Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Coexisting lumbar and cervical stenosis (tandem spinal stenosis): an infrequent presentation. Retrospective analysis of single-stage surgery (53 cases)

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Study design

Retrospective analysis of 53 patients who underwent single stage simultaneous surgery for tandem spinal stenosis (TSS) at single centre.

Objective

To discuss the presentation of combined cervical and lumbar (tandem) stenosis and to evaluate the safety and efficacy of single-stage simultaneous surgery.

Summary of background data

Combined stenosis is an infrequent presentation with mixed presentation of upper motor neuron and lower motor neuron signs. Scarce literature on its presentation and management is available. There is a controversy in the surgical strategy of these patients. Staged surgeries are frequently recommended and only few single-stage surgeries reported.

Methods

All the patients were clinico-radiologically diagnosed TSS. Surgeries were performed in single stage by two teams. Results were evaluated with Nurick grade, modified Japanese Orthopedic Association score (mJOA), oswestry disability index (ODI), patient satisfaction index, mJOA recovery rate, blood loss and complication.

Results

The mJOA cervical and ODI score improved from a mean 8.86 and 68.15 preoperatively to 13.00 and 30.11, respectively, at 12 months and to 14.52 and 24.03 at final follow-up. The average mJOA recovery rate was 48.23 ± 26.90 %. Patient satisfaction index was 2.13 ± 0.91 at final follow-up. Estimated blood loss of ≤400 ml and operating room time of <150 min showed improvement of scores and lessened the complications. In the age group below 60 years, the improvement was statistically significant in ODI (p = 0.02) and Nurick’s grade (p = 0.03) with average improvement in mJOA score.

Conclusion

Short-lasting surgery, single anaesthesia, reduced morbidity and hospital stay as well as costs, an early return to function, high patient satisfaction rate with encouraging results justify single-stage surgery in TSS. Age, blood loss and duration of surgery decide the complication rate and outcome of surgery. Staged surgery is recommended in patients above the age of 60 years.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AP:

Anteroposterior

EBL:

Estimated blood loss

IBL:

Intraoperative blood loss

LMN:

Lower motor neuron

mJOA:

Modified Japanese orthopaedic association

MRI:

Magnetic resonance imaging

NG:

Nurick’s grade

ODI:

Oswestry disability index

ORT:

Operation room time

TLIF:

Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion

TSS:

Tandem spinal stenosis

UMN:

Upper motor neuron

References

  1. Epstein NE, Epstein JA, Carras R et al (1984) Coexisting cervical and lumbar spinal stenosis: diagnosis and management. Neurosurgery 15(4):489–496

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Okada E, Matsumoto M, Fujiwara H, Toyama Y (2011) Disc degeneration of cervical spine on MRI in patients with lumbar disc herniation: comparison study with asymptomatic volunteers. Eur Spine J 20(4):585–591

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Matsumoto M, Okada E, Toyama Y, Fujiwara M, Momoshima S, Takahata T (2012) Tandem age-related lumbar and cervical intervertebral disc changes in asymptomatic subjects. Eur Spine J 22(4):708–713. doi:10.1007/s00586-012-2500-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Edwards WC, Larocca SH (1985) The developmental segmental sagittal diameter in combined cervical and lumbar spondylosis. Spine 10(1):42–49

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dendra H, Kimura S, Yamazaki A, Hosana N, Imura K et al (2011) Clinical significance of cerebrospinal fluid nitric oxide concentrations in degenerative cervical and lumbar diseases. Eur Spine J 20(4):604–611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dagi TF, Tarkington MA, Leech JJ (1987) Tandem lumbar and cervical spinal stenosis: natural history, prognostic indices, and results after surgical decompression. J Neurosurg 66(6):842–849

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Laban MM, Green ML (2004) Concurrent (tandem) cervical and lumbar spinal stenosis: a 10-yr review of 54 hospitalized patients. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 83(3):187–190

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Teng P, Papatheodorou C (1964) Combined cervical and lumbar spondylosis. Arch Neurol 10:298–307

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hsieh CH, Huang TJ, Hsu RW (1998) Tandem spinal stenosis: clinical diagnosis and surgical treatment. Changgeng Yi Xue Za Zhi 21(4):429–435

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kikuike K, Miyamoto K, Hosoe H, Shimizu K (2009) One-staged combined cervical and lumbar decompression for patients with tandem spinal stenosis on cervical and lumbar spine: analyses of clinical outcomes with minimum 3 years follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech 22(8):593–601

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Aydogan M, Ozturk C, Mirzanli C et al (2007) Treatment approach in tandem (concurrent) cervical and lumbar spinal stenosis. Acta Orthop Belg 73(2):234–237

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Naderi S, Mertol T (2002) Simultaneous cervical and lumbar surgery for combined symptomatic cervical and lumbar spinal stenoses. J Spinal Disord Tech 15(3):229–231

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Eskander MS, Aubin ME, Balsis SM, Eck J, Drew JM et al (2011) Is there a difference between simultaneous or staged decompression for combined cervical and lumbar stenosis. J Spinal Disord Tech 24(6):409–413

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Zulkefli A, Ramanathan R (2010) Tandem spinal stenosis. Malays Orthop J 4(1):46–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Caron TH, Bell GR (2007) Combined (tandem) lumbar and cervical stenosis. Semin Spine Surg 19(1):44–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kang Y, Lee JW, Koh YH, Hur S, Kim SJ, Chai JW, Kang HS (2011) New MRI grading system for the cervical canal stenosis. AJR 197(1):134–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Schizas C, Theuman N, Burn A, Tansey R, Wardlaw D et al (2010) Qualitative grading of severity of lumbar spinal stenosis based on the morphology of the dural sac on magnetic resonance images. Spine 35(21):1919–1924

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. William KE, Paul R, Dewan Y (2009) Functional outcome of corpectomy in cervical spondylitic myelopathy. Indian J Orthop 43(2):205–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Toyone T, Tanaka T, Kato D et al (2005) Patients’ expectations and satisfaction in lumbar spine surgery. Spine 30(23):2689–2694

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Fairbank JCT, Pynsent PB (2000) The oswestry disability index. Spine 25(22):2940–2952

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Teresi LM, Lufkin RB, Reicher MA et al (1987) Asymptomatic degenerative disk disease and spondylosis of the cervical spine: MR imaging. Radiology 164(1):83–88

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Opstelten FW, Boon AJ (2001) Suspected amyotrophic lateral sclerosis? Don’t forget diagnostic imaging of the spine. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 145(11):505–509

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Dodge LD, Bohlman HH, Rhodes RS (1998) Concurrent lumbar spinal stenosis and peripheral vascular disease. A report of nine patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res 230:141–148

    Google Scholar 

  24. Laroche M, Moulinier L, Arlet J et al (1992) Lumbar and cervical stenosis. Frequency of the association, role of the ankylosing hyperostosis. Clin Rheumatol 11(4):533–535

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fager CA (1973) Results of adequate posterior decompression in the relief of spondylitic cervical myelopathy. J Neurosurg 38(6):684–692

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Amundsen T, Weber H, Nordal HJ et al (2000) Lumbar spinal stenosis: conservative or surgical management? A prospective 10-year study. Spine 25(11):1424–1435

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mann KS, Khosla VK, Gulati DR (1984) Cervical spondylitic myelopathy treated by single-stage multilevel anterior decompression. A prospective study. J Neurosurg 60(1):81–87

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Richter M, Kluger P, Puhl W (1999) Diagnosis and therapy of spinal stenosis in the elderly. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 137(6):474–481

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Han IH, Suh SH, Kuh SU, Chin DK, Kim KS (2010) Types and prevalence of coexisting spine lesions on whole spine sagittal MR images in surgical degenerative spinal diseases. Yonsei Med J 51(3):414–420

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Osterman AL (1998) The double crush syndrome. Orthop Clin North Am 19(1):147–155

    Google Scholar 

  31. Taneja T, Kumar R, Amin A et al (2009) Bilateral simultaneous total knee replacements: the Harlow experience. J Bone Joint Surg Br 92:328

    Google Scholar 

  32. Passias PG, Ma Y, Chiu YL, Mazumdar M, Girardi FP, Memtsoudis SG (2012) Comparative safety of simultaneous and staged anterior and posterior spinal surgery. Spine 37(3):247–255

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. Rajesh Chudasama, Associate Professor, Community Medicine Department, Medical College, Rajkot, Gujarat and Miss Anitha Sunil, Assistant Professor, LJIMS, Ahmedabad for their support for statistical analysis.

Conflict of interest

No funds were received in support of this work. No benefits in any form have been or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. “STAVYA” Spine Hospital and Research Institute, Nr. Nagari Hospital, Mithakhali, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad, 380006, Gujarat, India

    Ajay Krishnan, Bharat R. Dave, Arun Kumar Kambar & Himanshu Ram

Authors
  1. Ajay Krishnan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bharat R. Dave
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Arun Kumar Kambar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Himanshu Ram
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ajay Krishnan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Krishnan, A., Dave, B.R., Kambar, A.K. et al. Coexisting lumbar and cervical stenosis (tandem spinal stenosis): an infrequent presentation. Retrospective analysis of single-stage surgery (53 cases). Eur Spine J 23, 64–73 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-2868-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-2868-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation