Back to Search Start Over

Decompression Alone Versus Interspinous/Interlaminar Device Placement for Degenerative Lumbar Pathologies: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors :
Pennington, Zach
Lakomkin, Nikita
Mikula, Anthony L.
Elsamadicy, Aladine A.
Astudillo Potes, Maria
Fogelson, Jeremy L.
Grossbach, Andrew J.
Elder, Benjamin D.
Source :
World Neurosurgery. May2024, Vol. 185, p417-417. 1p.
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

Interspinous devices (ISDs) and interlaminar devices (ILDs) are marketed as alternatives to conventional surgery for degenerative lumbar conditions; comparisons with decompression alone are limited. The present study reviews the extant literature comparing the cost and effectiveness of ISDs/ILDs with decompression alone. Articles comparing decompression alone with ISD/ILD were identified; outcomes of interest included general and disease-specific patient-reported outcomes, perioperative complications, and total treatment costs. Outcomes were analyzed at <6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and last follow-up. Analyses were performed using random effects modeling. Twenty-nine studies were included in the final analysis. ILD/ISD showed greater leg pain improvement at 3 months (mean difference, −1.43; 95% confidence interval, [−1.78, −1.07]; P < 0.001), 6 months (−0.89; [−1.55, −0.24]; P = 0.008), and 12 months (−0.97; [−1.25, −0.68]; P < 0.001), but not 2 years (P = 0.22) or last follow-up (P = 0.09). Back pain improvement was better after ISD/ILD only at 1 year (−0.87; [−1.62, −0.13]; P = 0.02). Short-Form 36 physical component scores or Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) symptom severity scores did not differ between the groups. ZCQ physical function scores improved more after decompression alone at 6 months (0.35; [0.07, 0.63]; P = 0.01) and 12 months (0.23; [0.00, 0.46]; P = 0.05). Oswestry Disability Index and EuroQoL 5 dimensions scores favored ILD/ISD at all time points except 6 months (P = 0.07). Reoperations (odds ratio, 1.75; [1.23, 2.48]; P = 0.002) and total care costs (standardized mean difference, 1.19; [0.62, 1.77]; P < 0.001) were higher in the ILD/ISD group; complications did not differ significantly between the groups (P = 0.41). Patient-reported outcomes are similar after decompression alone and ILD/ISD; the observed differences do not reach accepted minimum clinically important difference thresholds. ISD/ILDs have higher associated costs and reoperation rates, suggesting current evidence does not support ILD/ISDs as a cost-effective alternative to decompression alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
18788750
Volume :
185
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
World Neurosurgery
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
177147187
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2024.03.054