J Korean Neurosurg Soc.  2016 Nov;59(6):610-614. 10.3340/jkns.2016.59.6.610.

Microsurgical Foraminotomy via Wiltse Paraspinal Approach for Foraminal or Extraforaminal Stenosis at L5-S1 Level : Risk Factor Analysis for Poor Outcome

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Neurosurgery, Yeouido St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. chough65@gmail.com
  • 2Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Yeouido St. Mary's Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Abstract


OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to present the outcome of the microsurgical foraminotomy via Wiltse paraspinal approach for foraminal or extraforaminal (FEF) stenosis at L5-S1 level. We investigated risk factors associated with poor outcome of microsurgical foraminotomy at L5-S1 level.
METHODS
We analyzed 21 patients who underwent the microsurgical foraminotomy for FEF stenosis at L5-S1 level. To investigate risk factors associated with poor outcome, patients were classified into two groups (success and failure in foraminotomy). Clinical outcomes were assessed by the visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of back and leg pain and Oswestry disability index (ODI). Radiographic parameters including existence of spondylolisthesis, existence and degree of coronal wedging, disc height, foramen height, segmental lordotic angle (SLA) on neutral and dynamic view, segmental range of motion, and global lumbar lordotic angle were investigated.
RESULTS
Postoperative VAS score and ODI improved after foraminotomy. However, there were 7 patients (33%) who had persistent or recurrent leg pain. SLA on neutral and extension radiographic films were significantly associated with the failure in foraminotomy (p<0.05). Receiver-operating characteristics curve analysis revealed the optimal cut-off values of SLA on neutral and extension radiographic films for predicting failure in foraminotomy were 17.3° and 24°s, respectively.
CONCLUSION
Microsurgical foraminotomy for FEF stenosis at L5-S1 level can provide good clinical outcomes in selected patients. Poor outcomes were associated with large SLA on preoperative neutral (>17.3°) and extension radiographic films (>24°).

Keyword

Lumbar vertebrae; Foraminal stenosis; Foraminotomy; L5 root; Lordosis

MeSH Terms

Animals
Constriction, Pathologic*
Factor Analysis, Statistical*
Foraminotomy*
Humans
Leg
Lordosis
Lumbar Vertebrae
Range of Motion, Articular
Risk Factors*
Spondylolisthesis
X-Ray Film

Cited by  1 articles

Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Spinal Surgery Using a 30° Arthroscope for L5–S1 Foraminal Decompression
Ju-Eun Kim, Dae-Jung Choi
Clin Orthop Surg. 2018;10(4):508-512.    doi: 10.4055/cios.2018.10.4.508.


Reference

1. Baba H, Uchida K, Maezawa Y, Furusawa N, Okumura Y, Imura S. Microsurgical nerve root canal widening without fusion for lumbosacral intervertebral foraminal stenosis : technical notes and early results. Spinal Cord. 1996; 34:644–650. PMID: 8918959.
Article
2. Bae JS, Kang KH, Park JH, Lim JH, Jang IT. Postoperative clinical outcome and risk factors for poor outcome of foraminal and extraforaminal lumbar disc herniation. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2016; 59:143–148. PMID: 26962420.
Article
3. Chang SB, Lee SH, Ahn Y, Kim JM. Risk factor for unsatisfactory outcome after lumbar foraminal and far lateral microdecompression. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006; 31:1163–1167. PMID: 16648754.
Article
4. Darden BV 2nd, Wade JF, Alexander R, Wood KE, Rhyne AL 3rd, Hicks JR. Far lateral disc herniations treated by microscopic fragment excision. Techniques and results. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1995; 20:1500–1505. PMID: 8623070.
5. Donaldson WF 3rd, Star MJ, Thorne RP. Surgical treatment for the far lateral herniated lumbar disc. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993; 18:1263–1267. PMID: 8211356.
Article
6. Epstein NE. Foraminal and far lateral lumbar disc herniations : surgical alternatives and outcome measures. Spinal Cord. 2002; 40:491–500. PMID: 12235530.
Article
7. Gioia G, Mandelli D, Capaccioni B, Randelli F, Tessari L. Surgical treatment of far lateral lumbar disc herniation. Identification of compressed root and discectomy by lateral approach. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999; 24:1952–1957. PMID: 10515022.
8. Hallett A, Huntley JS, Gibson JN. Foraminal stenosis and single-level degenerative disc disease : a randomized controlled trial comparing decompression with decompression and instrumented fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007; 32:1375–1380. PMID: 17545903.
9. Hodges SD, Humphreys SC, Eck JC, Covington LA. The surgical treatment of far lateral L3-L4 and L4-L5 disc herniations. A modified technique and outcomes analysis of 25 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999; 24:1243–1246. PMID: 10382252.
10. Inufusa A, An HS, Lim TH, Hasegawa T, Haughton VM, Nowicki BH. Anatomic changes of the spinal canal and intervertebral foramen associated with flexion-extension movement. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996; 21:2412–2420. PMID: 8923625.
Article
11. Jenis LG, An HS. Spine update. Lumbar foraminal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000; 25:389–394. PMID: 10703115.
12. Jenis LG, An HS, Gordin R. Foraminal stenosis of the lumbar spine : a review of 65 surgical cases. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2001; 30:205–211. PMID: 11300129.
13. Kim HJ, Jeong JH, Cho HG, Chang BS, Lee CK, Yeom JS. Comparative observational study of surgical outcomes of lumbar foraminal stenosis using minimally invasive microsurgical extraforaminal decompression alone versus posterior lumbar interbody fusion : a prospective cohort study. Eur Spine J. 2015; 24:388–395. PMID: 25253301.
Article
14. Kunogi J, Hasue M. Diagnosis and operative treatment of intraforaminal and extraforaminal nerve root compression. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1991; 16:1312–1320. PMID: 1750006.
Article
15. Lee S, Kang JH, Srikantha U, Jang IT, Oh SH. Extraforaminal compression of the L-5 nerve root at the lumbosacral junction : clinical analysis, decompression technique, and outcome. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014; 20:371–379. PMID: 24460578.
Article
16. Matsumoto M, Watanabe K, Ishii K, Tsuji T, Takaishi H, Nakamura M, et al. Posterior decompression surgery for extraforaminal entrapment of the fifth lumbar spinal nerve at the lumbosacral junction. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010; 12:72–81. PMID: 20043768.
Article
17. Ozeki N, Aota Y, Uesugi M, Kaneko K, Mihara H, Niimura T, et al. Clinical results of intrapedicular partial pediculectomy for lumbar foraminal stenosis. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2008; 21:324–327. PMID: 18600141.
Article
18. Papavero L, Kothe R. Microsurgical extraforaminal decompression of lumbar root canal stenosis. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2013; 25:16–30. PMID: 23381738.
Article
19. Porter RW, Hibbert C, Evans C. The natural history of root entrapment syndrome. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1984; 9:418–421. PMID: 6236567.
Article
20. Spivak JM, Kummer FJ, Chen D, Quirno M, Kamerlink JR. Intervertebral foramen size and volume changes in low grade, low dysplasia isthmic spondylolisthesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010; 35:1829–1835. PMID: 20622747.
Article
21. Wiltse LL, Spencer CW. New uses and refinements of the paraspinal approach to the lumbar spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1988; 13:696–706. PMID: 3175760.
Article
22. Yamada K, Matsuda H, Nabeta M, Habunaga H, Suzuki A, Nakamura H. Clinical outcomes of microscopic decompression for degenerative lumbar foraminal stenosis : a comparison between patients with and without degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Eur Spine J. 2011; 20:947–953. PMID: 20953638.
Article
Full Text Links
  • JKNS
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr