Does the Surgical Timing and Decompression Alone or Fusion Surgery in Lumbar Stenosis Influence Outcome in Cauda
Bharat Rajendraprasad Dave1, Puspak Samal1, Romin Sangvi1
1Department of Spine Surgery, Stavya Spine Hospital and Research Institute, Ahmedabad, India.
Study Design:
A retrospective comparative analysis of 64 patients with cauda equina syndrome (CES), who underwent either decompression alone (NF) or fusion (F) surgery.
Purpose:
We compared the outcomes and timing effects.
Overview Of Literature:
CES can cause loss of autonomic control of vesicular function and lower limb neurological deficits. Prompt diagnosis and emergency surgery markedly improve outcome. Although decompression only is a mainstream technique, there is guarded recovery of vesicular dysfunction. Decompression ventrally in a narrow window requires manipulation of neural tissue in an already jeopardised critical canal and may accentuate irreversible damages. In F surgery, the adequate exposure leads to a lower neural manipulation.
Methods:
Until January 2008, we treated CES with decompression (laminectomy and/or discectomy). However, from that month forward, all our single-level CES patients have received a fusion operation. In this study, characteristic categorical variables and outcomes were analysed.
Results:
In a retrospective analysis of 64 patients, NF (n=37) and F (n=27) who received treatment, we found that both groups improved significantly on follow-up in all objective parameters. Although, the comparison of clinical and functional outcome data between the two groups was statistically insignificant, the average value of objective outcome such as vesicular function, low back pain (LBP), and complications was better for patients in F group compared with NF group. However, the patient satisfaction for the F group was also lower, in view of their residual symptoms and disabilities. Contrary to common perceptions, we found that the timing of surgery does not influence the recovery rate for either approach.
Conclusions:
Although both the techniques appear to be equally effective, the fusion approach overall showed a definite edge over non-fusion, with respect to reduced incidence of iatrogenic dural tears, LBP, and overall outcome, even despite the lower patient satisfaction.
Related Concept Videos
Nuclear Fusion
A helium nucleus has a mass that is 0.7% less than that of four hydrogen nuclei; this lost mass is converted into energy during the fusion. This reaction produces about...
Predicting Reaction Outcomes
Mitral Stenosis I: Introduction
Outcomes of Glycolysis
Cellular respiration can occur aerobically (with oxygen) or anaerobically (without oxygen). In the presence of oxygen, cellular respiration starts with glycolysis and continues with pyruvate...
Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care...
Mitral Stenosis III: Medical Management


