For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
53
views
33
references
 Top references
cited by
185
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      46
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Fusion Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The efficacy of fusion surgery in addition to decompression surgery in patients who have lumbar spinal stenosis, with or without degenerative spondylolisthesis, has not been substantiated in controlled trials.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Laminectomy plus Fusion versus Laminectomy Alone for Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.

          Zoher Ghogawala, James Dziura, William E Butler … (2016)
          The comparative effectiveness of performing instrumented (rigid pedicle screws affixed to titanium alloy rods) lumbar spinal fusion in addition to decompressive laminectomy in patients with symptomatic lumbar grade I degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis is unknown.
          Article 0 comments Cited 177 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            An assessment of surgery for spinal stenosis: time trends, geographic variations, complications, and reoperations.

            S Kreif, M Ciol, R Deyo … (1996)
            To study temporal trends and geographic variations in the use of surgery for spinal stenosis, estimate short-term morbidity and mortality of the procedure, and examine the likelihood of repeat back surgery after surgical repair. Cohort study based on Medicare claims. Hospital care. All Medicare beneficiaries 65 years of age or older who received a lumbar spine operation for spinal stenosis in 1985 or 1989 were followed through 1991 (10,260 patients from the 1985 cohort and 18,655 from the 1989 cohort). Two outcomes were measured: (1) rates of operation for spinal stenosis by state and (2) on an individual level, operative complications (cardiopulmonary, vascular, or infectious), postoperative mortality, and time between first operation and any subsequent reoperation. Rates of surgery for spinal stenosis increased eightfold from 1979 to 1992 for patients aged 65 and older and varied almost fivefold among US states. Mortality and operative complications increased with age and comorbidity. Complications were more likely for men and for individuals receiving spinal fusions. The 1989 cohort experienced a slightly higher probability of reoperation than the 1985 cohort for the first 3 years of follow-up. A rapid increase in surgery rates for spinal stenosis was identified over a 14-year period. The wide geographic variations and substantial complication rate from this elective surgical procedure (partly related to patient age) suggest a need for more information on the relative efficacy of surgical and nonsurgical treatments for this condition. The risks and benefits of particular surgical procedures for specific clinical and demographic subgroups as well as individual patient preferences regarding surgical risks and possible outcomes should also be evaluated further. These issues are likely to become increasingly important with the aging of the US population.
            Article 0 comments Cited 93 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The role of fusion and instrumentation in the treatment of degenerative spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis.

              C Baldus, Lawrence Lenke, K Bridwell … (1993)
              Between February 1985 and March 1990 44 patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis underwent primary surgery for spinal stenosis (in all cases the decompression preserved the facets bilaterally without discectomy) and were studied prospectively. Forty-three patients have been followed for > or = 2 years and are the basis of this study. There were three treatment groups: group I, no fusion (nine patients); group II, transverse process fusion with autogenous iliac bone graft without instrumentation (11 initial patients, with one lost to follow-up for a total of 10); and group III, transverse process fusion with autogenous iliac crest bone graft and instrumentation (24 patients, 18 with one-level pedicle fixation and six with two-level fixation). A higher proportion of group III subjects had a successful fusion compared with group II (p = 0.002). There was significantly more spondylolisthesis progression in groups I and II than in group III (p = 0.001). A higher proportion of "spondylolisthesis unchanged subjects" reported they were helped by the surgery than those whose spondylolisthesis progressed postoperatively (p < 0.01).
              Article 0 comments Cited 89 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): N. Engl. J. Med.
                Title: The New England journal of medicine
                Publisher: New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM/MMS)
                ISSN (Electronic): 1533-4406
                ISSN (Print): 0028-4793
                Publication date (Electronic): Apr 14 2016
                Volume: 374
                Issue: 15
                Affiliations
                [1 ] From the Department of Surgical Sciences, Division of Orthopedics (P. Försth, T.C., P. Fritzell, K.M., B.S.), and the Uppsala Clinical Research Center (P.Ö., K.M.), Uppsala University, Uppsala, Stockholm Spine Center (P. Försth, A.F.), the Department of Learning, Informatics, Management, and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet (G.Ó., F.B.), and Quantify Research (G.Ó., F.B.), Stockholm, and Futurum-Academy for Health and Care, Neuro-orthopedic Center, Ryhov (P. Fritzell) - all in Sweden.
                Article
                DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1513721
                PubMed ID: 27074066
                SO-VID: 26e43309-1031-4a4d-b09a-ebf1d886b07f
                History

                Data availability:

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content46

                See all similar

                Cited by184

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors663

                See all reference authors