Browsing by Author "Lubelski, Daniel"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Cervical spine surgery for tandem spinal stenosis: The impact on low back pain
    (Elsevier, 2018-03) Alvin, Matthew D.; Alentado, Vincent J.; Lubelski, Daniel; Benzel, Edward C.; Mroz, Thomas E.; Neurological Surgery, School of Medicine
    Objective Tandem spinal stenosis (TSS) can present similarly to cervical myelopathy, but often has a worse prognosis. Few studies have investigated outcomes and compared treatment approaches for patients with TSS. We sought to determine the impact of cervical spine surgery on cervical and lumbar spine symptoms in patients with symptomatic tandem spinal stenosis. Patients Methods 84 patients with TSS were identified over 5 years. 48 underwent cervical spine surgery alone, 20 underwent both cervical and lumbar spine surgery, and 16 received conservative treatment alone (conservative cohort). Quality of life (QOL) measures included the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for arm, neck, and back pain, and EuroQOL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D). QOL data were acquired at baseline (pre-operative) and 1 year postoperatively via an institutional prospectively collected database. Results Both surgical cohorts showed significant (p < 0.01) pre- to postoperative improvement for VAS neck and arm scores at 1-year post-op and significantly (p < 0.01) greater improvements than the conservative cohort. In addition, the cohort undergoing cervical spine surgery alone experienced significant improvement in the EQ-5D score whereas those undergoing both cervical and lumbar spine surgery did not. Conclusions Cervical spine surgery with or without follow-up lumbar spine surgery significantly improves neck pain in patients with TSS. In contrast, cervical spine surgery in these patients does not improve lumbar symptoms. Lumbar surgery also did not improve low back pain or quality of life. Future prospective studies are necessary to examine the impact of lumbar decompression alone on cervical spine symptoms in patients with TSS.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Quality of life changes after lumbar decompression in patients with tandem spinal stenosis
    (Elsevier, 2019-09) Pennington, Zach; Alentado, Vincent J.; Lubelski, Daniel; Alvin, Matthew D.; Levin, Jay M.; Benzel, Edward C.; Mroz, Thomas E.; Neurological Surgery, School of Medicine
    Objective Tandem spinal stenosis (TSS) is a degenerative spinal condition characterized by spinal canal narrowing at 2 or more distinct spinal levels. It is an aging-related condition that is likely to increase as the population ages, but which remains poorly described in the literature. Here we sought to determine the impact of primary lumbar decompression on quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes in patients with symptomatic TSS. Patients and methods We retrospectively reviewed 803 patients with clinical and radiographic evidence of TSS treated between 2008 and 2014 with a minimum 2-year follow-up. The records of patients with clinical and radiographic evidence of concurrent cervical and lumbar stenosis were reviewed. Prospectively gathered QOL data, including the Pain Disability Questionnaire (PDQ), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), EuroQOL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for low back pain, were assessed at the 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year follow-ups. Results Of 803 identified patients (mean age 66.2 years; 46.9% male), 19.6% underwent lumbar decompression only, 14.1% underwent cervical + lumbar decompression, and 66.4% underwent conservative management only. Baseline VAS scores were similar across all groups, but patients undergoing conservative management had better baseline QOL scores on all other measures. Both surgical cohorts experienced significant improvements in the VAS, PDQ, and EQ-5D at all time points; patients in the cervical + lumbar cohort also had significant improvement in the PHQ-9. Conservatively managed patients showed no significant improvement in QOL scores at any follow-up interval. Conclusion Lumbar decompression with or without cervical decompression improves low back pain and QOL outcomes in patients with TSS. The decision to prioritize lumbar decompression is therefore unlikely to adversely affect long-term quality-of-life improvements.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Variability in Surgical Treatment of Spondylolisthesis Among Spine Surgeons
    (Elsevier, 2018) Lubelski, Daniel; Alentado, Vincent J.; Williams, Seth K.; O'Rourke, Colin; Obuchowski, Nancy A.; Wang, Jeffrey C.; Steinmetz, Michael P.; Melillo, Alfred J.; Benzel, Edward C.; Modic, Michael T.; Quencer, Robert; Mroz, Thomas E.; Neurological Surgery, School of Medicine
    Background There are a multitude of treatments for low-grade lumbar spondylolisthesis. There are no clear guidelines for the optimal approach. Objective To identify the surgical treatment patterns for spondylolisthesis among United States spine surgeons. Methods 445 spine surgeons in the United States completed a survey of clinical/radiographic case scenarios on patients with lumbar spondylolisthesis with neurogenic claudication with (S+BP) or without (S−BP) associated mechanical back pain. Treatment options included decompression, laminectomy with posterolateral fusion, posterior lumbar interbody fusion, or none of the above. The primary outcome measure was the probability of 2 randomly chosen surgeons disagreeing on the treatment method. Results There was 64% disagreement (36% agreement) among surgeons for treatment of spondylolisthesis with mechanical back pain (S+BP) and 71% disagreement (29% agreement) for spondylolisthesis without mechanical back pain (S−BP). For S+BP, disagreement was 52% for those practicing 5 to 10 years versus 70% among those practicing more than 20 years. Orthopedic surgeons had greater disagreement than did neurosurgeons (76% vs. 56%) for S+BP. Greater clinical equipoise was seen for S−BP than for S+BP regardless of surgeon characteristics. For spondylolisthesis without mechanical back pain, neurosurgeons were significantly more likely to select decompression-only than were orthopedic surgeons, who more commonly selected fusion. Conclusions Clinical equipoise exists for the treatment of spondylolisthesis. Differences are greater when the patient presents without associated back pain. Surgeon case volume, practice duration, and specialty training influence operative decisions for a given pathologic condition. Recognizing this practice variation will hopefully lead to better evidence and practice guidelines for the optimal and most cost-effective treatment paradigms.