Abstract:Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a debilitating condition associated with degeneration of the spine with aging. Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of different types of surgery compared with different types of non-surgical interventions in adults with symptomatic LSS. Primary outcomes included quality of life, disability, function and pain. Also, to consider complication rates and side effects, and to evaluate short-, intermediate- and long-term outcomes (six months, six months to two years, five years or longer). Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, five other databases and two trials registries up to February 2015. We also screened reference lists and conference proceedings related to treatment of the spine. Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical versus non-operative treatments in participants with lumbar spinal stenosis confirmed by clinical and imaging findings. Data collection and analysis: For data collection and analysis, we followed methods guidelines of the Cochrane Back and Neck Review Group (Furlan 2009) and those provided in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Higgins 2011). Main results: From the 12,966 citations screened, we assessed 26 full-text articles and included five RCTs (643 participants).Low-quality evidence from the meta-analysis performed on two trials using the Oswestry Disability Index (pain-related disability) to compare direct decompression with or without fusion versus multi-modal non-operative care showed no significant differences at six months (mean difference (MD) -3.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) -10.12 to 2.80) and at one year (MD -6.18, 95% CI -15.03 to 2.66). At 24 months, significant differences favoured decompression (MD -4.43, 95% CI -7.91 to -0.96). Low-quality evidence from one small study revealed no difference in pain outcomes between decompression and usual conservative care (bracing and exercise) at three months (risk ratio (RR) 1.38, 95% CI 0.22 to 8.59), four years (RR 7.50, 95% CI 1.00 to 56.48) and 10 years (RR 4.09, 95% CI 0.95 to 17.58).Low-quality evidence from one small study suggested no differences at six weeks in the Oswestry Disability Index for patients treated with minimally invasive mild decompression versus those treated with epidural steroid injections (MD 5.70, 95% CI 0.57 to 10.83; 38 participants). Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) results were better for epidural injection at six weeks (MD -0.60, 95% CI -0.92 to -0.28), and visual analogue scale (VAS) improvements were better in the mild decompression group (MD 2.40, 95% CI 1.92 to 2.88). At 12 weeks, many cross-overs prevented further analysis.Low-quality evidence from a single study including 191 participants favoured the interspinous spacer versus usual conservative treatment at six weeks, six months and one year for symptom severity and physical function.All remaining studies reported complications associated with surgery and conservative side effects of treatment: Two studies reported no major complications in the surgical group, and the other study reported complications in 10% and 24% of participants, including spinous process fracture, coronary ischaemia, respiratory distress, haematoma, stroke, risk of reoperation and death due to pulmonary oedema. Authors' conclusions: We have very little confidence to conclude whether surgical treatment or a conservative approach is better for lumbar spinal stenosis, and we can provide no new recommendations to guide clinical practice. However, it should be noted that the rate of side effects ranged from 10% to 24% in surgical cases, and no side effects were reported for any conservative treatment. No clear benefits were observed with surgery versus non-surgical treatment. These findings suggest that clinicians should be very careful in informing patients about possible treatment options, especially given that conservative treatment options have resulted in no reported side effects. High-quality research is needed to compare surgical versus conservative care for individuals with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Avoiding inappropriate spine surgery in a patient with major cardiac comorbidities

When and if to stop low-dose aspirin before spine surgery?

Clinical assessment and management of lumbar spinal stenosis: clinical dilemmas and considerations for surgical referral

When to stop anticoagulation, anti-platelet aggregates, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) prior to spine surgery

Preventing Unnecessary Surgery in Patients Presenting for Orthopedic Spine Surgery: Literature Review and Case Series

Contemporary Practice Patterns in the Treatment of Cervical Stenosis and Central Cord Syndrome: A Survey of the Cervical Spine Research Society

Surgical versus non-surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis

Antithrombotic therapy and spinal surgery: a retrospective cohort study of 289 consecutive elderly patients with degenerative lumbar stenosis

Failure to Normalize Risk Profile of Spine Fusion Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Previously Treated With Percutaneous Stent Revascularization

Decompression Using Minimally Invasive Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Associated with Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Review

Surgical management of high-grade lumbar spondylolisthesis associated with Hajdu-Cheney syndrome: illustrative case

[Anesthetic management of a patient with severe aortic stenosis undergoing spine surgery]

Do Untreated Intraspinal Anomalies in Congenital Scoliosis Impact the Safety and Efficacy of Spinal Correction Surgery? A Retrospective Case-Control Study.

Impact of congestive heart failure on patients undergoing lumbar spine fusion for adult spine deformity

Non-instrumented extradural lumbar spine surgery under low-dose acetylsalicylic acid: a comparative risk analysis study

Personalized Interventional Surgery of the Lumbar Spine: A Perspective on Minimally Invasive and Neuroendoscopic Decompression for Spinal Stenosis

Risk factors for adjacent segment pathology requiring additional surgery after single-level spinal fusion: impact of pre-existing spinal stenosis demonstrated by preoperative myelography

Surgery for Spinal Stenosis in Achondroplasia: Causes of Reoperation and Reduction of Risks

Patient Comorbidities, Their Influence on Lumbar Spinal Fusion Surgery, and Recommendations to Reduce Unfavorable Outcomes

Evaluating osteoporosis and bone quality in the aging spine: modern considerations for surgical management in the geriatric population

Surgical interventions for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review with network meta-analysis