Faculty of Medicine and Health, The Kolling Institute, Northern Clinical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, New South Wales.
Orthopaedic Department, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, New South Wales, Australia.
J Clin Neurosci. 2021 Sep;91:243-248. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2021.07.005. Epub 2021 Jul 22.
The study aimed to determine how much change in neurogenic claudication spinal surgeons expect in patients following lumbar decompression for lumbar spine stenosis (LSS), and radicular leg pain following microdiscectomy. Secondary aims were to identify surgeons' preferences regarding surgical techniques for lumbar decompression, and their rating of the quality of current evidence for lumbar decompression. All Australian spine surgeons were invited, of whom 71 completed the survey (31% response rate). Only registered spinal surgeons were included. The online survey, administered using REDCap, included 4 sections: demographics and background; expected change in symptoms on a +/- 100% scale (-100% worst, 0% no change and 100% best possible); surgical preference; and rating of current evidence for lumbar decompression compared with other treatments. There were 71 complete responses, 76% were neurosurgeons (N = 54), predominantly male (96%; N = 68). On average, surgeons expected an 86% (median: 87%, inter-quartile range (IQR): 80%, 91%) improvement in neurogenic claudication following lumbar decompression for LSS and 89% (median: 91%, IQR: 85%, 95%) improvement in radicular pain following microdiscectomy. A multiple linear regression found no surgeon characteristics were associated with expected change following surgery. The preferred surgical technique for LSS was full laminectomy (58%; N = 41). Thirty-five percent of surgeons accurately rated the evidence supporting the superiority of lumbar decompression compared with non-surgical care for LSS as low quality. Spine surgeons expect large symptom improvements following lumbar decompression and microdiscectomy. Understanding of the current evidence was higher for lumbar decompression with fusion, than for decompression alone for LSS.
本研究旨在确定脊柱外科医生对腰椎减压术(LSS)治疗腰椎管狭窄症和腰椎间盘切除术治疗神经根性腿痛患者的神经源性跛行改善程度,次要目的是确定外科医生对腰椎减压手术技术的偏好,以及他们对腰椎减压当前证据质量的评价。所有澳大利亚脊柱外科医生均被邀请参加,其中 71 名完成了调查(31%的回应率)。仅包括注册的脊柱外科医生。在线调查使用 REDCap 进行,包括 4 个部分:人口统计学和背景;症状改善程度(在-100%至 100%的量表上,-100%表示最差,0%表示无变化,100%表示最佳);手术偏好;以及与其他治疗方法相比,对腰椎减压术当前证据的评价。共有 71 份完整回复,76%为神经外科医生(N=54),主要为男性(96%;N=68)。平均而言,外科医生预计 LSS 腰椎减压术后神经源性跛行改善 86%(中位数:87%,四分位距(IQR):80%,91%),腰椎间盘切除术治疗神经根性腿痛改善 89%(中位数:91%,IQR:85%,95%)。多元线性回归发现,外科医生的特征与术后预期变化无关。LSS 的首选手术技术是全椎板切除术(58%;N=41)。35%的外科医生准确地评价了支持腰椎减压术优于非手术治疗 LSS 的证据质量较低。脊柱外科医生期望腰椎减压术和腰椎间盘切除术能显著改善症状。与 LSS 单纯减压相比,对腰椎减压术联合融合术的当前证据的理解更高。