European Spine Journal

, Volume 25, Supplement 2, pp 270–271 | Cite as

Microscopic bilateral decompression by unilateral approach in spinal stenosis

  • Bastian StorzerEmail author
  • Klaus John Schnake
Open Operating Theatre (OOT)


Spinal stenosis Unilateral approach Bilateral decompression Minimal invasive 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest


Supplementary material

586_2016_4479_MOESM1_ESM.wmv (354.7 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (WMV 363261 kb)


  1. 1.
    Papavero L, Thiel M, Fritzsche E, Kunze C, Westphal M, Kothe R (2009) Lumbar spinal stenosis: prognostic factors for bilateral microsurgical decompression using a unilateral approach. Neurosurgery 65(6 Suppl):182–187 (discussion 187) PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Genevay S, Atlas SJ (2010) Lumbar spinal stenosis. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 24(2):253–265CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Amundsen T, Weber H, Nordal HJ, Magnaes B, Abdelnoor M, Lilleâs F (2000) Lumbar spinal stenosis: conservative or surgical management? A prospective 10-year study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25(11):1424–1435 (discussion 1435–1436) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    den Boogert HF, Keers JC, Marinus Oterdoom DL, Kuijlen JM (2015) Bilateral versus unilateral interlaminar approach for bilateral decompression in patients with single-level degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a multicenter retrospective study of 175 patients on postoperative pain, functional disability, and patient satisfaction. J Neurosurg Spine 23(3):326–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Overdevest GM, Jacobs W, Vleggeert-Lankamp C, Thomé C, Gunzburg R, Peul W (2015) Effectiveness of posterior decompression techniques compared with conventional laminectomy for lumbar stenosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:010036. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010036.pub2 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Schön-Klinik NürnbergFürthGermany

Personalised recommendations