (p = 0.022). \nConclusions:  The study concluded that the laminoforaminotomy is superior to laminectomy, in terms of claudication distance at four weeks after the procedure.","PeriodicalId":19963,"journal":{"name":"Pakistan Journal Of Neurological Surgery","volume":"127 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pakistan Journal Of Neurological Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36552/pjns.v26i4.817","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: The study aimed to compare the surgical outcome of two different procedures for lumbar spinal stenosis. It helped us in the decision-making to go for less invasive procedures, as compared to conventional laminectomy in lumbar spinal stenosis patient patients. Materials and Methods:  An interventional randomized controlled trial was conducted in the department of neurosurgery, Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Medical University, PIMS Islamabad. A total of 158 adult patients aged between 35 to 55 years with an established diagnosis of lumbar stenosis and claudication distance of fewer than 100 meters were enrolled. Patients were randomly included into two equal groups via the computerized method. In Group A laminectomy was done and in Group Blaminoforaminotomy was adopted. The outcome was measured in terms of claudication distance at 4 weeks after the procedure, and compared in both groups. Results:  The mean age of the patients was 44.92 ± 6.28 years. Poor outcome was significantly lower in the Laminoforaminotomy group as compared to the Laminectomy group, at 4 weeks after the procedure. The frequency of claudication distance > 500m (good) at 4 weeks was found to be 62 (78.5%) in the Laminectomy group and it was found in 74 (93.7%) patients in the Laminoforaminotomy group (p = 0.022). Conclusions:  The study concluded that the laminoforaminotomy is superior to laminectomy, in terms of claudication distance at four weeks after the procedure.
椎板切除术与椎间孔切开术对腰椎管狭窄患者跛行距离的影响
目的:本研究旨在比较两种不同手术方法治疗腰椎管狭窄的手术结果。与传统的椎板切除术相比,它帮助我们选择微创手术治疗腰椎管狭窄症。材料与方法:一项介入性随机对照试验在Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto医科大学伊斯兰堡PIMS神经外科进行。共入组158例年龄在35 - 55岁之间,明确诊断为腰椎管狭窄且跛行距离小于100米的成年患者。采用计算机化方法将患者随机分为两组。A组行椎板切除术,A组行椎间孔切开术。在手术后4周测量跛行距离,并比较两组的结果。结果:患者平均年龄44.92±6.28岁。手术后4周,椎板间孔切开术组的不良预后明显低于椎板切除术组。椎板切除术组4周跛行距离> 500m(良好)的发生率为62例(78.5%),椎板间孔切开术组为74例(93.7%)(p = 0.022)。结论:本研究认为椎板间孔切开术在术后四周的跛行距离方面优于椎板切除术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信