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.

Responsiveness of the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire in Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Undergoing Nonsurgical Treatment

Lateral lumbar interbody fusion for severe lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized controlled trial with 1-year follow-up

Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life Using the SF-36 in Chinese Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy Patients after Surgery and Its Consistency with Neurological Function Assessment: a Cohort Study.

Evaluating the Reproducibility of the Walking Test for Intermittent Claudication Associated with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Patients' experience with nonsurgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis: a qualitative study

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of simplified Chinese version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire.

Improvement in Health-Related Quality of Life With Spinal Cord Stimulation in Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: A Single-Center, Retrospective Study

Assessment of the Minimum Clinically Important Difference in Neurological Function and Quality of Life after Surgery in Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy Patients: a Prospective Cohort Study.

Severity of lumbar spinal stenosis does not impact responsiveness to exercise-based rehabilitation

Surgical versus non-surgical treatment for lumbar spinal stenosis

Responsiveness of the Numeric Pain Rating Scale in Patients with Low Back Pain

Quantifying Satisfaction of Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Patients in Post-lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Surgery: Establishing Critical JOABPEQ Cutoff Scores

Discrepancy between global- and disease-specific outcome measures following lumbar spine surgery

[Study about Outcomes of Non-Pharmacological Conservative Treatment for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis].

Preference Sensitive Care and Shared-decision Making in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Development and validation of a bowel-routine-based self-report questionnaire for sacral sparing after spinal cord injury

Risk Factors Associated with Failure to Reach Minimal Clinically Important Difference after Correction Surgery in Patients with Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis.

Assessment of the Effectiveness of Surgical Treatment of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Japanese Orthopaedic Association Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire (JOACMEQ) in Mainland China: an Investigation of Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness.

Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index, and Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale: Which has Superior Measurement Properties in Older Adults with Low Back Pain?

Recovery of the Japanese orthopedic association back pain evaluation questionnaire score and walking ability following lumbar spinal stenosis surgery