Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

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

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

Abstract

Purpose

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.

Methods

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.

Results

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.

Conclusion

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

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  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 31:1445–1451

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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 44:285–290

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Porter RW (1996) Spinal stenosis and neurogenic claudication. Spine 21:2046–2052

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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 1435–1426

    Google Scholar 

  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 30:744–749

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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. 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: 00007632-200506150-00003

    Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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. 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

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Roder C, Chavanne A, Mannion AF, Grob D, Aebi M (2005) SSE Spine Tango–content, workflow, set-up. www.eurospine.org-Spine Tango. Eur Spine J 14:920–924. doi:10.1007/s00586-005-1023-2

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

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

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany

    F. Beyer, A. Yagdiran, P. Neu & P. Eysel

  2. Department of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Medizinisches Zentrum StädteRegion Aachen GmbH, Mauerfeldchen 25, 52146, Würselen, Germany

    T. Kaulhausen & R. Sobottke

Authors
  1. F. Beyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Yagdiran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Neu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. T. Kaulhausen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. P. Eysel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. R. Sobottke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. Beyer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Beyer, F., Yagdiran, A., Neu, P. et al. Percutaneous interspinous spacer versus open decompression: a 2-year follow-up of clinical outcome and quality of life. Eur Spine J 22, 2015–2021 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-2790-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-2790-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation