Skip to main content

Spinal canal morphology and clinical outcomes of microsurgical bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach for lumbar spinal canal stenosis

European Spine Journal volume 23, pages 991–998 (2014)Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

Microsurgical bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach for lumbar spinal stenosis is a less invasive technique compared to conventional laminectomy. Although many technical reports have demonstrated acceptable overall surgical outcomes for this approach, no studies have attempted to clarify the clinical outcomes thereof in regard to anatomical variance of the spinal canal. This study was conducted to analyze the clinical outcomes of microsurgical bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach according to spinal canal morphology in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.

Methods

Between January 2008 and December 2009, 144 patients with single-level spinal lumbar stenosis underwent microsurgical bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach by a single surgeon. Patients were categorized into three groups according to spinal canal shape: round (n = 42), oval (n = 36), and trefoil (n = 66), and clinical parameters were assessed both before and after surgery with 2–3 years of follow-up.

Results

Mean visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) decreased after surgery, respectively, from 8.1 and 59.8 % to 2.1 and 19.1 % in the round shaped spinal canal group, from 7.2 and 47.1 % to 2.2 and 15.1 % in the oval shaped spinal canal group, and from 6.8 and 53.6 % to 3.6 and 33.3 % in the trefoil shaped spinal canal group. In all groups, VAS and ODI scores significantly improved postoperatively (p < 0.01), although less improved VAS and ODI scores were observed in the trefoil shaped spinal canal group (p < 0.01). The overall patient satisfaction rate was 66.7 %; however, statistically significant lower satisfaction rates were reported in the trefoil shaped spinal canal group (p < 0.01).

Conclusions

Microsurgical bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach may be a good modality for treating round or oval shape spinal canal stenosis, but is not recommended for trefoil-shaped-stenosis. The current authors recommend performing the bilateral decompression technique in cases of trefoil-shaped-spinal canal stenosis.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. Yagi M, Okada E, Ninomiya K, Kihara M (2009) Postoperative outcome after modified unilateral-approach microendoscopic midline decompression for degenerative spinal stenosis. J Neurosurg Spine 10:293–299

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Eule JM, Breeze R, Kindt GW (1999) Bilateral partial laminectomy: a treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis and midline disc herniation. Surg Neurol 52:329–337

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Guiot BH, Khoo LT, Fessler RG (2002) A minimally invasive technique for decompression of the lumbar spine. Spine 27:432–438

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Poletti CE (1995) Central lumbar stenosis caused by ligamentum flavum: unilateral laminotomy for bilateral ligamentectomy: preliminary report of two cases. Neurosurgery 37:343–347

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Young S, Veerapen R, O’Laoire SA (1988) Relief of lumbar canal stenosis using multilevel subarticular fenestrations as an alternative to wide laminectomy: preliminary report. Neurosurgery 23:628–633

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Iwatsuki K, Yoshimine T, Aoki M (2007) Bilateral interlaminar fenestration and unroofing for the decompression of nerve roots by using a unilateral approach in lumbar canal stenosis. Surg Neurol 68:487–492

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Weiner BK, Walker M, Brower RS, McCulloch JA (1999) Microdecompression for lumbar spinal canal stenosis. Spine 24:2268–2272

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Mayer HM (ed) (2000) Minimally invasive spine surgery: a surgical manual. Springer, Berlin, p 108

    Book  Google Scholar 

  9. Hwang SW, Rhim SC, Roh SW, Jeon SR, Hyun SJ (2008) Outcomes of unilateral approach for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: comparison between younger and geriatric patients. Korean J Spine 5:51–57

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ji YC, Kim YB, Hwang SN, Park SW, Kwon JT, Min BK (2005) Efficacy of unilateral laminectomy for bilateral decompression in elderly lumbar spinal stenosis. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 37:410–415

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bresnahan L, Ogden AT, Natarajan RN, Fessler RG (2009) A biomechanical evaluation of graded posterior element removal for treatment of lumbar stenosis: comparison of a minimally invasive approach with two standard laminectomy techniques. Spine 34:17–23

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Turner JA, Ersek M, Herron L, Deyo R (1992) Surgery for lumbar stenosis. Attempted meta- analysis of the literature. Spine 17:1–8

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Shenkin HA, Hash CJ (1979) Spondylolisthesis after multiple bilateral laminectomies and facetectomies for lumbar spondylosis. Follow-up review. J Neurosurg 50:45–47

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sienkiewicz PJ, Flatley TJ (1987) Postoperative spondylolisthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 221:172–180

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cavuşoğlu H, Türkmenoğlu O, Kaya RA, Tuncer C, Colak I, Sahin Y, Aydin Y (2007) Efficacy of unilateral laminectomy for bilateral decompression in lumbar spinal stenosis. Turk Neurosurg 17:100–108

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hindle RJ, Pearcy MJ, Cross A (1990) Mechanical function of the human lumbar interspinous and supraspinous ligaments. J Biomed Eng 12:340–344

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Haba K, Ikeda M, Soma M, Yamashima T (2005) Bilateral decompression of multilevel lumbar spinal stenosis through a unilateral approach. J Clin Neurosci 12:169–171

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Mackay DC, Wheelwright EF (1998) Unilateral fenestration in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Br J Neurosurg 12:556–558

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Palmer S, Turner R, Palmer R (2002) Bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis involving a unilateral approach with microscope and tubular retractor system. J Neurosurg 97:213–217

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Thomé C, Zevgaridis D, Leheta O, Bäzner H, Pöckler-Schöniger C, Wöhrle J, Schmiedek P (2005) Outcome after less-invasive decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized comparison of unilateral laminotomy, bilateral laminotomy, and laminectomy. J Neurosurg Spine 3:129–141

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Adachi K, Futami T, Ebihara A, Yamaya T, Kasai N, Nakazawa T, Imura T (2003) Spinal canal enlargement procedure by restorative laminoplasty for the treatment of lumbar canal stenosis. Spine J 3:471–478

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Khoo LT, Fessler RG (2002) Microendoscopic decompressive laminotomy for the treatment of lumbar stenosis. Neurosurgery 51:S146–S154

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 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 65:182–187

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kim K, Isu T, Sugawara A, Matsumoto R, Isobe M (2008) Comparison of the effect of 3 different approaches to the lumbar spinal canal on postoperative paraspinal muscle damage. Surg Neurol 69:109–113

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kleeman TJ, Hiscoe HC, Berg EE (2000) Patient outcomes after minimally destabilizing lumbar stenosis decompression: the “Port-Hole” technique. Spine 25:865–870

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Mak PH, Campbell RC, Irwin MG (2002) American Society of Anesthesiologists: the ASA physical status classification: inter- observer consistency. American Society of Anesthesiologists. Anaesth Intensive Care 30:633–640

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Carreon LY, Puno RM, Dimar JR 2nd, Glassman SD, Johnson JR (2003) Perioperative complications of posterior lumbar decompression and arthrodesis in older adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85A:2089–2092

    Google Scholar 

  28. Cassinelli EH, Eubanks J, Vogt M, Furey C, Yoo J, Bohlman HH (2007) Risk factors for the development of perioperative complications in elderly patients undergoing lumbar decompression and arthrodesis for spinal stenosis: an analysis of 166 patients. Spine 32:230–235

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Podichetty VK, Spears J, Isaacs RE, Booher J, Biscup RS (2006) Complications associated with minimally invasive decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis. J Spinal Disord Tech 19:161–166

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Park JH, Hyun SJ, Roh SW, Rhim SC (2012) A comparison of unilateral laminectomy with bilateral decompression and fusion surgery in the treatment of grade I lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 154:1205–1212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Cavuşoğlu H, Kaya RA, Türkmenoglu ON, Tuncer C, Colak I, Aydin Y (2007) Midterm outcome after unilateral approach for bilateral decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: 5-year prospective study. Eur Spine J 16:2133–2142

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Sasai K, Umeda M, Maruyama T, Wakabayashi E, Iida H (2008) Microsurgical bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach for lumbar spinal canal stenosis including degenerative spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 9:554–559

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Toyoda H, Nakamura H, Konishi S, Dohzono S, Kato M, Matsuda H (2011) Clinical outcome of microsurgical bilateral decompression via unilateral approach for lumbar canal stenosis: minimum five-year follow-up. Spine 36:410–415

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Jang JW, Park JH, Hyun SJ, Rhim SC (2012) Clinical outcomes and radiologic changes following microsurgical bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach in patients with lumbar canal stenosis and grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis with a minimum 3-year follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech [Epub ahead of print]

  35. Shabat S, Folman Y, Leitner Y, Fredman B, Gepstein R (2007) Failure of conservative treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis in elderly patients. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 44:235–241

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

There were no conflicts of interest in concerning this article. We received no financial support into produce this article.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, Spine and Joint Research Institute, Guro Teun Teun Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

    Won-Seok Choi & Chang Hyun Oh

  2. Department of Neurosurgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea

    Gyu Yeul Ji

  3. Department of Neurosurgery, Jangan-dong Teun Teun Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea

    Sung Chan Shin

  4. Department of Neurosurgery, Korea University Anam Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 126-1, 5-ga, Anam-dong, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, 136-705, Republic of Korea

    Jang-Bo Lee, Dong-Hyuk Park & Tai-Hyoung Cho

Authors
  1. Won-Seok Choi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chang Hyun Oh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gyu Yeul Ji
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sung Chan Shin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jang-Bo Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Dong-Hyuk Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Tai-Hyoung Cho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tai-Hyoung Cho.

Additional information

W.-S. Choi and C. H. Oh contributed equally to this project and should be considered co-first authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Choi, WS., Oh, C.H., Ji, G.Y. et al. Spinal canal morphology and clinical outcomes of microsurgical bilateral decompression via a unilateral approach for lumbar spinal canal stenosis. Eur Spine J 23, 991–998 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-3116-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-3116-7

Keywords

  • Microsurgical bilateral decompression
  • Unilateral approach
  • Spinal canal stenosis
  • Clinical result