European Spine Journal

, Volume 22, Issue 9, pp 2015–2021 | Cite as

Percutaneous interspinous spacer versus open decompression: a 2-year follow-up of clinical outcome and quality of life

  • F. Beyer
  • A. Yagdiran
  • P. Neu
  • T. Kaulhausen
  • P. Eysel
  • R. Sobottke
Original Article



Percutaneous interspinous stand-alone spacers offer a simple and effective technique to treat lumbar spinal stenosis with neurogenic claudication. Nonetheless, open decompressive surgery remains the standard of care. This study compares the effectiveness of both techniques and the validity of percutaneous interspinous spacer use.


Forty-five patients were included in this open prospective non-randomized study, and treated either with percutaneous interspinous stand-alone spacers (Aperius®) or bilateral open microsurgical decompression at L3/4 or L4/5. Patient data, operative data, COMI, SF-36, PCS and MCS, ODI, and walking distance were collected 6 weeks, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 24 months post-surgery.


Group 1 (n = 12) underwent spacer implantation, group 2 (n = 33) open decompression. Five patients from group 1 required implant removal and open decompression during follow-up (FU); one patient was lost to FU. From group 2, seven patients were lost to FU. Remaining patients were assessed as above. After 2 years, back pain, leg pain, ODI, and quality of life improved significantly for group 2. Remaining group 1 patients (n = 6) reported worse results. Walking distance improved for both groups.


Decompression proved superior to percutaneous stand-alone spacer implantation in our two observational cohorts. Therapeutic failure was too high for interspinous spacers.


Lumbar spinal stenosis Microsurgical decompression Percutaneous interspinous spacer Quality of life Clinical outcome 



FB is supported by the German Federal Ministry of Research and Education (BMBF grant 01KN1106).

Conflict of interest



  1. 1.
    Vogt MT, Cawthon PM, Kang JD, Donaldson WF, Cauley JA, Nevitt MC (2006) Prevalence of symptoms of cervical and lumbar stenosis among participants in the osteoporotic fractures in men study. Spine 31:1445–1451PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ciol MA, Deyo RA, Howell E, Kreif S (1996) An assessment of surgery for spinal stenosis: time trends, geographic variations, complications, and reoperations. J Am Geriatr Soc 44:285–290PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Porter RW (1996) Spinal stenosis and neurogenic claudication. Spine 21:2046–2052PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Guralnik JM, Ferrucci L, Simonsick EM, Salive ME, Wallace RB (1995) Lower-extremity function in persons over the age of 70 years as a predictor of subsequent disability. N Engl J Med 332:556–561. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199503023320902 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Amundsen T, Weber H, Nordal HJ, Magnaes B, Abdelnoor M, Lilleas F (2000) Lumbar spinal stenosis: conservative or surgical management?: A prospective 10-year study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25:1424–1435; discussion 1435–1426Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Richards JC, Majumdar S, Lindsey DP, Beaupre GS, Yerby SA (2005) The treatment mechanism of an interspinous process implant for lumbar neurogenic intermittent claudication. Spine 30:744–749PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sobottke R, Schluter-Brust K, Kaulhausen T, Rollinghoff M, Joswig B, Stutzer H, Eysel P, Simons P, Kuchta J (2009) Interspinous implants (X Stop, Wallis, Diam) for the treatment of LSS: is there a correlation between radiological parameters and clinical outcome? Eur Spine J 18:1494–1503. doi: 10.1007/s00586-009-1081-y PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kuchta J, Sobottke R, Eysel P, Simons P (2009) Two-year results of interspinous spacer (X-Stop) implantation in 175 patients with neurologic intermittent claudication due to lumbar spinal stenosis. Eur Spine J 18:823–829. doi: 10.1007/s00586-009-0967-z PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nardi P, Cabezas D, Rea G, Pettorini BL (2010) Aperius PercLID stand alone interspinous system for the treatment of degenerative lumbar stenosis: experience on 152 cases. J Spinal Disord Tech 23:203–207. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e31819b08da PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fabrizi AP, Maina R, Schiabello L (2011) Interspinous spacers in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal disease: our experience with DIAM and Aperius devices. Eur Spine J 20:20–26. doi: 10.1007/s00586-011-1753-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kondrashov DG, Hannibal M, Hsu KY, Zucherman JF (2006) Interspinous process decompression with the X-STOP device for lumbar spinal stenosis: a 4-year follow-up study. J Spinal Disord Tech 19:323–327. doi: 10.1097/01.bsd.0000211294.67508.3b PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sobottke R, Siewe J, Kaulhausen T, Otto C, Eysel P (2011) Interspinous spacers as treatment for lumbar stenosis. Seminars Spine Surg. doi: 10.1053/j.semss.2010.12.002 Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zucherman JF, Hsu KY, Hartjen CA, Mehalic TF, Implicito DA, Martin MJ, Johnson DR, 2nd, Skidmore GA, Vessa PP, Dwyer JW, Puccio ST, Cauthen JC, Ozuna RM (2005) A multicenter, prospective, randomized trial evaluating the X STOP interspinous process decompression system for the treatment of neurogenic intermittent claudication: two-year follow-up results. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:1351–1358. pii: 00007632-200506150-00003Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Anderson PA, Tribus CB, Kitchel SH (2006) Treatment of neurogenic claudication by interspinous decompression: application of the X STOP device in patients with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 4:463–471. doi: 10.3171/spi.2006.4.6.463 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zucherman JF, Hsu KY, Hartjen CA, Mehalic TF, Implicito DA, Martin MJ, Johnson DR 2nd, Skidmore GA, Vessa PP, Dwyer JW, Puccio S, Cauthen JC, Ozuna RM (2004) A prospective randomized multi-center study for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with the X STOP interspinous implant: 1-year results. Eur Spine J 13:22–31. doi: 10.1007/s00586-003-0581-4 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moojen WA, Arts MP, Bartels RH, Jacobs WC, Peul WC (2011) Effectiveness of interspinous implant surgery in patients with intermittent neurogenic claudication: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Spine J 20:1596–1606. doi: 10.1007/s00586-011-1873-8 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Weinstein JN, Tosteson TD, Lurie JD, Tosteson AN, Blood E, Hanscom B, Herkowitz H, Cammisa F, Albert T, Boden SD, Hilibrand A, Goldberg H, Berven S, An H (2008) Surgical versus nonsurgical therapy for lumbar spinal stenosis. N Engl J Med 358:794–810. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0707136 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shabat S, Arinzon Z, Folman Y, Leitner J, David R, Pevzner E, Gepstein R, Pekarsky I, Shuval I (2008) Long-term outcome of decompressive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis in octogenarians. Eur Spine J 17:193–198. doi: 10.1007/s00586-007-0514-8 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Postacchini R, Ferrari E, Cinotti G, Menchetti PPM, Postacchini F (2011) Aperius interspinous implant versus open surgical decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine J 11:933–939. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2011.08.419 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Moojen WA, Arts MP, Brand R, Koes BW, Peul WC (2010) The Felix-trial. Double-blind randomization of interspinous implant or bony decompression for treatment of spinal stenosis related intermittent neurogenic claudication. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 11:100. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-11-100
  21. 21.
    Sobottke R, Rollinghoff M, Siewe J, Schlegel U, Yagdiran A, Spangenberg M, Lesch R, Eysel P, Koy T (2010) Clinical outcomes and quality of life 1 year after open microsurgical decompression or implantation of an interspinous stand-alone spacer. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 53:179–183. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1263108 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Roder C, Chavanne A, Mannion AF, Grob D, Aebi M (2005) SSE Spine Tango–content, workflow, set-up. Tango. Eur Spine J 14:920–924. doi: 10.1007/s00586-005-1023-2 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Richter A, Schutz C, Hauck M, Halm H (2010) Does an interspinous device (Coflex) improve the outcome of decompressive surgery in lumbar spinal stenosis? One-year follow up of a prospective case control study of 60 patients. Eur Spine J 19:283–289. doi: 10.1007/s00586-009-1229-9 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Van Meirhaeghe J, Fransen P, Morelli D, Craig NJ, Godde G, Mihalyi A, Collignon F (2012) Clinical evaluation of the preliminary safety and effectiveness of a minimally invasive interspinous process device APERIUS((R)) in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis with symptomatic neurogenic intermittent claudication. Eur Spine J 21:2565–2572. doi: 10.1007/s00586-012-2330-z PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Steurer J, Roner S, Gnannt R, Hodler J (2011) Quantitative radiologic criteria for the diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic literature review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 12:175. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-12-175 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chiodo A, Haig AJ, Yamakawa KSJ, Quint D, Tong H, Choksi VR (2008) Magnetic resonance imaging vs. electrodiagnostic root compromise in lumbar spinal stenosis: a masked controlled study. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 87:789–797. doi: 10.1097/Phm.0b013e318186af03 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Haig AJ, Geisser ME, Tong HC, Yamakawa KSJ, Quint DJ, Hoff JT, Chiodo A, Miner JA, Phalke VV (2007) Electromyographic and magnetic resonance imaging to predict lumbar stenosis, low-back pain, and no back symptoms. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89A:358–366. doi: 10.2106/Jbjs.E.00704 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. Beyer
    • 1
  • A. Yagdiran
    • 1
  • P. Neu
    • 1
  • T. Kaulhausen
    • 2
  • P. Eysel
    • 1
  • R. Sobottke
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Orthopedic and Trauma SurgeryUniversity of CologneCologneGermany
  2. 2.Department of Orthopedic and Trauma SurgeryMedizinisches Zentrum StädteRegion Aachen GmbHWürselenGermany

Personalised recommendations